Dissertation Research: On Interdisciplinary Strategies at Research-Intensive Universities

论文研究：研究型大学的跨学科策略

• 批准号: 0451828
• 负责人: Roger Geiger
• 金额: $ 0.8万
• 依托单位: Pennsylvania State Univ University Park
• 依托单位国家: 美国
• 项目类别: Standard Grant
• 财政年份: 2005
• 资助国家: 美国
• 起止时间: 2005-01-01 至 2006-12-31
• 项目状态: 已结题
• 来源: https://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID=0451828&HistoricalAwards=false
• 关键词: Dissertation; Research; Interdisciplinary; Strategies; Intensive

This Societal Dimensions of Engineering, Science, and Technology Program Dissertation Improvement Grant will enable a dissertation student to conduct case studies at four major research institutions in order to move closer to completing his Ph.D. dissertation. The dissertation focuses on interdisciplinarity in university-based research. Fostering interdisciplinarity has become a laudable goal for federal agencies and research-intensive universities alike. The National Science Foundation (NSF) has supported interdisciplinarity for a number of years, through center programs and other initiatives (Brint, forthcoming; Hackett, 2000; Lattuca, 2001). In the early 2000s, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) made an explicit commitment to interdisciplinarity in the "NIH Roadmap" (National Institutes of Health, 2003). At about the same time, strategic plans of research universities have increasingly emphasized interdisciplinary scholarship (Feller, 2002, forthcoming). Universities, however, ground their basic organizational frameworks in the nexus between disciplines and academic departments (Blau, 1994; Clark, 1983, 1987, 1993, 1995; Geiger, 1986; Veysey, 1965). Both external sponsorship and university leadership commitment to fostering interdisciplinarity therefore suggest the need to induce change in the way scientists work. Whether universities choose to respond to calls for interdisciplinarity is partly a matter of institutional strategy, local culture, and organizational climates (Brint, forthcoming; Feller, 2002, forthcoming). Presently, little is known about which institutions are more likely to organize for interdisciplinary efforts and what organizational strategies they have employed. Previous studies of interdisciplinarity have focused on individual faculty members as the unit of analysis (Klein, 1990; Lattuca, 2001), on the work patterns or effectiveness of interdisciplinary research centers (Ailes, Roessner, & Coward, 2000; Newell, Saxberg, & Birnbaum, 1975; Rhoten, 2003), or purported paradigmatic shifts in the production of knowledge (Gibbons et al., 1994; Weingart & Stehr, 2000). Scattered findings on institutions that support interdisciplinarity (Brint, forthcoming; Feller, 2002, forthcoming) do not allow for understanding of general patterns of organizational change and adaptation. Is there a relationship between a university's official commitment to interdisciplinarity and the amount of sponsored interdisciplinary research it carries out? What are some of the organizational strategies that universities have employed to foster interdisciplinary science? This study will address these questions through a content analysis of universities' strategic plans and an analysis of the distribution of NSF interdisciplinary research grants. The content analysis will reveal the nature and extent of official institutional commitments to interdisciplinarity, and the analysis of NSF-funded projects will provide an objective measure of universities' boundary-spanning work. Together, these analyses will serve as an index of institutional emphasis on interdisciplinary or disciplinary-specialization strategies. To provide an in-depth understanding of organizational commitments and arrangements for interdisciplinary science, the researcher will also conduct case studies of selected universities that are making institutional commitments to interdisciplinary strategies. The case studies will be central to the proposed investigation, revealing potentially new structures that are altering the usual settings for faculty work. In its totality, the study will elucidate how the university system and selected institutions have reacted to sponsorship to interdisciplinarity, in what seems to be a salient trend for future research funding in the U.S. and internationally (Weingart & Stehr, 2000). Findings will be useful for higher education scholars and administrators dedicated to the study and the management of research-intensive universities, informing both practice and theory-building on adaptations of traditional academic structures to promote interdisciplinary modes of research. If the current support for interdisciplinary science is sustained - or perhaps increased - in the future, the relevance of organizational structures for boundary-spanning work will be heightened for universities that wish to participate effectively in the research economy. Results of the proposed investigation will be disseminated through presentations and publications in the field of higher education administration, and will also be included in a graduate-level course of a leading program in the field.

工程，科学和技术计划论文改进补助金的社会层面将使论文学生能够在四个主要研究机构进行案例研究，以便更接近完成博士学位。论文本论文的研究重点是大学研究中的跨学科性。培养跨学科已经成为联邦机构和研究密集型大学的一个值得称赞的目标。美国国家科学基金会（NSF）多年来一直通过中心计划和其他举措支持跨学科研究（Brint，即将出版; Hackett，2000年; Lattuca，2001年）。在21世纪初，美国国立卫生研究院（NIH）在“NIH路线图”（National Institutes of Health，2003）中明确承诺跨学科。与此同时，研究型大学的战略计划越来越强调跨学科奖学金（Feller，2002年，即将出版）。然而，大学的基本组织框架建立在学科和学术部门之间的联系上（Blau，1994; Clark，1983，1987，1993，1995;盖革，1986; Veysey，1965）。因此，外部赞助和大学领导层对促进跨学科的承诺都表明，需要改变科学家的工作方式。大学是否选择响应跨学科的号召，部分是机构战略、当地文化和组织气候的问题（Brint，即将出版; Feller，2002，即将出版）。目前，很少有人知道哪些机构更有可能组织跨学科的努力，他们采用了什么样的组织战略。以前的跨学科研究集中在作为分析单位的个别教师（Klein，1990; Latuca，2001），跨学科研究中心的工作模式或有效性（Ailes，Roessner，Coward，2000;纽韦尔，Saxberg，Birnbaum，1975; Rhoten，2003），或知识生产中的所谓范式转变（Gibbons等人，1994; WeingartStehr，2000）。关于支持跨学科的机构的零散研究结果（Brint，即将出版; Feller，2002年，即将出版）不允许理解组织变革和适应的一般模式。一所大学对跨学科的官方承诺和它所开展的跨学科研究的数量之间是否有关系？大学采用了哪些组织策略来促进跨学科科学？本研究将通过对大学战略计划的内容分析和对NSF跨学科研究赠款分布的分析来解决这些问题。内容分析将揭示官方机构对跨学科的承诺的性质和程度，对国家科学基金会资助项目的分析将为大学的跨界工作提供客观的衡量标准。总之，这些分析将作为一个指标的机构重视跨学科或学科专业化战略。为了深入了解跨学科科学的组织承诺和安排，研究人员还将对正在对跨学科战略作出机构承诺的选定大学进行案例研究。这些案例研究将是拟议调查的核心，揭示了潜在的新结构，这些结构正在改变教师工作的通常设置。总的来说，这项研究将阐明大学系统和选定的机构如何对跨学科的赞助做出反应，这似乎是美国和国际上未来研究资金的一个突出趋势（Weingart Stehr，2000）。调查结果将是有用的高等教育学者和管理人员致力于研究和研究密集型大学的管理，通知实践和理论建设的适应传统的学术结构，以促进跨学科的研究模式。如果目前对跨学科科学的支持在未来得到维持--或者可能增加--，那么对于希望有效参与研究经济的大学来说，跨学科工作的组织结构的相关性将得到提高。拟议的调查结果将通过在高等教育管理领域的演示文稿和出版物传播，也将被列入该领域的领先计划的研究生课程。