首页> 外文期刊>Minerva >Strategically Unclear? Organising Interdisciplinarity in an Excellence Programme of Interdisciplinary Research in Denmark
【24h】

Strategically Unclear? Organising Interdisciplinarity in an Excellence Programme of Interdisciplinary Research in Denmark

机译:战略上不清楚?在丹麦的跨学科研究卓越计划中组织跨学科

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

While interdisciplinarity is not a new concept, the political and discursive mobilisation of interdisciplinarity is. Since the 1990s, this movement has intensified, and this has affected central funding bodies so that interdisciplinarity is now a de facto requirement in successful grant application. As a result, the literature is ripe with definitions, taxonomies, discussions and other attempts to grasp and define the concept of interdisciplinarity. In this paper, we explore how strategic demands for interdisciplinarity meet, interact with and change local research practices and results of higher education and research. Our aim is to question and trace the consequences of applying the slippery and difficult term interdisciplinarity in research. The paper is based on ethnographic fieldwork in a Danish interdisciplinary research programme, where we observed and analysed practices of writing, publishing, collaboration and educational development in five different research projects. We show how the call for interdisciplinarity was mobilised in a way that rendered the incentives and motives behind the programme unclear. Furthermore, we argue that the absence of clear definitions and assessment criteria produced a dominant, all-inclusive, but vague, configuration of interdisciplinarity that affected the research outcome, and ultimately, promoted and reproduced the existing monodisciplinary research and power structures.
机译:尽管跨学科不是一个新概念,但跨学科的政治和话语动员却是。自1990年代以来,这一运动愈演愈烈,这影响了中央供资机构,因此,跨学科性现已成为成功申请赠款的事实上的要求。结果,文献中有了定义,分类法,讨论和其他尝试来掌握和定义跨学科概念的成熟知识。在本文中,我们探讨了跨学科的战略需求如何满足,互动和改变地方研究实践以及高等教育和研究成果。我们的目的是质疑和追溯在研究中应用滑溜和困难的术语跨学科的后果。本文基于丹麦跨学科研究计划中的人种学田野调查,我们在五个不同的研究项目中观察和分析了写作,出版,合作和教育发展的实践。我们展示了如何调动跨学科的呼吁,从而使该计划背后的动机和动机不清楚。此外,我们认为缺乏明确的定义和评估标准会导致占主导地位的,包罗万象的但跨学科的结构影响研究成果,并最终促进和复制了现有的单学科研究和权力结构。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号