What The Ancient Greeks Knew About Atoms (or what is a discipline?)

Natural philosophy has its origins in Greece during the Archaic period, (650 BCE – 480 BCE), when Pre-Socratic philosophers like Thales rejected non-naturalistic explanations for natural phenomena and proclaimed that every event had a natural cause.^[13] They proposed ideas verified by reason and observation and many of their hypotheses proved successful in experiment,^[14] for example atomism.

-http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physics#History

"Natural Philosophy" may have been the first Western word for what we would now call physics. Philosophers like Aristotle studied motion and matter alongside ethics and politics, going so far as to conceive of the atom centuries before experiments would confirm this concept. Physics had its origin with philosophy, as did many of the sciences.

Physics is an attempt to find the most fundamental descriptions of our universe. It takes us down to the level of atoms, then inside them, and even further still. By some happenstance of nature, physics has had great success using the tools of mathematics to explain and predict much of what we see in this world. We can mathematically relate the notion of electricity with that of light, describing the latter as an electromagnetic wave through empty space. But light is a particle! It is made up of tiny little light specks called photons. How can it be a wave? Such questions were the essence of 20th century physics. Physics strives to connect the language of mathematics with the essence of reality.

Hence I do not think that physics has any trouble being interdisciplinary within the natural sciences. We already collaborate with mathematicians, chemists, computer scientists, philosophers, biologists, engineers and plenty of others.

Past that point, it gets harder. Physicists seem to operate on a value system that is foreign and bizarre to social scientists. We have trouble making meaningful connections between social and physical reality. Another situation I have noticed is that our jargon is a prime target for confusion with that of other disciplines - it is easy to be confused with a statistician, engineer or computer scientist. Sometimes I am tempted to get one of these t-shirts :P

Physics is filled with theories. My experience so far has shown me that people from disciplines that are far from the natural sciences are hesitant to engage with mathematical theory, and physics is hardly easy for anyone. To quote Richard Feynman, one of the greats in this field, "I think I can safely say that nobody understands quantum mechanics." A more contemporary, though less famous thinker remarks, "it is often stated that of all the theories proposed in this century, the silliest is quantum theory. In fact, some say that the only thing that quantum theory has going for it is that it is unquestionably correct."

So what's next? Can we bridge the gap? I think underlying it is a simpler question: what can we do together that will reward both sides?

inter-disciplinary reflection

My inter-disciplinary experience has been rich and very enjoyable, but I don't feel as if I have been able to use the skills of a mathematician during this project.  Though I still have hopes that this will change, so far this experience has been less than ideal in that respect.  Tying the data sets we are working with into some interesting mathematical structure has been a significant challenge. 

However, in my independent research project, I've been working with a function which is a direct result of inter-disciplinary work.  Brownian motion is a function in probability which models the random movement of particles suspended on the surface of liquids, it was discovered by a biologist and is now a major part of countless work in applied math and stochastic processes.  The problem I've been working on is tied closely to this function, which serves as a consistent reminder to me of the potential of inter-disciplinary work, even in the stratified reaches of mathematics. 

Cross-disciplinary research in Social Work

Hello everyone,

Ever since I started my master's in Social Work 2 years ago, I knew that cross-disciplinary research was quite important in my field. I have always being interested about doing research on mental health and social work tends to collaborate with the field of psychology, especially when it comes to alcohol and drug addictions. Also, social work in general tends to work with other fields such as community health, medicine, human development and family studies, among other fields.
During the last year, I have also become more aware about the importance of cross-disciplinary and trans-disciplinary research in my field given that I am an I-TOPP (Illinois Transdisciplinary Obesity Prevention Program) scholar. As an I-TOPP scholar I work with the department of Community Health on issues related to childhood obesity and I have been reading various cross-disciplinary issues on obesity and depression among children. The literature that I have reviewed has shown me the need of cross-disciplinary studies, and it has also helped me understand its benefits. However, I have also witnessed that the main limitation of this type of research is that it is very time consuming and as graduate students, we do not have much time available.
Overall, I feel that cross-disciplinary research is quite important; however, not everyone has the necessary tools and support to carry it out. Programs such as I-TOPP and SPI are one of those few programs that will help me learn more about cross-disciplinary research and I am grateful for that opportunity.

Maria P.

Cross-disciplinarity in the world of Mathematics

     Mathematics is a very wide discipline. Many people seem to assume that most problems in mathematics have been solved or that it is an static discipline that does not serve a practical purpose.  I like to think of math as a language in which we communicate abstract ideas and contextualize them. Galileo once said, "Nature's great book is written in mathematics." Its ability to be cross-disciplinary derives from this idea.  We can use math to numerically quantify different natural phenomenon in various disciplines like physics, chemistry, economics, finance, computer sciences, and so on. 

     At the same time, problems from other disciplines inspire the creation of theoretical concepts that end up contributing to mathematics itself. While I don't doubt the benefits of cross-displinarity in mathematics, I think that translating it so that other disciplines may understand and use it correctly its a great challenge.  To be able to successfully do this will take a lot of cultural negotiation in between fields and an increament in the appreciation of cross-disciplinarity.

I hate to admit it but...

When I think back to the first week of this program I remember when we read the article speaking on the difficulties engineers and scientists have with IDR. I scoffed to myself believing I was a special exception to this ludicrous statement. Now that I have participated in IDR, it is ridiculously difficult and I wish I was more creative in my thinking to complete this project.The link below shows how I feel daily lol.

How I feel when Im trying to write about my panel topic.

You Merely Adopted IDR, I Was Born In It (Revised)

Urban Planners will know:

IDR comes naturally to me. It comes natural because I'm pragmatically lazy, I'm always looking at a problem from multiple angles in order to come up with a solution that would transform society for the better.  

Also, it helps that I'm older and have been around the block a few times (both on a professional and non-professional/sketchy level).  Having this eclectic background gives me the raw material to begin asking the "big" questions about life/what it means to be human.  

Guiding my research is this existential quest, or praxis, to create meaning by working and finding a shared understanding with others in order address these "big" questions.

The Importance of Cross-Disciplinary Research

Cross-disciplinary research is significant in the animal sciences field. Many of the research projects being done in this field do not only benefit animals themselves but can also benefit humans. Researchers from different fields can take advantage of this and work along with animal scientists. For instance, one of the readings I read last week was on linking violence-the connection between abusing animals and abusing people. People from different fields, including sociology and psychology, came together to learn more about this link. Even outside of research different fields work together. For example, if a social worker suspects animal abuse in a home they report it to animal control. It works the same the other way around, someone who abuses an animal is more likely to abuse a person, so this helps social workers keep a closer eye on a family where an animal is being abused.

The other paper I read summarized interdisciplinary projects from a research center that establishes this type of research with a focus on cattle, pigs, and poultry. One of the things I found interesting about this group was that they allow researchers to take their time coming up with a common goal on every project. Something else the paper pointed out was the importance of not having too many disciplines involved in one project. This makes sense because if there are too many disciplines represented then it will be even more difficult identifying a common ground.

Cross disciplinary research is challenging and at times it can be a waste of funds and time if researchers can not work together. However, if done successfully it can benefit multiple fields at the same time and save money. 
      

JM post three

I noticed that a few other fellows have been having a rough time with this cross-disciplinary project.  It certainly has not be a crystal staircase for me either.  Nevertheless, I am really enjoying the task.  It's been an awesome challenge to make sense of my own research and to attempt to seamlessly connect it to my groups work.  A big part of that has been trusting my mates to do their best and trusting myself to rise to the call(academic self-esteem).

In the past, I have had some pretty awful group experiences.  The biggest failure there related to our inability to voice concerns in a timely and constructive manner.  I do not believe that has been an issue with my current group and I do not see it becoming a problem in the future.  Maybe our one Achilles heel is following directions (my group knows what I'm talking about lol).  Otherwise, it's been great and I'm so happy that I was randomly matched up with these women.

Cross Disciplinarity in Psychology

The growing emphasis on a holistic understanding of mind in psychology gives new authority to approaches that integrate perspectives from multiple subdivisions of the field. Many divisions now seek corroboration for their theories regarding behavior, cognition, and personality in the biological perspectives of neuroscience. For example, research by Douyon, Franco, and Hervey-Jumper (2008) revealed that children who suffer from attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) fare best when provided with a combination of medication and psychosocial treatment. Similarly, Biederman et al. (2004) found that screening children with ADHD for deficits in executive functioning could be used to prevent poor academic performance, demonstrating the utility of psychology in fields such as education.

The aforementioned theories also see much interplay, and clinical psychologists (who study aspects of behavior and personality), cognitive psychologists (whose focus is on constructs involving learning, memory, and communication), and social psychologists (not to be confused with sociologists; social psychologists' work lies in the observation of behavior as it relates to the presence of others) tend to inform the research of the other divisions with the broad implications of findings that may, at first glance, appear particular to their areas of study. Psychologists who work in corporate or non-for-profit settings (industrial/organizational, or "I/O," psychologists) often incorporate multiple views from the other disciplines as they work to improve the functioning of a business or organization. As is the case with interdisciplinarity in general, however, the efficacy and quality of such work is dependent on the support and motivation for it provided by the institutions that employ these researchers.

cross-disciplinary research makes sense in my field

By now we know that cross-disciplinary research is very important for most if not all fields. I study area (Middle Eastern) studies and this field encompasses political science, history, art, languages, etc.

I was reading articles about suicide amongst women in Iran written with contributions from medical doctors, psychologists, and community organizations. Collaborations were crucial in writing the articles—without them the articles would have been incomplete. I was also learning more about the Theological perspective from my advisor.

I see strengths of cross-disciplinary research within my field. Perspectives from different disciplines are necessary to get a more comprehensive view of subject matters.

Cross-Disciplinarity contra Identity Politics (and dogma)

Hello all,

Let me begin with a touchy but elucidating experience most of us have confronted:  General Education. Most of us -- most college students period -- damn it. Why? Because we see some, if not all, of these classes that fall outside our primary foci as impediments on our pursuits -- especially for those who had aspirations for, and now are obviously in, graduate school. But General Education is not inherently at fault -- it's its practitioners (and eventually, will likely be us, for the future academics). The vast majority of our general education professors fail to ever tie the relevance of the course to a larger framework (i.e. LIFE). And even for those courses which do not have a clear or immediate relationship to our individual experience, they still embody an alternative practice (for better or worse) of interrogating the world. And this is important, because this is a fundamental reality of human existence, in every conceivable domain, including our specific fields.

Granted, as an English Literature student (and more broadly, a student of the Humanities), cross-disciplinarity is inherent to my subject matter. Stories are made up of the same properties of life, and meaning is an effect of the various relations of these properties. To put it a different, but related, way, stories have contexts, and those contexts are limitless, while bound still bound to life, if only to be transformed by our imaginations (the means through which we experience the world). And given the variety of properties, contexts, and consequently, characters, Literary Studies, done responsibly and in a sophisticated manner, needs to engage with these variables on their (i.e. YOUR field's) terms.

So what is the significance of these two paragraphs? Let us take a phenomenon like Identity Politics as our counter-weight:  most simply (and perhaps slanted, to illustrate the point), identity politics are the politicization of specific groups to the exclusion/neglect of others. I'm gay or black or poor or woman or disabled, and I -- as a member of this specific group -- am oppressed. Now, where the specific histories and manifestations of oppression for each group are important, when they begin to be foregrounded as isolated causes (a symptom of this approach), the larger collective oppression of peoples is forgotten, impeding on the recognition of a collective struggle and the possibility for collective mobilization -- the real means for change.

What cross-disciplinarity -- as does General Education and Literature, WHEN DONE RIGHT -- embodies and promotes as a practice is the negotiation and synthesis of a variety of variables/perspectives/problems, giving way to the recognition 1) that we are all taking different approaches to different but related problems -- the world/our existence/the existence of others being the common denominator -- and 2) that real change requires collective change, bringing with it the challenge of taking into account other perspectives/discourses, and simultaneously the possibility of revolution (be it scientific, aesthetic, and/or political).

PS Do not let the failure of a specific moment of practice cast a shadow on the significance of the practice itself. In fact, you are all the more prepared to make it work the next time around. And there will, or ought to be, a next time...

Potential for Cross-disciplinary research....maybe??

Economics is the only social science that is considered a STEM field by the NSF. I believe the reason for this is the study of Economics at the graduate level and most economic research is highly quantitative. In my opinion this is the only thing that truly separates economics from the other social sciences. Other social sciences look more at the big picture- economists typically believe that everything can be quantified and most answers to common day problems can be found through the statistical analysis of large data sets and when abnormalities within data arise there are statistical tools that can adjust the abnormalities from the data. Other social scientists consider these abnormalities to be caused by various theories in which their disciplines support or have created, and often times they focus on the data abnormalities to form new theories that are supported with qualitative/ historical/ cultural/ etc facts rather than quantitative methods- while economists do this as well their theories are typically further supported with more quantitative tools. 


I think that cross-disciplinary research has the potential to be significant in my field. If economists could provide their statistical/ quantitative skills to cross-diciplinary research projects I think that both Economics and other social science disciplines could be strengthened. However while I believe research, as a whole would be strengthened I also think the lines that divide the disciplines would start to blur even more. Sometimes I wonder, if I had gone into another social science sociology for example and I received a PhD in sociology and a PhD or masters in mathematics would my research in sociology be so quantified to the extent that it could be published in economic journals? Would some of my found or proposed theories be more similar to those of economists? 


An article that touches on these aforementioned ideas can be found at the following links:

http://web.ebscohost.com.proxy2.library.illinois.edu/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=105f5b9b-f63c-4371-ac14-38d407946515%40sessionmgr11&vid=4&hid=19


I will probably look back on this post when I finish my degree and laugh because I am sure that (other than the "quantitativeness" of economics) there are some VERY significant divides/boundaries between Economics and other social sciences that I am not yet aware of, citing previous posts I have made- I am still learning how to define my discipline and do not believe I fully know what it/ entails, what the boundaries of it are and what is actually considered economics and what is not considered economics. When I know a little bit more about my discipline maybe this post and considerations into inter-diciplinary/ cross-diciplinary research will be relevant to my life and research. For now I see the "potential", but I do not think I am informed or knowledgeable enough to have a definitive answer on the political, social and economic impact of cross-diciplanary research within my field. 


Patrese Anderson 

Persoanl Thought.....

Personally, I see more the positive side of interdisciplinary research and group collaboration. I try to view and relate this work and experiences as a social interaction. Don't get me wrong I have been in group projects where it went all wrong, but in the end, it is still a living experience. As a sociologist may comment, we have to learn to work and live together in one world. This experience so far has been a positive experience. Of course as SPI participants and writing group members we all have a commitment to the program, but as well, we have a chance to meet and learn from a group of smart and intelligent group of scholars. We all bring something different to this city and university, lets make the best of it. In reality, at times we are not always going to agree and enjoy what we need to do, but I try to see the positives side of life and the events I have the privilege to participate in. I cannot wait to see what is to still come of this experience in Illinois.

Engineering and Cross-disciplinary Research

Cross-disciplinary research has been a key component certainly in environmental science (my undergraduate major of study) long before it became popular. This is especially true after sustainable development was put on the international map after the 1992 Rio Summit. When it comes to agricultural engineering, the term cross-disciplinary becomes more unclear. In fact, the most useful sources I found for this exercise come from computer engineering, which is still related to my research independent study this summer.

As agricultural engineering hones on sustainability (not only in development but in educational outreach), it is by default involved with other fields. Watcher notes that it is basically impossible to educate on sustainability utilizing a single discipline (48). Outreach programs through extension services seem to be a staple at every major university. Yet, it is not as though agricultural engineers and agronomists are always contracting out services to sociologists and anthropologists. Rather, they are applying their problem-solving, scientific methods to approach outreach from an engineering perspective, combined with the notion that universal skills such as public speaking and group presentations were taught in general education. Additionally, the myth that engineers cannot write or speak well is losing stigma as we become more and more visible in this information age.

In short agricultural engineering has certainly become more holistic, but cross-disciplinary would be a stretch to describe agricultural engineering. At best, it’s a gray area when working with consumer and food sciences. Collaboration here is very important for a variety of reasons, including informed consumer safety. Moving towards including more disciplines is important in an age of unprecedented information and communication.

I would hypothesize the limitations of any cross-disciplinary research in agricultural engineering stem from what was discussed in the Week 2 readings. Specifically, I am not aware of agricultural engineers who collaborate on grants extensively outside of their own field; yet engineering itself applies the pure sciences and mathematics. Mehanjiev, Brereton and Hosking note that ideas in engineering are transferable (1). This seems more practical than the methodical conversations described in Week 2 readings.

The economics of cross-disciplinary research is that there appears a growing interest (demand) for the concept, but it can and does take time, especially in academia. I would say that my research family is able to work effectively and we do often go line by line on important parts of the documents we write. But because we don’t always agree and sometimes have to communicate the same ideas in different ways so everyone can understand and I can see how this can keep people from other duties when time and efficiency are valuable commodities.

These challenges can transition into the political realm by creating red tape, so any cross-disciplinary project should be weighed out carefully. I can say that in the natural sciences, understanding incentives is a key role in making policy judgments. If a life cycle analysis or other holistic means are used to develop a project and find an outcome, then I would find difficulty in focusing on just one field. Yet, if one examines life cycle analyses, this procedure has its own set of ISO standards that do not call for specific collaboration of fields.

The social implications for cross-disciplinary research could yield a much better understanding of social dynamics and human culture. Agricultural engineers, for instance, could apply a scientific approach to solving problems that social or natural scientists may not have been exposed to or simply do not use. It’s even possible that cross-disciplinary education programs can be developed beyond the general education for students to develop more intangible skills. Such skills are frequently cited on resumes and CVs. Ivory noted that you need to be able to explain research if it’s on a CV, but this also applies to skills. I also think that it could help the social sciences in the long term because collaboration could bring in a variety of uncertainty analyses, which are a staple for engineers.

---------------------------------------------------------------

Sources:

Mehanjiev, Nikolay, Brereton Pearl, and Hosking John . "Second International Workshop on Interdisciplinary Software Engineering Research (WISER’06).". New York, NY: Association for Computing Machinery, 2006. 1-3. Print. <http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1137662>.

Wachter, Christine. "Interdisciplinary Teaching and Learning for Diverse and Sustainable Engineering Education." GIEE 2011: Gender and Interdisciplinary Education for Engineers. Ed. Andre Beraud, Anne-Sophie Godfroy and John Michel. Paris, France: Sense Publications, 2011. 48. Print. <http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-94-6091-982-4_5>.

A reflection of the panel abstract:

This past week working as a team has been a learning experience. We had to be in sync, varying from scheduling meeting times, working on the abstract, and the proposal. While doing so, I learned a lot about my group and how effective we are together.

Our panel abstract is important in the field of animal science. We are working on studying the different aspects of sow housing. The behavioral, social and physical state of sows is very significant to all consumers. This collective topic directly relates to my individual theme. As a matter of fact, I am studying a component of the behavioral effects of sows while living in a confined space. My primary field of study is Mathematics; comprehending this issue has been a new experience for me. 

Interdisciplinary Research: Assignment #3

When looking at the significance of cross-disciplinary research in a political, social, and economical aspect; economically there will be a need for more funds and outsourcing to support the extra research because I do not believe too many researchers will use their own funds. Socially it will call for alot of majors and disciplines to become either frustrated with each other respect each others areas more. Every discipline as a stereotype against others and a huge let go of egos will have to be diminished. Politically I really do not see that much impact but that the government would look at its funds and where they would go.

I think that cross- disciplinary research is more significant in my field between different specialties such as reproduction and nutrition. It is easier because everybody is more familiar with the research already done and the stress of a collaboration would be decreased. There can be cross- disciplinary research done between animal science and other fields; primarily the hard sciences such as engineering and mathematics, but it would take time to establish trust and understanding.

R&W Abstract/Proposal

My experience working with my R&W Family was not difficult, nor work would I consider it enjoyable either. My group member are legit, positive, humorous, and flexible, but with so many members having different schedules coordinating everything becomes cumbersome, because we all like to work on our own schedule, which is understandable. Developing a panel abstract first and foremost was somewhat difficult because we have not completed our individual readings, our research, or began writing and thus we aren’t certain which direction our writings will go. So writing the abstract felt like we were all making an educated guess. For the most part there wasn’t much difficulty bringing our differing viewpoints together it just took some time to set down and make sure everyone was on he same page. Honestly, it’s hard to say, more because all we’ve done is write an abstract & proposal. So everything sounds good on paper right now, the real bumps in the road, if any, will lie in writing and presenting.

I.Akande

I will be quite frank with you, I did not enjoy the process of writing the abstract or proposal at all; not, however, because of my group, we get along just fine, but because of how false and hollow this whole endeavor feels.  Calling what we are doing interdisciplinary or research just feels like a misnomer, what it feels as if we are doing is writing four papers on a subject broad enough that we could all find something to write on and yet still narrow enough that our papers are vaguely connected.  This feeling is only further compounded by the fact that I am nowhere near capable enough to apply the types of math that interest me to any sort of other discipline and so I have to resort to doing things like statistical analysis instead.  When I compare how I feel about the work our research and writing families are doing and the work my department research group is doing the only word for it is hollow, the abstract and proposal on swine housing my group wrote feels hollow and as a result I feel completely unengaged in the project.  I think that at the core of it the problems is simple we are too immature in our respective disciplines to truly bring our two subjects, mathematics and animal science, together in any meaningful way; the result being a process which feels more akin to a term paper for an undergraduate course in a subject you don't particularly care for as opposed to a collaboration of disciplines.

Before you get the impression that I only have negative feelings toward the process, let me say that it has been a learning experience in its own way. After all if it take you a hundred tries to make a lightbulb you never failed you just found ninety-nine ways not to make a lightbulb and you learn things along the way.  I have no doubt that while the process may not produce the desired result there will still be something to learn in my group, even if it is just one way not to do interdisciplinary work; maybe we will even learn something about how to along the way.

R&W Collaboration

     Unlike many, I feel as thought my research and writing family came to a consensus on our research topic with ease. When we first met we discussed our overall interest within our fields. We were not to focused on connecting our individual projects so that eliminated any possible divisions within our group. Also, only three out of four members were present at the time. The three of us were all in the College of Agriculture Consumer and Environmental Science (ACES), which made it fairly simple to connect our interest. The three of us had come to an agreement on a topic during our first meeting. Once our fourth and final member was introduced, we asked for her interest and related it to the established topic. Our fourth member has a background in mathematics so we acknowledged her disconnect by explaining some key terms that were essential to our topic. The formation of our alliance was almost effortless and I am sure that it is because of the close relationships between our backgrounds and personal interest.

-Lakiah N. Clark

My Blended Family

I have enjoyed spending time with and getting to know my family members, Lonna, EJ, and Marlon, during our weekly meetings.  However, deciding on either an "interdisciplinary" topic or a topic to approach in a "cross-disciplinary" manner proved to be a challenge.  Although at first glances our backgrounds in math (me and EJ), electrical engineering (Lonna), and educational policy with an interest in STEM education (Marlon) might seem conducive to some type of collaboration, we quickly realized there was no completely natural route for our research to take.  EJ and I found ourselves especially challenged as we racked our brains to come up with a relevant way to incorporate our summer research projects or our even broader spectrum of research interests going into our PhD's.  As pure mathematicians it is almost given that our work will have little to no applications outside of mathematics and, in addition, that the applications it does have will be sought out and developed not by us, but by applied mathematics, statisticians, engineers, and computer scientists.

After much discussion and several trial runs, we eventually landed on a topic.  We decided to look at the factors that contribute to the disproportionately low amount of diverse students in STEM fields and see if that proportion can be positively affected by informing students of the benefits that careers within STEM fields, more specifically within solar technology, can provide.  We will attempt to ascertain these factors through surveys of students in K-12 grades.  My role, along with EJ, is to use the data we gather to create quantitative and qualitative metrics to measure the different factors influencing students in their pursuit, or lack thereof, of STEM education.  This is a far cry from the research I am doing this summer in mathematical logic, nonetheless, I hope to draw upon my mathematical foundation in analysis and topology in the development and analysis of these metrics. 

J M reflection

I am having a positive experience with this project (in spite of my slow internet connection problems).  Initially, I was not terribly in love with our group's topic.  It seemed interesting but I didn't necessarily feel a connection.  It was just like an intriguing story but not one that I was drawn towards (or could see myself forcing out 5 pages about). 

After some time, we met again together and collectively realized it was not working.  We decided to reexamine what made us feel passionate in the first place and re-commit to a topic that better fit all of our expertises. 

It's still not perfect but at least it's something.  We all will discuss under-representation from the lenses of each of our disciplines.   My section will focus more on the problem with underpaid appointments and unpaid internships and how they (in my opinion)  overwhelmingly hinder poorer, people of color from entering into the library science field. 

We shall see what happens. 

The Ups and Downs in the R&W Family

My family is investigating how microfinance can be applied in the United States. This is important because there are a lot of poor communities that are targeted by predatory lending institutions leaving few sound financial options for low-income populations.  

Integrating our different disciplines has been challenging. As we were unfamiliar with each other's research, developing a topic was difficult. We also had difficulty learning how each of us would approach the topic. After a few weeks now, however, I think we have a better understanding of how we will contribute to the project. 

This process has been rewarding because although my family has had some cohesiveness issues, I think we are reaching common understandings. Participating in this project has also reminded me of how passionate researchers are. Conducting research inconsistent with our interests (passions) makes harmonizing our disciplines difficult. If I choose to conduct IDR in the future, however, the integration of perspectives may come more naturally. 

Overall, I think my family is on the right track. We may have some issues, but what family doesn't? 

Reflections

This week has been more challenging than I anticipated. First, we started with one topic and switched to another. I was slightly frustrated due to the topic change simply because I would like to speak within the confines of my expertise. I ended up just using an analogy within my knowledge base to support the topic. I think its weak but I just want to get the work done. I wonder if this is typical for physical scientist (or engineers) when attempting to do work with social scientist. This was a challenge I was not prepared for AT ALL.

Train of thought...

Our group chose Hip-Hop as our topic of choice. There was a natural gravitational pull towards that topic when we first met at the beginning of SPI. The conversation continued outside of the Agricultural, Consumer and Environmental Sciences (ACES) Library and soon enough we began to talk about focusing our research on Mos Def/Yasiin Bey. The benefit of living in the same building is helpful because we would run into each other, which helped our relationship as a Writing and Research family.

Also, the benefit of working together has given us the opportunity to learn about each other and help each other to formulate a blueprint for the dissemination of our abstract, proposal, and individual interests. While it may not always be easy to work with the varying personalities and many ideas, we do our best to contribute and work towards the end goal. Naturally, we feel out the situation and contribute in our own ways to complete our task.

While Hip-Hop may be frequently misunderstood and seen as just a form of entertainment, we are aware that there is a deeper conversation within the hip-hop community that has taken place. We just happen to be contributing towards further developing the discussion. Issues of racism, poverty, crime, politics, and so on are addressed, but popular culture taints the culture with unethical practices: materialism, violence, under-aged/unprotected sex, male dominance, subjugation of women, etc. Yasiin Bey touches on these issues in his tracks and works as the perfect model for our conversation of hip hop and its contribution to society. 

I think the more challenging part is figuring out how all of our approaches to the focal point will connect, but I think we have some good ideas and dedicated family members to make this work out. Another conflict is that we have different schedules that make it difficult to meet, due to our respective research projects, but we manage to find a middle ground to meet and converse. 

Panel Abstract Experience

Putting together the panel abstract has been somewhat of a challenge.  As a research group interested in better understanding poverty through consumer behavior, economics, and urban planning, the topic of "microfinance" seemed ambiguous enough to fit with each of our respective field.  The challenging part was trying to construct a unifying framework that weaves together our work in preparation for an hour long panel presentation.  This forced us to be creative - to tinker and reflect.  Perhaps that's the beauty of interdisciplinary work.  We are forced to give up preconceived notions of a given topic and get swept away by our intellectual curiosity.  I just hope this intellectual curiosity leads to new insights.

Math and the QT \pi 's

I'm in the R&W group with Lonna, Marissa and Marlon, and it's been great - they've all been very committed and organized, and it's been a fun experience.  The biggest challenge has been how to incorporate the research interests and perspectives of Marissa and myself, since both of us are interested in different areas of theoretical mathematics.  This is still an issue, and I for one am still unsure of whether it is in fact possible to unite pure math with the social sciences in any way that is either innovative mathematically or significant with regard to the social sciences.  A mathematician who seeks to contribute to other fields (especially those outside the natural sciences) usually becomes an engineer or a statistician very quickly - not that there is anything wrong with that (certainly not!), but the simple fact is that there are other people who are trained for this and who can do it much more effectively.  I am somewhat suspicious that trying to incorporate theoretical math into research in the social sciences will end up making the math more obscure without making any meaningful contribution to the social sciences. 

However, our research group has been extremely committed, and I'm hopeful that we've found a way to move forward.  Our goal now is to use real analysis and the theory of metric spaces as a way to produce insights into the likelihood of young students from under-represented minorities to be interested in STEM fields.  This was somewhat inspired by the readings (I'll look up the exact reference later) which described the use of metrics to measure the "inter-disciplinarity" of a paper.  I think this may be a way to truly bring our different disciplines together in a meaningful way, and I'm proud of our team for seeing the potential in this idea.

peace,

EJ

A Voyage into Children’s Literature

A Voyage into Children’s Literature

It is no wonder interdisciplinary work is challenging!! I personally feel that interdisciplinary research and collaboration across disciplines is emphasized way too late in our intellectual development, the time in which people have learned their “static” disciplinary boundaries and the role in the society. It is no wonder interdisciplinary work at graduate level is overwhelmingly frustrating; we have been socialized to value our individual disciplines to the point where it is frightening to collaborate. At this point, we have learned the “importance ” of our individual disciplinary approaches to solving world problems; as a result we are too comfortable to be challenged. Only if interdisciplinary work started early in our education journeys, would we have more tolerance of other disciplines. Mutual understanding and respect of each other’s background as of contribution in dismantling information that eventually lead to combating today’s societal problems would not be as problematic and barrier to IDR.

However, that is not to undermine the power of such work. This is my first time in my academic journey to intentionally work with other people from various disciplines. From establishing group norms to writing abstract, proposal and more, it seems as if we have known each other for a long time. My SPI family experience has been very enriching, but I think it is so because we have similar interests, we all value the power of cultural experiences in influencing one’s interests. My group is comprised of two social work students, library science and one from history background. The most common thing we share is that, we like to focus on issues that impact minority groups, in this case minority children in children's illustrated books.

 On the very first day we met as a group, we talked about our individual disciplinary background, but the most important part was our personal interest both short and long terms. This allowed us too keep each other in our thoughts as we crafted and continue to work on our project.

This process has become more than just working on project, but how day in and out I am realizing more and more how personal and relevant our topic is. Children are fragile human beings and through our curiosity to examine the depiction of ethnic minorities in children’s literature and the impact on children, we work hard to create space for all of us to question and learn. We are learning together! This has led some of us to think critically as minorities, how would we want to raise our own children given the misinformation that is circulating. One of the fundamental questions that have come as a result for me is, how can we raise awareness and fight and demand for inclusion, more diversified and accurate depiction of experiences of minority groups in children’s illustrated books? This question and many more are explored in our interdisciplinary research team.

Research Writing Family

I would to start out by saying I truly enjoy everybody in my research family. However, I am not a fan of trying to tie our topics together. It seems like the SPI students last year mapped out there own research interest and were able to almost make a road map for the years to come. I was extremely excited to be able to do that this summer but instead I am pulling at "strings" trying to make a connection between very different topics.

Making progress

Our proposal came out looking great. I am curious to see the feedback though. The three of us (in our writing family) are all interested in African American history, hip-hop history, social action etc. so we did not really stumble as some of the other groups did. We chose a dynamic topic, so it has kept us moving.

I will be covering the historical context of hip-hop music and will analyze three of Yasiin Bey’s songs with social justice lyrics. Andrew and Alonso will be writing about the broader implications of Yasiin’s music, and will also analyze songs. Yasiin’s songs are rich in meaning and Yasiin is an artist that continues to be faithful to the original ideals of hip-hop.  

Wish us luck!

What Can You Do With A Physicist?

I feel that I was put into my research family to challenge us. The rest of the team is in library science and education, disciplines that appear to have similar values, at least from my outside perspective. Physics is different. Much of my SPI experience has revolved around discovering and articulating the ways in which physics is different.

First, physics is a relatively pure science - a large portion of the field is geared towards extending our knowledge of fundamental laws of nature. Physics has proven its applicability as a primary driver of technology over centuries, but that's not the always the primary reason why we study it. Physicists often base our value judgements on the generalizability, clarity and even surprise of what's being tested. A good example of a highly regarded physics experiment is known as the double-slit experiment. The basic idea of an experiment like this is that even though we know that light can be broken down into single particles, when we send a single particle of light through a pair of slits in some wall, the photon's location on the other side still behaves as if we had a wave of many particles passing through all the slits at once. This experiment showed us something that is true of all light and matter, clear in its implications and surprising enough to challenge a fair number of assumptions about the nature of light. It's also simple to repeat, which is essential to ensuring that we can distinguish between a new physical phenomenon and a mistake the experimenters made.

What are the applications of the double-slit experiment? Clearly we are not putting a double-slit in every home and factory. There are some scientific and technical applications of this, but for the most part, we use the results of this results of this sort of research second-hand. Experiments like the double-slit helped scientists understand quantum mechanics, the branch of physics that would lead to the invention of the transistor, which would in turn lead to the miniaturization of computers, leading to the invention of the PC, the Internet, the mobile phone, etc.

The double-slit is also one of the old predecessors to my own independent study in quantum optics, despite being roughly 200 years old.

So when it came time for me to explain my work to my own R&W "family," I think I started in the wrong place. I outlined information theory and then attempted to show its generality - it might be used as a quantitative measure of how many different explanations we might expect to need for urban poverty, or as a way of marking the point at which a piece of metal becomes magnetized. I then described the power of quantum mechanics in terms of its surprising qualities - objects can act as if they are simultaneously in many places at once. Only afterwards did it dawn on me that social sciences do not think in these terms.

The readings painted a few examples of why interdisciplinary research involving natural sciences often goes wrong. I don't think these papers produced particularly general results, focusing on a single group of sociologists/modellors (Jeffrey) and a small sample of environmental scientists to represent a large collection of fields (Lele and Noorgard). Still, I did notice some patterns.

One common technique in interdisciplinary research seems to be what I would call a client-consultant model - one side sets the purpose of the research, and the other is brought in to provide expertise. Projects in the Lele and Noorgard paper implicitly adopted the value systems and dissemination forms of the social sciences, requesting natural scientists to participate but eliminating any innate incentive to do so. It was not surprising to me, for instance, that the hydrologist mentioned in Lele and Noorgard's paper did not want to change his terminology to suit the needs of economists. He probably had not realized that hydrology was being brought in to serve the needs of economics, not the other way around. A more balanced example existed in Jeffrey's paper, where the modellers and sociologists fought over the project's direction based on what was probably subconscious self-interest. The modellers would be evaluated on the model's technical merits regardless of the data being analyzed, and the sociologists on the human implications of their result regardless of how it was processed. Each side wanted to become the main purpose of the project, using the other to provide backend resources.

Client-consultant models of research can easily construct their own prestige hierarchy. When it is expected that mathematicians will contribute to nearly every field, but that few can contribute to mathematics, a value judgement is already in play. Ironically, the overall field hierarchy tends to favor the side that is less likely to receive benefits from collaboration.

I digress. This is just one of what I would consider the long, sad history of cop-out answers to the challenges of truly interdisciplinary research.

Group 8 initially struggled to cohere around a topic. We were very much leaning towards special education in the beginning, but it soon became clear that several of us were leaning too far out of our own fields and would be compromised in our ability to contribute as masters of our fields. We went back to the drawing board and realized that we were all based around the topic of information. It was a good starting point but very broad.

We came together when we split off to each write our own version of the abstract. Taking a break seemed to help us converge. We sort of found a structure to how our specific topics each handled information, starting with the practical right-now challenges of information in our education system and progressing to the more futuristic and theoretical ideas.


This process has been challenging, and it has been at times difficult for me to balance against the already substantial demands of a physics PhD. I am on some level glad that we did not back down from the hardest issue - how do we create a piece of research that is a true combination of natural and social sciences, rather than a study in one that just happens to reference the other?

I personally have a fair amount of faith that the concept of information theory is broadly applicable - it is one of the few places where I suspect that a fully interdisciplinary path (one in all 3 of the sciences, social sciences and humanities) is already laid out. I have to do a better job of making that case.

Art. Science. Humanity. Society. The chasms between fields are deep. How far can we cross?

Week 2

R&W Family

I'm thankful for my R&W group, the QT Pi's (lol), because the members have made this experience more enjoyable. Although it is quite difficult blending our research interests, we learned that it's actually possible. After deciding on a research topic, we realized that we have access to a lot more resources than we thought, resources that will make our research possible and relevant. Our abstract/proposal is important because we seek to understand a dilemma that diverse individuals of the younger generation encounter. We intend to explore the factors that contribute to a child's decision to major in a STEM field, more specifically an underrepresented child. We want to encourage their participation in STEM fields, especially solar technology, because in doing so, they can contribute to the uplifting of their local communities.  

The process has definitely been challenging since our fields are very different (i.e. math, electrical engineering, and educational policy). Math was the most difficult to relate because so of the topics have no real-world application. We utilized one of the readings in which math metrics were used in an interdisciplinary study to determine how to relate math to our study.


I learned that sometimes we're given assignments that may initially come off as forced, but actually end up helping us expand our thinking.

R&W Collaboration Experience

     My research and writing family is composed by Jaime, Lakiah and Kathryn. At first I wasn't sure how I would contribute through my discipline for our group project. It took me awhile to understand the purpose of our project and the different perspectives my team members had. Especially since our topic is focused on agricultural and ecological practices (something I have little to no background  in).  Thankfully, all my family members where really supportive through out the process of making our abstract and proposal. What helped me the most, as most articles we read explained, was that each family member took some time to explain terminology and concepts I was unfamiliar with.  Each of us put our best effort to understand or at least relate on some level with our different approaches.

     As with every family we sometimes have misunderstandings but until now I believe we have been working really well together. The challenges of interdisciplinary work are very noticeable in our meetings but acknowledging they exist helps the process of getting through them.  I have great hope for our project! I feel that as I get to know them better as a person it makes it easier to get where they are coming from and how to deal with conflict of ideas better.

Death to Interdisciplinary Research!!!

I think interdisciplinary research is a good thing when you bring people together whom are all knowledgeable about the proposed research topic, however when you bring people together who are not it can become chaotic and frustrating which is what my experience with the group proposal and abstract was. Our panel abstract is discussing the relevance of using micro financing as a means to alleviate poverty within low income neighborhoods in the United States. The importance of this panel is micro-financing projects are being utilized in developing countries to create sustainable economic growth however in the United States low income areas are typically void of financial institutions that are willing to lend to low income people. Instead low income neighborhoods are flooded with predatory financial service organizations such as pay day loans and title services etc. My research family believes that by utilizing micro-financing techniques rather than the predatory financial institutions economic growth within impoverished would increase.

It was very difficult and I still do not believe that we have not successfully mapped each of our disciplines into this topic. When our group first decided on this topic I knew for me, it would be an easy project to research because within the past 20 years development economists have spent a lot of time looking at different cash transfer programs effects on the alleviation of poverty, so I immediately THOUGHT I saw the connection/ parallel. However when my group members and I began explaining the parallels and connections to our respective disciplines it immediately became apparent that NONE of us fully understand the connections. I think that this is because none of us (including me!!)  knew/understood the correct terminology of our fields or any prominent discipline specific theories that addressed micro-financing. So we each sat around the table trying to explain something to each other that we our selves did not fully understand. It was like trying to teach spanish when the only words you know are hola and gracias.

(McCoy, S. and Gardner, S. 2012) Discuss the importance of having the right people involved in interdisciplinary research (IDR). According to this paper IDR has a higher probability to be effective in social sciences. While I agree with this, I think that having the right people also means having knowledgeable people and since we are all incoming graduate students clearly we are not knowledgeable enough about our own fields to be embarking into IDR and trying to explain our field parallels to other people in other disciplines.

So to conclude this blog post I AM NOT ENJOYING this IDR experience. I believe if I were presented with this research project after my second or third year of graduate school when I have completed most of my core course work I would enjoy it more for now I am saying DEATH to IDR!!!!
 

Collaboration going right

Hi all,

So off the bat, I think our group was at an advantage in finding common ground (hip-hop; Yasiin Bey fka Mos Def) through which we can explore our interests, vacillating between personal and academic (e.g. field/department, Independent study). Where we are each touching on our academic fields in our own way, we have come together to explore this subject matter on its own terms, and hence have allowed the project to develop organically, without the need/pressure to conform to disciplinary rigidity (whether it be the field or ourselves; although in the same breadth, each of our fields our inherently interdisciplinary, and we all have backgrounds in english literature). With that being said, although we haven't decided on this just yet, we see the capacity for synthesizing our individual projects -- as we are for the presentation -- into a substantial single document, really putting the practice of interdiscplinarity to the test. We had a smooth and successful test-run regarding the panel abstract/proposal, which was another bench-mark in our collective progress and development.

Although things have been smooth, it is not to say we haven't had to negotiate differences, particularly regarding our personalities. Collectively, we encompass a pretty wide-spectrum in terms of demeanor and approach, and it has been wonderful to see it play out as it has (despite personal anxieties of talking too much and/or coming across as insistent, but that is also symptomatic of my personality).

I look forward to seeing where we decide to take the written ("individual") portion of the project, if we decide to collaborate, and if so, how that process unfolds. But if the panel proposal was any indication, as a synecdoche of a larger document, then I feel optimistic about the possibility and potential of a collaborative writing project, with an eye toward completing a draft to work on for (maybe) publication.