Re-disciplining Academic Careers? Interdisciplinary Practice and Career Development in a Swedish Environmental Sciences Research Center

Abstract

Interdisciplinarity is often framed as crucial for addressing the complex problems of contemporary society and for achieving new levels of innovation. But while science policy and institutions have provided a variety of incentives for stimulating interdisciplinary work throughout Europe, there is also growing evidence that some aspects of the academic system do not necessarily reward interdisciplinary work. In this study, we explore how mid-career researchers in an environmental science research center in Sweden relate to and handle the distinct forms of uncertainty that arise from conflicting institutional and policy impulses. Our material suggests that interdisciplinary academics are often confronted with and at times themselves operate with a surprisingly dichotomous, value-laden view of their research practice. Disciplinarity is primarily associated with the ideals of scientific rigor, while interdisciplinarity becomes conflated with application-oriented work and a lack of 'theory.' We also draw attention to the underlying practical dynamics that reproduce this tension and entangle it with the very process of academic socialization. Specifically, we analyze the ambivalent consequences of the various work-arounds that researchers rely on to carve out opportunities for ongoing interdisciplinary research within heterogeneous funding landscapes. These tactics turn out to be undermined by the overriding normative power of formal career incentives at universities, which continue to emphasize the ideals of the individual high-performing academic who publishes in disciplinary journals and attracts the most selective grants. Under such * Wolfgang Kaltenbrunner circumstances, the work-arounds themselves become an insidious mechanism that allows researchers to stay in academia but systematically marginalizes their voices and epistemic ambitions in the process.

Plugging In: How One Graduate Program Shaped Doctoral Students’ Scholarly Identities as Interdisciplinary Scientists

“…As our results reveal, some consider themselves bridge-builders between disciplines whereas others were more likely to indicate they used the methods of other disciplines to address questions squarely within their home discipline. This finding is consistent with past research (e.g., Gantogtokh & Quinlan, 2017;Gardner et al, 2014;Lattuca, 2003;Lyall, 2019;Müller & Kaltenbrunner, 2019), which shows that there are multiple ways interdisciplinarity can be enacted and performed. While the kinds of interdisciplinary scholarly identity students demonstrate is beyond the scope of this paper and we revisit it in the conclusion, we note this an important assumption before we discuss our findings.…”

“…By values, we refer to the conscious and unconscious assumptions about what is important that guides human behavior (Schein, 1984;Thoeonig & Paradeise, 2014). Unlike prior research on interdisciplinary graduate education which shows the interdisciplinary values are often not affirmed in higher education (e.g., Gardner et al, 2012Gardner et al, , 2014Gonzales & Rincones, 2012;Lyall, 2019;Müller & Kaltenbrunner, 2019), the NRT program nurtured the interdisciplinary values of participants in this study. Network connections emphasized the value of collaboration and the use of multiple perspectives in approaching research problems.…”

“…One of the most critical elements of the NRT program that facilitated interdisciplinary scholarly identity was that the LSC provided recognition and support for students who have interdisciplinary interests. The program, by design, was intended to break down departmental barriers that undermine interdisciplinary research endeavors (Boden et al, 2011;Borrego & Cutler, 2010;Gardner et al, 2012;Lattuca, 2001;Lindvig & Hillersdal, 2018;Lyall, 2019;Müller & Kaltenbrunner, 2019;Robinson, 2016). Whether through weekly or annual meetings of the language science community, informal reading groups, or exchanges between students in class, the LSC legitimated and encouraged students to gain research skills and launch interdisciplinary projects in ways that contributed to their scholarly identity as interdisciplinary scientists.…”

“…Colleges and universities are structurally organized around academic departments that represent disciplines (Holley, 2009;Lindvig & Hillersdal, 2019;Lyall, 2019). Creating and sustaining interdisciplinary units requires organizational strategies such as changing tenure and promotion policies (Holley, 2009;Hurtado & Sharkness, 2008;Lyall, 2019;Müller & Kaltenbrunner, 2019), creating shared physical spaces (Borrego, Boden, & Newswander, 2014;Gantogtokh & Quinlan, 2017;Holley, 2015), and dedicating resources and staffing to interdisciplinary program management (Gantogtokh & Quinlan, 2017). Likewise, cultural barriers, such as norms regarding appropriate research questions, methods, theories, and frameworks through which new knowledge is produced (Brister, 2016;Holley, 2009;Lyall, 2019), also thwart scholars from doing interdisciplinary research.…”

“…Thus, enhancing interdisciplinarity may also act as a lever by which to fulfill American workforce needs in science and technology fields (National Academy of Science, Engineering, and Medicine, 2018). Despite consensus on the need for and benefits of interdisciplinary research, there is little agreement on what interdisciplinary research is, how it should be conducted, and the skills researchers need to do it (Klaassen, 2018;Lattuca, 2001Lattuca, , 2003Lindvig, 2018;Lindvig & Hillersdal, 2019;MacLeod & Nagatsu, 2018;Müller & Kaltenbrunner, 2019). This disagreement presents challenges for higher education institutions seeking to train doctoral students to conduct research that crosses disciplinary boundaries (Boden, Borrego, Newswander, 2011;Borrego & Newswander, 2010;Carr, Loucks, & Blöschl, 2018).…”