Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Engaging undergraduate students in interdisciplinary learning (i.e., integrating disciplines to solve problems or create novel insights) is crucial for equipping them to tackle complex, real-world problems. Despite the importance, limited empirical research has studied how to design activities and assignments to foster undergraduates’ interdisciplinary learning. To address the gap, we synthesized four design principles (i.e., authentic scenarios, boundary-crossing between disciplines, interdisciplinary collaboration, and cognitive advancement) by drawing on critical characteristics of interdisciplinary learning to guide the design of interdisciplinary learning activities and assignments. Through a quasi-experiment, we evaluated the effectiveness of the design by examining the interdisciplinary learning quality demonstrated in the weekly posts (i.e., notes posted on a digital collaborative platform Miro) and final essays of students in the experimental (principle-based design) and comparison conditions (routine design). We found that the online posts and essays of the experimental condition showed greater levels of diversity and integration; online posts of the experimental condition showed significantly greater disciplinary grounding than those in the comparison condition; essays of the experimental condition showed greater cognitive advancement, suggesting the effects of the design. Weekly feedback suggested that participants in the experimental condition provided more positive responses and offered more suggestions to increase engagement, interaction and conceptual understanding. This study contributes to the field by synthesizing actionable design principles and providing empirical evidence for the effectiveness while underscoring the need to improve the integration dimension further.

Keywords

design principles engagement higher education instructional design interdisciplinary learning quasi-experiment

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Alberta Education. (2015). Interdisciplinary learning. https://www.learnalberta.ca/content/kes/pdf/or_ws_tea_elem_05_interdis.pdf

Bertel

L. B.

Winther

Routhe

H. W.

Kolmos

(2022). Framing and facilitating complex problem-solving competencies in interdisciplinary megaprojects: An institutional strategy to educate for sustainable development. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 23(5), 1173–1191.

Boix Mansilla

Duraising

E. D

. (2007). Targeted assessment of students’ interdisciplinary work: An empirically grounded framework proposed. The Journal of Higher Education, 78(2), 215–237. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2007.11780874

Boix Mansilla

Miller

W. C.

Gardner

. (2000). On disciplinary lenses and interdisciplinary work. In Wineburg

Grossman

(Eds.), Interdisciplinary curriculum: Challenges of implementation (pp. 17–38). Teachers College Press.

Brassler

Dettmers

(2017). How to enhance interdisciplinary competence-interdisciplinary problem-based learning versus interdisciplinary project-based learning. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 11(2), 12. https://doi.org/10.7771/1541-5015.1686

Coffield

J. A.

Choi

Walker

B. B.

Walters

Hill

J. R.

Kim

Rechtman

J. E.

Carmichael

K. P.

Pidaparti

Welch-Devine

(2021). Graduate Scholars leadership, engagement, and development: Initial design, implementation, and lessons learned. Journal of Higher Education Outreach and Engagement, 25(1), 65–86.

Cronin

M. A.

Weingart

L. R.

(2007). Representational gaps, information processing, and conflict in functionally diverse teams. Academy of Management Review, 32, 761–773. https://www.jstor.org/stable/20159333

Epstein

S. L.

(2005). Making interdisciplinary collaboration work. In Derry

S. J.

Schunn

C. D.

Gernsbacher

M. A.

(Eds.), Interdisciplinary collaboration: An emerging cognitive science (pp. 245–264). Psychology Press.

Franks

Dale

Hindmarsh

Fellows

Buckridge

Cybinski

(2007). Interdisciplinary foundations: Reflecting on interdisciplinarity and three decades of teaching and research at Griffith University, Australia. Studies in Higher Education, 32(2), 167–185. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070701267228

10.

Freeman

Eddy

S. L.

McDonough

Smith

M. K.

Okoroafor

Jordt

Wenderoth

M. P.

(2014). Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 111(23), 8410–8415. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1319030111

11.

Gonzalez-Cespon

J. L.

Alonso-Rodriguez

J. A.

Rodriguez-Barcia

Gallego

P. P.

Pino-Juste

M. R.

(2024). Enhancing employability skills of biology graduates through an interdisciplinary project-based service learning experience with engineering and translation undergraduate students. Education Sciences, 14(1), 95. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci14010095

12.

Gopalan

Rosinger

Ahn

J. B.

(2020). Use of quasi-experimental research designs in education research: Growth, promise, and challenges. Review of Research in Education, 44(1), 218–243. https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X20903302

13.

Hains-Wesson

(2020). Students’ perceptions of an interdisciplinary global study tour: Uncovering inexplicit employability skills. Higher Education Research & Development, 39(4), 657–671.

14.

Han

S. J.

Abadi

Jin

Chen

(2021). Cultivating interdisciplinary team creativity through an intensive design competition. Higher Education Skills and Work-Based Learning, 11(3), 757–772. https://doi.org/10.1108/HESWBL-06-2020-0141

15.

Horn

Urias

Zweekhorst

M. B. M.

(2022). Epistemic stability and epistemic adaptability: Interdisciplinary knowledge integration competencies for complex sustainability issues. Sustainability Science, 17(5), 1959–1976. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-022-01113-2

16.

Hou

Zhu

Zheng

Zhang

Huang

Zhong

Ker

C. L.

(2024, March 18–22). Prompt-based and Fine-tuned GPT models for context-dependent and-independent deductive coding in social annotation [Conference session]. 14th Learning Analytics and Knowledge Conference, Kyoto, Japan (pp. 518–528). https://doi.org/10.1145/3636555.3636910

17.

Ivanitskaya

Clark

Montgomery

Primeau

(2002). Interdisciplinary learning: Process and outcomes. Innovative Higher Education, 27(2), 95–111. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021105309984

18.

Jiang

Shen

Smith

B. E.

(2019). Designing discipline-specific roles for interdisciplinary learning: Two comparative cases in an afterschool STEM+ L programme. International Journal of Science Education, 41(6), 803–826. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2019.1581958

19.

Johnson

Griffin

(2023). Student experiences of online problem-based learning in an interdisciplinary dietetic and engineering environment: Journal of Experiential Education. Journal of Experiential Education, 47(3), 424–442. https://doi.org/10.1177/10538259231193100

20.

Kezar

Elrod

(2012). Facilitating interdisciplinary learning: Lessons from project kaleidoscope. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 44(1), 16–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/00091383.2012.635999

21.

Kidron

Kali

(2015). Boundary breaking for interdisciplinary learning. Research in Learning Technology, 23, Article 26496. https://doi.org/10.3402/rlt.v23.26496

22.

Kidron

Kali

(2024). Promoting interdisciplinary understanding in asynchronous online higher education courses: A learning communities approach. Instructional Science, 52(1), 139–169. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-023-09635-7

23.

Klaassen

R. G.

(2018). Interdisciplinary education: A case study. European Journal of Engineering Education, 43(6), 842–859. https://doi.org/10.1080/03043797.2018.1442417

24.

Kuo

H. C.

Tseng

Y. C.

Yang

Y. T. C.

(2019). Promoting college student’s learning motivation and creativity through a STEM interdisciplinary PBL human-computer interaction system design and development course. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 31, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2018.09.001

25.

Lam

J. C.

Walker

R. M.

Hills

(2014). Interdisciplinarity in sustainability studies: A review. Sustainable Development, 22(3), 158–176. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.533

26.

Luan

Ling

C. D.

Xie

X. Y.

(2016). The nonlinear effects of educational diversity on team creativity. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 54(4), 465–480. https://doi.org/10.1111/1744-7941.12078

27.

MacLeod

(2018). What makes interdisciplinarity difficult? Some consequences of domain specificity in interdisciplinary practice. Synthese, 195(2), 697–720.

28.

Madden

M. E.

Baxter

Beauchamp

Bouchard

Habermas

Huff

Ladd

Pearson

Plague

(2013). Rethinking STEM education: An interdisciplinary STEAM curriculum. Procedia Computer Science, 20, 541–546. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2013.09.316

29.

MacLeod

Van der Veen

J. T.

(2020). Scaffolding interdisciplinary project-based learning: A case study. European Journal of Engineering Education, 45(3), 363–377.

30.

Miro. (n.d.). Miro. http://www.miro.com/

31.

Repko

A. F.

(2008). Interdisciplinary research. SAGE.

32.

Spelt

E. J.

Biemans

H. J.

Tobi

Luning

P. A.

Mulder

(2009). Teaching and learning in interdisciplinary higher education: A systematic review. Educational Psychology Review, 21, 365–378. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-009-9113-z

33.

Stentoft

(2017). From saying to doing interdisciplinary learning: Is problem-based learning the answer? Active Learning in Higher Education, 18(1), 51–61. https://doi.org/10.1177/1469787417693510

34.

Tagg

A. C.

(1994). Leadership from within: Student moderation of computer conferences. American Journal of Distance Education, 8(3), 40–50. https://doi.org/10.1080/08923649409526865

35.

Wang

Yao

Kwok

J. T.

L. M.

(2020). Generalizing from a few examples: A survey on few-shot learning. ACM Computing Surveys, 53(3), 1–34. https://doi.org/10.1145/3386252

36.

Weinberg

Harding

(2004). Interdisciplinary teaching and collaboration in higher education: A concept whose time has come. Washington University Journal of Law and Policy, 14, 15.

37.

Williams

Uhing

Bennett

Voigt

Funk

Smith

W. M.

Donsig

(2024). Conceptualizations of active learning in departments engaged in instructional change efforts. Active Learning in Higher Education, 25(3), 355–374. https://doi.org/10.1177/14697874221131

38.

Zhong

Cai

Zhu

(2024, July). Enhancing the analysis of interdisciplinary learning quality with GPT models: Fine-tuning and knowledge-empowered approaches [Conference session]. International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education, Recife, Brazil (pp. 157–165). Springer Nature Switzerland. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-64312-5_19

39.

Zhong

Zhu

Hou

Wang

Fan

(2024). The influences of ChatGPT on undergraduate students’ demonstrated and perceived interdisciplinary learning. Education and Information Technologies, 29, 23577–23603. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-12787-9

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.02 MB

Design principles-based activities and assignments to enhance undergraduates’ interdisciplinary learning

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References

Supplementary Material