This article suggests that transdisciplinary approaches to social research, which are problem-centered, are necessary for addressing contemporary social problems. The article suggests that there is a social justice undercurrent to transdisciplinarity. Moreover, it is important to teach students how to think and design research in transdisciplinary ways so that they are prepared to meet the challenges of our time. In this regard the article details how transdisciplinary approaches to research can be coupled with problem-based learning (PBL) in order to teach students responsive problem-solving strategies. The article also details how transdisciplinary approaches to PBL can be used to teach qualitative research skills and thus train the next generation of researchers in qualitative practice.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AmadorJ.A., MilesL., & PetersC.B. (2006). The practice of problem-based learning: A guide to implementing PBL in the college classroom.Boston: Anker.
2.
Association of American Colleges and Universities (AAC&U). www.aacu.org/.
3.
AustinW., ParkC., & GobleE. (2008). From interdisciplinary to transdisciplinary research: A case study.Qualitative Health Research, 18(4), 557–564.
4.
BrookfieldS. (2006). The skillful teacher: On technique, trust, and responsiveness in the classroom.San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
5.
BurgerP., & KamberR. (2003). Cognitive integration in transdisciplinary science: Knowledge as a key notion.Issues in Integrative Studies, 21, 43–73.
6.
DenzinN. K. (2010). A qualitative manifesto: A call to arms.Walnut Creek, CA.: Left Coast Press, Inc.
7.
DepresC., BraisN., & AuellanS. (2004). Collaborative planning for retrofitting suburbs: Transdisciplinary and intersubjectivity in action.Futures, 36, 471–486.
8.
DuchB., GrohS., & AllenD. (2001). The power of problem-based learning: A practical “how to” for teaching undergraduate courses in any discipline.London: Falmer.
9.
DuffyM. (1995). Sensemaking: A collaborative inquiry approach to “doing” learning.The Qualitative Report, Vol. 2, No. 2. www.nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR2-2/duffy.html.
10.
EakinJ. M., & MykhalovskiyE. (2005). Teaching against the grain: The challenges of teaching qualitative research in the health sciences.Forum: Qualitative Social Research. Vol. 6, No.2, nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0114-fqs0502427.
11.
ErnstR. R. (2008). Societal responsibility of universities. Wisdom and foresight leading to a better world. In DarbellayF., CockellM., BillotteJ., & WaldvogelF. (Eds.), A vision of transdisciplinarity: Laying foundations for a world knowledge dialogue (pp. 121–135). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
12.
FinkelD. (2000). Teaching with your mouth shut.Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook.
13.
FlintermanJ., Teclemariam-mesbahR., BroerseJ. E., & BundersJ. F. (2001). Transdisciplinarity: The new challenge for biomedical research.Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 21(4), 253–266.
14.
GiriA. K. (2002). The calling of a creative transdisciplinarity.Futures, 34(1), 103–115.
15.
HaberliB., & Grossenbacher-MansuyW. (1998). Transdisziplinaritat zwischen forderung und uberfonderung. Erkenntnisse aus dem spp umwelt.GAIA, 7(3), 196–213.
16.
HadornG.H., Biber-KlemmS., Grossenbacher-MansuyW., Hoffmann-RiemH., JoyeD., PohlC., WiesmannU., & ZempE. (2008). The emergence of transdisciplinarity as a form of research. In HadornG. H., Hoffmann-RiemH., Biber-KlemmS., Grossenbacher-MansuyW., JoyeD., PohlC., WiesmannU., & ZempE. (Eds.), Handbook of transdisciplinary research.Bern, Switzerland: Springer.
17.
Hesse-BiberS. N., & LeavyP. (2011). The practice of qualitative research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
18.
Hoffmann-RiemH., Biber-KlemmS., Grossenbacher-MansuyW., HadornG.H., JoyeD., PohlC., WiesmannU., & ZempE. (2008). Idea of the handbook. In HadornG. H., Hoffmann-RiemH., Biber-KlemmS., Grossenbacher-MansuyW., JoyeD., PohlC., WiesmannU., & ZempE. (Eds.), Handbook of transdisciplinary research (pp. 3–17). Bern, Switzerland: Springer.
19.
HooksB. (1994). Teaching to transgress: Education as the practice of freedom.New York: Routledge.
20.
Horlick-JonesT., & SimeJ. (2004). Living on the border: Knowledge, risk, and transdiscipli- narity.Futures, 36, 441–456.
21.
HurworthR. E. (2008). Teaching qualitative research: Cases and issues.Rotterdam: Sense.
22.
KleinJ. T. (2000). “Voices of Royaumont.” In SomervilleM.A., & RapportD.J. (Eds.), Transdi- sciplinarity: ReCreating integrated knowledge (pp. 3–12). Oxford, UK: EOLSS.
23.
KleinJ. T. (2004). Prospects for transdisciplinarity.Futures, 36, 515–526.
24.
KrimskyS. (2000). Transdisciplinarity for problems at the interstices of disciplines. In SomervilleM.A., & RapportD. J. (Eds.), Transdisciplinarity: ReCreating integrated knowledge (pp. 109–114). Oxford, UK: EOLSS.
25.
LawrenceR. J. (2004). Housing and health: From interdisciplinary principles to transdisci- plinary research and practice.Futures, 36(4), 487–502.
26.
LeavyP. (2008). “Incorporating Problem-Based Learning into Sociology Courses.” Paper presented at the New England Sociological Association Fall Conference, Central Connecticut State University.
LeavyP. (2011). Essentials of transdisciplinary research: Using problem-centered methodologies.Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast Press, Inc.
29.
MachtmesK., JohnsonE., FoxJ., BurkeM. S., HarperJ., ArcemontL., HebertL., TarifaT., BrooksR. C., ReynaudA. L., DeggsD., MatzkeB., & AguirreR. T. P. (2009). Teaching qualitative research methods through service-learning.The Qualitative Report, Vol. 14, No. 1, March, 155–164. www/nova.edu/ssss/QR/QR14-1/matchmes.pdf.
30.
McDonellG. J. (2000). Disciplines as cultures: Toward reflection and understanding.” In SomervilleM.S., & RapportD.J. (Eds.), Transdisciplinarity: ReCreating integrated knowledge (pp. 25–37). Oxford, UK: EOLSS.
31.
McMichaelA. J. (2000). Doing transdisciplinarity. In SomervilleM. A., & RapportD. J. (Eds.), Transdisciplinarity: ReCreating integrated knowledge (pp. 15–19). Oxford, UK: EOLSS.
32.
MesserliB., & MesserliP. (2008). From local projects in the Alps to global change programmes in the mountains of the world: Milestones in transdisciplinary research. In HadornG. H. (Eds.). The handbook of transdisciplinary research (pp. 43–62). Bern, Switzerland: Springer.
33.
NewellW. H. (2000). Transdisciplinarity reconsidered. In SomervilleM.S., & RapportD.J. (Eds.), Transdisciplinarity: ReCreating integrated knowledge (pp. 42–48). Oxford, UK: EOLSS.
34.
PohlC., & HadornG. H. (2007). Principles for designing transdisciplinary research. (A. B. Zimnmermann, Trans.). Munich, Germany: Oekom Gesell F. Oekolog.
35.
ProClim (1997). Footnote 14., p. 71. In PohlC., & HadornG.H. (2007). Principles for designing transdisciplinary research (A.B. Zimmermann, Trans.) (p. 71). Munich, Germany: Oekom Gesell F. Oekolog.
36.
RamadierJ. (2004). Transdisciplinarity and its challenges: The case of urban studies.Futures, 36(4), 423–439.
37.
RussellA. W., WicksonF., & CarewA. L. (2008). Transdisciplinarity: Context, contradictions and capacity.Futures, 40, 460–472.
38.
Van ManenM. (2001). Transdisciplinarity and the new production of knowledge.Qualitative Health Research, 11(6), 850–852.
39.
WicksonF., CarewA. L., & RussellA. W. (2006). Transdisciplinary research: Characteristics, quandaries and quality.Futures, 38, 1046–1059.
