Epistemology for interdisciplinary research – shifting philosophical paradigms of science
Tóm tắt
Từ khóa
Tài liệu tham khảo
Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2013). Teaching with and about nature of science, and science teacher knowledge domains. Science & Education, 22(9), 2087–2107. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-012-9520-2 .
Aboelela, S. W., Larson, E., Bakken, S., Carrasquillo, O., Formicola, A., Glied, S. A., . . . Gebbie, K. M. (2007). Defining interdisciplinary research: Conclusions from a critical review of the literature. Health Services Research, 42, 329–346. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6773.2006.00621.x
Addae, J. I., Wilson, J. I., & Carrington, C. (2012). Students’ perception of a modified form of PBL using concept mapping. Medical Teacher, 34(11), e756–e762. https://doi.org/10.3109/0142159X.2012.689440 .
Alvargonzález, D. (2011). Multidisciplinarity, Interdisciplinarity, Transdisciplinarity, and the sciences. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science, 25(4), 387–403. https://doi.org/10.1080/02698595.2011.623366 .
Andersen, H. (2013). The second essential tension: On tradition and innovation in interdisciplinary research. Topoi, 32(1), 3–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11245-012-9133-z .
Andersen, H. (2016). Collaboration, interdisciplinarity, and the epistemology of contemporary science. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A, 56, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsa.2015.10.006 .
Andersen, H., & Wagenknecht, S. (2013). Epistemic dependence in interdisciplinary groups. Synthese, 190(11), 1881–1898. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-012-0172-1 .
Aneas, A. (2015). Transdisciplinary technology education: A characterisation and some ideas for implementation in the university. Studies in Higher Education, 40(9), 1715–1728. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2014.899341 .
Apostel, L., Berger, G., Briggs, A., & Michaud, G. (Eds.). (1972). Interdisciplinarity problems of teaching and research in universities. Paris: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.
Aram, J. D. (2004). Concepts of interdisciplinarity: Configurations of knowledge and action. Human Relations, 57(4), 379–412 http://www.journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0018726704043893 .
Bammer, G. (2013). Disciplining Interdisciplinarity - integration and implementation sciences for researching complex real-world problems. Canberra: Australian National University E-press.
Bergmann, M. (2012). The integrative approach in transdisciplinary research. In M. Bergmann, T. Jahn, T. Knobloch, W. Krohn, C. Pohl, & E. Schramm (Eds.), Methods for transdisciplinary research - A primer for practice (pp. 22–49). Frankfurt/New York: Campus Verlag.
Boon, M. (2006). How science is applied in technology. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science, 20(01), 27–47. https://doi.org/10.1080/02698590600640992 .
Boon, M. (2011). In defense of engineering sciences: On the epistemological relations between science and technology. Techné: Research in Philosophy and Technology, 15(1), 49–71. https://doi.org/10.5840/techne20111515 .
Boon, M. (2012). Scientific concepts in the engineering sciences: Epistemic tools for creating and intervening with phenomena. In U. Feest & F. Steinle (Eds.), Scientific concepts and investigative practice (pp. 219–243). Berlin: De Gruyter.
Boon, M. (2015). Contingency and inevitability in science – Instruments, interfaces and the independent world. In L. Soler, E. Trizio, & A. Pickering (Eds.), Science as it could have been: Discussing the contingent/inevitable aspects of scientific practices (pp. 151–174). Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.
Boon, M. (2017a). An engineering paradigm in the biomedical sciences: Knowledge as epistemic tool. Progress in Biophysics and Molecular Biology, 129, 25–39. doi:j.pbiomolbio.2017.04.001.
Boon, M. (2017b). Philosophy of Science In Practice: A Proposal for Epistemological Constructivism. In H. Leitgeb, I. Niiniluoto, P. Seppälä, & E. Sober (Eds.), Logic, Methodology and Philosophy of Science – Proceedings of the 15th International Congress (CLMPS 2015). College Publications, 289–310.
Boon, M. (2017c). Measurements in the engineering sciences: An epistemology of producing knowledge of physical phenomena. In N. Mößner & A. Nordmann (Eds.), Reasoning in measurement (pp. 203–219). London and New York: Routledge.
Boon, M. (2019) scientific methodology in the engineering sciences. Chapter 4 in the Routledge Handbook of Philosophy of Engineering. D. Michelfelder and N. Doorn (eds.). New York: Taylor & Francis / Routledge.
Boon, M., & Knuuttila, T. (2009). Models as epistemic tools in engineering sciences: A pragmatic approach. In a. Meijers (Ed.), Philosophy of technology and engineering sciences. Handbook of the philosophy of science (Vol. 9, pp. 687–720): Elsevier/North-Holland.
Bosque-Perez, N. A., Klos, P. Z., Force, J. E., Waits, L. P., Cleary, K., Rhoades, P., . . . Holbrook, J. D. (2016). A pedagogical model for team-based, problem-focused interdisciplinary doctoral education. BioScience, 66(6), 477–488. https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/biw042 .
Boumans, M. (1999). Built-in justification. In M. S. Morgan & M. Morrison (Eds.), Models as mediators - perspectives on natural and social science (pp. 66–96). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cartwright, N. (1983). How the Laws of physics lie. Oxford: Clarendon Press, Oxford University Press.
Cartwright, N. (1999). The dappled world. A study of the boundaries of science. Cambridge University Press.
Cat, J. (2014). The Unity of Science. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2014 Edition).
Chan, C. K., Zhao, Y., & Luk, L. Y. (2017). A validated and reliable instrument investigating engineering students’ perceptions of competency in generic skills. Journal of Engineering Education, 106(2), 299–325. https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20165 .
Chang, H. (2014). Epistemic Activities and Systems of Practice: Units of Analysis in Philosophy of Science After the Practice Turn. In: L. Soler, M. Lynch, S. D. Zwart, & V. Israel-Jost (Eds.), Science after the Practice Turn in the Philosophy, History, and Social Studies of Science (pp. 75–87): Routledge.
Collins, H. M., & Evans, R. (2002). The third wave of science studies: Studies of expertise and experience. Social Studies of Science, 32, 235–296.
Collins, H., & Evans, R. (2007). Rethinking Expertise. Chicago. London: The University of Chicago Press.
Cullingan, P. J., & Pena-Mora, F. (2010). Engineering. In R. Frodeman (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of interdisciplinarity (pp. 147–160). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
DeZure, D. (2010). Interdisciplinary pedagogies in higher education. In R. Frodeman (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of interdisciplinarity (pp. 372–387). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Edmondson, K. M., & Novak, J. D. (1993). The interplay of scientific epistemological views, learning strategies, and attitudes of college students. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30(6), 547–559. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660300604 .
Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive–developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34(10), 906. Retrieved from http://www4.ncsu.edu/~jlnietfe/Metacog_Articles_files/Flavell%20(1979).pdf –911.
Fortuin, K. P. J., & van Koppen, C. S. A. (2016). Teaching and learning reflexive skills in inter- and transdisciplinary research: A framework and its application in environmental science education. Environmental Education Research, 22(5), 697–716. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2015.1054264 .
Frodeman, R. (2010). Introduction. In R. Frodeman, J. T. Klein, & C. Mitcham (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Interdisciplinarity (pp. xxix-xxxix): The Oxford University Press.
Frodeman, R., & Mitcham, C. (2007). New directions in Interdisciplinarity: Broad, deep, and critical. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 27(6), 506–514. https://doi.org/10.1177/0270467607308284 .
Giere, R. N. (1999). Science without Laws: Science and its conceptual foundations. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
Giere, R. N. (2010). An agent-based conception of models and scientific representation. Synthese, 172, 269–281.
Gnaur, D., Svidt, K., & Thygesen, M. (2015). Developing students’ collaborative skills in interdisciplinary learning environments. International Journal of Engineering Education, 31(1B), 257–266.
Goddiksen, M. P. (2014). Clarifiying interactional and contributory expertise. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science. Part A, 47, 111–117.
Goddiksen, M., & Andersen, H. (2014). Expertise in interdisciplinary science and education. [Preprint]. Retrieved from: http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/id/eprint/11151
Grantham, T. A. (2004). Conceptualizing the (dis)unity of science. Philosophy of Science, 71(2), 133–155. https://doi.org/10.1086/383008 .
Green, S. (2013). When one model is not enough: Combining epistemic tools in systems biology. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences, 44(2), 170–180. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsc.2013.03.012 .
Grüne-Yanoff, T. (2011). Models as products of interdisciplinary exchange: Evidence from evolutionary game theory. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A, 42(2), 386–397. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsa.2010.12.004 .
Grüne-Yanoff, T. (2014). Teaching philosophy of science to scientists: Why, what and how. European Journal for Philosophy of Science, 4(1), 115–134. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13194-013-0078-x .
Haynes, C., & Brown-Leonard, J. (2010). From surprise parties to mapmaking: Undergraduate journeys toward interdisciplinary understanding. The Journal of Higher Education, 81(5), 645–666. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2010.11779070 .
Hirsch-Hadorn, G., Pohl, C., & Bammer, G. (2010). Solving problems through transdisciplinary research. In R. Frodeman (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of interdisciplinarity (pp. 431–452). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Holbrook, J. B. (2013). What is interdisciplinary communication? Reflections on the very idea of disciplinary integration. Synthese, 190(11), 1865–1879. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-012-0179-7 .
Huutoniemi, K., Klein, J. T., Bruun, H., & Hukkinen, J. (2010). Analyzing interdisciplinarity: Typology and indicators. Research Policy, 39, 79–88.
Ivanitskaya, L., Clark, D., Montgomery, G., & Primeau, R. (2002). Interdisciplinary learning: Process and outcomes. Innovative Higher Education, 27(2), 95–111. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021105309984 .
Jacobs, J. A., & Frickel, S. (2009). Interdisciplinarity: A critical assessment. Annual Review of Sociology, 35, 43–65.
Jantsch, E. (1972). Inter- and Transdisciplinary University: A systems approach to education and innovation. Higher Education, 1(1), 7–37.
Khosa, D. K., & Volet, S. E. (2013). Promoting effective collaborative case-based learning at university: A metacognitive intervention. Studies in Higher Education, 38(6), 870–889. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2011.604409 .
Klein J. T. (1990). Interdisciplinarity: History, Theory and Practice. Detroit: Wayne state University Press.
Klein J. T. (1996). Crossing Boundaries: Knowledge, Disciplinarities, and Interdisciplinarities. Charlottesville: University Press.
Klein, J. T. (2010). A taxonomy of interdisciplinarity. In R. Frodeman, J. T. Klein, & C. Mitcham (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of interdisciplinarity (pp. 15–30). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Kline, S. J. (1995). Conceptual foundations for multidisciplinary thinking: Stanford University Press.
Knuuttila, T., & Boon, M. (2011). How do models give us knowledge? The case of Carnot’s ideal heat engine. European Journal for Philosophy of Science, 1(3), 309–334. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13194-011-0029-3 .
Krohn, W. (2010). Interdisciplinary cases and disciplinary knowledge. In R. Frodeman, J. T. Klein, & C. Mitcham (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of interdisciplinarity (pp. 31–49). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Kuhn, T. S. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions (second ed.). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Lattuca, L. R. (2001). Creating interdisciplinarity: Interdisciplinary research and teaching among college and university faculty: Vanderbilt University Press.
Lattuca, L. R. (2002). Learning interdisciplinarity: Sociocultural perspectives on academic work. The Journal of Higher Education, 73(6), 711–739 http://www.jstor.org/stable/1558403 .
Lattuca, L. R., Knight, D. B., Ro, H. K., & Novoselich, B. J. (2017). Supporting the development of Engineers' interdisciplinary competence. Journal of Engineering Education, 106(1), 71–97. https://doi.org/10.1002/jee.20155 .
Liu, S. Y., Lin, C. S., & Tsai, C. C. (2011). College Students' scientific epistemological views and thinking patterns in Socioscientific decision making. Science Education, 95(3), 497–517. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20422 .
Lourdel, N., Gondran, N., Laforest, V., Debray, B., & Brodhag, C. (2007). Sustainable development cognitive map: A new method of evaluating student understanding. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 8(2), 170–182. https://doi.org/10.1108/14676370710726634 .
MacLeod, M. (2016). What makes interdisciplinarity difficult? Some consequences of domain specificity in interdisciplinary practice. Synthese, 195, 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-016-1236-4 .
MacLeod, M., & Nersessian, N. J. (2013). Coupling simulation and experiment: The bimodal strategy in integrative systems biology. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences, 44(4, Part A), 572–584. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsc.2013.07.001 .
Maki, U. (2016). Philosophy of interdisciplinarity. What? Why? How? European Journal for Philosophy of Science, 6(3), 327–342. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13194-016-0162-0 .
Mansilla, V. B. (2010). Learning to synthesize: the development of interdisciplinary understanding. In R. Frodeman (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of interdisciplinarity (pp. 288–306): Oxford University Press.
Mattila, E. (2005). Interdisciplinarity “in the making”: Modeling infectious diseases. Perspectives on Science, 13(4), 531–553. https://doi.org/10.1162/106361405775466081 .
Maull, N. L. (1977). Unifying science without reduction. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A, 8(2), 143–162. https://doi.org/10.1016/0039-3681(77)90012-7 .
McComas, W. F., Almazroa, H., & Clough, M. P. (1998). The nature of science in science education: An introduction. Science & Education, 7(6), 511–532. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008642510402 .
Menken, S., & Keestra, M. (2016). An introduction to interdisciplinary research: Theory and practice. Amsterdam: University Press.
Mitchell, S. D. (2009). Unsimple Truths, Science Complexity and Policy. Chicago and Londen. The University of Chicago Press.
Nagel, E. (1961). The structure of science; problems in the logic of scientific explanation. New York: Harcourt, Brace and World.
National Academy of Sciences; National Academy of Engineering; Institute of Medicine; Policy and Global Affairs; Committee on Science, E., and Public Policy; Committee on Facilitating Interdisciplinary Research. (2005). Facilitating interdisciplinary research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
National Science Foundation. (2008). Impact of transformative interdisciplinary research and graduate education on academic institutions. Washington, Cd.
Nersessian, N. J. (2009). Creating scientific concepts. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Nersessian, N. J., & Patton, C. (2009). Model-based reasoning in interdisciplinary engineering. In a. W. M. Meijers (Ed.), Handbook of the Philosophy of Technology and Engineering Sciences (pp. 687–718).
Newell, W. H. (2001). A theory of interdisciplinary studies. Issues in Integrative Studies, 19, 1–25.
Newell, W. H. (2013). The state of the field: Interdisciplinary theory. Issues in Interdisciplinary Studies, 31, 22–43.
Newstetter, W. C. (2005). Designing cognitive apprenticeships for biomedical engineering. Journal of Engineering Education, 94(2), 207–213.
Nikitina, S. (2006). Three strategies for interdisciplinary teaching: Contextualizing, conceptualizing, and problem-centring. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 38(3), 251–271. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220270500422632 .
Novak, J. D. (1990). Concept mapping: A useful tool for science education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 27(10), 937–949. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.3660271003 .
Oppenheim, P., & Putnam, H. (1958). Unity of science as a working hypothesis. In H. Feigl, M. Scriven, & G. Maxwell (Eds.), Minnesota studies in the philosophy of science (Vol. 2, pp. 3–36). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
O'Rourke, M., Crowley, S., & Gonnerman, C. (2016). On the nature of cross-disciplinary integration: A philosophical framework. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C, 56, 62–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsc.2015.10.003 .
Pintrich, P. R. (2002). The role of metacognitive knowledge in learning, teaching. and assessing. Theory into practice, 41(4), 219–225 http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1207/s15430421tip4104_3 .
Procee, H. (2006). Reflection in education: A Kantian epistemology. Educational Theory, 56(3), 237–253. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-5446.2006.00225.x .
Repko, A. F. (2008). Interdisciplinary research: Process and theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Repko, A. F., & Szostak, R. (2017 3rd ed.). Interdisciplinary research: Process and theory. Los Angeles: Sage.
Repko, A., Navakas, F., & Fiscella, J. (2007). Integrating Interdisciplinarity: How the theories of common ground and Cognitive_Interdisciplinarity are informing the debate on interdisciplinary integration. Issues in Interdisciplinary Studies, 25, 1–31.
Robles, M. M. (2012). Executive perceptions of the top 10 soft skills needed in Today’s workplace. Business Communication Quarterly, 75(4), 453–465. https://doi.org/10.1177/1080569912460400 .
Rossini, F. A., & Porter, A. L. (1979). Frameworks for integrating interdisciplinary research. Research Policy, 8, 70–79.
Schmidt, J. C. (2008). Towards a philosophy of interdisciplinarity. Poiesis & Praxis, 5(1), 53–69. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10202-007-0037-8 .
Schmidt, J. C. (2011). What is a problem? On problem-oriented interdisciplinarity. Poiesis & Praxis, 7(4), 249–274. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10202-011-0091-0 .
Sin, C. (2014). Epistemology, sociology, and learning and teaching in physics. Science Education, 98(2), 342–365. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21100 .
Spelt, E. J., Biemans, H. J., Tobi, H., Luning, P. A., & Mulder, M. (2009). Teaching and learning in interdisciplinary higher education: A systematic review. Educational Psychology Review, 21(4), 365–378. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-009-9113-z .
Stentoft, D. (2017). From saying to doing interdisciplinary learning: Is problem-based learning the answer? Active Learning in Higher Education. (online) http://www.journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1469787417693510
Strang, V. (2009). Integrating the social and natural sciences in environmental research: A discussion paper. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 11(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-007-9095-2 .
Suárez, M. (2003). Scientific representation: Against similarity and isomorphism. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science, 17(3), 225–244.
Thomas, L., Bennett, S., & Lockyer, L. (2016). Using concept maps and goal-setting to support the development of self-regulated learning in a problem-based learning curriculum. Medical Teacher, 38(9), 930–935. https://doi.org/10.3109/0142159x.2015.1132408 .
Thorén, H. (2015). The hammer and the nail: interdisciplinarity and problem solving in sustainability science. PhD thesis (pp. 1-356). Lund University.
Thorén, H., & Persson, J. (2013). The philosophy of Interdisciplinarity: Sustainability science and problem-feeding. Journal for General Philosophy of Science, 44(2), 337–355. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10838-013-9233-5 .
Tsai, C. C. (2007). Teachers' scientific epistemological views: The coherence with instruction and students' views. Science Education, 91(2), 222–243. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20175 .
Tuana, N. (2013). Embedding philosophers in the practices of science: Bringing humanities to the sciences. Synthese, 190(11), 1955–1973. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-012-0171-2 .
Turner, S. (2000). What are disciplines? And how is interdisciplinarity different. In N. Stehr & P. Weingart (Eds.), Practising interdisciplinarity (pp. 46–65). Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Turner, V. K., Benessaiah, K., Warren, S., & Iwaniec, D. (2015). Essential tensions in interdisciplinary scholarship: Navigating challenges in affect, epistemologies, and structure in environment–society research centers. Higher Education, 70(4), 649–665. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-015-9859-9 .
Van den Beemt, A., MacLeod, M., Van der Veen, J. T., Van de Ven, A. M. A., Van Baalen, S. J., Klaassen, R. G., & Boon, M. (under review). Interdisciplinary engineering education as a holy grail: A systematic review on vision, education, and facilitation.
Weideman, M., & Kritzinger, W. (2003). Concept mapping: A proposed theoretical model for implementation as a knowledge repository. ICT in Higher Education. Retrieved from https://web.stanford.edu/dept/SUSE/projects/ireport/articles/concept_maps/Concept%20map%20as%20knwoledge%20repository.pdf
Yerrick, R. K., Pedersen, J. E., & Arnason, J. (1998). "We're just spectators": A case study of science teaching, epistemology, and classroom management. Science Education, 82(6), 619–648.