![[PDF]](/pb-assets/Icons/adobe-pdf-icon-1498649896243.png){kind=icon}
Abstract
In a series of Teaching Exchange (TE) staff development workshops aimed at exploring prospective, bottom–up quality assurance in media studies in the United Kingdom, interdisciplinarity arose as a key topic. This article reflects on teaching staff’s views expressed in the TE workshops around interdisciplinarity in relation to their experiences in designing and reaching courses, as well as in the classroom. To contextualize these arguments, the article introduces media studies’ interdisciplinarity in reference to other fields, then summarizes the methods used to gain insight into the views of higher education practitioners in media studies in the United Kingdom. It then critically discusses the accounts given by workshop participants of three aspects of the role that interdisciplinarity plays in their pedagogy: at the levels of colleagues’ profiles, course design, and student bodies. The article concludes by noting that tensions exist between top–down pressures “disciplinizing” media studies and its interdisciplinarity characteristics and argues that the field is best conceptualized as an (inter)discipline that, as such, faces distinctive pedagogical challenges and opportunities. The U.K. case study is posited as a possible counterpoint for other higher education contexts internationally.
References
Section:
|
Aram, J. D. (2004). Concepts of interdisciplinarity: Configurations of knowledge and action. Human Relations, 57, 379-412. Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI | |
|
Barnett, R. (2000). University knowledge in an age of supercomplexity. Higher Education, 40, 409-422. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI | |
|
Barthes, R. (1973). Mythologies. Boulder, CO: Paladin. Google Scholar | |
|
Conyers, J. L. (2003). Afrocentricity and the academy: Essays on theory and practice. Jefferson, NC: McFarland. Google Scholar | |
|
Corner, J. (1998). Studying media: Problems of theory and method. Edinburgh, UK: Edinburgh University Press. Google Scholar | |
|
Cowan, M. A., Ewell, B. C., McConnell, P. (1995). Creating conversations. College Teaching, 43, 127-131. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Creeber, G., Martin, R. (2008). Digital culture: Understanding new media (1st ed.). Maidenhead, UK: Open University Press. Google Scholar | |
|
Crossick, G. (n.d.). The danger of the discourse of skills. Retrieved from http://creative-blueprint.co.uk/thinkpieces/item/the-dangers-of-the-discourse-of-skills Google Scholar | |
|
Davies, M., Devlin, M. (2010). Interdisciplinary higher education. In Davies, M., Devlin, M., Tight, M. (Eds.), International perspectives on higher education research (Vol. 5, pp. 3-28). Bingley, UK: Emerald. Google Scholar | |
|
Dini, P., Iqani, M., Mansell, R. (2011). The (im)possibility of interdisciplinarity: Lessons from constructing a theoretical framework for digital ecosystems. Culture, Theory and Critique, 52, 3-27. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Fabillar, E., Jones, C. (n.d.). Interdisciplinary connections: Teacher and student empowerment through social and cultural history, critical pedagogy, and collaboration. The Radical Teacher, 65, 16-22. Google Scholar | |
|
Feigenbaum, A. (n.d.). We-thinking the classroom: Using open source principles in HE course design. Media Education Research Journal, 2(2), 26-41. Google Scholar | |
|
Feigenbaum, A., Iqani, M. (2015). Quality after the cuts? Higher education practitioners’ accounts of systemic challenges to teaching quality in times of “austerity.” Journal of Further and Higher Education, 39, 46-66. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI | |
|
Feigenbaum, A., Iqani, M. (2011). A handbook for teaching exchange workshops. ADM-HEA Research Project Deliverable (Research report). York, UK: Higher Education Academy. Google Scholar | |
|
Fraser, P., Wardle, J. (n.d.). Why a manifesto? Retrieved from http://www.manifestoformediaeducation.co.uk/ Google Scholar | |
|
Gardiner, J. K. (2003). Paradoxes of empowerment: Interdisciplinary graduate pedagogy in women’s studies. Feminist Studies, 29, 409-421. Google Scholar | ISI | |
|
Gray, K., Chang, R., Radloff, A. (2007). Enhancing the scholarship of teaching and learning: Evaluation of a scheme to improve teaching and learning through action research. International Journal of Teaching & Learning in Higher Education, 19, 21-32. Google Scholar | |
|
Hull, G. T., Bell-Scott, P., Smith, B. (1982). All the women are White, All the Blacks are men, but some of us are brave: Black women’s studies. New York: Feminist Press at CUNY. Google Scholar | |
|
Hunsinger, J. (2005). Toward a transdisciplinary internet research. The Information Society, 21, 277-279. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI | |
|
Jacobs, H. H. (1989). Interdisciplinary curriculum: Design and implementation. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision & Curriculum. Google Scholar | |
|
Jensen, J. (1993). The consequences of vocabularies. Journal of Communication, 43(3), 67-74. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI | |
|
Kellner, D. (1995). Media culture: Cultural studies, identity and politics between the modern and the post-modern. London: Routledge. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Livingstone, S. (2005). Critical debates in Internet studies: Reflections on an emerging field. In Curran, J., Gurevitch, M. (Eds.), Mass media and society (pp. 9-28). London, England: SAGE. Retrieved from http://www.hoddereducation.co.uk/ Google Scholar | |
|
Luke, C. (1994). Feminist pedagogy and critical media literacy. Journal of Communication Inquiry, 18(2), 30-47. Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | |
|
Luke, C. (2003). Pedagogy, connectivity, multimodality, and interdisciplinarity. Reading Research Quarterly, 38, 397-403. Google Scholar | ISI | |
|
Martin, J. R. (1976). What should we do with a hidden curriculum when we find one? Curriculum Inquiry, 6(2), 135-151. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI | |
|
McRobbie, A. (1991). Feminism and youth culture: From “Jackie” to “Just Seventeen.” London: Macmillan Education. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Merrin, W. (2009). Media studies 2.0: Upgrading and open-sourcing the discipline. Interactions: Studies in Communication & Culture, 1, 17-34. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Newswander, L. K., Borrego, M. (2009). Engagement in two interdisciplinary graduate programs. Higher Education, 58, 551-562. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI | |
|
Nicolescu, B. (2002). Manifesto of transdisciplinarity. Albany: State University of New York Press. Google Scholar | |
|
Penny, S. (2009). Rigorous interdisciplinary pedagogy five years of ACE. Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies, 15, 31-54. Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | |
|
Pryse, M. (1998). Critical interdisciplinarity, women’s studies, and cross-cultural insight. NWSA Journal, 10(1), 1-22. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Rogow, F. (2004). Shifting from media to literacy one opinion on the challenges of media literacy education. American Behavioral Scientist, 48, 30-34. Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | ISI | |
|
Sandoval, C. (2000). Methodology of the oppressed. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Google Scholar | |
|
Sholle, D. (1995). Resisting disciplines: Repositioning media studies in the university. Communication Theory, 5, 130-143. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI | |
|
Somerville, M. A., Rapport, D. J. (2002). Transdisciplinarity: ReCreating integrated knowledge. Montreal, Quebec, Canada: McGill-Queen’s University Press. Google Scholar | |
|
Streeter, T. (1995). No respect? Disciplinarity and media studies in communication. Communication Theory, 5, 117-129. Google Scholar | Crossref | ISI | |
|
Tavin, K. M. (2003). Wrestling with angels, searching for ghosts: Toward a critical pedagogy of visual culture. Studies in Art Education, 44, 197-213. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Universities, UK. (2013, January 28). Universities UK report looks at trends in higher education over the last decade. Retrieved from http://www.universitiesuk.ac.uk/highereducation/Pages/HETrends2011.aspx#.Usvpr9IW3Ak Google Scholar | |
|
Uppal, J., English, H. (2005). Teach feminist: Pedagogy, politics, and process in women’s studies. Cultural Studies ↔ Critical Methodologies, 5, 30-44. Google Scholar | SAGE Journals | |
|
Van Leeuwen, T . (2005). Three models of interdisciplinarity. In Wodak, R., Chilton, P. (Eds.), A new agenda in (critical) discourse analysis. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins, 3-18. Google Scholar | Crossref | |
|
Williamson, J. (1995). Decoding advertisements: Ideology and meaning in advertising. London, England: Marion Boyars. Google Scholar | |
|
Wineburg, S. S., Grossman, P. L. (2000). Interdisciplinary curriculum: Challenges to implementation. New York, NY: Teachers College Press. Google Scholar | |
|
Winkler, K. J. (1990). Scholars say issues of diversity have “revolutionized” field of Chicano Studies. Chronicle of Higher Education, 37(4), 6-9. Google Scholar |
