Interdisciplinarity: Potentials and Challenges

Systemic Practice and Action Research

Volumn 12, Issue 2, 1999, Pages 173-182

  Payne, Stephen L ^a  

^a GEORGIA COLLEGE AND STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Action research; Interdisciplinarity; Management systems; Reflexivity

Indexed keywords

EID: 0033424885     PISSN: 1094429X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1023/A:1022473913711     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Armstrong, F. (1980). Faculty development through interdisciplinarity. J. Gen. Educ. 32(1), 52-63.
2. Casey, B. A. (1994). The administration and governance of interdisciplinary programs. New Direct. Teach. Learn. 58, 53-67.
3. Edwards, A. F. (1996). Interdisciplinary Undergraduate Programs: A Directory, 2nd eds., Copley, Acton, MA.
4. Fisher, F. G. (1996). Transdisciplinary teaching: Overcoming the inevitable dislocation in applying science without regard to its social context. In Gasparski, W. W., Mlicki, M. K., and Banathy, B. H. (eds.), Social Agency: Dilemmas and Education Praxiology, Transaction, New Brunswick, NJ.
5. Flood, R. L. (1998). Action research and management and systems sciences. Syst. Pract. Act. Res. 11(1), 79-101.
6. Flood, R. L., and Romm, N. (1996). Diversity Management: Triple Loop Learning, Wiley, Chichester.
7. Fuller, S. (1993). The position: Interdisciplinarity as interpenetration. In Fuller, S. (ed.), Philosophy, Rhetoric and the End of Knowledge, University of Wisconsin Press, Madison.
8. Gouldner, A. W. (1979). The Future of Intellectuals and the Rise of the New Class, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
9. Jones, M. (1997). It all depends what you mean by discipline. . . . In Mingers, J., and Stowell, F. A. (eds.), Information Systems: An Emerging Discipline? McGraw-Hill, London.
10. Keesey, R. (1988). Transformations in disciplinary knowledge assumptions and their implication for reforming the undergraduate discipline. Issues in Integr. Stud. 6, 82-125.
11. Klein, J. T. (1990). Interdisciplinarity: History, Theory and Practice, Wayne State University Press, Detroit, MI.
12. Linstead, S. (1994). Objectivity, reflexivity, and fiction: Humanity, inhumanity, and the science of the social. Hum. Relat. 47, 1321-1345.
13. Lunca, M. (1996). An Epistemological Programe for Interdisciplinarisation, ISOR, University of Utrecht, Utrecht.
14. Mason, R. O., and Mitroff, I. I. (1981). Challenging Strategic Planning Assumptions, Wiley, New York.
15. Newell, W. H. (1997). Editorial essay. In Newell, W. H. (ed.), Interdisciplinarity 1997: An Anthology of the Professional Literature, Miami University, Oxford, OH.
16. Romm, N. (1998). Interdisciplinary practice as reflexivity. Syst. Pract. Act. Res. 11(1), 63-77.
17. Senge, P. M. (1990). The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization, Doubleday/Currency, New York.
18. Spaul, M. (1997). Discipline and critique: The case of information systems. In Mingers, J., and Stowell, F. A. (eds.), Information Systems: An Emerging Discipline? McGraw-HIll, London.
19. Stember, M. (1991). Advancing the social sciences through the interdisciplinary experience. Soc. Sci. J. 28(1), 1-14.
20. Tait, J., Morris, D., and Ison, R. (1997). Orchestrating discipline-based research and learning: Why, when and how. In Stowell, F. A., Ison, R. L., Armson, R., Holloway, J., Jackson, S., and McRobb, S. (eds.), Systems for Sustainability: People, Organisations and Environments, Plenum Press, New York.
21. Trow, M. (1984-1985). Interdisciplinary studies as a counterculture: Problems of birth, growth and survival. Issues Integr. Stud. 4, 1-15.
22. Van de Ven, A. H., and Delbecq, A. (1974). The effectiveness of nominal, Delphi and interacting group decision-making processes. Acad. Manage. J., 17, 605-621.
23. Weil, S. (1998). Rhetorics and realities in public service organizations: Systemic practice and organizational learning as critically reflexive action research. Syst. Pract. Act. Res. 11(1), 37-62.