What do you think?
Rate this book
In Defense of Disciplines: Interdisciplinarity and Specialization in the Research University
Calls for closer connections among disciplines can be heard throughout the world of scholarly research, from major universities to the National Institutes of Health. In Defense of Disciplines presents a fresh and daring analysis of the argument surrounding interdisciplinarity. Challenging the belief that blurring the boundaries between traditional academic fields promotes more integrated research and effective teaching, Jerry Jacobs contends that the promise of interdisciplinarity is illusory and that critiques of established disciplines are often overstated and misplaced.
Drawing on diverse sources of data, Jacobs offers a new theory of liberal arts disciplines such as biology, economics, and history that identifies the organizational sources of their dynamism and breadth. Illustrating his thesis with a wide range of case studies including the diffusion of ideas between fields, the creation of interdisciplinary scholarly journals, and the rise of new fields that spin off from existing ones, Jacobs turns many of the criticisms of disciplines on their heads to mount a powerful defense of the enduring value of liberal arts disciplines. This will become one of the anchors of the case against interdisciplinarity for years to come.
Drawing on diverse sources of data, Jacobs offers a new theory of liberal arts disciplines such as biology, economics, and history that identifies the organizational sources of their dynamism and breadth. Illustrating his thesis with a wide range of case studies including the diffusion of ideas between fields, the creation of interdisciplinary scholarly journals, and the rise of new fields that spin off from existing ones, Jacobs turns many of the criticisms of disciplines on their heads to mount a powerful defense of the enduring value of liberal arts disciplines. This will become one of the anchors of the case against interdisciplinarity for years to come.
273 pages, Paperback
First published October 25, 2013
2 people are currently reading
24 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews
July 19, 2017
At this point, a call along the lines of "We need to break down this disciplinary silos and get those eggheaded professors working together on a project that matters" is conventional wisdom, not a radical cry to action. In this deeply researched empirical work, Jacob torches this hoary piece of conventional wisdom, showing disciplines as durable organizing factors in intellectual work, characterized by fluid boundaries and a internally synthetic views.
Jacobs categorizes disciplines by two factors: First, the present of an internal labor market, a la Stephen Turner. Second, an omnipresence in American colleges and universities. By his measure, there are eight first tier disciplines: Biology, chemistry, English, history, mathematics, political science, psychology, and sociology. Economics, physics, and philosophy are nearly as common, then computer science, anthropology, art history and the classics. After that things get rather fragmented. A closer look at what students major in show that traditional liberal arts disciplines tend to be cannibalized by preprofessional majors; communications rather than English, or business rather than economics. Likewise, a study of the 700 odd new journals founded in 2008 showed that roughly 40% described themselves as interdisciplinary, but that these integration was a narrow focus on specific topics, rather than a broad synthesis across fields. Two case studies, of education and American studies, show the difficulties in maintaining intellectual quality and vigor in interdisciplinary program, which may tend to become backwaters, or unable to sustain their integrity against college pressures.
Jacobs' thesis, clearly and elegantly presented, is that knowledge must be organized in some way, and that disciplines provide a way to cover broad curriculum (English) while allowing scholars to specialize (19th century British decadent poets). Disciplines link big departments at big public universities with small departments, and even lone scholars at smaller campus. Disciplines provide a set of standards and a market for intellectual knowledge and scholars. To the extent that interdisciplinarity endeavors succeed, it is because they replicate disciplinary structures.
Far less polemical than I expected, this book is vital for anyone who works in American higher education.
Jacobs categorizes disciplines by two factors: First, the present of an internal labor market, a la Stephen Turner. Second, an omnipresence in American colleges and universities. By his measure, there are eight first tier disciplines: Biology, chemistry, English, history, mathematics, political science, psychology, and sociology. Economics, physics, and philosophy are nearly as common, then computer science, anthropology, art history and the classics. After that things get rather fragmented. A closer look at what students major in show that traditional liberal arts disciplines tend to be cannibalized by preprofessional majors; communications rather than English, or business rather than economics. Likewise, a study of the 700 odd new journals founded in 2008 showed that roughly 40% described themselves as interdisciplinary, but that these integration was a narrow focus on specific topics, rather than a broad synthesis across fields. Two case studies, of education and American studies, show the difficulties in maintaining intellectual quality and vigor in interdisciplinary program, which may tend to become backwaters, or unable to sustain their integrity against college pressures.
Jacobs' thesis, clearly and elegantly presented, is that knowledge must be organized in some way, and that disciplines provide a way to cover broad curriculum (English) while allowing scholars to specialize (19th century British decadent poets). Disciplines link big departments at big public universities with small departments, and even lone scholars at smaller campus. Disciplines provide a set of standards and a market for intellectual knowledge and scholars. To the extent that interdisciplinarity endeavors succeed, it is because they replicate disciplinary structures.
Far less polemical than I expected, this book is vital for anyone who works in American higher education.
September 15, 2016
A quantitative and qualitative defense of research disciplines that shows just how little they behave as "silos." Jacobs reviews activities on campus and off to illustrate the ways in which academics collaborate with and learn from other disciplines. Just like many of the critiques against higher ed, the trope of disciplines disconnected is demonstrably false. Dr. Jacobs provides plenty of excellent examples of what CAN work and what does not work.
May 17, 2014
Written from the perspective of an academic fearful of losing his right to individual scholarship. His arguments are questionable and he could have done better to support his cause. Rather than argue against interdisciplinarity, why not argue for the timeless individual creation of knowledge? Nonetheless, a good treatise on an alternative perspective to the push for collaborative scholarship.
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews