Features
Nation’s Colleges Rediscover Multidisciplinary Studies
By Bruce E. Phillips
Nov 1, 2006, 17:32

“That which is old will be new again” is a familiar adage that is finding renewed respect on America’s college campuses.

The policy of promoting specialized training in technical fields, encouraging students to know more and more about less and less, is being slowly replaced by a growing awareness among those who educate students---and the employers who hire them---that perhaps it would be better to equip students with a broad-based educational foundation, one that prepares them to use diverse but compatible educational disciplines to solve the scientific and technical challenges that increasingly cross “traditional” academic boundaries.

What’s going on here? What does it mean for today’s students? We sought out renowned academic and scientific experts to get the answers.

Gary L. Harris, Ph.D., P.E., is the director of the Howard Nanoscale and Engineering Facility, a part of the National Nanotechnology Infrastructure Network that is supported by the National Science Foundation. He says his field of nanotechnology is a perfect example of the move toward multidisciplinary studies in higher education.

“Nantechnology involves people from different disciplines using skills and tools originally developed for semiconductor technology,” he notes. While the original goal was to make big things smaller---a “top down” approach---there is a now a “bottom up” desire to make big things out of small, nano-sized things. He points out that “all fields, including engineering, biology, and chemistry, want to make things at the nano level.” No field of science is untapped in the study and application of nanotechnology.”

Why is this shift back to cross-discipline education happening now? “It is the nature of science itself,” Dr. Harris believes. “Science is not set up with specialized fields in mind. That was man’s creation. In nature, things overlap.”

He thinks the trend is a healthy one for all concerned. “This is a blessing. It brings together people with different perspectives. When you get people together, the outcome can be greater than the individual parts. There is a multiplier effect.” Students benefit from this as much as employers do, in his view.

“Students don’t have to be pigeonholed,” Dr. Harris says. “They can wear lots of hats. ... There is a growing opportunity to interact with more people and learn things from a different perspective. It broadens our way of getting a solution.”

The shift encourages a valuable cross-pollination of ideas. He continues, “Engineers and scientists think differently, and they both have something to contribute. Engineers think about practical applications, while scientists might be more curious about why things occur.”

Dr. Harris stresses that industry is no longer making a clear distinction in what it expects from engineers and scientists, and he says, “Industry is asking scientists to be more practical, not just theoretical. And engineers need to be more curious about the nature of things, not just about practical applications.”

He believes that we have no time to waste in the struggle to encourage creative thinking about technology and its challenges. “America will lose its place in the league of nations if it fails to get kids interested in engineering and science,” he says. “There is a tremendous opportunity out there. These are exciting times for science in history. Man is trying to understand the nature of things ... to build things from the atom level on up.” In Dr. Harris’ view, it will require creative and curious men and women with a variety of scientific and technical skills to meet the needs of our times.

Another academic expert who has examined this issue closely and implemented the changes on his own campus is Joseph L. Graves Jr., Ph.D., dean of University Studies and professor of biological sciences at North Carolina A&T State University. He is a distinguished biologist and much-published author who leads NCA&T's new University Studies department, and he is a true believer in the importance of multidisciplinary studies: “The greatest error in college curricula is the absence of multidiscipline instruction in science. ... Graduates need to be able to create and to communicate” across traditional disciplinary lines.

To ensure that they are among those who can both create and communicate, NCA&T students are now required to demonstrate competence in four academic areas before they graduate: critical writing; an understanding of the contemporary world; analytical reasoning, including logic, critical thinking, math, and scientific reasoning; and the African-American experience. In addition, students are expected to take courses in such diverse topics as global conflict, energy and the environment, science, technology and progress, and health and well-being, among others.

Dr. Graves is convinced that “It is absolutely critical that institutions re-examine their curriculum and rethink what they want to accomplish. Today, many universities have mix-and-match curriculum based on what faculties want to teach, not what students need to learn.” This may please students and professors, he says, but “it does not prepare students for the real world.”

“The most visionary thinkers recognize the importance of having multidisciplinary studies in science, across the curriculum and at all levels.”

One distinguished scientist who sees the importance of multidisciplinary training firsthand is Paul Szauter, Ph.D., user support specialist for Mouse Genome Informatics (MGIs) at the Jackson Laboratory in Bar Harbor, Maine. The nonprofit lab specializes in genetic research in a number of areas, including seeking cures for cancers, birth defects, metabolic diseases, and neurological disorders. The organization employs a staff of 465, including 179 Ph.D.s, M.D.s, and D.V.M.s.

Dr. Szauter is tasked with finding ways to organize the MGIs vast research database so scientists can access and use the information effectively, a challenge that requires expertise in computer technology as well as biology. “Knowledge must be dynamic,” he says. “You need a way to pull relevant research from the vast amounts of data available today.”

His own work group is “inherently interdisciplinary,” he points out, involving biologists and computer scientists working together to find solutions. “We greatly benefit from having people across multiple disciplines.”

He encourages math students and physicists to develop an interest in biology also, because they can bring a quantitative approach to the field. To illustrate this point, he notes that it was physicists working in the field who started the specialty of molecular biology.

Dr. Szauter, who is actively involved in the Jackson Laboratory minority outreach effort, knows from experience the value that diversified training brings to both individuals and organizations, but he advises students to make sure that they have solid training in the core disciplines of math, biology, and computer science before they consider further specialization. “You need to have your feet on the ground while looking at other fields. ... Don't just dabble as if education is a buffet. Biologists must first understand physics and chemistry.”