Antecedents, Processes, and Outcomes of an Interdisciplinary, Conference/Collaboration: A comparative Study of Three Interdisciplinary Working Groups

Juliana L. Fuqua, Anna E. Bargagliotti, Jefrey A. Phillips, D. Herreiner, L. DaSilva
{"title":"Antecedents, Processes, and Outcomes of an Interdisciplinary, Conference/Collaboration: A comparative Study of Three Interdisciplinary Working Groups","authors":"Juliana L. Fuqua, Anna E. Bargagliotti, Jefrey A. Phillips, D. Herreiner, L. DaSilva","doi":"10.51355/jstem.2018.38","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ere is a growing recognition of the need for interdisciplinarity in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) education. The purpose of the present study is to identify antecedents, processes, and outcomes of an interdisciplinary, collaborative conference and ongoing collaboration. The Breaking Boundaries in STEM education conference was developed with multiple goals, including fostering collaborative interdisciplinary scientific writing for publication among teacher-scholars who participated in one of three interdisciplinary working groups. One hundred teacher-scholars with interest in STEM education participated in the conference. A comparative study of three working groups from the conference was conducted using a triangulation of qualitative and quantitative methods. Surveys and behavioral observations were completed at the conference, and phone interviews with attendees were conducted 3-4 months later. Groups varied in their readiness to collaborate. Several themes emerged that might explain why one group was highly productive, one group was moderately productive, and one group was not productive at completing publications after the conference. Groups with a narrower disciplinary span, stronger leadership presence, a paper champion, motivated leader, and a leader with a strong recent history of publishing on the topic, were more ready to collaborate, and they experienced faster, smoother completion of publications. Further research and more passage of time, such as a few years, is needed to determine the quantity, quality, span of disciplinarity, novelty, and generativity of the publications over time. The generalizability of these themes to other interdisciplinary collaborative studies is briefly discussed.","PeriodicalId":252126,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Research in STEM Education","volume":"11 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Research in STEM Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.51355/jstem.2018.38","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

ere is a growing recognition of the need for interdisciplinarity in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) education. The purpose of the present study is to identify antecedents, processes, and outcomes of an interdisciplinary, collaborative conference and ongoing collaboration. The Breaking Boundaries in STEM education conference was developed with multiple goals, including fostering collaborative interdisciplinary scientific writing for publication among teacher-scholars who participated in one of three interdisciplinary working groups. One hundred teacher-scholars with interest in STEM education participated in the conference. A comparative study of three working groups from the conference was conducted using a triangulation of qualitative and quantitative methods. Surveys and behavioral observations were completed at the conference, and phone interviews with attendees were conducted 3-4 months later. Groups varied in their readiness to collaborate. Several themes emerged that might explain why one group was highly productive, one group was moderately productive, and one group was not productive at completing publications after the conference. Groups with a narrower disciplinary span, stronger leadership presence, a paper champion, motivated leader, and a leader with a strong recent history of publishing on the topic, were more ready to collaborate, and they experienced faster, smoother completion of publications. Further research and more passage of time, such as a few years, is needed to determine the quantity, quality, span of disciplinarity, novelty, and generativity of the publications over time. The generalizability of these themes to other interdisciplinary collaborative studies is briefly discussed.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
跨学科会议/合作的前因后果、过程与结果:三个跨学科工作组的比较研究
人们越来越认识到科学、技术、工程和数学(STEM)教育需要跨学科。本研究的目的是确定一个跨学科的合作会议和正在进行的合作的前因由、过程和结果。STEM教育突破界限会议有多个目标,包括促进参与三个跨学科工作组之一的教师学者之间的跨学科协作科学写作。100位对STEM教育感兴趣的教师学者参加了会议。利用定性和定量方法的三角测量法对会议的三个工作组进行了比较研究。调查和行为观察在会议上完成,并在3-4个月后对与会者进行电话采访。各团体合作的意愿各不相同。出现了几个主题,可以解释为什么一组在会议结束后完成出版物时效率很高,一组效率中等,而另一组效率不高。具有较窄的学科跨度、较强的领导力、论文冠军、积极的领导者以及在该主题上有较强的近期出版历史的领导者的团队更愿意合作,并且他们更快、更顺利地完成了出版物。随着时间的推移,需要进一步的研究和更多的时间(如几年)来确定出版物的数量、质量、学科跨度、新颖性和创造性。简要讨论了这些主题在其他跨学科合作研究中的普遍性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Do STEM teachers have the potential to become leaders in online education? A comic-based conservation lesson plan diversifies middle school student conceptions of scientists Effectiveness of an Inquiry Focused Professional Development: Secondary Mathematics and Science Teachers’ Beliefs and Instruction Pathways to Teacher STEM Certification in Texas: A Case for Addressing the Minority Teacher Shortage Categorizing Classroom-based Argumentation in Elementary STEM Lessons: Applying Walton’s Types of Argument Dialogue
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1