{"title":"学科学术认同:文理学院的边界与认同工作","authors":"Brandy L. Simula, Tracy Scott","doi":"10.1177/23294965211001401","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"A large body of scholarship shows that even as interdisciplinarity gains recognition, the disciplines remain core aspects of the organization of modern academic life in the United States. We do not yet know, however, how faculty draw on disciplines and disciplinary boundaries in their academic identity work or how they construct their academic identities and convey those identities to others. We explore these questions through 100 in-depth interviews with faculty from 34 arts and sciences disciplines at a private, Research 1 university. We show how boundary battles over symbolic resources associated with disciplines contribute to faculty identity work. We identify four types of identity work arts and sciences faculty use: foregrounding disciplinarity, resisting disciplinary identities associated with administratively assigned departmental homes, emphasizing scientist identities, and pursuing question-oriented identities. Finally, we show how beliefs that disciplinary differences reflect underlying distinctions between “kinds of people” shore up the importance of disciplinary divisions, even in a university setting that provides material support for interdisciplinarity. We use these results to argue that even in institutional settings that provide support for interdisciplinarity, disciplinary boundaries may remain central by providing important symbolic resources.","PeriodicalId":44139,"journal":{"name":"Social Currents","volume":"8 1","pages":"378 - 397"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/23294965211001401","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Disciplining Academic Identities: Boundaries and Identity Work among Arts and Sciences Faculty\",\"authors\":\"Brandy L. Simula, Tracy Scott\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/23294965211001401\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"A large body of scholarship shows that even as interdisciplinarity gains recognition, the disciplines remain core aspects of the organization of modern academic life in the United States. We do not yet know, however, how faculty draw on disciplines and disciplinary boundaries in their academic identity work or how they construct their academic identities and convey those identities to others. We explore these questions through 100 in-depth interviews with faculty from 34 arts and sciences disciplines at a private, Research 1 university. We show how boundary battles over symbolic resources associated with disciplines contribute to faculty identity work. We identify four types of identity work arts and sciences faculty use: foregrounding disciplinarity, resisting disciplinary identities associated with administratively assigned departmental homes, emphasizing scientist identities, and pursuing question-oriented identities. Finally, we show how beliefs that disciplinary differences reflect underlying distinctions between “kinds of people” shore up the importance of disciplinary divisions, even in a university setting that provides material support for interdisciplinarity. We use these results to argue that even in institutional settings that provide support for interdisciplinarity, disciplinary boundaries may remain central by providing important symbolic resources.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44139,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Social Currents\",\"volume\":\"8 1\",\"pages\":\"378 - 397\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-03-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/23294965211001401\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Social Currents\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/23294965211001401\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Currents","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/23294965211001401","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Disciplining Academic Identities: Boundaries and Identity Work among Arts and Sciences Faculty
A large body of scholarship shows that even as interdisciplinarity gains recognition, the disciplines remain core aspects of the organization of modern academic life in the United States. We do not yet know, however, how faculty draw on disciplines and disciplinary boundaries in their academic identity work or how they construct their academic identities and convey those identities to others. We explore these questions through 100 in-depth interviews with faculty from 34 arts and sciences disciplines at a private, Research 1 university. We show how boundary battles over symbolic resources associated with disciplines contribute to faculty identity work. We identify four types of identity work arts and sciences faculty use: foregrounding disciplinarity, resisting disciplinary identities associated with administratively assigned departmental homes, emphasizing scientist identities, and pursuing question-oriented identities. Finally, we show how beliefs that disciplinary differences reflect underlying distinctions between “kinds of people” shore up the importance of disciplinary divisions, even in a university setting that provides material support for interdisciplinarity. We use these results to argue that even in institutional settings that provide support for interdisciplinarity, disciplinary boundaries may remain central by providing important symbolic resources.
期刊介绍:
Social Currents, the official journal of the Southern Sociological Society, is a broad-ranging social science journal that focuses on cutting-edge research from all methodological and theoretical orientations with implications for national and international sociological communities. The uniqueness of Social Currents lies in its format. The front end of every issue is devoted to short, theoretical, agenda-setting contributions and brief, empirical and policy-related pieces. The back end of every issue includes standard journal articles that cover topics within specific subfields of sociology, as well as across the social sciences more broadly.