FACILITATING INTERDISCIPLINARY RESEARCH

Committee on Facilitating Interdisciplinary Research

Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy

NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES, NATIONAL ACADEMY OF ENGINEERING, AND INSTITUTE OF MEDICINE OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES

THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS
WASHINGTON, D.C.
www.nap.edu



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page R1
Facilitating Interdisciplinary Research FACILITATING INTERDISCIPLINARY RESEARCH Committee on Facilitating Interdisciplinary Research Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES, NATIONAL ACADEMY OF ENGINEERING, AND INSTITUTE OF MEDICINE OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS WASHINGTON, D.C. www.nap.edu

OCR for page R1
Facilitating Interdisciplinary Research THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS 500 Fifth Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20001 NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competences and with regard for appropriate balance. Support for this project was provided by the W. M. Keck Foundation. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the organizations or agencies that provided support for the project. International Standard Book Number 0-309-09435-6 (Book) International Standard Book Number 0-309-54727-X (PDF) Available from the Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy, 500 Fifth Street, NW, Washington, D.C. 20001; 202-334-2807; Internet, http://www.nationalacademies.org/cosepup Additional copies of this report are available from the National Academies Press, 500 Fifth Street, N.W., Lockbox 285, Washington, D.C. 20055; (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334-3313 (in the Washington metropolitan area); Internet, http://www.nap.edu Copyright 2005 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America Grateful acknowledgment is made for permission to use the following items: the drawings on pages 25, 40, 69, and 150 are reprinted with permission by Sid Harris, drawings on pages 109, 144, and 178 were commissioned by the Committee and appear courtesy of Mike Mikula; and the drawing on page 132 is reprinted with permission from the New Yorker/Cartoon Bank.

OCR for page R1
Facilitating Interdisciplinary Research THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES Advisers to the Nation on Science, Engineering, and Medicine The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Bruce M. Alberts is president of the National Academy of Sciences. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. Wm. A. Wulf is president of the National Academy of Engineering. The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Harvey V. Fineberg is president of the Institute of Medicine. The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy’s purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Bruce M. Alberts and Dr. Wm. A. Wulf are chair and vice chair, respectively, of the National Research Council www.national-academies.org

OCR for page R1
Facilitating Interdisciplinary Research COMMITTEE ON FACILITATING INTERDISCIPLINARY RESEARCH NANCY C. ANDREASEN (Co-Chair), Andrew H. Woods Chair of Psychiatry, University of Iowa Hospitals & Clinics; Director, MIND Institute; Adjunct Professor, University of New Mexico THEODORE L. BROWN (Co-Chair), Founding Director Emeritus, Beckman Institute for Advanced Science and Technology, University of Illinois—Urbana Champaign JENNIFER CHAYES, Scientist, Microsoft Corporation STANLEY COHEN, Kwoh-Ting Li Professor of Genetics and Professor of Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine JONATHAN R. COLE, John Mitchell Mason Professor of the University; Provost and Dean of Faculties, Emeritus, Columbia University ROBERT CONN, Managing Director, Enterprise Partners Venture Capital MILDRED DRESSELHAUS, Institute Professor of Electrical Engineering and Physics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology GERALD HOLTON, Mallinckrodt Research Professor of Physics and Research Professor of History of Science, Harvard University THOMAS KALIL, Special Assistant to the Chancellor for Science and Technology, University of California, Berkeley ROBERT W. KATES, Professor Emeritus, Brown University TIMOTHY L. KILLEEN, Director, National Center for Atmospheric Research MARIO MOLINA, Institute Professor, Massachusetts Institute of Technology PATRICK SUPPES, Lucie Stern Professor of Philosophy Emeritus, Stanford University JAN H. van BEMMEL, Professor of Medical Informatics, Erasmus University Rotterdam TANDY WARNOW, Professor of Computer Science, University of Texas, Austin ROBERT M. WHITE, University Professor and Director, Data Storage Systems Center, Carnegie Mellon University MARY LOU ZOBACK, Senior Research Scientist, Earthquake Hazards Team, U.S. Geological Survey Principal Project Staff DEBORAH D. STINE, Study Director LAUREL HAAK, Program Officer

OCR for page R1
Facilitating Interdisciplinary Research ALAN ANDERSON, Consultant Science Writer ERIN MCCARVILLE, Project Assistant CAMILLE COLLETT, Senior Project Assistant HEATHER AGLER, Christine Mirzayan Science and Technology Policy Fellow MARY ANDERSON, Christine Mirzayan Science and Technology Policy Fellow MARY FEENEY, Christine Mirzayan Science and Technology Policy Fellow JESSE GRAY, Christine Mirzayan Science and Technology Policy Fellow REBECCA JANES, Christine Mirzayan Science and Technology Policy Fellow JOSHUA SCHNELL, Christine Mirzayan Science and Technology Policy Fellow GRETCHEN SCHWARZ, Christine Mirzayan Science and Technology Policy Fellow NORMAN GROSSBLATT, Senior Editor

OCR for page R1
Facilitating Interdisciplinary Research COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, ENGINEERING, AND PUBLIC POLICY MAXINE F. SINGER (Chair), President Emeritus, Carnegie Institution of Washington BRUCE ALBERTS (Ex-officio), President, The National Academies R. JAMES COOK, R. James Cook Endowed Chair in Wheat Research, Washington State University HAILE DEBAS, Dean, School of Medicine and Vice Chancellor, Medical Affairs, University of California, San Francisco GERALD DINNEEN (Ex-officio), Retired Vice President, Science and Technology, Honeywell, Inc. HARVEY FINEBERG (Ex-officio), President, Institute of Medicine MARYE ANNE FOX (Ex-officio), Chancellor, University of California, San Diego ELSA GARMIRE, Sydney E. Junkins Professor of Engineering, Dartmouth College NANCY HOPKINS, Amgen Professor of Biology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology WILLIAM JOYCE (Ex-officio), Chairman and CEO, Hercules Incorporated MARY-CLAIRE KING, American Cancer Society Professor of Medicine and Genetics, University of Washington W. CARL LINEBERGER, Professor of Chemistry, Joint Institute for Laboratory Astrophysics, University of Colorado ANNE PETERSEN, Senior Vice President for Programs, W.K. Kellogg Foundation, Battle Creek, Michigan CECIL PICKETT, President, Schering-Plough Research Institute GERALD RUBIN, Vice President for Biomedical Research, Howard Hughes Medical Institute HUGO SONNENSCHEIN, Charles L. Hutchinson Distinguished Service Professor, Department of Economics, The University of Chicago JOHN D. STOBO, President, University of Texas Medical Branch of Galveston IRVING WEISSMAN, Karel and Avice Beekhuis Professor of Cancer Biology, Stanford University SHEILA WIDNALL, Abbey Rockefeller Mauze Professor of Aeronautics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology WM. A. WULF (Ex-officio), President, National Academy of Engineering MARY LOU ZOBACK, Senior Research Scientist, Earthquake Hazards Team, U.S. Geological Survey

OCR for page R1
Facilitating Interdisciplinary Research Staff RICHARD BISSELL, Executive Director DEBORAH D. STINE, Associate Director LAUREL HAAK, Program Officer MARION RAMSEY, Administrative Associate

OCR for page R1
Facilitating Interdisciplinary Research This page intentionally left blank.

OCR for page R1
Facilitating Interdisciplinary Research Preface Over the last decade, the National Academies Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy (COSEPUP) has issued a series of reports on how science and engineering are performed and supported in the United States and how future generations of scientists are trained and educated.1 A point made by each report is that science and engineering research continually evolves beyond the boundaries of single disciplines and offers employment opportunities that require not only depth of knowledge but also breadth of knowledge, integration, synthesis, and an array of skills. Several reports suggested that a greater emphasis on interdisciplinary research and training would be consistent with those findings. In May 2003, the National Academies and the W.M. Keck Foundation announced the National Academies Keck Futures Initiative, a program designed to realize the full potential of interdisciplinary research (IDR). Specifically, the Futures Initiative was created to “stimulate new modes of inquiry and break down the conceptual and institutional barriers to interdisciplinary research that could yield significant benefits to science and society.” As indicated by Robert A. Day, chairman and chief executive officer of the W. M. Keck Foundation, “The Futures Initiative is designed to create a 1   See, for example, Science, Technology, and the Federal Government: National Goals for a New Era (1993), which emphasized the importance of human resources for the scientific enterprise, and Reshaping the Graduate Education of Scientists and Engineers (1995), which urged expanded training opportunities for students to prepare them not only for academic careers but also for wider employment opportunities. Later reports dealt with changing careers and mentoring students in science and engineering.

OCR for page R1
Facilitating Interdisciplinary Research powerful, ongoing forum where the best and brightest minds from across the disciplines of science, technology, and medical research can come together and ask each other, ‘What if…?’ More than that, they can then secure the funds necessary to pursue ideas and conduct follow-on research. Training individuals who are conversant in ideas and languages of other fields is central to the continued march of scientific progress in the 21st century. The W. M. Keck Foundation is proud to participate in this important effort.” As part of the Futures Initiative, the Keck Foundation asked the National Academies to review the state of interdisciplinary research and education in science and engineering and recommend ways to facilitate them. Accordingly, COSEPUP, under the aegis of the National Academies, created the Committee on Facilitating Interdisciplinary Research, whose members were drawn from government, academe, and industry and had long experience in leading and performing IDR.2 The committee was charged with the following tasks: Review proposed definitions of interdisciplinary research, including similarities and differences from research characterized as cross-disciplinary, intradisciplinary, and multidisciplinary, and develop measures to determine whether research is interdisciplinary or not. Identify and analyze current structural models of interdisciplinary research. Identify and analyze the policies and procedures of Congress, funding organizations, and institutions that encourage or discourage interdisciplinary research. Compare and contrast current structural models and policies and procedures in academic and nonacademic settings as well as traditional and nontraditional academic settings that encourage or discourage interdisciplinary research. Identify measures that can be used to evaluate the impact on research, graduate students and postdoctoral scholars, and researchers expected from their engagement in greater interdisciplinary research and cross-professional opportunities. Develop findings and conclusions as to the current state of interdisciplinary research and the factors that encourage (or discourage) it in academic, industry, and federal laboratory settings. Provide recommendations to academic institutions and public and private sponsors of research as to how to better stimulate and support interdisciplinary research. 2   Biographical information on members of the committee are listed in Appendix A.

OCR for page R1
Facilitating Interdisciplinary Research The committee’s methods and the framework for this report are provided in the “Note to the Reader” that follows the Executive Summary. In sum, the committee based its analysis of how to facilitate IDR on its Convocation on Facilitating IDR, surveys, focus groups, interviews with scholars, and an extensive literature review. The committee was hampered in its attempt to compare models and policies that encourage IDR by a lack of recent published information. There is a considerable history of research, but the committee found insufficient evidence to answer such questions as, Which, if any, emerging IDR fields and subfields should be strengthened? What technologies and instruments are most likely to generate new ID fields and subfields? Where (if anywhere) should the government increase its investment in IDR? This report is the latest in a growing literature on models and policies that situates the discussion in the current context of science and engineering, and it formally recommends increased research to provide the necessary answers. Similarly, in attempting to compare academic and nonacademic research practices, the committee found substantial asymmetries. Interdisciplinarity has long been accepted and familiar in many industrial and government laboratories and other nonacademic settings; such settings traditionally emphasize teams and problem-driven research, and they permit researchers to move easily between laboratories, to share their skills, and to acquire new ones. In academe, however, such collaboration is often impeded by administrative, funding, and cultural barriers between departments, by which most research and teaching activities are organized. For that reason and because the highest concentration of scholarly expertise is found in universities, this report focuses primarily on facilitating IDR in academe. The study identified academic institutional customs that create a small but persistent “drag” on researchers who would like to do interdisciplinary research and teaching. They include especially the academic promotion and reward system and the department-based budgeting structures of universities. The committee concluded that IDR nevertheless plays an essential and growing role in permitting researchers to venture beyond the frontiers of their own disciplines and address questions of ever-increasing complexity and societal urgency. The committee identified “best practices” identified in its investigation that can be applied by those who wish to facilitate IDR, including undergraduate and graduate students, postdoctoral fellows, faculty members, researchers, funding organizations, academic and nonacademic institutions, and disciplinary societies. In some of the cases, institutions have experimented with substantial alteration of the traditional academic structures or even replacement with new structures and models to reduce barriers to IDR. It also found that improved evaluation tools, such

OCR for page R1
Facilitating Interdisciplinary Research MARY-CLARE KING, American Cancer Society Professor of Medicine and Genetics, University of Washington GERALD M. RUBIN, Vice President for Biomedical Research, Howard Hughes Medical Institute EDWARD H. SHORTLIFFE, Professor and Chair, Department of Medical Informatics, Columbia University, Vanderbilt Clinic, Columbia Presbyterian Medical Center MAXINE SINGER, President Emeritus, Carnegie Institution of Washington Finally, we would like to thank the staff for this project, including Deborah Stine, associate director for the Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy and study director, who managed the project; Laurel Haak, program officer with the Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy who conducted interviews, wrote boxes, organized the convocation, and conducted research and analysis; Alan Anderson, the science writer for this report; Erin McCarville and Camille Collett, who provided project support; Christine Mirzayan Science and Technology Policy Fellows Heather Agler, Mary Anderson, Mary Feeney, Jesse Gray, Rebecca Janes, Joshua Schnell, and Gretchen Schwarz, who all provided research and analytical support; and Richard Bissell, executive director of the Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy and of Policy and Global Affairs.

OCR for page R1
Facilitating Interdisciplinary Research Contents     EXECUTIVE SUMMARY   1 1   A VISION OF INTERDISCIPLINARY RESEARCH   16      Key Conditions for Interdisciplinary Work,   19      Conversations, Connections, Combinations,   19      A Question of Urgency,   22 2   THE DRIVERS OF INTERDISCIPLINARY RESEARCH   26      Defining Interdisciplinary Research,   26      Challenges Driving Interdisciplinary Research,   30      The Inherent Complexity of Nature and Society,   30      The Drive to Explore Basic Research Problems at the Interfaces of Disciplines,   33      The Need to Solve Societal Problems,   34      The Stimulus of Generative Technologies,   35      Conclusions,   39      Findings,   39 3   INTERDISCIPLINARITY IN INDUSTRIAL AND NATIONAL LABORATORIES   41      Research Strategies at Industrial Laboratories,   42      Some Models and Lessons from Industry,   44      A New Degree of Interdisciplinarity?,   48

OCR for page R1
Facilitating Interdisciplinary Research      Research Strategies at National Laboratories,   49      Some Models and Lessons from US National Laboratories,   51      Importance of IDR at National Laboratories,   52      Strategies of National Laboratories in Recruiting and Organizing IDR Teams,   52      When IDR Works Well,   53      When IDR Is Less Successful,   53      How IDR Has Changed over the Years,   54      Lessons of National Laboratories for Academic Institutions That Wish to Facilitate IDR,   54      Interdisciplinary Research in Japan,   55      Government-University-Industry Research Collaborations,   56      Conclusions,   59      Findings,   60 4   THE ACADEMIC RESEARCHER AND INTERDISCIPLINARY RESEARCH   61      Undergraduates,   62      Graduate Students,   63      Postdoctoral Scholars,   67      Hiring,   69      Junior Faculty,   72      Gaining Tenure,   73      Tenured Professors,   77      Conclusions,   79      Findings,   80      Recommendations,   80 5   HOW ACADEMIC INSTITUTIONS CAN FACILITATE INTERDISCIPLINARY RESEARCH   84      A Vision for Institutions That Wish to Promote Interdisciplinary Research,   84      Institutional Barriers to Interdisciplinary Research,   88      Limited Resources,   88      The Academic Reward System,   88      Different Institutional Cultures,   88      Program Evaluation,   89      Different Departmental Policies and Procedures,   89      Lengthy Startup Times,   90      Decentralized Budget Strategies,   91      A Need for Systematic Institutional Reform,   93

OCR for page R1
Facilitating Interdisciplinary Research      Facilitating Interdisciplinary Research and Education,   94      Undergraduate Education,   96      Graduate Education,   97      Postdoctoral Fellowships,   98      Hiring,   98      Junior Faculty,   99      Tenured Faculty,   101      All Faculty,   102      Institutional Leadership,   103      Incentives and Rewards,   105      Promoting Interactions,   106      Budget Reforms,   106      Conclusions,   109      Findings,   110      Recommendations,   110 6   HOW FUNDING ORGANIZATIONS CAN FACILITATE INTERDISCIPLINARY RESEARCH   114      A Vision for Funding Organizations That Wish to Promote Interdisciplinary Research,   114      Barriers Encountered by Funding Organizations in Supporting IDR,   115      Support for Ideas and Initiatives,   119      Support for People and Programs,   124      Graduate Students,   125      Postdoctoral Scholars,   125      Faculty,   125      Support for Institutions and Facilities,   127      Reviewing Proposals for Interdisciplinary Activities,   130      Conclusions,   132      Finding,   134      Recommendations,   134 7   THE ROLE OF PROFESSIONAL SOCIETIES   137      A Vision for Professional Societies That Wish to Facilitate IDR,   138      Publication Barriers Encountered by Researchers,   139      Support for People and Programs,   139      Research Publications,   139      Program Initiation,   141      Support for Ideas and Initiatives,   142      Professional Society Meetings,   143      Promoting the Integration of Disciplines,   144

OCR for page R1
Facilitating Interdisciplinary Research      Support for Institutions and Facilities,   146      Developing Norms for Interdisciplinary Research,   146      Conclusions,   147      Finding,   147      Recommendations,   147 8   EVALUATING OUTCOMES OF INTERDISCIPLINARY RESEARCH AND TEACHING   149      The Challenge of Evaluating Research,   149      Evaluating Relative to the Drivers of IDR,   152      Evaluating the Direct and Indirect Impacts of IDR,   152      Direct Contributions of IDR to Knowledge,   153      Indirect Contributions of IDR to Knowledge,   156      Evaluating the People Who Perform IDR,   159      Undergraduate and Graduate Students,   160      Postdoctoral Scholars,   161      Faculty,   161      Evaluating Programs, Institutes, and Centers That Engage in IDR,   162      Comparative Evaluations and Rankings of Research Institutions,   165      Conclusions,   166      Finding,   166      Recommendations,   168 9   TOWARD NEW INTERDISCIPLINARY STRUCTURES   171      Interdisciplinary Structures,   171      A Vision of New Institutional Structures: The Matrix Model,   172      Beyond the Matrix,   174      Supporting New Interdisciplinary Structures for People and Programs,   177      Change at the Undergraduate Level,   179      Change at the Graduate Level,   179      Change at the Faculty Level,   180      Change at the Institutional Level,   181      Change Driven by Generative Technologies,   182      Conclusions,   184      Finding,   185      Recommendations,   185

OCR for page R1
Facilitating Interdisciplinary Research 10   FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS   188      Findings,   188      Definition,   188      Current Situation,   188      Challenges to Overcome,   190      Changes Needed,   190      Recommendations,   191      Students,   192      Postdoctoral Scholars,   193      Researchers and Faculty Members,   193      Educators,   194      Academic Institutions’ Policies,   195      Team Leaders,   198      Funding Organizations,   198      Professional Societies,   200      Journal Editors,   201      Evaluation of IDR,   201      Academic Institutional Structure,   204     APPENDIXES         A   Biographical Information on Members and Staff of the Committee on Facilitating Interdisciplinary Research   209     B   Charge to the Committee   219     C   Convocation Program and Speakers’ Biographies   221     D   From Interdiscipline to Discipline   249     E   Survey of Institutions and Individuals Conducting Interdisciplinary Research   254     F   Committee Interviews with Administrators, Scholars, and Center Directors   281     G   Focus Groups on Facilitating Interdisciplinary Research   287     H   Bibliography   296

OCR for page R1
Facilitating Interdisciplinary Research Figures, Tables, and Boxes FIGURES 1-1   Number of Departments at Selected Universities, 1900-2000,   19 2-1   Difference between Multi- and Interdisciplinary,   29 4-1   Consistent Undergraduate Interest in Interdisciplinary Studies at Brown University,   63 4-2   Trends in Undergraduate Interest in Interdisciplinary Studies at Columbia University,   64 4-3   Survey: Recommendations to Educators,   66 4-4   Survey: Recommendations to Postdoctoral Scholars,   68 4-5   Survey: Top Impediments to IDR,   76 4-6   Survey: Recommendations for Principal Investigators,   77 5-1   Survey: Institutional Environment for IDR,   85 5-2   Survey: Size of Seed Money Grants,   86 5-3   Survey: Recommendations for Institutions,   87 5-4   Survey: Institutional Methods for Program Evaluation,   92 5-5   Survey: Recommendations for Departments,   92 6-1   Survey: Recommendations to Funding Agencies,   117 6-2   Trends in Teams: Single vs. Multiple Investigator Awards at the National Science Foundation, 1982-2001,   118 7-1   Growth in Numbers of Professional Societies, 1880-1985,   138 8-1   Degrees Awarded by Stanford School of Earth Sciences,   159

OCR for page R1
Facilitating Interdisciplinary Research TABLES ES-1   List of Boxes by Order of Appearance, by Category and Title,   12 1-1   Key Conditions for Successful IDR at Academic Institutions Based on Committee Interviews with IDR Leaders and Scholars,   21 2-1   Interdisciplinary Research Structures,   28 BOXES     Innovative Practice     2-4   The Knowledge and Distributed Intelligence (KDI) Funding Initiative,   37 3-1   Philips Physics Research Laboratory,   43 3-2   The Role of IDR at IBM,   46 3-3   Establishing an Interdisciplinary Environment for Hard-Disk-Drive Research,   58 4-2   Interdisciplinary Departments Train Interdisciplinary Students,   67 4-3   The Global Environmental Assessment Project,   70 4-4   The Institute for Mathematics and Its Applications,   72 4-5   Combining Interdisciplinary Research and Graduate Education,   74 5-2   Breaking Down Institutional Barriers by Breaking Bread Together,   94 5-3   IDR at Primarily Undergraduate Institutions,   97 5-4   The Cluster Hiring Initiative at the University of Wisconsin,   100 6-1   NIH Roadmap: Research Teams of the Future,   120 6-2   The DoD’s Multidisciplinary Research Initiative,   121 6-3   NASA Fosters the Development of Interdisciplinary Fields,   122 6-5   Burroughs Wellcome Fund Career Transition Awards,   126 6-7   Creating Spaces for Interdisciplinary Research,   129 7-3   The Association of American Geographers,   145 7-4   Models for Collaboration Between Professional Societies,   146 8-2   Evaluating IDR Center Proposals and Programs: The National Science Foundation Engineering Research Centers,   154 9-2   Replacing Courses and Majors with Programs and Planning Units,   175 9-3   A University Without Departments: Rockefeller University,   176 9-4   Cross-Cutting Reorganization of Academic Departments,   177 9-5   Cohiring: Collaborations Between Centers and Departments,   180

OCR for page R1
Facilitating Interdisciplinary Research 9-6   Hotel Space: The Allocation of Space by Project,   183 9-7   Supporting Teamwork with Distributed Information Technologies: The Biomedical Informatics Research Network (BIRN),   184     Toolkit     4-1   IDR Immersion Experiences: Summer Research Opportunities,   65 4-6   Creating and Managing Interdisciplinary Collaboration,   78 5-5   Providing for Interdisciplinarity in the Tenure and Review Process,   103 5-6   The Beckman Institute at the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign,   104 5-7   Stirring the Pot,   107 5-8   Making Money Flow Sideways: Budgeting Models at UC Davis and the University of Michigan,   108 6-8   OSTP Business Models Initiative,   131 7-1   The Role of Journals in Fostering IDR,   140 7-2   Professional Societies Have Fostered IDR Through a Number of Initiatives,   142 8-1   Measures to Evaluate Interdisciplinary Work,   151 8-4   Evaluating the NSF Integrative Graduate Education and Research Trainee (IGERT) Program,   160 8-5   Assessment of Disciplinary and Interdisciplinary Research in the Netherlands,   164 8-6   Determining How to Assess a Program: The Case of the Transdisciplinary Tobacco Use Research Centers,   167     Definition     9-1   What is Matrix Management?,   173     Evolution     2-1   The International Geosphere-Biosphere Program (IGBP),   31 2-2   The Development of Microwave Radar at MIT’s Radiation Laboratory,   34 2-3   Protein Structure Determination Using X-Ray Crystallography,   36 2-5   Tool-Driven Interdisciplinary Research: The Advanced Photon Source (APS) at Argonne National Laboratory,   38 5-1   Assessing Research-Doctorate Programs,   90

OCR for page R1
Facilitating Interdisciplinary Research 6-4   The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency,   123 6-6   Fullerene Research at Rice University,   127 6-9   The Emergence of Biomedical Engineering: A Case Study in Collaboration Among Researchers, Societies, and Funders,   133 8-3   Social Network Evaluation of IDR Centers,   157     Structures/Policies     1-1   University Departments and Centers. Case Study: Columbia University,   20 1-2   (1+1)>2: Promoting Multidisciplinary Research in the Netherlands,   23 1-3   Interdisciplinary Research in Europe: The EURAB Report,   24

OCR for page R1
Facilitating Interdisciplinary Research This page intentionally left blank.