The EDU101’s Podcast

This episode offers an insightful exploration into the field of "law and society," challenging the common, idealized views of law as merely a collection of rules or an abstract, gravity-like force. It reveals law as a dynamic social product that is profoundly interconnected with everyday life, not separate from society.

In this episode, we examine Rick Szostak’s Intuition and Interdisciplinarity: A Reply to Mackey. Szostak argues that intuition is vital to interdisciplinary research but should work within a structured process. He contends that while intuition drives individual insight, shared frameworks make research cumulative and coherent, urging scholars to document their methods to strengthen the field.

In this debate episode, we turn to J. Linn Mackey’s Rules Are Not the Way to Do Interdisciplinarity: A Response to Szostak. While Rick Szostak outlines a twelve-step, structured model for interdisciplinary research, Mackey pushes back, arguing that interdisciplinarity cannot be reduced to a checklist. Instead, he views it as an intuitive and often unsystematic process, better guided by creativity and flexibility than rigid rules. To illustrate his point, Mackey compares his own experience writing an interdisciplinary article to Szostak’s framework, showing that only a few of the steps applied—and mostly by coincidence. Drawing on post-positivist thinkers like Thomas Kuhn and Michael Polanyi, he notes that even the sciences depend heavily on intuition, which means interdisciplinarity must rely on it even more. Mackey closes by suggesting a shift in focus from “integration” to “emergence” as a defining feature of interdisciplinary work, sparking an important conversation about whether rules or intuition should guide the future of interdisciplinary research.

In this episode, we dive into J. Linn Mackey’s article Rules Are Not the Way to Do Interdisciplinarity: A Response to Szostak. Mackey challenges Rick Szostak’s structured, multi-step model of interdisciplinary research, arguing instead that interdisciplinarity is best understood as an intuitive, flexible process rather than a rigid set of rules. Drawing from his own writing experience, Mackey shows how real interdisciplinary work often unfolds in unsystematic ways, with Szostak’s steps applying only loosely or by coincidence. He further grounds his critique in post-positivist perspectives from philosophers like Thomas Kuhn and Michael Polanyi, noting that even scientific inquiry depends heavily on intuition and hunches. Mackey concludes by suggesting that interdisciplinarity may ultimately be defined less by integration and more by the concept of emergence, calling for scholars to share their own accounts of the intuitive processes behind their work.

In this episode, we explore Rick Szostak’s 2002 paper How to Do Interdisciplinarity: Integrating the Debate. Szostak introduces a twelve-step process for conducting interdisciplinary research, developed in response to a 2001 debate on William Newell’s theory of interdisciplinarity. Drawing on critiques and insights from scholars such as Julie Thompson Klein and Stanley Bailis, Szostak offers a more concrete and inclusive framework for tackling complex questions. The process guides researchers in identifying relevant phenomena, theories, and literature, while also addressing disciplinary biases and highlighting the value of integration. Ultimately, Szostak presents this structured approach as a clear definition of interdisciplinarity and a roadmap for how scholars can contribute to broader academic conversations.

This excerpt, titled "Research Integration: A Comparative Knowledge Base" by Julie Thompson Klein, published by SAGE Publications in 2013, focuses on integration as the core methodology in both interdisciplinary (IDR) and transdisciplinary (TDR) research. The text provides a historical overview of the concept of integration, tracing its evolution from ancient Greek philosophy to modern approaches. It compares various methods and means of achieving integration, such as using common language, bridging concepts, and employing models and frameworks. Furthermore, the article highlights four key principles of integration: the principle of variance, platforming, iteration, and communicative rationality, underscoring the importance of adaptability, foundational work, iterative processes, and effective communication in successful inter- and transdisciplinary endeavors.

Explore the evolving landscape of knowledge in this episode, as we delve into Julie Thompson Klein's Taxonomy of Interdisciplinarity. We'll demystify the core vocabulary, distinguishing between multidisciplinary, interdisciplinary, and transdisciplinary approaches, originally shaped by the OECD typology. 

The research encourages students to reflect on their interdisciplinary program and learning, revealing key themes such as openness, creativity, bridging, and perspective-taking. These themes are connected to the theory and practice of interdisciplinary education and the study of metacognition. The student perspectives ultimately substantiate the value of IE from multiple viewpoints and suggest areas for further research. The analysis also links these student-identified attributes to existing literature on personality traits, metacognition, and 21st-century skills, aiming to develop a vocabulary and conceptual framework for new interdisciplinary programs.

The research encourages students to reflect on their interdisciplinary program and learning, revealing key themes such as openness, creativity, bridging, and perspective-taking. These themes are connected to the theory and practice of interdisciplinary education and the study of metacognition. The student perspectives ultimately substantiate the value of IE from multiple viewpoints and suggest areas for further research.