“Keywords:
Interdisciplinary and Transdisciplinary contributions, Environment,
Col-laboration” (Lawrence, 2010)
The quote above
comes from an article by human ecology professor Roderick J. Lawrence and is
featured at the end of the introduction’s ‘abstract’. It is interesting to find
that Lawrence wanted to draw the reader’s attention to these phrases in helping
to contextualise his research. It is also intriguing to find that I myself have
been using the terminology ‘environment’ and ‘collaboration’ when discussing my
own work. It suggests that disciplinary, interdisciplinary and
transdisciplinary learning, to a degree, relies on these terms in order to give
its definition a form of context and so methodology has grounds to be explored
within.
Lawrence
cites Swiss psychologist Jean Piaget (1972) as an instigator for knowledge
being applied outside of disciplinary thinking with particular regards to
teaching. This is not teaching through means of an educational institute,
however, but the exchange of skills between individuals in an attempt to
further improve a product by way of collaboration. Lawrence goes onto cite the
development of professional “practice of architecture, urban design, and
land-use planning that involves stakeholders in decision-making processes”
(2010) as a major catalyst for disciplinary transitioning to transdisciplinary.
Projects will often rely on the cooperation of many contributing parties. A lot
of the participant’s roles will share similarities across many institutes of
professional practice. The builder, project manager and financial support
within the industry of architecture are really no different in terms of purpose
from that of the respective performer, creative team and financial support
within performing arts. The methodology draws a line of comparison in
reflecting political scientist Robert Axelrod’s theory of cooperation as part
of networking, discussed in module one. The “TIT FOR TAT” (2006) ideology, of
exchanging fair information for fair information, lends itself to
transdisciplinary learning and its other guises that came after.
While a clear
distinction can be made between disciplinary knowledge, a singular source of
input contributed by an individual, and inter/transdisciplinary, it is harder
to distinguish the latter two knowledges amongst one another.
“Some authors remind us that the word
interdisciplinary has been used consistently to denote scientific research that
involves a number of disciplines. In contrast, the word transdisciplinary has
not been restricted to scientific research.” (Lawrence, 2010)
Interdisciplinary
will involve an individual who contributes knowledge utilising more than one
subject. This can be helpful in collaboration but allows for no other contribution.
To give an example of it working within my practice, a cast for a show could be
in the stages of mid-rehearsal and on one particular day the choreographer and
musical director are called away and cannot attend the session. The director of
the show, could carry the rehearsal and make decisions on behalf of the other
two members of the creative team. Whether they have the technical or ethical authority
to do so could be considered debatable by the cast. In the event the director
has not been briefed by his colleagues, they can only give knowledge based on
what they have learnt themselves. Whether they are competent enough to fulfil the
duties is irrelevant, the opportunity for the choreographer and musical
director to impart their own knowledge has forgone. It could be argued that the
work can be undone and changed in the next rehearsal should these other two
creatives not like what has been set but the initial knowledge that had been
imparted will remain with the cast. Due to its subjective nature, this can lead
to a fragmentation in opinion as to which knowledge is preferred by
individuals. Transdisciplinary knowledge, however, works differently in that it
invites active members of the same party to contribute. Lawrence defines the
process:
“Transdisciplinary contributions of
this kind enable the cross-fertilisation of ideas and knowledge from different
contributors that promotes an enlarged vision of a subject, as well as new
explanatory theories. Innovative contributions require not only logical
reasoning but imaginative thinking. Transdisciplinarity is a way of achieving innovative
goals, enriched understanding, and a synergy of new methods.” (Lawrence, 2010)
In the
context of performance, the approach of accepting ideas and influences from any
and all members of a cast, not limiting to the creative team, allows more
opportunity for diverse work and findings. The performers may have valid and
credible resources at their disposal, skills not possessed by others that can
further the dynamic of the production. However, a dialogue must be opened up in
order to allow for these discoveries to be made. Lawrence states that “This
implies the giving up of sovereignty over knowledge, the generation of new
insight and knowledge by collaboration, and the capacity to consider the know-how
of professionals” (2010).
Disciplinary
knowledge in all its forms are detrimental to collaboration within performance.
When looking for work, the performer will often be working strictly with
disciplinary knowledge. However, a shift in thinking is required once a job is
obtained as the cast relies on collaboration in order for projects to be
successful. As mentioned previously, ‘collaboration’ and ‘environment’ have
proved themselves as important aspects of my inquiry interests and I imagine further
analysis of practitioner theory will prove for more expansive thought on
practice and ethics involved.
Bibliography
Axelrod, R 2006 “The Evolution of Cooperation”, New
York: BasicBooks
Lawrence, R, 2010, “Transdisciplinary Journal of
Engineering & Science” Deciphering Interdisciplinary and Transdisciplinary
Contributions [online] Available at: http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&ved=0ahUKEwiv7ZL1mq_JAhWLhhoKHfvLAo4QFggsMAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ed.ac.uk%2Fpolopoly_fs%2F1.138504!%2FfileManager%2FRJL-2010Inter-Trans.pdf&usg=AFQjCNFEsGG0UAkijtrKK1etXmPWbHsx3A&sig2=P9MA0JHJ7OoXoK97VwQyww
[Accessed 25 November. 2015]
Piaget, J 1972 “The Principles of Genetic
Epistemology”, New York: BasicBooks
Thanks Tom
ReplyDelete