Dialog About Interdisciplinary Graduate Study at UCSC Not

Dialog About Interdisciplinary Graduate Study* at UCSC * Not necessarily just graduate study * Also, at the graduate level research in inextricably tied up with instruction

History Issue taken up last year (S. Carter chair) Main outcome was May 11 2011 “Guidelines for Interdisciplinary Graduate Programs” Geared towards abetting ID grad programs Ø Temporary program FTE Ø Strong, enforceable charter; faculty MOUs Ø Clearly defined lead Dean Ø Cross-listing of courses (teaching credit) Ø Program chair contributes to personnel letter

2011 -2012 Activity Undertaken by subcommittee of four GC members Jorge Hankamer Bruce Schumm Don Smith Megan Thomas Linguistics Physics METOX Politics Ø ID-oriented faculty identified and invited to one of four 90 -minute focus sessions Ø VPAA Lee invited to Grad Council (5/3/12) Ø Provost Galloway invited to Grad Council (5/17/12)

Participating Faculty Sharon Daniels Gina Dent Jean Fox Tree Carla Freccero Julie Guthman Doug Kellog Ronnie Lipschutz Michael Mateas Dean Mathiowetz Glenn Millhauser Andy Moore Karen Ottemann Eric Porter Mary Beth Pudup Warren Sack Noah Wardrup-Fruin DANM Feminist Studies Psychology Literature Community Studies MCD Bio Politics Computer Sceince Politics Chemistry Ocean Sciences METOX American Studies Community Studies Film&Digital Media Computer Science

Primary Questions Posed v What are the intrinsic challenges associated with the offering of ID study? v In what ways do our academic/adminstrative structures abet or impede ID study? v Is UCSC notably interdisciplinary? Still open to more input! baschumm@ucsc. edu

Themes that Arose • Interdisciplinarity indeed somewhat notable at individual-faculty level, and through some individually-funded efforts (Science and Justice) • Also notable ID departments (His. Con, Feminist Studies…) • Inter-departmental/divisional activity not necessarily a strength (additional details to follow) • “Lost effort” of ID activity (not recognized by department/division) cited by many • Focus on department-based national rankings (divisional administration) can be a disincentive (VPAA: Not uniform from division to division; decanal prerogative) • Cross-listing/co-teaching not easily accommodated • ID activity not at core of campus planning strategy (largely divisionally based); IGERT support felt to be anemic (“culture of interdisciplinarity” not strong in all divisions) • Senate culture? (Interdisciplinarity could be criterion for COR grants) • “Silo-ing”: might pooling more funds in Grad Division increase ID flexibility?

“Sense” of Three Interdivisional Programs Bioinformatics (Engineering/P&BS) • Doing fine, but now essentially retreated into Engineering DANM (Engineering/Arts) • Struggling: some FTE commitments met with temporary (adjunct) appointments, retracted during budget cuts ( clearer, more enforceable MOUs? ) • Balance shifting to Arts PBSE (Program in Biological Sciences and Engineering) • Thriving, but mostly as multi-disciplinary intake to disciplinary programs. • Seems to have fostered little interdisciplinary curriculum and inquiry.

National-Rankings Orientation VPAA: Not uniform from division to division; decanal prerogative Cross-Listing, Co-Teaching Not immediately clear to me what impediments are Explore in more depth?

“Silo-ing” Some degree of resignation Ø Faculty must be evaluated/promoted by competent peers (Departments) Ø Resources controlled by broader structure (Divisions) Ø Rethinking this not ruled out, but would require creative thought and good rhetorical skills Ø VPAA’s office offers redress and over-arching influence (faculty should be aware of this!) Ø Greater pooling of certain resources (fellowship, TA support) in Graduate Division? Ø Explicit discussion of ID culture among Deans, central Administration, Senate leaders (“Interdisciplinarity convocation”)?

Lost Effort Ø Teaching outside the direct purview of a department Ø Advising Ø Organizing seminars, colloquia, visiting positions, workshops These issues can be contemplated by Deans: How to organize credit for and evaluation of extradepartmental teaching CAP: How to ensure that this effort makes it into the file and contributes to advancement*. Written guidelines? ? *I believe CAP has had a keen eye for this, but faculty need to know this, and feel empowered to make sure it gets into the file.

Actions that might be taken…? Ø Convocation on Interdisciplinarity by campus leaders • Co-teaching and cross-listing • Extra-departmental teaching • Rationale for focusing on national rankings • Consciousness-raising (hear from ID faculty, IGERT support, etc. ) • Explicit discussion of role of Provost and VPAA in promoting/abetting ID • Development and sharing of best practices Ø CAP guidelines on how to present ID effort and on how it will be evaluated Ø Re-assignment of some resources to Graduate Division? Ø Further exploration of “temporary FTE” approach

Summary Ø Interdisciplinarity in evidence for many individual faculty, a few (very) notable departments, and some individually funded efforts. Ø Interdivisional collaboration not yet evident at program level Ø ID activity may benefit from a re-evaluation of certain structures/practices Ø Faculty may not be aware of certain resources and practices (VPAA office, peer review) that might encourage ID effort and programs Ø If in the interests of the aministration/faculty, there is certainly room to create more of an ID “buzz”. Ø Do not hesitate to join the discussion (baschumm@ucsc. edu), but: Ø GC owes the Senate a report, most likely will be drafted in the next week or two (this is supposed to be a sort of outline)

Dialog About Interdisciplinary Graduate Study* at UCSC * Not necessarily just graduate study * Also, at the graduate level research in inextricably tied up with instruction