当前位置: X-MOL 学术Res. High. Educ. › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
What Catalyzes Research Universities to Commit to Interdisciplinary Research?
Research in Higher Education ( IF 2.615 ) Pub Date : 2020-06-11 , DOI: 10.1007/s11162-020-09603-x
Sondra N. Barringer , Erin Leahey , Karina Salazar

For decades, science policy has been promoting interdisciplinary research (IDR), but universities have not responded uniformly. To explain this variation, we integrate insights from the organizational literature, especially research on microfoundations, and highlight the role of both administrators and faculty. We collect and, with the help of machine learning, code vast amounts of textual data from 156 universities nationwide to measure universities’ structural commitment to IDR as well as key explanatory variables, including top-down administrative support for, and bottom-up faculty engagement with, IDR. We integrate these measures with extant data from the Survey of Earned Doctorates, Higher Education R&D Expenditures Survey, NIH, NSF, and IPEDS to analyze how internal university dynamics influence the degree to which a university commits to IDR. Our results reveal that the level of structural commitment to IDR differs at universities with and without medical schools, as do the precursors to this commitment. At universities with medical schools, we find that bottom-up engagement is positively associated with structural commitment to IDR, and that status moderates the relationship between top-down administrative support and structural commitment to IDR. For universities with low levels of supportive administrative discourse status significantly impacted their structural commitment to IDR. At universities without medical schools, top-down support and bottom-up engagement are interrelated and mutually reinforcing such that universities with high levels of both administrative support and interdisciplinary research grants have higher levels of structural commitment to IDR. We discuss the implications of these findings for university administrators, policy makers, and researchers.

中文翻译:

是什么促使研究型大学致力于跨学科研究?

几十年来,科学政策一直在促进跨学科研究(IDR),但是大学并未做出统一的回应。为了解释这种差异,我们整合了组织文献中的见解,尤其是对微观基础的研究,并强调了管理者和教师的作用。我们在机器学习的帮助下收集并编码全国156所大学的大量文本数据,以衡量大学对IDR的结构承诺以及关键的解释变量,包括自上而下的行政支持和自下而上的教师参与与IDR。我们将这些衡量标准与来自“博士学位获得者调查”,“高等教育研发支出调查”,NIH,NSF,和IPEDS分析大学内部的动态如何影响大学对IDR的承诺程度。我们的结果表明,在有或没有医学院的大学中,对IDR的结构性承诺水平有所不同,这一承诺的前身也是如此。在拥有医学院校的大学中,我们发现自下而上的参与与对IDR的结构性承诺正相关,并且这种状况减轻了自上而下的行政支持与对IDR的结构性承诺之间的关系。对于支持性行政话语水平较低的大学,这显着影响了其对IDR的结构承诺。在没有医学院的大学,自上而下的支持和自下而上的参与是相互联系和相辅相成的,因此拥有高水平行政支持和跨学科研究资助的大学对IDR的结构承诺水平更高。我们讨论了这些发现对大学管理者,政策制定者和研究人员的意义。
更新日期:2020-06-11
down
wechat
bug