A Study of Transdisciplinarity in the Context of the Transformation of Knowledge Production
Zhang Dongliang1, Yu Shuqi2, Zhou Guping3
1.Institute of China’s Science, Technology and Education Policy, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310058, China 2.School of International Studies, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310058, China 3.College of Education, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310058, China
Abstract：The transformation of the knowledge production model is accompanied by fundamental changes in the logic of knowledge production and the features of educational activities. Going through transformation and development stage from model 1 to model 2, and then to model 3, it no longer follows rigorous academic tradition or takes academic researches as the ultimate goal, but applies knowledge to application and market. The new knowledge production models serve the society instead of serving the universities only, create the interdisciplinarity and organizational diversity of the universities and capture the gradual development of the paradigms of the discipline, from multidisciplinarity, interdisciplinarity, cross-disciplinarity to trans-disciplinarity. The complexity and specificity of the research objects concerning higher education determines that we should place the study of the construction and operation mechanism of the existing transdisciplinary organizations under the threshold of the transformation of the knowledge production model. By doing so, it helps to summarize the experience of building trans-disciplinary organization suitable for China’s reality.Stanford Doerr School of Sustainability, MIT Schwarzman College of Computing and Pritzker School of Molecular Engineering, University of Chicago are the typical representatives of the transdisciplinary teaching and research entities, and they respectively demonstrate three unique transdisciplinary modes: sustainable development-led model, digital-driven model, and new-technologies-oriented model. Among them, Stanford Doerr School of Sustainability adheres to the concept of sustainable development, with eight centered research areas, two institutes, Woods Institute for the Environment and the Precourt Institute for Energy and a three-pillared sustainability accelerator as an important mechanism to achieve speed and scale for global impact. MIT Schwarzman College of Computing takes digitalization as a means to reshape the future directions of other disciplines (including arts and the humanities) and artificial intelligence, reshapes computing changes in various disciplines and integrates social groups and social forces to create a multidimensional gathering of personnel. Pritzker School of Molecular Engineering is driven by advances in basic science and relies highly on the Argonne National Laboratory that provides a transdisciplinary knowledge platform, to apply molecular-level science to the enhancement of the quality of human life.The concept, cognition, paradigm and practice of transdisciplinarity have so far provided new inspirations to China’s construction, organization and researches, regarding disciplines. It further promotes China’s universities to make corresponding adjustments and changes in the aspects of knowledge production, academic research orientation, disciplinary organizational changes, and collaborative and institutional innovations: Firstly, set up a certain transdisciplinary direction, field and system, that consists of the integration of proximate and remote disciplines, and achieve discipline convergence that aims at realizing public interests; Secondly, construct a transdisciplinary organization that relies on the advantageous disciplines and build multifaceted transdisciplinary research centers or innovation platforms that are comprised of research centers, research institutes and national laboratories; Thirdly, establish a mechanism that links closely with the industry, the region, the public, and improve the cooperation between the government, the society and the university, so as to construct a research community.
张栋梁, 俞舒琪, 周谷平. 知识生产模式转型视角下的美国高校超学科实践研究[J]. 浙江大学学报(人文社会科学版), 2024, 54(2): 107-118.
Zhang Dongliang, Yu Shuqi, Zhou Guping. A Study of Transdisciplinarity in the Context of the Transformation of Knowledge Production. JOURNAL OF ZHEJIANG UNIVERSITY, 2024, 54(2): 107-118.
1 黄瑶、马永红、王铭： 《知识生产模式Ⅲ促进超学科快速发展的特征研究》，《清华大学教育研究》2016年第6期，第37-45页。 2 英］迈克尔·吉本斯、卡米耶·利摩日、黑尔佳·诺沃提尼等： 《知识生产的新模式——当代社会科学与研究的动力学》，陈洪捷、沈文钦等译，北京：北京大学出版社，2011年。 3 蒋逸民： 《新的知识生产模式及其对我国高等教育改革的启示》，《外国教育研究》2009年第6期，第73-78页。 4 Jean P.， “The epistemology of interdisciplinary relationships，” in Apostel L. （ed.）， Interdisciplinarity： Problems of Teaching and Research in Universities， Paris： OECD， 1972， pp. 127-139. 5 王小栋、苑大勇： 《跨越学科认知边界：超学科的理念表征与现实适用》，《比较教育学报》2022年第2期，第131-146页。 6 Nègre A.， “A transdisciplinary approach to science and astrology，” 2013-10-27， https：//jungpage.org/learn/articles/analytical-psychology/57-a-transdisciplinary-approach-to-science-and-astrology， 2023-12-11. 7 Ramadier T.， “Transdisciplinarity and its challenges： the case of urban studies，” Futures， Vol. 36， No. 4 （2004）， pp. 423-439. 8 Knapp N. C.， Reid R. S. & Fernandez M. E. et al.， “Placing transdisciplinarity in context： a review of approaches to connect scholars， society and action，” Ecological Economics， Vol. 11， No. 18 （2019）， pp. 1-25. 9 Lang D. J.， Wiek A. & Bergmann M. et al.， “Transdisciplinary research in sustainability science： practice， principles and challenges，” Sustain Science， Vol. 7， No. 1 （2012）， pp. 25-43. 10 Binder C. R.， “Transdisciplinarity： co-creation of knowledge for the future，” RCC Perspectives， No. 2 （2014）， pp. 31-34. 11 蒋逸民： 《作为一种新的研究形式的超学科研究》，《浙江社会科学》2009年第1期，第8-16页。 12 Scholz R. W. & Steiner G.， “Transdisciplinarity at the crossroads，” Sustainability Science， Vol. 10， No. 4 （2015）， pp. 521-526. 13 Mittelstra? J.， “Auf dem Wege zur Transdisziplinarit?t，” GAIA-Ecological Perspectives for Science and Society， No. 5 （1992）， https：//doi.org/10.14512/gaia.1.5.2. 14 McGregor S. L. T. & Volckmann R.，“Synopsis of integral leadership review’s series on transdisciplinarity in higher education，” Integral Leadership Review， Vol. 11， No. 3 （2011）， pp. 1-12. 15 Biancani S.， McFarland D. A. & Dahlander L.， “The semiformal organization，” Organization Science， Vol. 25， No. 5 （2014）， pp. 1306-1324. 16 Pohl C. & Hadom G. H.， Principles for Designing Transdisciplinary Research， Munich： Oekom Verlag， 2007. 17 胡甲刚： 《美国跨学科研究生培养管窥——以华盛顿大学“城市生态学”IGERT博士项目为个案》，《学位与研究生教育》2009年第10期，第71-75页。 18 Hanikel N.， Prévot M. S. & Yaghi O. M.， “MOF water harvesters，” Nature Nanotechnology， Vol. 15， No. 5 （2020）， pp. 348-355. 19 王晓玲、张德祥： 《试论学科知识生产的三种模式》，《复旦教育论坛》2000年第2期，第12-17页。 20 陈艾华、吴伟、王卫彬： 《跨学科研究的协同创新机理：基于高校跨学科组织的实证分析》，《教育研究》2018年第6期，第70-79页。 21 张泽、陈云敏、严建华等： 《新形势下一流学科如何建——学科建设与产业创新良性互动》，《光明日报》2020年10月27日，第15版。 22 黄瑶、王铭： 《“三螺旋”到“四螺旋”：知识生产模式的动力机制演变》，《教育发展研究》2018年第1期，第69-75页。
2024, Vol. 54 
