Challenges IGERTs Face

Source: CIRGE, University of Washington, Multinational Collaborations in Challenges to the Environment, Friday Harbor, 9-13-4

Challenges IGERTs FaceLessons and Recommendations

1. Challenges of novel, interdisciplinary, international doctoral programs

2. The Case of the UW Urban Ecology

3. Lessons learned and Recommendations

Vivek Shandas, Doctoral Candidate at UW , Urban Ecology IGERT and Urban Planning and Design

Maresi Nerad, Associate Graduate Dean, UW The Graduate SchoolDirector, Center for Innovation and Research in Graduate Education

(CIRGE) www.cirge.washington.edu


Key Challenges

1. National differences between the systems of higher education and structures of doctoral education

2. Differences between the disciplines in US universities (cultural differences)

3. Challenges of working in teams4. Language differences: disciplinary

languages, national languages


Internal Organization of U.S. University: Example I

PresidentProvost/vice PresidentFor Academic Affairs

DeanGraduate School

Graduate Council

Graduate Faculty

Dean e.g. College of Engineering

Dean e.g. College of Arts and Sciences


Basic Structure of US Ph.D Programs in Physical, Life Sc.+ Engineering

SelectiveAdmission

Course Work (core courses)

Prelim. Exam (end of 1st year )Diss. Proposal development

Dissertation Research

General Exam (end of 2nd-3rd year)

Final Exam (end of 5-7 th year)

GREGPA3 letters

PhD

Postdoc 2-4 yrs


Basic Structure of US Ph.D Programs in Soc. Sciences + Humanities

Course Work (core courses)

General Exam ( 3rd year )

Diss. Proposal

Diss. Proposal Review (3rd -4th year)

SelectiveAdmission

GREGPA3 letters

Dissertation Research

Dissertation Defense (5-9th year)PhD


Disciplinary Differences

1. Mode of research– In the laboratory /field - library

2. Structure of program– Master’s –no masters’ degree– Expectation for dissertation

3. Methodology– Quantitative versus qualitative

4. Availability of resources– “Richer” Science versus “poorer” social science

5. Faculty student interaction 1. Frequent interaction in laboratory –less frequent in

library sciences2. Easy access- hierarchical formal interaction

Lessons learned from the Urban Ecology IGERT

program at the University of Washington

Science

Decision•Process•Management•Implementation

Policy

Problem•Definition•Analysis•Actors

Assessment•Scenarios•Alternatives•Criteria

Evaluation•Indicators•Monitoring•Performance

Drivers•Economic•Policy•Biophysical

Patterns•Demographic•Land use•Infrastructure

Processes•Economic•Hydrological•Ecological

Impacts•Ecological•Human behavior•Economic

Conceptual Model of IntegratingScience and Policy

IGERT

Current Projects in Urban Ecology

• Spatial analysis of urban growth between 1972 – 2000 along I-90 corridor (2001)

• Policy analysis of protecting environmentally sensitive Areas in western Washington (2002)

• Ecological, social, and economic impact of urban green space in the Puget Sound (2003)

• Factors affecting the emergence of Seattle parks 1900 – 2000 (2003)• Urban backyard wildlife sanctuaries – opportunities and challenges

(2003)• Impacts of vegetated buffers on aquatic conditions (2004)• Impact of second-home ownership on the fragmentation of rural

landscapes (2004)• Neighborhood walk ability and quality of life indicators (2004)

Organization• Core faculty represent:

– Forestry, urban design and planning, geography, biology

– Associated faculty comprise 5 other departments• Students are assigned into interdisciplinary

teams, and asked to develop a research project– Few constraints on the nature of the project or

organization of the group• Students work with their primary advisor to

develop disciplinary project

Structure

• 2 years of required coursework:– 1st year undergraduates and graduate students

identify project and develop research design– 2nd year PhD students collect data, analyze data and

publish manuscript• Co-authored manuscript will become one

chapter in the dissertation • Group process sessions with professional

mediator (twice a year)

Developing a Group Project

• Identify criteria:– interdisciplinary, addresses ‘real-world’ problem

(results aimed at influencing policy), regional, feasible (time and cost), utilizes faculty expertise, interesting to all participants

• Real-world problems—’hotspots’ in the region– Salmon, salmon, salmon

Opportunities with IGERT

• Exposure– theory, methods, culture, faculty, etc…

• Support (financial, peer, faculty, University)• Publications

– interdisciplinary and disciplinary projects– educational experiences

• Employment (TBD)

Opportunities (continued)

• International Component – Universities in Berlin, Warsaw, and Oslo– Collaboration in projects

• seminal paper/books in the field (urban ecology)– Differences between U.S. and European programs

• hierarchical• integration-challenged• language limitations

Challenges in Collaborative Research

• Team Process– level of interest, commitment, accountability– co-authorship

• Disciplinary biases– faculty representation– quantitative, larger ‘n’ = better results– language barriers

• In-class discussions– conceptual disagreements → personality attacks– tone and spirit of discussion was essential to learning

• Hierarchical context– Presumption of equality

• Schedule mismatch– field seasons, conferences, personal leave

How we made it work….• Flexibility

– openness to multiple methods of analysis, disciplinary conceptions, cultural norms

• Dialog– reading seminars– approach primary advisor to address core faculty

• Informal gatherings (homes, pubs, conferences)– building trust, acknowledging biases, humoring

personalities• Location – centrally located, easy accessibility

for all participants • Group process facilitator

– developing systems, evaluating ideas, over-coming barriers

An Example of Making it Work

• Guidelines for Group Work– arrive on time– encourage creative exploration of idea– promote opportunities for ‘group think’– develop sacred dates calendar


Challenges for Students– Lesson Learned

1. Balancing disciplinary departmental requirements with IGERT requirements – provide written transparent requirements

2. Utilizing the multidisciplinary information and applying it in thesis without “drowning”– dedicate extra time to students in the dissertation topic formation phase, make transparent (master piece –versus first scholarly work )


Challenges for Students– Lesson Learned

3. Finding additional advisors, ( US doctoral programs require 3 members in dissertation committee) – make sure NON-IGERT department faculty know about the basic thrust of the program

4. Degree outcomes for additional work–certificate? joined PhD?


Challenges for Professors –Lessons learned

1. Different motivations for participating in IGERTS- devote time to establish common goals

2. Trained in traditional disciplines – devote time to understanding the differences, accept other methods as equals

3. Limited time, IGERT work demands time, intensive preparation, - make sure that their department chair recognizes their extra work

4. Lack of project management and time management skills- invite consultant to teach these skills


Challenges for Administrative Staff –lessons learned

1. Everybody underestimates time IGERT logistics require- need full-time staff

2. Constantly adjusting process, requires high degree of flexibility, however universities are highly bureaucratic and rigid organizations-get sanctions of top administrators for project

3. Torn between students’ view and faculty view, limited institutional power-systematically include their knowledge, observations into planning process


Summary of Key Recommendations

1. Spend time to get to know each other, both faculty and studentsa. Expectations regarding the IGERTb. Motivations for participating/applyingc. Strength each person brings to the

processd. Working stylef. Cultural differences, believe system


Recommendations

2. Be aware of the choice of language and its effectSpeaking English privileges some and disadvantages others, creates hierarchy both among and between faculty and students

3. Provide special language courses for students focusing on the topic and teaches simultaneously presentation and publishing skills in English


Recommendations

4. Offer team building training earlyTeam building is a planned and structure process that includes listening skills, given professionally feedback, and conflict resolution skills


Recommendations

5. Plan regular feedback sessions, once a term, particularly at transition periods in the program- among faculty, - among students- and between faculty and students.


Recommendations

6. Create at a non-competitive learning environment - between disciplines (soft and hard sciences) which method is better- which country does it better ( resource imbalance)

7. Faculty/professors model behavior they expect students to demonstrate


Thank you!

CIRGE website

www.cirge.washington.edu

Challenges IGERTs Face

Documents

Transcript of Challenges IGERTs Face