User:Evarenon/sandbox/Approaches to Knowledge/Seminar Group 4/Disciplinary Categories

Disciplinary categories

Discussion

Discipline categories often appear due to popular interest as certain individuals have a shared desire to learn about similar aspects of the world, thus suggesting that disciplines aren't specifically defined by the structure of the world but also by social and cultural context. As a result, they are a way of organising information in terms of similar characteristics whilst taking in consideration spatial and temporal aspects, thus making it easier for individuals to learn about their subject of interest.

Classification and categorization is essential for the vast amount of information that we can find on various supports, whether in library books or on the internet, to be somewhat ordered, and they facilitate navigation across all these platforms. However, according to Borges, classifications are arbitrary and conjectural to an extent. Such lack of legitimacy can often cause societal problems and divisions, for exemple divides and fights between immigrants and residents.

Disciplinary classification is the art and science of shaping information, products and experiences to support usability and findability. However, classification is all arbitrary and conjectual spatial, temporal or spatial-temporal segmentation of the world. Thus the system of disciplinary categories can never be complete or mutually exclusive.--C lmy (discuss • contribs) 20:27, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

	Classification, interdisciplinarity , and the study of science	The role of Classification in Knowledge Representation and Discovery	Overcoming the Brittleness Bottleneck using Wikipedia: Enhancing Text Categorization with Encyclopaedic Knowledge
Arguments	Classification is necessary for interdisciplinary scholarship The idea of a universal classification is feasible Universal classification can facilitate interdisciplinary inquiries	Classification is useful for communication, exploration, theorizing There are many approaches to classifications that have different goals and structures. Classification is a way of seeing It is useful to understand the properties of classification structures to use them accordingly	By building a feature generator to identify the most important information from the encyclopedia database and augment word bags, we can enhance classification and thereby, the interdisciplinary studies that make use of them
Disciplines involved	Medicine: How disagreements between mainstream and alternative medicine can be handled with categorization Human science: the classification related to the field evolves over time Chemistry: provides fairly objective standards of classification	Technological progress: advances in measuring and viewing enhanced classification Gemology: new ways to categorize gems over time thanks to new observation tools and discovering gem properties Economics: how classification can be used to economic ends (by the dairy industry) for example	Computer science: computer programming, digital algorithm Mathematics: studying the improvement of text categorization in digits Data management: studies the way data is kept and what pieces of information can be linked together through categorization
Comparison of arguments	The arguments of this article revolve a bit more around using classification for interdisciplinary scholarship purposes compared to the other 2. Like the 3^rd article, it introduces a will to improve classification, however it does so in its own unique way: by introducing the idea of universal classification that is not only accessible to a narrow community of scholars. It has a more scientific focus and emphasizes on classification as a way to facilitate information research and sharing.	The arguments from this paper are more of academic type. They also emphasize from the start the importance of categorization but takes the topic from another perspective: by exploring the different types of classifications and thus understanding how these categorizations tremendously affect the way in which we view the world. The arguments have the objective of making the readers open-minded towards classification, to make most of the benefits, that are numerous, and work our way around the setbacks.	This article emphasizes from the very beginning the importance of classification and how we can improve it using encyclopedic databases. It’s different from the 1^st article in the way that it has a clear objective: enhancing categorization. It’s more like a business-pitch kind of argument than an academic argument.

Table - Arguments and comparison : 3 articles on disciplinary categories... to an extent.

	Disciplinary cultures and the moral order of studying	How approaches to teaching are affected by discipline and teaching context	Measuring knowledge transfer between fields
Main argument	Disciplinary categories emerge from a group of people with a common set of values. This shared ideology is then cultivated in students of the discipline thus each discipline forms a ‘tribe’ each with its own culture	Teaching methods vary between disciplinary categories, most significantly between hard and soft disciplines, with hard disciplines being more teacher focused and soft disciplines being more student focused.	The relationship between disciplines can be quantified by analyzing citations that cross disciplinary categories. Citation rate, size, and characteristics can all indicate the influence that different disciplinary categories have on one another.
Disciplines involved	Sociology: development of specific cultures within disciplines Psychology: idea that people with similar ways of thinking form each discipline Anthropology: comparison of disciplines to tribes	Statistics: using t-test to compare types of teaching in different categories Psychology: measuring and understanding self-efficacy rates in teachers from different disciplines	Statistics: calculating citation rates.
Comparison	Unlike the other two papers this one looks at how the divide between disciplinary categories are actually formed and maintained. It tries to explain how subjects are categorized and why they continue to exist.	This paper focuses on the effect of categorizing disciplines. Furthermore, the main argument of the paper can potentially be explained through the lens of the first. If methods of teaching (structured in sciences and discussion orientated in humanities for example) are specific to disciplines then it can be argued that it is part of the culture of the department.	While the other two papers both highlight the boundaries between disciplines this paper aims to show how research crosses those distinctions. If we are looking at each discipline as a culture it may seem that exchange between disciplines is unlikely due to differences in basic ideology, however, this paper shows that it does happen naturally.


	Classification and its discontents	History, Science and Literature: Integrating Knowledge	The Effects of Discipline on Deep Approaches to Student Learning and College Outcomes
Argument	-the article claims that discipline isn't defined by the structure of the world but rather by the popular desire of certain individuals to learn about a specific aspect of the world -argues that disciplines are often learned cultural categories and that they are socially constructed and historically positioned -they only exist due to the 'perceived' structure of the world and our goals and tasks within it -lastly, it says that once we accept the flaws of the rigid classification system we will be able to shape our education in an appropriate manner for the changing research needs and communication landscape	- argues that the disciplines of history, science and language aren't as different as many believe as there are many overlapping concepts present in all of them - talks about the link between science and language as it claims that science papers differ based on which language they are written in due to different cultural and social contexts - looks at the way in which history encompasses both science and literature as it asses their impact on society; thus it teaches students to to think developmentally and see knowledge in meaningful relationships rather than separate disciplines	-claims that disciplines often reflect the values and norms held by its constituent individuals - argues that for a more prosperous academic environment one needs to research the practices present in various disciplines as deep approaches to knowledge appear to be the most successful mean of researching (refers to critical discussion and challenging theories within the topic)
Disciplines Involved	Biology: uses the examples of biologists who have found multiple ways to classify the phenomena of the organic world Sociology: looks at the development of media and its encouragement of interdisciplinarity Psychology: looks at the people's need to be part of a certain category History: documents the classification of university departments historically and the way in which they have changed during the last century due to the increasing level of globalization	History: talks about the impact of scientific developments on society over time Literature: looks at the importance of engaging literature when presenting a subject to students Sociology: brings in the importance of the social environment on the presentation of disciplines throughout the world	Sociology: looks at how different societies are classified into different disciplines according to their culture and beliefs Science: carries out an experiment that studies the learning outcomes of students that undergo deep approaches to knowledge
Comparison	Similarly to paper 3, this article claims that one should disregard the rigid classification of disciplines as they are often created by societal norms. Moreover, like paper 2 it looks at the way in which the development of technology has impacted the way in which we now divide disciplines.	This paper mainly concentrates on a concrete example to argue that that the disciplinary boundaries aren't as rigid as most believe. Although it reaches a similar conclusion with articles 1 and 2 it primarily refers to the study of history and its ability to encompass several disciplines.	Like paper 1, this article looks at society's role in our classification of disciplines and argues that one would benefit more from not viewing subjects as completely separate. However, it does so through looking at concrete data and also mentions deep and soft approaches to knowledge, thus differing from the other two articles.

Teobogatu (discuss • contribs) 14:05, 23 October 2018 (UTC) 14:20, 14 October 2018 (UTC)


	Disciplinary Categories, Majors, and Undergraduate Academic Experiences: Rethinking Bok's ‘‘Underachieving Colleges' Thesis	What are Academic Disciplines?	DISCIPLINE: MEANING, EVOLUTION AND CLASSIFICATION
Argument	Differences between Humanities and Social Science majors' and Science and Engineering students' performances plus ways to improve the situation.	The 'interdisciplinarity' is highly promoted by many nations, however, the narrow and arbitrary disciplinary boundaries may prevent academics seeing conncections of different disciplines, the prevelant tendency pf specialisation would foster insularity and imperalism.	Due to social and academic demand, disciplines become differentiated into new branches in order to focus in a more penetrating manner to an area of problem. Sometimes their overlapping with each other leads to interdisciplinary study of a problem.
Disciplines involved	Data Science: collecting statistics about the outcome of several surveys aiming at comparison of study time, efficiency and so on. Education: the aim of the research is to boost students' interest in studying and the samples as well as the locations are all about education and campus. Management and Administration: the research also include interviews to professors and faculties. The author tries to rethink about positive school management	Politics: the specialisation of knowledge and its classification may lead to centralisation of power and imperalism. History:reviewing the trend of awards to 'interdisciplinarity'. Philosophy:by referring to the fact that the tendency of specialisation would foster insularity.	History:Tracing back to the times of Aristotle when the term of discipline first appeared. Sociology and Culture: representative of a social construct rooted in distinctive disciplinary cultures. Education:the need of impatting knowledge encourages the proliferation of Disciplines.
Comparison	Compared to others, this one is more like the application of disciplinary categories. Based on two branches, the authror conducts many surveys. Though I believe the sample and classification need to be reconsidered.	The second one mainly focus on the drawbacks of interdisciplinarity rather than its merits. But it is definitely a comprehensive angle to analyze the topic.	The third one, like the first one, talking about the positive results of the classification, and it also focus more on the Social Science, like the second article. It lies a foudation to start discovering about disciplinary categories.

Lyu Muyao--C lmy (discuss • contribs) 20:29, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

	Discipline and theory in higher education (Tight, 2012)	Principles of Psychology (Kantor, 1924)	How approaches to teaching are affected by discipline and teaching context (Trigwell et al., 2006)
Argument	Argues that disciplines are largely categorised by their methodologies. Specifically focusses on the subject of higher education as a field of study - not classifying it as a discipline due to the lack of new knowledge being added to the subject and there not being a consistent method of research used across the study of it.	Psychology is a natural science due to its use of scientific procedures in experiments (similar to that of the physical sciences). However, it can sometimes be categorised as a soft science because some psychological research can lack in rigorous, empirical research methods and data to support their conclusions.	Teaching style is dependent on discipline. Hard disciplines warrant more teacher-centred learning, whereas soft disciplines warrant more student-centred teaching. Disciplines can be categorised by their common teaching style.
Disciplines involved	Education - while defining what they believe defines a discipline, they use higher education as an example looking at why they believe it shouldn't be classed as a discipline itself. Government policy (on education) - looking at higher education internationally, they look into the differences between the policies outlining the systems and standards of higher education. Research methods/analysis - evaluates the methods used in both the physical and social sciences as those studying higher education usually conduct research in the style of their own discipline.	Psychology - focusses on this discipline and explores the classification of it as a discipline (whether it is a hard or soft discipline). Physical sciences - uses comparisons of psychology and the physical sciences to outline the similarities and differences between them. History - looks into past and present research methods used in psychology (qualitative and quantitative) and how they have changed overtime.	Education - by examining the variations in teaching styles across disciplines, teachers can improve the ways of conveying knowledge to students. Psychology - researchers evaluated the effectiveness of these teaching techniques in different disciplines. Qualitative research methods - used to justify their conclusions that different disciplines warrant different teaching styles.
Comparison	Agrees with the other two articles on categorising disciplines by their use of research methods.	Focusses mostly on speaking about psychology as a discipline, not disciplinary categories generally. However, like the others uses the use of research methods of the discipline to categorise it.	Can be linked to the mention of research methods used to sort disciplines in the other articles. For example, student-centred teaching in soft disciplines implies that students are encouraged to develop their own interpretations of what they're studying, which is connected to the use of qualitative research which can be collected and used in a very subjective way.

Amberk23 (discuss • contribs) 20:55, 15 October 2018 (UTC)


	Some issues in the classification of zoology (Blake, 2011)	Indigenous knowledge and the politics of classification (Agrawal, 2002)	Identifying interdisciplinarity through the disciplinary classification of coauthors of scientific publications (Abramo et al, 2012)
Argument	Classification allows comprehensive organisation and understanding of the relationships between species, but there is a trade-off between efficiency and accuracy. Cladistics (an alternative zoological classification to taxonomy, featuring deep hierarchies) provides greater scientific accuracy at the expense of information retrieval efficiency. Hence, many scientists still use Linnaean as well as cladistic hierarchies.	The classification and documentation of indigenous knowledge helps create a database of knowledge that can contribute to conservation research and policy, and provides recognition to a historically marginalised social group. However, there is a need to be wary of isolating the knowledge from its people and their socio-political context, i.e., appropriating their knowledge for personal use in the name of development and scientific progress without necessarily benefitting the indigenous people.	The increasingly complex problems faced by scientific progress requires a higher level of collaboration between the scientific disciplines. Intradisciplinary collaborations between the specialisations in fields like medicine are also frequent. The implications of this analysis are on policymakers and research institutions, to encourage interdisciplinary collaboration and structure the communication networks necessary to favour such work.
Disciplines involved	Zoology - cladistics are primarily used in the biological classification of animals. Paleobiology - insofar as classification systems affect how we view the world, the use of varying zoological hierarchies could affect the studies done on fossils found. Conservation/environmental studies - what constitutes a species, or what falls under a species group, affects policy and action in environmental conservation	Anthropology - understanding and appreciating the indigenous cultures which have produced this knowledge History - the treatment of indigenous people is particularly contentious because of the historical background, in which many indigenous people have been marginalised in the advent of colonisation and industry Environmental sciences - in that indigenous knowledge is largely linked to nature/the environment, and can contribute to advancing the natural science fields	The sciences
Comparison	Blake looks more at the methodology and functionality of classification itself than its real-life effects, as the other two do.	Agrawal focuses more on how knowledge is inherently intertwined with the context of its creation and the politics of its use. The systematic documentation of knowledge helps its applicability and accessibility for a wider audience, but risks treating the knowledge - and by extension the indigenous people - as an exploitable resource.	Abramo et al make a case for infrastructure to support interdiscplinarity in the sciences, and unlike Agrawal works by defining the scientists involved in terms of their disciplinary knowledge. They too suggest a detriment to the thorough classification of knowledge (in this case, disciplines) as the clear-cut boundaries tend to work in disfavour of scientific progress.

Leewenyi (discuss • contribs) 20:41, 16 October 2018 (UTC)


	Undisciplining Knowledge: Interdisciplinarity in the 20th century (Scott, 2017)	“The imperative to make exaggerated promises about impact is damaging to the science itself” (Rose, 2014)	Knowledge organisation for a new millennium: principles and processes (Rowley, 2000)
Arguments	A comment on Harvey Graff’s book; Undisciplining Knowledge: Interdisciplinarity in the 20th century. Evaluation of Graff’s take on interdisciplinarity and the structure of knowledge. Graff sees interdisciplinarity as a force which can challenge the institutionalism of knowledge (in form of set disciplines). Scott however, argues that to do so (challenge) they have to take on some of the characteristics of the structure they are challenging.	Rose argues that social sciences needs to be setting the agenda and being involved in the actual scientific work although the research is bio technical as there are social implications involved. In addition he argues that social and natural scientist should get more used to working together to overcome disciplinary barriers.	Rowley explains that in our modern age, communities are flooded by information which has to be filtered by consumers. Information is only valuable when structured. She argues that as the quantity of information has grown the limitations of hierarchical systems are more evident. Rowley believes that the internet offers a potential solution by linking topics on the web.
Disciplines involved	This paper mostly concerns itself with how we categorise knowledge into disciplines. However, it does reference history (how the discipline is treated differently in France and England), economics (how the data revolution has made econometrics more dominant in the discipline) and the emergence of new disciplines in the 20th century like gender and sexuality studies.	Two main disciplines involved Social and Natural Science. On a more detailed level; biotechnology (for the actual project itself: Human Brain Project), sociology, ethics, law, governmental policy and economics are also mentioned in the article as being involved.	Data technology and library studies (how we organise knowledge) can be seen as two disciplines involved.
Comparison	Rose’s article displays a sort of battle between two disciplines; Social and Natural Science and how their differences result in the scientists having difficulties with collaboration on the Human Brain Project. Hence, if they had some interdisciplinary schooling they would have found it easier to collaborate.	Scott on the other hand presents a battle between the structuring of knowledge into disciplines (a sort of hierarchy). In addition he presents another way of thinking of disciplines and interdisciplinary work as a spectrum rather than a divide.	Rowley focuses on how information overload in our modern world has challenged the traditional way of structuring knowledge that Scott explores.

23:02, 16 October 2018 (UTC)


	Reported Gains In Student Learning: Do Academic Disciplines Make a Difference? (Pike & Killian, 2001)	Interdisciplinary - A Historical Reflection (Slavicek, 2012)	The classification of the sciences and the quest for interdisciplinarity: a brief history of ideas from ancient philosophy to contemporary environmental science (Trompf, 2011)
Main arguments	This article compares perceived university experience and learning outcomes, as well as the relationship between these components, of students in different disciplinary areas of a specific university. The classificatory system employed is Biglan’s organization of disciplines into pure and applied. Differences relating to student perception of their university environment have been shown to exist between pure and applied disciplines, with perceptions of those in applied fields generally being more favorable. However, difference in disciplines does not affect the relationships between variables such as overall experience and learning gains. When it comes to critical thinking, there is no difference between disciplinary categories. Ultimately, differences in learning outcomes seem to be produced not by organizational distinction of disciplines, but rather by variation in their content.	Academic disciplines are a representation of classifications which exist in order to identify, differentiate, categorize, and organize specific areas of knowledge. The process of disciplines becoming increasingly specialized creates a need for cross-disciplinary approaches. Interdisciplinarity provides a link between disciplines which are distinct. It is used to solve complex problems which cannot effectively be placed within one single discipline. The emergence of interdisciplinarity has its roots in historical development, particularly the growth of natural sciences. Disciplines, which remain the prevailing structure in knowledge organization, should operate in an environment of inclusivity and exchange, rather than separation, while interdisciplinarity should serve as an important link between disciplines.	This article examines the historical process of classifying human knowledge, particularly scientific knowledge. This activity was necessitated by the accumulation, occurring mainly throughout the 19th century, of information about the world. The article also argues that attempts were made both to distinguish and to unify different areas of knowledge, and it is shown that origins of such attempts can be found already in antiquity. In this way, it recognizes the importance in history of finding points of contact between the disciplines, looking at how they relate to each other and what unites them. As disciplines branch out into more specialized areas, classifying them becomes increasingly difficult. Finally, the article recognizes environmental science as an important area where combined interdisciplinary effort has become crucial for future progress.
Disciplines involved	Education: Examination of experiences and learning outcomes within the context of university. Research methods: Conceptual modelling, qualitative research (questionnaire), statistics, data measurement and analysis, effects of different characteristics, relationship between university experience and learning outcomes	History: Tracing the origin of disciplinary categories, their meaning, development and function throughout history. The article also addresses critical points within history for the emergence of interdisciplinarity. Philosophy: Lines of thought of different philosophers are examined in relation to the classification of disciplines. Education: Role of universities in the development of disciplines. Social science: Link between knowledge and power within society. Language: Linguistic origins of the terms ‘discipline’ and ‘interdisciplinarity’.	History: The article provides a historical perspective on the classification of knowledge into different disciplines, as well as exploring the concept of interdisciplinarity as it occurs throughout history. Sociology/Anthropology: The article reviews various classification schemes from different cultures, religions, regions, etc. It also examines how different classifying principles developed within social contexts. Philosophy: What are the principles by which knowledge should be organized (e.g. rational order versus dynamic processes)? What are the values underlying learning processes and human behavior? Environmental science: The importance of interdisciplinary collaboration is placed within the context of environmental science.
Comparison	This article differs from the other two articles in that it focuses on a more explicit question defined within a specific field, i.e. higher education. It relies on a clear definition of the demarcation of disciplines, namely Biglan’s approach of classifying disciplines, as opposed to examining the historical evolution of disciplinary categories as a whole, as is the case in the other articles. The article highlights differences between academic disciplines in analyzing students’ reported experiences of university and gains in learning. Furthermore, this study uses different research methods in its analysis, most importantly incorporating a conceptual model, based on both qualitative and quantitative evidence, of the relationship between several factors relating to education. Such a model enables comparison between disciplinary categories. The conclusions of this article are thus based on findings obtained from research. According to the article, differences in disciplinary content impact student learning outcomes.	This article introduces the main ideas in the historical evolution of academic disciplines, and the consequent rise of interdisciplinarity. It is similar to Trompf, as they both follow a primarily historical approach in examining the classification of academic disciplines. However, this article argues that within academic organization, individual disciplines still prevail. Interdisciplinary work should be used in solving complex problems where gaps between differing disciplines need to be filled, thereby linking the disciplines in order to acquire a new kind of knowledge.	Similarly to Slavicek, this article views the evolution of disciplines through a historical perspective, outlining the both the process of organizing knowledge into distinct areas, and that of searching for a kind of unity of knowledge. In comparison to the previous article, the scope of this article is wider, with its historical examination spanning centuries of development in more detail. Both articles identify 19th century Europe and the advancement of modern science as crucial for the classification of knowledge into disciplines. This article identifies and underlines the importance of crossing disciplinary boundaries, looking both at historical attempts to synthesize fields of knowledge and at the relevance of interdisciplinarity in solving crucial present-day issues such as ensuring environmental sustainability.

User:Evarenon/sandbox/Approaches to Knowledge/Seminar Group 4/Disciplinary Categories

Disciplinary categories

Discussion

Suggested readings

Navigation menu

User:Evarenon/sandbox/Approaches to Knowledge/Seminar Group 4/Disciplinary Categories

Disciplinary categories

Discussion

Suggested readings

Navigation menu

Search