Search

The aim of this paper is to describe actions designed to foster interdisciplinary research efforts at a major university in the UK. The study employed a descriptive mixed method case study approach to collecting and analysing the data used to draw its conclusions. One hundred and twenty-seven academic staff responded to the survey. The results of the survey were verified by 25 interviews with heads of colleges, heads of schools, research coordinators, research team leaders, and team members. These interviews were supported by document review to support the findings. Leadership is important at the college and university levels if interdisciplinarity is to thrive. According to the data, this seems to have not yet occurred at this particular institution. The university has done well with most of the big structures that enrich and support interdisciplinarity. However, ‘small’ structures such as clarity of meaning, motivation of staff, misalignment of old structures, time and workload, and loss of identify have impeded the move to university wide interdisciplinarity. A series of three recommendations are made to move the interdisciplinary project forward: stay clear on focus, extend the benefits of serendipity to more people, and remember that one size does not fit all. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Chinese universities are being continually subjected to new managerial practices and technologies that have fundamental consequences on the university faculty's academic life. Within a predominantly communitarian theoretical framework of academic identity, this qualitative case study draws upon interviews with 25 academics in Mainland China to expose the extent to which Chinese academics’ values, beliefs and behaviour are convergent and consistent with those that might be expected within the reform agenda. The systematic data analysis identified six identity-related characterisations of how Chinese university faculty at this case university have reacted to this shifting context, contributing to the global literature on the academic profession in two respects. First, it contributes to the empirically grounded knowledge of the complex manner in which Chinese academics negotiate, challenge or comply with the new managerialist agenda. Second, it explores the prime academic identity that Chinese academics have built up under this new managerial circumstances. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]