On Nov. 21st, Bangladesh Student
Association at Purdue University (BDSA) organized a panel to discuss
“Interdisciplinary Research: Challenges and Opportunities for Building a New
Collaboration.” More than 30 Bangladeshi students and faculty gathered in the
Material Science and Electrical Engineering Building. The discussion began
promptly at 7:30 pm when the BDSA President Shams Duha introduced a multi-disciplinary
panel (Dr. Uma K. Aryal, Director of
Purdue Proteomics Facility; Dr. Maizbha
Uddin Ahmed, Postdoctoral Research Associate, Industrial and Physical
Pharmacy; SM Ferdous, Graduate
Research Assistant, Computer Science; Israt
Ferdous, Graduate Research Assistant, Science Education; Rafatul Faria, Graduate Research
Assistant, ECE) and requested Prof. Alam, a Purdue Electrical Engineering
Faculty, to moderate the panel discussion.
In explaining the importance of the
topic, Prof. Alam recalled two TV shows from the 1980s: Ei Shob Din Ratri, a
Bangladesh TV show where famous writer Humayun Ahmed introduces “situational
comedy” where extraordinary things arises at the intersections of the ordinary,
and in COSMOS TV series, Carl Sagan attributes the transformative creativity of
classical Greece, Rome and Renaissance Venice to the cross-currents of ideas
percolating in these small trading islands. In short, transcendent creativity
often arises when people with different backgrounds have an opportunity to work
together.
The discussion got a lively start in
trying to define the meaning of “Disciplinary vs. interdisciplinary” research.
One of the panelists, Dr. Aryal, defined the issue crisply by distinguishing
between interdisciplinary vs. multidisciplinary research and contrasting it
with transdisciplinary research. Using concrete examples from his laboratory,
he explained that a multidisciplinary researcher uses a resource from another
discipline to answer a discipline-specific question, while an interdisciplinary
researcher answers a broader question that can only be answered by a synthesis
of disciplines. Rafatul Faria explained that a smart-phone, which involves a
synthesis of many branches of electrical, mechanical, chemical engineering,
could only be created by a synthesis of research from multiple fields. The
discussion led to the notion of trans-disciplinary research, which involves the
big collaboration needed to produce a smartphone, even though each research
topic must still be confined to neighboring disciplines. Several members of the
audience noted that even the disciplinary research actually involves
contributions from many disciplines (e.g. ECE students learn mathematics,
physics, computer engineering, and so on). SM Ferdous explained that sometimes
it is difficult to distinguish between collaborative research and
interdisciplinary research or multidisciplinary research, and yet a board
collaboration between scientists and engineers was essential to the creation of
modern civilization. Israt Ferdous neatly summarized the discussion by drawing
a series of diagrams defining the terms and how they relate to each other.
The audience and panel agreed that
interdisciplinary research is important because it can lead to new
field-defining research and significant impact. There are however many
challenges in initiating and sustaining interdisciplinary research. The rigid
disciplinary structure of a university discourages interdisciplinary research.
How would one identify the collaborators? Does one need to learn multiple new
topics and new terminologies for effective interdisciplinary research? Is it
more difficult to publish the research because the editors may not find
reviewers who are comfortable with multiple topics? Can an interdisciplinary researcher
suffer from an identity crisis? Is there a perception that interdisciplinary
research implies an inferior research because depth may be compromised for
breadth? The cultural attitude can be a problem: the noise in one field can be
the main result in another field. Dr. Ahmed provided a concrete example from
personal experience: When he first started his PhD, his main aim was to use the
conventional pharmacology methods. At that time, he had no idea that
related methods from other disciplines
would be essential for his success. Learning these new methods were very
challenging, but ultimately very rewarding.
The room buzzed with questions, comments, and personal observations
because the topic is not academic, but something that everyone grapples daily.
Although there were no definitive answers
about how to conduct interdisciplinary research correctly, there were several
suggestions. First of all, everyone agreed that one must master a discipline at
the undergraduate/graduate level, before venturing into interdisciplinary
research. In fact, the group agreed that the primary goal of undergraduate
education should be to create a broad and deep foundation (like a pyramid
base). At the graduate level, the disciplinary, multi-disciplinary, or
interdisciplinary research should be viewed as tools whose choice is dictated
by the original research hypothesis. If the research question is shallow, the
answer – disciplinary or multidisciplinary – cannot lead to profound results.
Some suggested that it helps to have a broad interest and talk to a lot of
people. Others felt that initially, it is better to work in multi-disciplinary
teams with narrower questions, but then venture into more integrated
interdisciplinary problems.
The rewards of multidisciplinary research
are numerous and significant in terms of publication in high impact journals,
increased productivity, better name recognition, and an ability to attract
funding from multiple sources. Despite these advantages, one should be careful
about ethical pitfalls in terms of credit
sharing, acknowledging contributions from others, etc. Without this broader and
more generous perspective, the interdisciplinary teams may disintegrate in
bitter acrimony. In other words, people-issues are as important as technical issues
in interdisciplinary research.
By now the western style panel discussion
has morphed into an “Adda” with a lively discussion threading the big room. It
was getting late, however, and the pizza was getting cold. Therefore, the
moderator brought the discussion to a close by thanking the organizer and
acknowledging the panelists and audience for their thoughtful participation. He
also remarked that interdisciplinary research is often enabled by a broad
curiosity about the world and a deep humility so that we can learn from people
around us. He explained that in that context, an understanding of the history,
literature, and technical issues allows one to ask deep and enduring
interdisciplinary questions and frame the answers in memorable ways. As the event
ended and everyone stepped out in the cold winter night, one hopes that the
BDSA group discussion will trigger and sustain an even more important and
profound conversion in the future: The discussion that one holds with oneself
when no one is around.
