Learning Each Others' Ropes: Negotiating interdisciplinary authenticity

TL;DR

This paper explores a multi-year interdisciplinary dialogue between a physicist and a biologist, leading to mutual understanding and curriculum development that better integrates physics into biology education.

Contribution

It presents a case study of interdisciplinary collaboration that enhances curriculum design and understanding between physics and biology educators.

Findings

Deepened understanding of disciplinary perspectives

Development of biologically authentic physics problems

Improved interdisciplinary communication and curriculum integration

Abstract

A common feature of the recent calls for reform of the undergraduate biology curriculum has been for better coordination between biology and the courses from the allied disciplines of mathematics, chemistry, and physics. Physics has lagged math and chemistry in creating new biologically oriented curricula, though much activity is now taking place and significant progress is being made. In this article we consider a case study: a multi-year conversation between a physicist interested in adapting his physics course for biologists (Redish) and a biologist interested in including more physics in his biology course (Cooke). These extended discussions have led us both to a deeper understanding of each others' discipline and to significant changes in the way we each think about and present our classes. We discuss two examples in detail: the creation of a physics problem for a biology class on fluid flow, and the creation of a biologically authentic physics problem on scaling and dimensional analysis. In each case, we see differences in how the two disciplines frame and see value in the tasks. We conclude with some generalizations about how biology and physics look at the world differently that help us navigate the minefield of counterproductive stereotypical responses.