5.3.3 Question 3 response Type C

Several postgraduates, again from outside the archaeological discipline, also discussed interdisciplinarity:

'For me, the main question raised is how I can make use of this new perspective and also make my own work more interdisciplinary. We are very quick to jump on the "interdisciplinary band wagon", but often unsuccessful at realising its full potential as you have to become an expert in several fields, and "interdisciplinarity", to penetrate the output of most studies.'

'My overall interpretation of participating in the project is that hegemony of jargon loaded impenetrable papers doesn't make sense in an interdisciplinary world. As academics looking out into the world, we should be thinking about how to communicate collaboratively with one another across disciplines, as opposed to how to exclude one another with disciplinary rivalry and snobbishness.'

'...the exercise has made me think about the meaning of "interdisciplinary"; why we try to aim for it and what its potentials are. My research is also "interdisciplinary" (drawing from philosophy, literature, intellectual history); however what that means, in effect, is not that it brings together these fields, but rather that it creates a new field. As a result, anyone who does not possess a more and more specific cultural capital is excluded from the discourse and interdisciplinary dialog is thus not achieved. Anyone who does not follow the established terminologies and methodologies from all of the disciplines is thus left by the wayside, and of course in traditional academic discourse, if we're going to be honest, that's often even seen as something to be proud.'


© Internet Archaeology/Author(s)
University of York legal statements | Terms and Conditions | File last updated: Fri May 20 2011