Internal stakeholders’ views on interdisciplinarity: An empirical study within an interdisciplinary master’s program

Abstract Even though research exists on interdisciplinary education and interdisciplinary skills, the term “interdisciplinary” is ambiguous. Currently, studies on how different internal stakeholders in an education setting define and conceptualise interdisciplinarity are lacking. Consequently, the purpose of this paper is to define and conceptualise interdisciplinarity in higher education. This is investigated by focus group interviews with 29 internal stakeholders representing students, teachers, and program managers at an interdisciplinary master’s program. The conclusion provides a definition of interdisciplinarity; The integration of people possessing different competencies (knowledge, background, and skills) acting upon an identified need, challenge or opportunity that requires a holistic approach founded in synergies and thereby creating new knowledge. Interdisciplinary learning is mainly conceptualised to take place in open-ended and research-like innovation projects.

Abstract: Even though research exists on interdisciplinary education and interdisciplinary skills, the term "interdisciplinary" is ambiguous. Currently, studies on how different internal stakeholders in an education setting define and conceptualise interdisciplinarity are lacking. Consequently, the purpose of this paper is to define and conceptualise interdisciplinarity in higher education. This is investigated by focus group interviews with 29 internal stakeholders representing students, teachers, and program managers at an interdisciplinary master's program. The conclusion provides a definition of interdisciplinarity; The integration of people possessing different competencies (knowledge, background, and skills) acting upon an identified need, challenge or opportunity that requires a holistic approach founded in synergies and thereby creating ABOUT THE AUTHORS Mirka Kans is an associate Professor in Terotechnology at the department of Mechanical Engineering and has been program director for several educational programs since 2004 and forward. She is active in developing the education practices and curriculum according to student centered and active learning concepts (e.g. in form of CDIO), and in close collaboration with industry. Research focus lies within data and information systems for industrial management, and especially on data and IT requirements for maintenance management and how to support maintenance by means of IT to achieve cost-effectiveness. Åsa Gustafsson is a senior lecturer at Linnaeus University, Sweden. She received her PhD from Växjö University, Sweden. She is the director for the interdisciplinary master program "Innovations through business, engineering, and design", Linnaeus University, Sweden. Her research interest is in the area of supply chain management with a special interest in the supply chain for soft wood lumber.
Åsa Gustafsson is a senior lecturer at Linnaeus University, Sweden. She received her PhD from Växjö University, Sweden. She is the director for the interdisciplinary master program "Innovations through business, engineering, and design", Linnaeus University, Sweden. Her research interest is in the area of supply chain management with a special interest in the supply chain for softwood lumber.

PUBLIC INTEREST STATEMENT
To work in interdisciplinary settings is an important ability for many professionals today. Consequently, the interest in interdisciplinary higher education programs has increased. Even though many studies and publications address interdisciplinarity, the term itself is ambiguous, leading to different perceptions on how interdisciplinarity could be defined and manifested in the education context. With better understanding of the perceptions of interdisciplinarity amongst different internal stakeholders such as students, teachers, and program managers, improvements in teaching as well as in the curriculum design could be achieved. In this study, 29 internal stakeholders representing students, teachers, and program managers have been interviewed regarding their perception of interdisciplinarity.

Introduction
Today's business environment is constantly changing, resulting in difficulties for students to choose and apply for an education that will meet the requirements of their forthcoming professional life. To accommodate higher education in the current business context, there is a need for universities to graduate students who can operate in changing environments (Delaney, Pattinson, McCarthy, & Beecham, 2017). Interdisciplinary knowledge will increase the students' ability to understand complex challenges (Annan-Diab & Molinari, 2017). Consequently, there is an increased demand on universities and teaching institutions within higher education to teach interdisciplinarity to students. At the same time, the concept of interdisciplinarity acts as an enabler to challenge traditional teaching and thereby constitutes "an intellectual attitude" for project-oriented collaboration between scholars from different disciplines (Trommler, 1992).
Interdisciplinary knowledge will prepare students for their professional lives, as underscored in Newell (2012). Several universities and teaching institutions have developed interdisciplinary courses (see, for instance, Augsburg, 2003;Duffield, Olson & Kerzman, 2013), and they encourage interdisciplinary programs (Vanstone et al., 2013) to meet the needs of future employers. From a university perspective, the academic workplace is becoming increasingly complex for faculty members (O'Meara, Rivera, Kuvaeva, & Corrigan, 2017). Faculty members are, in general, committed to their work, and to offer a stable work life, universities and teaching institutions need to reduce complexity (Johnsrud & Rosser, 2002). Needless to say, this is a complicated balancing act-providing complexity in educational programs in the form of interdisciplinary learning, while not increasing the complexity of the work environment for involved faculty members.
It is important to identify ways to establish interdisciplinarity in the traditional university structure by teaching more than traditional industrial project setup (e.g. Tonnquist, 2016). The concept of interdisciplinarity is ambiguous, as it might imply different characteristics to different stakeholders. For unclear concepts, a definition of terms is useful (Govier, 2013). In the traditional university structure, two internal stakeholders are mainly involved; faculty members (faculty members teaching and/or acting as program managers) and students (Ramsden, 2003). It is important that internal stakeholders have the same view on issues to reach the most beneficial output in an efficient way.
For universities aiming to teach interdisciplinary programs/courses, a dilemma appears; striving to reduce complexity and at the same time imitate professional working life. The need to be able to employ students with interdisciplinary knowledge cannot be misunderstood. Currently, studies providing a state-of-the-art description of how interdisciplinarity is defined and conceptualised within traditional university structure are lacking. There might be explanations for this, but to realise and offer a well-developed program, a united holding amongst involved internal stakeholders is needed.
The main purpose of this paper is to discover characteristics of interdisciplinarity in higher education, and thereafter compare the findings with existing literature. Hence, the following questions arise: 1) How could interdisciplinarity be defined by different internal stakeholders? and 2) How could interdisciplinarity be conceptualised in an interdisciplinary master's program?

Method and empirical setting
This paper deploys an inductive approach (Bryman & Bell, 2013), aiming at a deeper understanding of the concept of interdisciplinarity in higher education. Inductive research is useful when additional perspectives are needed for specific research (Eisenhardt, 1989). This is done by studying internal stakeholders' conceptualisation of interdisciplinarity in a master's program utilising the focus group interview method. Focus group interview is a recognised method for examining how respondents together interpret the general phenomenon the researcher is studying (Bryman & Bell, 2013). Further, focus groups are preferred, as they explore opinions, previous experience and future expectations (Rodrigues et al., 2010). O'Neill and Palmer (2004) claim that focus groups are appropriate, as they allow for gaining interesting insight into respondents' mind-set. They are advantageous, as they allow for follow-up questions and clarifications (Bryman & Bell, 2013). Consequently, empirical data has been gathered through focus groups with open questions focusing on interdisciplinarity. Each focus group interview were recorded and thereafter transcribed, and included two up to six participants. The discussions were directed by two researchers, guaranteeing that no single participant was given too much speaking time, and that all participants were answering each question. The interview guides are presented in Appendix A. Appropriate members in a focus group are those who possess experience in the studied phenomenon (Bryman & Bell, 2013). In the present study, focus groups have been carried out with three categories of respondents (internal stakeholders); 1) students (fourth-semester students writing their thesis who were therefore able to reflect on their previous education), 2) teaching faculty members, and 3) faculty members acting as program managers. For information on each category of respondents (number of focus group/s, and total number of respondents) see Table 1. In total 29 respondents participated in the study.
The program involves students from three faculties; Faculty of Engineering, Faculty of Arts and Humanities, and School of Business and Economics, all enrolled in the same program. Students enrolled in the program ought to develop competencies in interdisciplinary teams and deepen their individual subject knowledge. The program is based on the students' conducting realistic innovation projects based on briefs provided by different stakeholders outside the university. The program consists of four semesters, 30 credits each. The first year is interdisciplinary, whereas the second year consists of traditional advanced courses.
For analysing the interview results, conventional content analysis in which coding categories are derived directly from the interviews was applied (Hsieh & Shannon, 2005). In this conventional content analysis, the authors let the data "speak for itself" and selected phrases containing information relevant to the respective research question. The data analysis started with each author reading the empirical data repetitively to get a basic understanding and capture the core concepts. The empirical data were given codes. Labels for the codes emerged that reflected several codes or notion of codes. These labels were thereafter sorted into categories, as recommended by Hsieh and Shannon (2005). The extracted quotes and final categorisation are found in Appendixes B-D. Within conventional content analysis, relevant theories are addressed in the discussion section (Hsieh & Shannon, 2005).
Baily (2006) identified scientific criteria for qualitative research concerning credibility, transferability, dependability, and conformability. These have been obtained in this paper as follows: Teaching faculty members 2 8 Faculty members acting as program managers 1 3 • Credibility implies, for instance, authenticity, and plausibility of the results (Miles & Huberman, 1994). Credibility in this study has been achieved by applying appropriate methods, and the conclusion stems from the data as recommended by Lincoln and Guba (1985).
• Transferability refers to the applicability of findings outside the research setting (Stake, 1995). Transferability allows for replication of the study in other settings, situations, and with other participants. A discussion of transferability regarding the research questions is presented in the conclusion chapter.
• Dependability refers to internal consistency between research questions, data collection, and analysis. To enhance dependability, a detailed description of the research process is provided as recommended by Bailey (2006).
• Conformability infers that the findings can be supported by data (Baily, 2006). The findings of this study are clearly supported by the empirical data.

Main findings
In this section, the main findings from the focus group interviews are described. Empirical material in the form of representative quotes and their categorization is found in Appendixes; student quotes are presented in Appendix B, teaching faculty members in Appendix C, and faculty members acting as program managers in Appendix D (each quote is identified by a number; the first number refers to the appendix number, while the second number is a serial number, serial number). In total, 10 different categories were extracted. Four categories describe the definition of interdisciplinary: integration of people, Integration of knowledge, deepened knowledge as outcome, and problem-solving. Six categories describe the interdisciplinary conceptualisation: Student active learning, traditional learning, real-life setting, physical location, teacher role, and curriculum (interdisciplinary learning as seen in the curriculum). Table 2 accounts for the frequency of responses regarding each category.
The empirical data is organized according to the questions and the different internal stakeholder category. 3.1. How could interdisciplinarity be defined by different internal stakeholders?

Students
The students commonly saw interdisciplinarity as the combination or integration of disciplines or students from different disciplines. Some students discussed the possibility to be an interdisciplinary student, if this student studies two or more disciplines (for quote, see for instance, serial number 2.2). The discussion was extended to include not only academic experience but also practical experience (for quote, see for instance, serial number 2.10). Although a majority of the students viewed interdisciplinarity as something happening between students, they reflected upon the necessity of having an exchange between students for creating interdisciplinarity. Otherwise, interdisciplinarity was perceived to remain as thoughts without action.
The action takes place between students, and several students saw interdisciplinarity as a way of working together. Students viewed the project work, in which participants from all three disciplines work together to solve a real-life problem stated by an external party, as the setting in which interdisciplinarity took place. A distinction between working as a group and working in an interdisciplinary setting was noted (for quote, see for instance, serial number 2.14).
Moreover, the students recognised that interdisciplinarity work has several purposes. The opportunity to learn from each other was recognised as one purpose. Another commonly discussed purpose was solving problems and creating new things. Several students found these two purposes as interlinked; by learning from each other, they will be able to reach the objectives. This is enabled only if students are open to new experiences and thoughts (for quote, see for instance, serial number 2.25).
As a student, you have to apply an open mind and a willingness to learn not only new knowledge but also work on your social competencies (for quote, see for instance, serial number 2.24).
Language was emphasised as something you learn from each other. By working in an interdisciplinary way, students learn terms and languages of the other disciplines. The learning is deep; you have to understand the meaning of a word rather than the single definition. One example that was brought up is the term "sketch," which means quite different things for an engineer and a designer (for quote, see for instance, serial number 2.22). The interdisciplinary setting as a means for achieving a common goal is clearly seen in the previous quote, as well as the necessity to discuss and learn from each other. By collaborating and viewing the same problem from several perspectives, a deeper knowledge of the problem area (and its solutions) is gained.

Teaching faculty members
While the students focused on interdisciplinarity as something that happened between people, the teachers mainly focused the discussion on integrating disciplines, or disciplinary knowledge. One teacher explained that interdisciplinarity is represented in the versatile genius, i.e. a person who manages several disciplines, such as da Vinci. A classical industrial design project could also be seen as interdisciplinary. It is also seen in study programs combining two or more disciplines some teachers argued. The view was not unanimous, though (for quote, see for instance, serial number 3.3).
It was recognised that interdisciplinarity was a means to increase problem-solving capacity and a working method for reaching a common goal. The knowledge gained by interdisciplinary work is a synthesis, rather than separate disciplinary pieces, according to one teacher (for quote, see for instance, serial number 3.16). That kind of learning is quite complicated and unique in higher education, the teaching faculty member continued. The term interdisciplinarity was mainly discussed from the student perspective, but it was also recognised that interdisciplinarity could be a working method for teachers.

Faculty members acting as program managers
The interviewees agreed that interdisciplinarity could be viewed as different disciplines working together towards a common goal, sharing ideas and knowledge. The sharing is not one-way, but directed in both ways, one respondent explained. Respondents also recognised interdisciplinarity as a working method or a way to approach a problem. Working in an interdisciplinary mode strengthens one's own disciplinary understanding (for quote, see for instance, serial number 4.5).
The different disciplines represent more than a specific knowledge base; they represent cultures with their own language and codes, which can be visible by working in an interdisciplinary setting. It is most important with interdisciplinary learning not to deepen your own knowledge but to understand the other disciplines' codes, one program manager concluded.

How could interdisciplinarity be conceptualised in an interdisciplinary master's program?
The respondents were asked to describe where and how interdisciplinarity takes place in the program. In addition, the teaching faculty members and faculty members acting as program managers reflected on their own teaching and which forms of teaching support disciplinary teaching and interdisciplinary teaching.

Students
Interdisciplinary learning happens mainly in the project work, according to the students. Interdisciplinarity is a way of working, and interdisciplinary learning is a result of discussions held within the project team (for quote, see for instance, serial number 2.37). The lectures were not seen as a means to learn interdisciplinarity; it happened in the projects (for quote, see for instance, serial number 2.42).
According to the students, interdisciplinary learning happens in a real-life context where a team consisting of different disciplinary abilities have to solve a problem or deal with an issue. The reallife context was not explicitly mentioned by many students when discussing where and when interdisciplinarity took place, but the projects were all real-life assignments by external stakeholders, and the connection with industry was seen as a driver for entering the program.
The students also mentioned the studio as a place in which interdisciplinary learning took place, and the interdisciplinary teachers' team as a support for the learning. Just as interdisciplinarity was not seen as a topic of lectures, interdisciplinarity was not seen in the syllabi either (for quote, see for instance, serial number 2.47).

Teaching faculty members
Teaching faculty members also recognised interdisciplinary learning as something that happens in the projects. They stressed the interactivity and training of capabilities during the projects. The learning process is continuous and incremental over time (for quote, see for instance, serial number 3.18). The teachers also reflected on their role as tutors for enabling the interdisciplinarity (for quotes see for instance, serial number 3.21). Reflection was also given to the problems that arise in interdisciplinary education, and how they could improve the learning process for students, for instance, by better instructions and coordination. Students need to learn a new way of learning.
Different ways to view teaching were described. Some of the teaching faculty members did not see interdisciplinarity in the teaching, especially not in the lectures, while others saw tutoring as interdisciplinary teaching. One teacher argued that being strong in one's own discipline is a prerequisite for being successful in interdisciplinary programs (for quote, see for instance, serial number 3.34).
The discussions also considered the way the program was regulated. Several teaching faculty members saw interdisciplinarity as a way to structure and organise a program and not a way of teaching (for quote, see for instance, serial numbers 3.32 and 3.36).

Faculty members acting as program managers
The faculty members acting as program managers held a more abstract discussion regarding interdisciplinarity and when it happens. Many thoughts were centred around the learning that happens in interaction with others (for quote, see for instance, serial numbers 4.10 and 4.15).
Learning as a continuous process that happens all the time, even during non-scheduled hours, was also reflected upon (for quote, see for instance, serial number 4.17). Teaching faculty members should work according to the interdisciplinary setting, but teaching is mainly disciplinal, according to the faculty members acting as program managers. Teachers should be good role models (for quote, see for instance, serial numbers 4.7 and 4.12).
The faculty members acting as program managers recognised interdisciplinarity as difficult for students, and if the balance between challenge and safety is poor, they tend to fall back to their own discipline (for quote, see for instance, serial number 4.14).

How could interdisciplinarity be defined?
Definitions are useful for all concepts. There are four types of definitions: reportive (describes how a word is used), stipulative (refers to how a group uses a word), ostensive (aims to collect concepts directly to the world by identifications of examples), and persuasive (stipulative definitions concealed as either reportive definition or factual statements). The adequacy of a reportive definition can be evaluated based on the following criteria 1) essential features included, 2) scope (broad and narrow), 3) obscurity, and 4) circularity (Govier, 2013).
People working together in multidisciplinary groups resemble a traditional industrial project setup, where project outcomes can be reached without extensive collaboration between project team members; see e.g. Tonnquist (2016). In the studied master's program, the students are working on projects, but the nature of these projects is quite different from traditional project work. The integration of different people possessing different knowledge is essential to solve the task given. Consequently, integration of people and knowledge become natural parts of the definition as well as the problem-solving.
As early as 1978, Meeth recognises the real-life context and the necessity to integrate disciplines. The latter characteristic is recognised by several authors (see for instance, Davies & Devlin, 2007;Porter, Roessner, Cohen, & Perreault, 2006;Rogers, Scaife, & Rizzo, 2005). Pharo et al. (2012) emphasise outcomes when integrating disciplines in the form of insights that are more than the sum of each discipline's knowledge brought into the learning situation. To enable a broadening of knowledge, a deepening of knowledge must also take place, as it is only possible to discuss and adjust the details. Consequently, deepened knowledge as an outcome is an aspect to be considered in proposing a definition.
In 1990, Thompson Klein states that interdisciplinarity is just as difficult to explain as it is to apply in concrete situations. However, interdisciplinary work is common for those who work with knowledge production (Aram, 2004). Trommler (1992) claims that the concept of interdisciplinarity is an "intellectual attitude" that stems from challenging the traditional teaching setting. Interdisciplinarity holds different dimensions, including the integration of different methods and viewpoints (Davies & Devlin, 2010). Davies and Devlin (2010) propose the following definition of interdisciplinary learning; "integration of two or more disciplines in the education", whereas Pharo et al. (2012) propose "the integration of disciplinary perspectives to produce insights that are more than the summing of disciplinary knowledge". Several definitions have been provided. However, "integration of disciplines" and thereby facilitating the creation of deep knowledge (Pharo et al., 2012;Rogers et al., 2005) seems to be common. In 1978, Meeth provides the following definition; "Interdisciplinary programs attempt to integrate the contributions of several disciplines to a problem, issue, or theme from life … " Aldrich (2014) provides the following definition including research as well as teaching; Interdisciplinary research (IDR) is a mode of research by teams or individuals that integrates information, data, techniques, tools, perspectives, concepts and/or theories from two or more disciplines or bodies of specialized knowledge to advance fundamental understanding or to solve problems whose solutions are beyond the scope of a single discipline or field of research practise.
In interdisciplinary studies, integration means bringing interdependent parts of knowledge into a harmonious relationship. It involves relating part to part, part to whole, and whole to part. Porter et al. (2006) suggested the following definition; "a mode of research by teams or individuals that integrates perspectives/concepts/theories, and/or tools/techniques, and/or information/data from two or more bodies of specialized knowledge or research practice".
The provided definitions offer common characteristics; integration of people and/or knowledge, deepened knowledge as an outcome, and problem-solving.

How could interdisciplinarity be conceptualised?
Interdisciplinary learning outcomes depend on, for instance, previous experience and language (Ryser, Halsetsh, & Thien, 2009). The students participating in this study recognised the importance of developing social competencies in addition to the knowledge-related competencies. A common workspace could serve as a key platform for developing knowledge-related and social competencies (Holley, 2015). Interdisciplinarity does not appear to be supported by traditional university layouts with lecture rooms and clearly separated locations for students and teachers. Instead, the students perceive a need for dedicated workshops for project work, preferably equipped with technical and physical resources supporting the development of solutions in all stages, from concept development and design to prototyping. Such resources could, for instance, be videoconferencing equipment, simulation software, manufacturing machines or 3D-printers. The project teams also perceive a need for a designated project work area, where the confidentiality of the project could be ensured. Closeness to teaching faculty members should be enabled as well. Since the teaching faculty members come from several subject areas, it could be impossible to arrange offices near the student workshop. Sufficient and relevant resources for the project teams in the form of physical locations, materials and tools are thus important.
Immaterial resources, such as support for learning in the form of lectures, tutoring and structured methodologies, are perceived to be of equal importance. Interdisciplinarity was perceived as something that happened in the project teams, often outside normal teaching hours. While this correlates well with the definition of interdisciplinary, there is fuzziness regarding where learning takes place. Learning could be seen as a process of reproduction or creating meaning (Ramsden, 2003). In disciplinary settings, reproduction is an effective way to learn the language, theoretical constructs and methods of the particular discipline. In interdisciplinary settings, creation of meaning is predominant, which implies finding the best theoretical constructs and methods for solving a specific problem.

Conclusions and further research
This research contributes to the body of knowledge as regards defining and conceptualising interdisciplinary programs/courses primarily by providing empirical data. This knowledge supports educational change, as it facilitates the development work of interdisciplinary programs/courses. Interdisciplinarity is becoming established as a subject in academia as compared to traditional subjects, and its characteristics are of vital importance. However, it is important to continuously stress the content of the concept. In this research, four characteristics of interdisciplinarity were identified; integration of people, integration of knowledge, deepened knowledge as outcome, and problemsolving. The following definition of interdisciplinarity is proposed by the authors of this paper: The integration of people possessing different competencies (knowledge, background and skills) acting upon an identified need, challenge or opportunity that requires a holistic approach founded in synergies and thereby creating new knowledge. This definition of interdisciplinarity could be categorized as a reportive definition. It meets assessment criteria proposed by Govier (2013), as it covers the integration of people and knowledge, as well as the context in which interdisciplinarity takes place, i.e. problem solving where the outcomes are more than the sum of the different disciplinary knowledge utilized, thus requiring a holistic approach. Deriving this definition is the first step in understanding how to create interdisciplinary learning.
This research further supports educational change as it pinpoints that interdisciplinarity is perceived through student active learning and real-life settings. The students participating in this study recognised the importance of developing social competencies in addition to the knowledge-related competencies. According to Holley (2015), fostering interdisciplinarity could be seen as a socialization process where faculty engagement and curriculum design are crucial factors for successful interdisciplinary programs. Thus, the interdisciplinary nature of the program should be visible in the curriculum and in the teaching. Interdisciplinarity was perceived by the students as something that happens intuitively in the program and by the faculty members as a way of working rather than intended knowledge content. The teaching faculty members recognised interdisciplinary teaching to take place mainly in tutoring sessions, i.e. in close connection to the project work, while lectures mainly focused on disciplinary knowledge. Whilst interdisciplinarity is best learned by practising, measures could be taken to strengthen the interdisciplinary work. Faculty members act as designers and enablers of interdisciplinary activities, on a strategic level by developing curricula, and on an operative level by activity creation and execution (Kans & Gustafsson, 2016). In an interdisciplinary setting, the teachercentred approach in the form of lectures could focus on explaining interdisciplinary terminology, visualizing the interdisciplinary context, describing differences between disciplinary and interdisciplinary work, and proposing a methodology for students to use when working in an interdisciplinary mode. In the curriculum, interdisciplinary knowledge contents, as well as modes of learning, should be highlighted. The study is inductive and based on focus group interviews. By nature, it is therefore connected to its setting; however, the results are connected to the concept of interdisciplinary, and the setting is of minor importance. Therefore, the results are transferrable to other settings.
To secure learning interdisciplinary knowledge, a working process needs to be established, securing focus on meeting students' learning needs, while at the same time meeting the requirements stated in the respective course syllabi. This constitutes a basis for future research. This work still needs to be done. Another challenge for future work is to identify how to operationalize interdisciplinary knowledge. Further, there is a need to identify an evaluation model for interdisciplinary programs.

Funding
The authors received no direct funding for this research.

Students
(1) How do you define interdisciplinary?
(2) What does interdisciplinarity mean for you?
(3) How does interdisciplinarity appear in the program?
(6) How do you define interdisciplinary?

Teaching faculty members and Faculty members acting as program manager
The definition of interdisciplinary (1) How do you define interdisciplinary?
(2) What does interdisciplinarity mean for you?

Interdisciplinary in the program
(3) How does interdisciplinarity appear in the program?
Teaching interdisciplinary (6) In the program, do you mainly do disciplinary or interdisciplinary teaching? (Why/why not?) (7) How could interdisciplinary be thought?
(8) Which forms of teaching supports disciplinary teaching and interdisciplinary teaching?
Interdisciplinary learning environments (9) What possibilities and hinders are there for you as a teacher/researcher participating in the program?
(10) How do you perceive the structural changes that occurred in the program from it started? Working with different perspectives on the same goal. Work in process with other disciplines towards the same goal, but also conversation.
We had a project in Poland, A., M., Z. and me. In a car to Poland we discussed the project. Should have recorded the conversation, because we could approach from different angles the same project, understand weaknesses and strengths. 2.32. In the projects. In the projects that we worked on together. Because we didn't have that many lectures, and if we had lectures then they were either based on some business topics or some engineering topics.

5, 6
2.33. Yeah, it was not like a professor comes in now, this is what interdisciplinarity is about and lists all the things you have to look at. It was more you get thrown into projects and there it is a number of designers, a number of engineers, number of business people and then you have the issue you are dealing with and then you start and make through all the mess that arises you learn how to deal with it.
In reality it works in the production line,,, the program is in connection with the real world and how people work 7 2.35. It is in the projects; I have an example when working with IKEAmodule. I designed a really nice thing and the engineer said that we cannot do it is a sustainable material, and I said; what do you mean? 5 2.36. Designer almost always have innovative ideas but sometimes it is not easy to make it reality, I think this program is more to drag the designers' imagination back a bit into reality. the box is not that limited-it is more to do the things reachable.-we have to think about the concept. 7 2.37. When we work in interdisciplinary teams, we complement each other. 5 2.38. Based on my own experience, in the first year, in the first semester we all learnt how to work in an interdisciplinary team.-we needed time to work in this adapted mode, sometimes mistakes happened. For the second semester, we could always add something on it based on our aspects; designers-crazy ideas, business people-how to make it work, and engineers-we calculate if it could work or not. 5 2.39. In our studio. Everyone came and we had our roles,,,,, we usually had lunch together in the restaurant and we talked about the projects, but mainly in our studio. 8 2.40. We showed our projects before the final presentation and we got valuable feedback from different teachers from business, engineering and design, it was very valuable for us to progress in our projects. 9 2.41. All teachers had their own subject into the project, design teachers focused more on design, engineering focused on finding a solution, business people were dominant. Some teachers had a strategic focus 9 2.42. It is important to discuss together with friends. Interdisciplinary working in some hands on projects but in theoretical background, I do not know which lecture was about interdisciplinary work? There were good lectures in different disciplines.

5, 6
2.43. That project, and, it was not in the classroom, it was when we would meet with our group and discuss and sometimes had some arguments and sometimes, but we … because we believed in what we believed, so we had arguments … then you also felt ok if we on our own together business, engineers and designers, to kind of learn how to do it. It was very good, I think. In an operational level confusion, but creative for learners, teachers. It is a scope where teachers become learners "we are learning a lot of this along with the students". It is a journey.
3 3.8. If we compare with multidisciplinary it is still that you still have the disciples separated in some way but you make them meet 1 3.9. I agree with you about business people having this background-a lot of engineering students come to business. On a higher education level it differs on between the counties in India,,,, business is a new area-design is traditional 2 3.10 MBA is just a thing coming from the states 2 3.11 In the meeting between the different students and how they from the start speak different languages and then they slowly understand that they talk about the same thing in different way. 3.14.
When several disciplines meet in order to deliver towards one goal, but I would like to add that the synchronized subjects meet in order to deliver towards one shared goal. In the meeting between the different students and how they from the start speak different languages and then they slowly understand that they talk about the same thing in different way. 5 3.18. When they do their projects and present, actual the process as such. There is a big differences when they have done it some time, I really like when they do it the third time-you have different language and different way of keeping up the work. L: what you can see in the presentations, when they present in the beginning you can really hear the they speak their own language J: That is an aspect we did not fully understood when we started the program-these cultural aspects need to be taken into consideration L: then also the language barrier,,, G: language depending on where you come from S: Specific for this program as we have so many international students and cultural backgrounds then the projects are really important because then they work, when you work you can see and feel, then they take in the knowledge in other ways than words 5 3.20. L: In the projects J: that is where they train their capabilities G: That is where the interdisciplinarity shows up-where you have to solve the task/complex issue with all three disciplines 5 3.21.
The quality of interdisciplinarity-as it takes place everywhere-but in the beginning of the program, we as the teachers need to push the ideas to the students that it will be of value to them because they do not understand that. Once they have run a particular project, they realize what they have done and understand the uniqueness of the learning process. But if the student group is not able to understand or except the value interdisciplinary is going to give them, the projects will fall out. 9, 5 3.22. For tutoring mainly interdisciplinary, I have to solve many things for the engineering students. When I tutor and discuss with them it is mainly design and engineering, but even business, for me this is classic design work. Business is on an overall level. … if you look at a discipline, that's a way of being. You are in it, it's not just knowledge, it is a way of being. You have codes, but then, the interdisciplinary opens up for other ways to be and other codes that you do not have to master completely, one must understand them. Especially when you go inside and solve things together. But I think that's a good description. 3 Quotes regarding conceptualization 4.8.
It is a word that we use repeatedly in our program, both in marketing and in, yes, and when we present the program for the students. And when we teach. That's something that we bring up all the time, really. 10 4.9. We just started it. We picked up a group from different disciplines to solve something together. And then we've been working very hard to bring about a situation where they almost have to deal with this, huh. And then we were like, "What's up, then?" We were not so prepared. We did not at all prepare ourselves in terms and methods, etc., but we moved on like this. 9, 10 4.10. … it's up to this to find a distinction, "Yes, who am I in relation to you. You're one of those and I'm one of those." Like, that's the first thing to happen. But then when they do, when we force them, they aim at a common goal, then things are happening in the classroom. This focus is an important part. What unites is the focus. Everybody wants be somewhere, everyone we give their best, I think. To me it is that we represent it through our teachers 9 4.12. I think it is important that, yes, there is a desire that we also work as we expect them to work. There is a dialogue there, amongst the teachers. 4.13. … The intention has been to shape activities where everyone enter from their own perspective and discuss it. And from that discussion there will then be something common uniting the participants. From the different perspectives. It has been the intention so that it … workshops and activities, yes activities.
… how sometimes it does not occur when we expect it to. I think that it might be interesting when you see that students have been trying for a while, working together in projects with different skills, but then they may face too much resistance and fall back to their own disciplines and then stay there. Because they are safer there, they may know what they are going to do and they cannot really take in more from outside 5 4.15. It's one thing to work in their competence to solve a certain task and the other to work with team dynamics to ensure that these competencies really flourish in the activities 5 4.16.
In the physical room, that is, this studio we have given them. A residence … to have a residence that they feel "there I can be, that's my place". … it combines technology and design, the bodily and that it is linked to a certain environment, the workshops are also the environment where things happen. Yield. And unlike our business administrators who have their world in the books in a way 8 4.17.
And then to hang out. To hang out constantly in that office. I think that happens a lot more when we're not there … Interdisciplinarity is not like a knowledge, it is a way of being 5, 9 a Classification codes: 1) Integration of people, 2) Integration of knowledge, 3) Deepened knowledge as outcome, 4) Problem solving, 5) Student active learning, 6) Traditional learning, 7) Real-life setting, 8) Physical location, 9) Teacher role, 10) Curriculum.