Page 113 - Teaching and learning of interdisciplinary thinking in higher education in engineering

Learning challenges, student strategies, and the outcomes of education in interdisciplinary thinking
food [reference]. Also, [reference] reports that equipment for ozonation [ozonated] washing need [needs] higher anticorrosive and initial investment [reference]. So, I think CMC will take these regulations and requirement of equipment into account when it makes decision of use of antimicrobial agent.” This example illustrates a meta-level of reasoning (Boix Mansilla & Duraising, 2007) with respect to particular sources and explains how assumptions were derived in view of these sources. By providing this kind of justification, students show their understanding of disciplinary paradigm knowledge (subskill 2 and criteria a). The subcategories of justifications within the category of having knowledge of interdisciplinarity deal with explaining the interrelationships between the disciplinary knowledge elements (see Table 5.6). For instance, “It [the connection] shows how the setting of product and process parameter specifications and managerial issues such as operator training and organisation culture influence operator[s’] decision[s]. Thus showing [the connection shows that] decisions are not just depended [dependent] on technological conditions but also on people characteristics and administrative conditions.” This example explains the interdependency between technology-related and management-related factors (see chapter 5.2.2) and shows the student's critical awareness of interdisciplinarity (subskill 3 and criteria b).
With respect to the category of having higher-order cognitive skills, the subcategories of justifications concern the construction of the knowledge connection and the contribution of each discipline to this knowledge connection (see Table 5.6). The following excerpt is a student reflection on how the connection is constructed: “Two main factors, logical reasoning and underpinning [with] literature. Logical reasoning derived from the combination of three critical points; crucial facts (provided by the CMC [company] description), my previous educational background, and finally the detailed analysis of my operational research instrument. Additionally, the useful support of literature was very important for extracting data on the set of key questions.” By providing this kind of justification, students show their
103