Page 34 - Teaching and learning of interdisciplinary thinking in higher education in engineering

Chapter 2
conditions was conducted. This analysis included two steps: (a) all extracted subskills and conditions were categorized according to the four components of the Conceptual Review Framework (see Figure 2.1), and (b) similar subskills or conditions were grouped and labeled.
2.4 Results and discussion
2.4.1 Description of scientific research into teaching and learning in interdisciplinary higher education
The search resulted in 309 unique publications. Of these, 14 publications met the aforementioned criteria for inclusion. While two relevant publications reported on the same empirical study results, only the publication with the most extensive coverage was included. Of those 13 relevant publications, ten were empirical and three were theoretical studies. The publications that were removed included 172 describing individual faculty experiences, courses, curricula, or projects and 73 publications that fell outside the scope of this review. Also excluded were 50 publications on a different topic.
The majority of the reviewed publications (11 out of 13) were published in the twenty- first century and in the domain of education (nine out of 13). All relevant publications were written in English. Three publications – Boix Mansilla and Duraising (2007) and Nikitina (2005, 2006) – concerned one particular research project on interdisciplinarity at Harvard University.
A broad range of topics on teaching and learning was researched. This resulted in: potential frameworks (seven out of 13), best practices (four out of 13), and essential conditions (two out of 13). To start with the proposed frameworks, these publications considered the following teaching and learning topics: an adaptation of Biggs and Collis’ Structure of Observed Learning Outcome (SOLO) taxonomy to illustrate interdisciplinary
24