1 / 8

Opportunities and Obstacles in Interdisciplinary Research

Explore the opportunities, risks, and obstacles faced in interdisciplinary research and the different models for producing accepted knowledge within healthcare. Discuss conflicts within medicine and the need for transparency in the patient-physician encounter. Examine the use of metaphors in understanding genes and public perceptions of climate change.

trask
Download Presentation

Opportunities and Obstacles in Interdisciplinary Research

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. ENGL 5382 Week 7: Thursday, OCTOBER 9

  2. Announcements • Proposals: • Everyone is offered an opportunity to revise and resubmit for a new grade. In some cases, I specifically encouraged you to do this, but everyone is welcome. Deadline for resubmitting is October 31.

  3. Bazeley & Jackson, Ch. 5--“Going on with Coding”: Thoughts, questions, comments on this chapter? Julie has offered to screen-share

  4. Tonight’s readings • Roles of Medical Rhetoricians: Co-investigators • What does that mean? • What are the opportunities, risks, and obstacles that we face when we attempt to do interdisciplinary research? • Tonight’s readings showcase three different models for medical rhetoricians to produce knowledge that’s accepted within health care. • Any thoughts on these key terms? • Interdisciplinary • Transdisciplinary • Multidisciplinary • Cross-disciplinary

  5. Your blog posts for Week 7-- • Jennifer has some interesting points about the conflicts that exist within medicine. Sometimes it’s easy to focus so much on the obvious disciplinary divides (such as humanities v. science, etc.) that we overlook the deep conflicts and differences that exist within a seemingly unified discipline. • Gail writes about Mirel-Barton-Ackerman, relating it to last week’s discussion about applied technical communication in the workplace. Also writes about the relationship between qualitative and quantitative research as it’s discussed in this article.

  6. Your blog posts for Week 7— • Julie, Angela, and Maryn write about Barton’s article, with an emphasis on the need for more transparency in the patient-physician encounter. This raises some interesting questions for me. How much transparency is too much? Is it possible to have complete transparency, and if so, is that even desirable? Do you think Barton is advocating that physicians should always be more transparent (i.e., more explicit in stating a prognosis)? • I’m curious about how we all understand Barton’s recommendations? Is she recommending that physicians should always be more transparent in offering a prognosis to cancer patients?

  7. Your blog posts for Week 7-- • Joy writes about metaphor, as used by Gronvoll & Landau. An interesting question is raised by Joy’s comment that “We [laypeople] can only understand genes through metaphoric language.” But is the same true for scientists? Interesting point about metaphors used by the authors themselves: multiplicative and additive. Finally, Joy suggests the garden metaphor. • Maggie also writes about metaphor, relating it to her own research on public perceptions of climate change. Also raises some good questions about the function of rhetorical criticism (deconstruction v. production). Also writes about the question of accuracy—what does it mean to say that some metaphors are more accurate than others? Does this imply that we could peel away all the metaphors and get at the real “thing” underneath?

  8. For next week: Graham, S. S. (2009). Agency and the rhetoric of medicine: Biomedical brain scans and the ontology of fibromyalgia. Technical Communication Quarterly, 18, 376-404. Graham, S.S., & Herndl C.G. (2011). Talking off-label: The role of Stasis in transforming the discursive formation of pain science. Rhetoric Society Quarterly, 41, 145-167. Meurk, C. et al. (2013). What does “acceptance” mean? Public reflections on the idea that addiction is a brain disease. BioSocieties, 8, 491-506. Bazeley & Jackson book, Chapter 6 (“Cases, Classifications, and Comparisons”) Blog response due Wed. Oct. 15, 10 pm

More Related