Issue |
Nat. Sci. Soc.
Volume 23, Number 4, October-December 2015
|
|
---|---|---|
Page(s) | 367 - 377 | |
DOI | https://doi.org/10.1051/nss/2015056 | |
Published online | 07 January 2016 |
Paradoxe identitaire et interdisciplinarité : un regard sur les identités disciplinaires des chercheurs
Identity paradox and interdisciplinarity: an analysis of the disciplinary identities of researchers
1
Sciences de l’éducation, Université de Genève, Centre interfacultaire en
droits de l’enfant, 1950
Sion, Suisse
2
Linguistique, Université de Genève, Centre interfacultaire en droits de
l’enfant, 1950
Sion
Suisse
3
Sciences de l’environnement, Académies suisses des sciences, td-net,
Network for Transdisciplinary Research, 3007
Berne, Suisse
4
Interdisciplinarité, Université de Genève, Centre interfacultaire en droits
de l’enfant, Cellule Inter- et Transdisciplinarité, 1950
Sion
Suisse
Auteur correspondant : A. Sedooka,
ayuko.sedooka@unige.ch
Reçu :
3
Octobre
2014
Accepté :
11
Juin
2015
Cette contribution vise à s’interroger sur les identités disciplinaires de chercheurs qui pratiquent la recherche interdisciplinaire. Nous tentons de mettre en évidence la nature paradoxale du travail interdisciplinaire au travers des regards que portent des chercheurs sur leur propre identité dans le contexte académique. Cette nature paradoxale correspond à une tension entre, d’une part, des identités disciplinaires relativement stables et institutionnellement reconnues et, d’autre part, des identités interdisciplinaires hybrides qui doivent encore obtenir une forme de reconnaissance. Nous proposons une typologie de différents profils types qui se déroule sur un continuum allant de la disciplinarité à l’indisciplinarité : l’identité disciplinaire ; les identités interdisciplinaires, déclinées en identité thématique, identité hybride, « interdisciplinary native » et « interdisciplinary migrant » ; et enfin l’identité indisciplinée. Notre questionnement s’appuie sur les résultats d’une recherche menée sur les pratiques de recherche interdisciplinaire.
Abstract
This contribution proposes to investigate the disciplinary identities of researchers involved in interdisciplinary research in order to highlight its paradoxical nature which is revealed in their discourse about the way they perceive themselves and their own identity in the academic context. This paradoxical nature results in a tension between relatively stable and institutionally recognized disciplinary identities on the one hand and interdisciplinary hybrid identities that are still in need of recognition on the other. We address the complex relationship between the apparently stabilized disciplinary identity of researchers and their interdisciplinary research practices that lead them to redefine their identities in contact with other disciplines in a dynamic of multiple perceptions and representations. How do researchers demonstrate and represent their disciplinary –in some cases interdisciplinary or even undisciplinary– identity? What are their relations with their institutional belonging and respective disciplines? What are their academic and career paths that guide their practices? By exploring these issues we propose a typology of different type-profiles of researchers who practice interdisciplinary research. The typology runs on a continuum from disciplinarity to undisciplinarity: disciplinary identity; interdisciplinary identities expressed as thematic identity, hybrid identity, “interdisciplinary native” and “migrant interdisciplinary”; and finally undisciplined identity. These reflections and typology are based on the results of a study on interdisciplinary research practices.
Mots clés : recherche / dispositifs institutionnels / identité disciplinaire / interdisciplinarité / trajectoire académique
Key words: research / institutional framework / disciplinary identity / interdisciplinarity / academic path
© NSS-Dialogues, EDP Sciences 2016
Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.
Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.
Initial download of the metrics may take a while.