Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Challenges IGERTs Face
Challenges IGERTs Face
Challenges IGERTs Face
2.
3.
Key Challenges
1. National differences between the
systems of higher education and
structures of doctoral education
2. Differences between the disciplines in
US universities (cultural differences)
3. Challenges of working in teams
4. Language differences: disciplinary
languages, national languages
Source: CIRGE, University of Washington, Multinational Collaborations in Challenges to the
Environment, Friday Harbor, 9-13-4
Dean
e.g. College of
Arts and Sciences
Dean
e.g. College of
Engineering
Graduate Council
Graduate Faculty
Source: CIRGE, University of Washington, Multinational Collaborations in Challenges to the
Environment, Friday Harbor, 9-13-4
Course Work
(core courses)
PhD
Course Work
(core courses)
GRE
GPA
3 letters
PhD
Source: CIRGE, University of Washington, Multinational Collaborations in Challenges to the
Environment, Friday Harbor, 9-13-4
Disciplinary Differences
1. Mode of research
2. Structure of program
3. Methodology
4. Availability of resources
Impacts
Economic
Policy
Biophysical
Ecological
Human
behavior
Economic
Demographic
Land use
Infrastructure
Evaluation
Definition
Analysis
Actors
Indicators
Monitoring
Performance
IGERT
Science
Patterns
Problem
Processes
Economic
Hydrological
Ecological
Policy
Assessment
Decision
Scenarios
Alternatives
Criteria
Process
Management
Implementation
Organization
Core faculty represent:
Forestry, urban design and planning, geography,
biology
Associated faculty comprise 5 other departments
Structure
2 years of required coursework:
1st year undergraduates and graduate students
identify project and develop research design
2nd year PhD students collect data, analyze data and
publish manuscript
Opportunities (continued)
International Component
Universities in Berlin, Warsaw, and Oslo
Collaboration in projects
seminal paper/books in the field (urban ecology)
Disciplinary biases
faculty representation
quantitative, larger n = better results
language barriers
In-class discussions
conceptual disagreements personality attacks
tone and spirit of discussion was essential to learning
Hierarchical context
Presumption of equality
Schedule mismatch
field seasons, conferences, personal leave
Dialog
reading seminars
approach primary advisor to address core faculty
Lessons learned
1. Different motivations for participating in
IGERTS- devote time to establish common
goals
2. Trained in traditional disciplines devote
time to understanding the differences, accept
other methods as equals
3. Limited time, IGERT work demands time,
intensive preparation, - make sure that their
department chair recognizes their extra work
4. Lack of project management and time
management skills- invite consultant to teach
these skills
Source: CIRGE, University of Washington, Multinational Collaborations in Challenges to the
Environment, Friday Harbor, 9-13-4
Summary of Key
Recommendations
1. Spend time to get to know each
other, both faculty and students
a. Expectations regarding the IGERT
b. Motivations for participating/applying
c. Strength each person brings to the
process
d. Working style
f. Cultural differences, believe system
Source: CIRGE, University of Washington, Multinational Collaborations in Challenges to the
Environment, Friday Harbor, 9-13-4
Recommendations
2. Be
Recommendations
4.
Recommendations
5. Plan regular feedback sessions,
Recommendations
6. Create
at a non-competitive
learning environment
- between disciplines (soft and hard
sciences) which method is better
- which country does it better ( resource
imbalance)
Thank you!
CIRGE website
www.cirge.washington.edu
Source: CIRGE, University of Washington, Multinational Collaborations in Challenges to the
Environment, Friday Harbor, 9-13-4