I like this because instead of just learning about phenomena all the time, you would actually get to work with them and get first-hand experience.

The opportunity for students to not only collaborate with others, but to collaborate with different disciplines is huge. A team of scientists can now be a team made up of biologists, chemists, etc. instead of just one strict discipline.

Such a great idea with limitless potential, however it is dependent on its implementation and limitations.

In a rapidly growing work environment, learning how to adapt to never before seen challenges is important.

This is so important to the college experience, that you get out there and do something to affect the world around you. For a time is was only through research, but now we are getting practical.

I don't think there is a bigger way to let students apply their education to real life than by having them problem solve a transition to 100% renewable energy in 13 years!

I like how the framing was dissected. Even though "Work now, play later" doesn't seem like a negative thing to say, it can allow students to feel like they are trudging through school and feel like it's forced not chosen.

This is a really big concept that can be lost, that if a student isn't invested into their education then they won't enjoy it. Sure you can try to do things to aid that process, but at the end of the day if someone hates math they will probably never enjoy math class.

I like how there is just a little bit of time taken out so everyone is on the same page. Everyone knows what relevant means, however now we all have the same idea when reading this.

Nice perspective, I also feel like this way is 'easier'. Instead of having to go out and create your own curriculum, you just follow an already made one instead. It also allows you to get extremely focused into one area without interruption.

This is a good premise, however this probably only really applies to certain interdisciplinary programs. Anything involving Neurology would be where this point stands strongly as the brain needs to be fully understood before you can start working on it.

Really correct definition, but this is also a really complicated way to define what a discipline is.

This. So many times do ideas fail because there was an enormous mistake that no could actually see, because they could only look through one lens.

I feel like this is because people want to be more in control of what their classes are. People want to become 'x', but often times don't like a lot of aspects of becoming 'x' due to the amount of classes they have to take. For example, Musical Theatre Majors have take Music Theory 1. Although it could be useful, they would be much better off with a music theory class tailored for just them, and not thrown into the Music Theory 1 designed for Music Ed majors.

If people get to choose what constitutes their education versus them choosing an already made curriculum, people will be more likely more invested into their education.

I love connected learning, which I think what IDS is all about. I really like Psychology because of it's connectedness, you don't learn one thing at a time but learn how one thing affects an entire system.

People talk about Critical Thinking a lot, but I feel like people need to start thinking about Abstract Thinking as well. It has shown the world to me a new way, and others should be able to see through new ways as well.

Another big thing that contributes to the big shift in college is the fact that you essentially live with your peers.

I remember as a kid always being shocked at how people studied one thing and got a job in something similar but not the actual field itself. i.e. I had a math teacher who's B.S. was in like Nuclear Chemistry or something. They were an amazing Math Teacher, just surprised me that their B.S. wasn't in Math Education or something like that.

I feel like in high school you need to have some constructed program to go off of, but even then you ought to be able to have some say in your course load. However, at the college level, I feel like people ought to control their education. With interdisciplinary you get all the things you want out of your education and not the hopes of what you want.

We talked about this a little bit in class before Spring Break. Something that can be forgotten, but essential to know.

I feel like a lot of people want this, but don't know how to or are unsure about its 'practicality'. My program is similar to this, and I think that if someone wants to then they should go for it!

What an amazing introduction. I feel like some people feel like interdisciplinary studies is here to take away disciplines, when it's actually to bolster them and create new ones!

I never really knew about associations/societies until I got to college. The only societies I knew of before college were just the honor societies, but there are so many here at PSU.

Never thought back on this until reading this, interesting perspective. I imagine my teachers were probably friends, as well as people discussing their fields.

I like the analogies presented, and how math and english are used to contrast. I feel like it also explains an idea that can be extremely complicated with extreme ease.

I feel like psychology uses this a lot, unless you get into more anatomy and physiology. The scientific process seems to fall under this too.

I feel like a lot of numbers or statistics avoid this part of contextual thinking, they forget to explore the background a bit. It's good to be able to not only information that lacks support, but to then find it out for yourself.

This system of thinking can be good, but also has a drawback too. If you go too far down the hole, then you completely lose the big picture.

Interesting thought, either option is good however which one is better? Something that may not be able to be answered right away, but now there is opportunity to have a dialogue about it.

Amazing example. Even though I do interdisciplinary work, I always get amazed hearing how two disciplines can come together to make something incredible.

New solutions to common problems seems like an amazing thing to have.

The process of going from classroom to real world. Application can be hard to achieve sometimes, but hopefully with interdisciplinary perspectives it won't be the case for much longer

Great analogy. Interesting to see the analogies used later too, amazing!

Really like the collaboration portion, something that I feel that can really push people to new heights. Being able to have multiple perspectives on complicated issues is always good!

Definitely going to be a huge challenge for some teachers to navigate. How do you go from having students producing work that displays competency of the material, to producing work that, in addition to displaying competency over material, also allows there work to be appealing to a larger audience than the classroom.

Yes they can, but the difference may not be very clear at this moment. Digital Scholarship is a very new thing, so it could be a long time until there is an established pedagogical approach to this.

This is a great statement from the author. If ePorts are treated like an online poster, then can we truly say we have established a digital place for our scholarship?

Is it radical, or is it innovative? Similar meanings, but definitely two extremely different nuances. Also, is something 'radical' if the general populous supports that change? Although the movement for digital ownership is small, it's growing and will definitely continue to do so until it becomes a part of common curriculum.

Innovative idea, but I feel like it could have as many repercussions as benefits. Sure you'd get to see if the student's progress has been astronomical over time. However as a student I wouldn't really want to do this until senior year of high school, or freshman year of college. The reason is because I don't know how I would feel if someone could look back at my work from freshman year of high school or even earlier.

If you tell people all the bad things about something and nothing about the good things, then how are people expected to take initiative to try something on their own accord? Instead of telling about all the bad things that could happen, tell people about how to be in control and all the good things that will happen.

This sounds similar to something I've heard of at my college, oh wait . . . that's what we're doing right now! I think it's great that there is now a slow movement in higher education to help better prepare students establishing a professional online presence.

Always at least two sides to an argument. Although student privacy is important, what about the people who need their data to do research? In my opinion this is definitely a topic that can be debated in terms of the ethics of both sides.