kathryn evans and i are finalising a text on
BRIDGING THE SILOS: CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT AS A TOOL FOR CROSSING DISCIPLINES IN THE ARTS, SCIENCES AND HUMANITIES
for the Leonardo Electronic Almanac
We welcome comments, rebuttal, suggestions for improvements, key references
LEA PAPER DRAFT 11/30/13
BRIDGING THE SILOS: CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT AS A TOOL FOR CROSSING DISCIPLINES IN THE ARTS, SCIENCES AND HUMANITIES
Kathryn Evans* and Roger Malina**, University of Texas at Dallas, School of Arts and Humanities, USA.
*Senior Lecturer and Head, Vocal and Choral Music, UT Dallas. Contact firstname.lastname@example.org
**Professor and Associate Director, Arts and Technology (ATEC), UT Dallas and CNRS Aix-Marseille University. Contact email@example.com
A survey of current cross-disciplinary offerings in higher education is needed to understand the mechanisms that were employed to offer them and their pedagogical basis. We present here a study that analyzes a compendium of arts-science-humanities cross-disciplinary courses that was created through several Calls for Contributions from 2009 to 2013. A web site was created and over 100 submissions were posted at http://www.utdallas.edu/atec/cdash/ . The data from the courses was analyzed as to the nature of the cross-disciplines, level of offering (graduate vs. undergraduate), geographical location, level of collaboration (number of instructors), and the department(s) offering the course. A comprehensive re-visioning of curricular structure to encourage collaborative teaching of integrative courses and programs is needed. Suggested actions include specific ideas to enhance networking and visibility, sharing of syllabi and course materials, and a research effort to demonstrate the effectiveness of cross-disciplinary art-science-humanities courses. This preliminary study points the way towards further efforts in curricular design and research that will be required for cross-disciplinary arts-science-humanities courses to be integrated into the college curriculum.
In 2001, Stephen Wilson wrote “The arts and sciences are two great engines of culture: sources of creativity, places of aspiration and markers of aggregate identity.”  Art has a serious impact on student creativity and innovation. Students who engage in art-making are more inclined to take risks, create collectively and individually, work in groups, think “outside the box”, transfer skills between disciplines, learns to speak persuasively, network, are willing to fail and can disregard the dominant point of view to create new perspectives.  Indeed, the U.S. National Academies have remarked that the need for interdisciplinary education is driven by increasingly complex problems that cut across traditional disciplines and recommended “…students should seek out interdisciplinary experiences, such as courses at the interfaces of traditional disciplines…” 
THE HISTORY OF DISCIPLINARITY
Most four-year universities in the United States have emulated a small number of elite university that were founded more than 150 years ago, including Harvard, Yale, Johns Hopkins, Cornell and MIT.  In the U.S. this common history can be traced to a movement by Charles Eliot at Harvard in the 19th century. In an effort to have both depth and breadth, Eliot created the system of majors and minors, general education courses and electives for undergraduates and set graduate schools at the top of the system, narrowing the curriculum at that level.  The post World War II expansion of college enrollments coupled with the launch of Sputnik in 1957 and the ensuing space race led to the creation of the “research university” that would turn out the highly trained scientists and engineers needed for such an effort. The creation of the departmental structure had already distanced the academic disciplines from one another. The arts and humanities took a back seat, and the salary differentials between the disciplines created stratification and a source of tension between departments.  In 2007, in their report Rising Above the Gathering Storm, the U.S. National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering and the Institute of Medicine called for increasing emphasis on science, technology, engineering and math (the “STEM” subjects) in order to “ensure that our nation continues to enjoy the jobs, security, and high standard of living that this and previous generations worked so hard to create.”  In the 2010 Federal budget, the NSF received about 20 times as much direct Federal funding as the NEH and NEA combined. The academic tension and competition created by such disparate funding and emphasis create insularity and isolation among scholars and the students they teach. Recognizing these developments in the U.S a movement to re integrate the arts and design into STEM approaches (STEM to STEA) has emerged; in the U.S congress the “STEAM caucus’ has been signed by 50 U.S congressional representatives to encourage and stimulate this development .
INTERDISCIPLINARY AND INTEGRATIVE STUDIES
Even though interdisciplinarity and interdisciplinary studies are terms that are more closely associated with the 20th century, the concept has historical antecedents in Greek philosophy. Aristotle’s division of the various disciplines into the area of knowledge (theology, mathematics and physics), the practical subjects (ethics and politics) and the productive subjects (fine arts, poetics and engineering) were then tied together by philosophy as the universal field of inquiry. Up until the end of the nineteenth century, the word “science” was often used interchangeably with “philosophy”, to mean all forms of knowledge rather than particular branches of it. From the 1830s onward, the term “science” began to refer to the natural sciences.  Nietszche attacked the rise of disciplines in his essay We Scholars, which he saw as a creation of the research-oriented German universities. The specialized “scholar” replaced the “philosopher” as a way to climb the career ladder within a professionalized society.  The university was becoming a closed institution, through the creation of departments, learned societies and journals, and the acquisition of a Ph.D. in a specialized subject. The term “interdisciplinary” emerged within the context of concerns about general education in the mid-1920s and became common usage in the social sciences and humanities after World War II. 
There are still many barriers to interdisciplinary work, including different types of training, institutional context, and different pedagogical systems. Study in the humanities tends to be historically organized, while in the sciences knowledge is seen as cumulative, with study focusing on the most up-to-date discoveries and research, characterizing the history of the discipline as a mere stepping stone to the current work. C. P. Snow delineated this division in his oft-quoted The Two Cultures and the Scientific Revolution, a lecture delivered Cambridge in 1959, about the “gulf of mutual incomprehension” that existed between the sciences and the humanities. Those who cite this gulf often forget that Snow suggested that the best way to improve the situation was education and particularly interdisciplinary studies. 
The current climate of emphasizing assessment in all areas of higher education has been extended to interdisciplinary courses, which have their own unique challenges in defining objectives and setting goals, given that they must often meld these from different areas. Many universities now have suggestions for faculty who engage in interdisciplinary teaching, including defining objectives, specifying outcomes, identifying issues, encouraging critical thinking, and generating evaluative rubrics. . While they do not directly address the intersection of the arts and sciences, there are long-standing organizations that do. The Association for Interdisciplinary Studies, formed in 1979 to “ promote the interchange of ideas among scholars and administrators in all of the arts and sciences” maintains a website at http://www.units.muohio.edu/aisorg/ that includes a variety of resources, including links to assessment references, a survey of graduate programs, peer-reviewed syllabi, and job listings for interdisciplinary programs and a scholarship of interdisciplinary teaching page.  Instructors of art-science-humanities curriculum would be well served by studying the rich tradition of interdisciplinary and integrative studies, in order to ameliorate some of the barriers that still exist in university departments and disciplines.
THE NEED FOR CROSS-DISCIPLINARY CURRICULUM
In the 21st century, investigators are finding that there are often tools, information, resources and even points of view from other disciplines that can elucidate and even answer the problem they are studying. However, higher education becomes more restrictive as a student moves from “interesting” first year university seminars bridging a wide range of topics, through their major courses in a discipline and finally into graduate school, where a single department awards their Masters or Ph.D. degree based on a usually narrow set of course requirements and a thesis or dissertation. Graduate students who wish to take courses in other departments are often told that those courses “don’t count” towards their degree, sending a negative message. Faculty are told that they may not “get full course credit” for their course if they team-teach with a faculty member in another department. Issues of funding, resources and evaluation are difficult for faculty who cross disciplines. New programs and centers are trying to bridge this gap, but most institutions do not offer “cross-disciplinary” courses in their standard curriculum. Much work needs to be done, not only to encourage institutions and administrators to offer such courses, but to assist instructors with examples of courses that cross from science, technology, engineering and mathematics to the arts and humanities (“STEM” to “STEAM”) and that will inspire them to create courses, either by themselves or in collaboration with other faculty. While some call for an elimination of silos, a bridging concept will foster a renewed interest in interdisciplinary teaching and a new approach to curriculum. We need a “comprehensive re-visioning of course offerings … to emphasize a systemic and integrative – rather than disciplinary and course-based – curriculum”. 
In the 2003 report, Beyond Productivity: Information, Technology, and Creativity, a committee composed of educators from several major universities, corporate researchers and working artists identified several barriers to collaboration between the arts and information technology. The barriers to collaboration in the arts, sciences, and humanities generally are the same and include the presence of academic silos, lack of funding, the minor role mainstream arts play in many major institutions, and the difficulty of creating hybrid collaborations.  The arts play a small part in the general education requirements of the state universities in the three largest states in the Unites States: California, New York and Texas. The California State University System general education requirements include only one course in the arts and one in the humanities, as opposed to four courses in math and sciences; New York and Texas requirements are essentially the same, with some institutions, such as the University of Texas at Dallas requiring far more math and science – 5 courses – and the same level of arts and humanities. The recommendations in Beyond Productivity to colleges and universities, primarily to administrators, included the support of interdisciplinary curriculum at the undergraduate level. Other recommendations were “big” solutions that require fundamental changes to hiring, promotion and tenure, funding and support, and evaluation of grant proposals and publications in cross-disciplinary areas. 
Hiring, promotion and tenure decisions in colleges and university tend to be disciplinary. A recent study of people who earned interdisciplinary research doctorates in the United States in 2010 found that they display near-term income risk since they tend to earn nearly $1,700 less in the year after graduation. It also found that the probability that non-citizens pursue interdisciplinary dissertation work is 4.7% higher when compared with US citizens.
In 2012 and 2013, Kathryn Evans and Roger Malina sent out a call for curriculum through Leonardo, a publication of the International Society for the Arts, Sciences and Technology. The international call for contributions requested examples of interdisciplinary art-science-engineering-humanities curricula, and specifically asked for a broad range of all forms of the arts, humanities and sciences. A website at http://www.utdallas.edu/atec/cdash was created to post these courses and faculty were contacted for permission to list their courses, with their institution and brief descriptions, on the site. They were also asked to send any other courses they wish to have included and to update their descriptions. Permissions and updates were received for over 100 courses, along with additional material. The site also contains other relevant literature, our collaborative cloud curriculum project, programs and research centers, reports and studies and other areas of interest. Contact information for additions or corrections is included, and interest in a specific course will be forwarded to the relevant instructor. The website was expanded to include these new contributions, including an area for Primary and Secondary Curricula, other Calls for Contributions, K-12 courses, medical school courses, and other areas of interest. (To see the complete methodology, please visit the SEAD network White Papers by Evans and Malina at .) 
All courses were cross-disciplinary in nature, either general science and the arts, or a specific science and the arts, or a specific science and a specific art. Courses included both undergraduate and graduate level curriculum and some K-12 curricula in the United States, as well as courses in medical schools. While it is clear that the K-12 offerings are of vital importance to higher education efforts in this area, the issues in K-12 education and higher education, while connected, are distinct from one another in the way curriculum decisions are made and implemented. Hence, we have chosen not to discuss the K-12 curricula at this time, as they are outside the scope of this research. While the focus of this effort was in art-science-humanities curricula, a few submissions involved computer science, cognitive science, sociology and psychology.
Submissions were received from Australia (5), Brazil (2), Canada (9), Denmark (5), France (5), Germany (7), Italy (1), Korea (1), Netherlands (4), Russia (1), Serbia (1), Turkey (1), United Kingdom (7), and the United States (79). The compilation is also admittedly heavily weighted to courses in the United States (52.83%), due to the initial posting in an American journal. This sample is by no means representative, but a response to a specific call. The scope has increased over time and is less “US-centric” than it was in previous calls.
The largest areas were biology (23%) and visual arts (52%). Very few courses in theatre, dance, film or music were submitted. Some of the submissions did not meet the precise criteria as some combined the “hard” and “soft” sciences but not specifically the arts. While the focus of this study was art-science-humanities, this initial compilation of courses further indicates that there is a increasingly “fuzzy” border between the arts, sciences (both hard and soft) and the humanities.
We postulated that the absence of courses in music was the result of the nature of the call, asking for courses that are not common offerings. Indeed, a Google search revealed that music-science courses (and more specifically, music-mathematics, music-physics and music-psychology/cognition) were common in curriculum and there are even degrees offered in such areas (see for example the B.S. in Mathematics and Music at the University of Leeds, UK on the “Programs and Centers” area of the CDASH website http://www.utdallas.edu/atec/cdash/centers/). Music has a long history of integration with mathematics, physics and psychology, starting with the foundations of music theory by Pythagoras (ca. 570-497 B.C.). Aristoxenus (ca. 320 B.C.) felt music should be considered an empirical science and musical phenomena were cognitive in nature. Its inclusion in the Quadrivium (astronomy, geometry, arithmetic and music) persisted into the sixteenth century and was responsible for much interaction between the disciplines. . Disciplines such as acoustics, psychoacoustics, and sound design, as well as mathematical approaches to composition, all arose in the 20th century and gave rise to new curricular areas. Therefore, they are not generally considered cross-disciplinary by their instructors.
Collaborative vs. Hybrid Instructors
In most cases, the courses were offered by a single individual in a discipline who has an interest or a degree in another discipline (“hybrid” instructors). About 17% of courses were taught by 2 or more persons. Notable examples of true collaborative teaching were the programs at UC Davis, which connects faculty from multiple disciplines in the Art Science Fusion program ; the San Francisco Art Institute, which offers courses through their Interdisciplinary Studies program in the arts and biology, mathematics and astronomy ; the “Science, Technology and Society”, a new program at Stanford, which provides faculty with a space “to think about interdisciplinary issues that may not necessarily have a home in their own department.”  and the “Mathematics Across the Curriculums (MATC)” program, which ran from 2000 to 2005 at Dartmouth (http://www.math.dartmouth.edu/~matc/index.html) but still offers courses created during that time. 
Graduate vs. Undergraduate Offerings
Overall, there were approximately the same numbers of undergraduate courses (51%) versus graduate courses (49%). This is not representative when you examine the offerings in the United States versus those outside the United States. The breakdown between US courses (undergraduate 71 % vs. graduate 29%) and non-US courses (undergraduate 28% vs. graduate 72%) was significant, with a higher percentage of graduate offerings in the non-US population. This is also reflected in the graduate level departments that offered courses in institutions outside the United States such as the “Art and Culture Studies” program at the University of Denmark and the “Art and Science” program at the University of the Arts in London.
There is also a dichotomy of the types of courses and the level at which they are offered. We observed many undergraduate courses that were for first year university students, offered as “interesting” seminars outside their major. As in the Dartmouth MATC program, it is possible for one department (in this case mathematics) to create a series of collaborative, interdisciplinary courses by reaching out to other departments. These courses were intended for “non-science” majors and primarily offered at the lower division level. At the graduate level, an organized program at the Masters or Ph.D. level creates a set of course offerings. We observed few courses at the upper level, no doubt a reflection of the emphasis on required disciplinary courses at that level.
Department Offering the Course
In the US, 20 courses (35%) were offered in math and science departments, 20 (35%) were offered in arts departments and the remainder (16 courses or 28%) were offered by interdisciplinary programs, an almost equal distribution between the three offering departments, with arts and sciences programs slightly higher. Outside the US, 19 courses (19%) were offered in science departments, 17 were offered in arts departments (34%) and the remainder (14 courses or 28%) were offered in interdisciplinary programs. The non-US courses also had programs labeled as “Art-Science” and “History of Science”. This distribution suggests that different areas of the world conceive of interdisciplinary curricula in a different context and is an area ripe for further research.
Boundaries of the Compilation
This study also did not address the growing body of “informal” education courses now being offered over the Internet. There is a growing hacker/maker/”Do it Yourself”/ citizen scientist population who now explore the intersections of the arts, sciences and humanities through courses offered on MOOCs (Massive Open Online Courses), informal workshops and other community based art-science-humanities educational activities. Additionally, institutions of higher education are developing coursework with non-profit organizations to enhance their own online learning abilities. MIT, Harvard, the University of California at Berkeley and the University of Texas System have recently partnered with EdX, a non-profit venture designed specifically for interactive study via the web. 
Suggested Action #1: Networking and Visibility
Cross-disciplinary art-science-humanities instructors are isolated and often work with no knowledge of best practices, other instructors and courses, and possible collaborations. To date, no comprehensive inventory or study of cross-disciplinary course curriculum has been conducted. The current website invites contributions in order to expand the listings. A symposium on Art-Science Curriculum has now been scheduled through the College Art Association (http://www.collegeart.org/) for their February, 2014 meeting. Other networking organizations in the arts and sciences such as the Art & Science Collaborations, Inc.(http://www.asci.org/) can be contacted. In order to attract submissions from Europe, international organizations like YASMIN (http://www2.media.uoa.gr/yasmin/) could be contacted. A new call for courses should be initiated through SEAD (Network for Sciences, Engineering, Arts and Design, http://sead.viz.tamu.edu/). A proper and extensive survey of such curriculum would encourage faculty members in art and science disciplines to offer such courses and collaborate with other faculty in complementary areas. A dedicated website, designed to assist instructors with information about other curricula, including a cloud-based syllabi resource similar to http://artsci.unsw.wikispaces.net/Curriculum%20Archive, a blog for communication, links to best practices in interdisciplinary curriculum; and announcements of international conferences in art-science-humanities efforts and conferences.  The CDASH website could be expanded to include these, which could lead to the heightened presence of the website in academic journals and websites.
Suggested Action #2: Geographical Study of Cross-Disciplinary Art-Science-Humanities Curricula
There is currently a lack of information about where art-science-humanities cross-disciplinary curriculum are currently being offered and their impact on the educational environment. However, we have not yet used current available technology to study where these courses are being offered and in what context. A study of “informal” art-science-humanities education, with an emphasis on community engagement would add to the overall knowledge of current offerings. An international study that uses asset mapping tools as a way of defining the current “state-of-the-state” and identify geographical nodes and centers of learning ios needed. This could include both formal, for-credit courses, on-line educational sites and local informal courses.
Suggested Action #3: Integration through Research
Cross-disciplinary art-science-humanities courses are still rare in most university degree plans and are still not a part of standard curriculum at the tertiary level in both the undergraduate and graduate programs. Administrators and curriculum designers are focused more on limiting the number of electives to increase graduation rates with minimal time to graduation and hence a reduction in cost to the student. The requirements for tenure and promotion, course credit, and funding are distinctly disciplinary in most universities. Cross-disciplinary teaching and research is not rewarded in the current evaluative process. The most effective way to do so would be to foster an environment where cross-disciplinary courses are offered and resources are made available to instructors who wish to teach them. Further, we must foster research that helps justify the inclusion of such courses into standard university degree plans. This requires substantial evidence that cross-disciplinary curriculum is a valuable part of every student’s education. A nationally funded research effort to investigate the usefulness of cross-disciplinary art-science-humanities education with an eye towards answering the following questions: Are students who have taken cross-disciplinary art-science-humanities courses more accepting or interested or explorative of areas outside their majors? Are they more innovative? Can they think “outside the box’? Can they become members of the “Creative Class”? More specifically, students who are currently taking cross-disciplinary courses should be evaluated before and after their curricular experience to study the effects of this kind of education.
There is a growing consensus that cross-disciplinary curriculum is a needed change in higher education Government organizations like the NSF and NEA are now encouraging art and science collaborations to develop new courses and projects that can be folded into the existing educational framework. In his latest book on higher education, Checklist for Change, Making American Higher Education a Sustainable Enterprise, Robert Zemsky suggestions for changes to create a “competent curriculum” include a designed curriculum and an exploration of learning pathways and cohorts that moves away from the current system of major, minors and electives.  In The Innovative University: Changing the DNA of Higher Education from the Inside Out, Clayton Christensen calls for a a move from “comprehensive specialization and departmentalization” to “interdepartmental faculty collaboration and from “curricular distribution (general education) and concentration (majors)” to “cross-disciplinary integrated general education and modular, customizable majors”.  This compendium indicates that cross-disciplinary arts-science-humanities curriculum exists in some areas and in some institutions of higher education, but has, for the most part, not been integrated into the standard undergraduate curriculum. The over-riding concern should now be how to create an environment that will foster these kinds of courses and a system that will ensure sustainability. While this undertaking will requires some substantial changes in the way curriculum is currently designed and offered, it is also clear that higher education must work towards a more integrative approach.
While many “art-science” papers and studies call for “big” solutions, the “small” solution of art-science-humanities cross-disciplinary coursework at the undergraduate and graduate level could be an important part of a student’s education, creating a generation of artists and scientists that will see these collaborations as natural and necessary. Students already live in a highly technological world where they move seamlessly across science, technology and the arts and humanities. These students are the future generation of scientists, artists and scholars. Until we can demonstrate the clear usefulness of this kind of curricula, it will be difficult to convince administrators and curriculum designers that this kind of curriculum has a clear value and should be included in existing degree plans. This preliminary study points the way towards further efforts in curricular design and research that will be required for cross-disciplinary arts-science-humanities courses to be integrated into the college curriculum.
This project was initiated for a white paper for SEAD (the Network for Science, Engineering, Art and Design) and developed in collaboration with the Leonardo Education and Art Forum (LEAF); we thank in particular Paul Thomas and Nina Czegledy for discussions and collaboration. This work was supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No.1142510.
Kathryn Evans, Senior Lecturer in Music, School of Arts and Humanities, University of Texas at Dallas, 800 W. Campbell Rd., Richardson, TX75080. 214-226-3136, Email: firstname.lastname@example.org. Website: http://www.utdallas.edu/ah/people/faculty_detail.php?faculty_id=271
Roger Malina, Professor and Associate Director, Arts and Technology (ATEC), School of Arts and Humanities, UT Dallas, 800 W. Campbell Rd., Richardson, TX75080. 972-883-2023. Email: email@example.com. Website: http://www.utdallas.edu/ah/people/faculty_detail.php?faculty_id=1341
 Wilson, Stephen. Information Arts: Intersections of Art, Science, and Technology. Cambridge, MA: Leonardo Books, 2001.
 Reid, Theresa. ArtsEngine initiative at the University of Michigan, Art-Making and the Arts in Research Universities. Last modified March 4-6, 2012. Accessed November 24, 2013. http://arts-u.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/ArtsEngine-National-Strategic-Task-Forces-Interim-Report-March-2012.pdf.
 National Academies. Committee on Science, Engineering and Public Policy, Facilitating Interdisciplinary Research, (Washington, DC: NationalAcademy Press, 2004), 4.
 Christensen, Clayton M., and Henry J. Eyring. The Innovative University: Changing the DNA of Higher Education from the Inside Out. San Francisco, CA: Jossy-Bass, 2011, 20.
 Ibid, 5.
 Richard A deMillo, Abelard to Apple: The Fate of American Colleges and Universities, (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2011), 8.
 Committee on Prospering in the Global Economy of the 21st Century, . Rising Above the Gathering Storm: Energizing and Employing America for a Brighter Economic Future. Washington, D.C. : The National Academies Press, 2007. 12.
 STEAM: Science, Technology, Engineering, Arts and Design, “Congressional STEAM Caucus.” Last modified February 2013. Accessed November 30, 2013. http://stemtosteam.org/events/congressional-steam-caucus/.
 Joe Moran, Interdisciplinarity: The New Critical Idiom, (London and New York: Routledge, 2010), Kindle edition, 9.
 Nietzsche, Friederich. The Nietzsche Channel, “Published Works:Beyond Good and Evil | We Scholars.” Last modified October 21, 2013. Accessed November 24, 2013. http://www.thenietzschechannel.com/works-pub/bge/bge6.htm.
 Joe Moran, Interdisciplinarity: The New Critical Idiom, Kindle Edition, 13.
 C.P. Snow, The Two Cultures, (New York, NY: Cambridge University Press, ,  1993), 4.
 San FranciscoStateUniversity, “http://ctfd.sfsu.edu/feature/top-ten-suggestions-for-interdisciplinary-teaching.” Accessed November 24, 2013. http://ctfd.sfsu.edu/feature/top-ten-suggestions-for-interdisciplinary-teaching.
 Association for Integrative Studies, “Interdisciplinary Studies.” Accessed November 24, 2013. http://www.units.muohio.edu/aisorg/.
 Cenkl, Pavel. Netowrk for Science, Art, Education and Design, A New Ecology of Learning: Ecological Systems as Pedagocial Models. Last modified August 16, 2013. Accessed November 24, 2013. http://seadnetwork.wordpress.com/white-paper-abstracts/final-white-papers/a-new-ecology-of-learning-ecological-systems-as-pedagogical-models-a-new-ecology-of-learning-ecological-systems-as-pedagogical-models.
 Mitchell, William J., Alan S. Inouye, and Marjory S. Blumenthal, Beyond Productivity: Information, Technology, Innovation, and Creativity : , 2003. Print., (Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press, 2003)., 4 -11.
 Ibid, 11-13.
 Kniffin , Kevin M. , and Andrew S. Hanks. CornellUniversity, “Boundary Spanning in Academia: Antecedents and Near-Term Consequences of Academic Entrepreneurialism.” Accessed November 24, 2013. http://www.ilr.cornell.edu/cheri/upload/cheri_wp158.pdf.
 Evans, Kathryn, and Roger Malina. Network for Science, Engineering, Art and Design, “Breaking Down the Silos: Curriculum Development in the Arts, Sciences and Humanities.” Last modified August 16, 2013. Accessed November 24, 2013. http://seadnetwork.wordpress.com/white-paper-abstracts/final-white-papers/breaking-down-the-silos-curriculum-development-as-a-tool-for-crossing-disciplines-in-the-arts-sciences-and-humanities.
 Diana Deutsch, “Psychology and Music” in Psychology and its Allied Disciplines, ed. M. H. Bornstein, (Hillsdale: Erlbaum, 1984), 156-157.
 University of California, Davis, “Art Science Fusion Program.” Accessed November 24, 2013. http://artsciencefusion.ucdavis.edu/homepage.html.
 San Francisco Art Institute, “School of Interdisciplinary Studies.” Accessed November 24, 2013. http://www.sfai.edu/school-interdisciplinary-studies.
 AACU (Association of AmericanColleges and Universities, Liberal Education for the Twenty-First Century: Science, Technology and Society at Stanford University. Last modified April 12, 2012. Accessed November 24, 2013. http://www.aacu.org/aacu_news/aacunews12/april12/feature.cfm
 DartmouthCollege, “Mathematics Across the Curriculum.” Last modified June 19, 2002. Accessed November 24, 2013. http://www.math.dartmouth.edu/~matc/.
 LaCoste-Caputo, Jenny. The University of Texas System, “The University of Texas System joins edX. The University of Texas System, 15 Oct 2012. Web. 17 Aug 2013. .” Last modified October 15, 2012. Accessed November 24, 2013. http://www.utsystem.edu/news/2012/10/15/university-texas-system-joins-edx.
 Thomas, Paul. University of New South Wales, “Art and Science Cloud Curriculum Archive.” Accessed November 24, 2013. http://artsci.unsw.wikispaces.net/Curriculum Archive.
 Zemsky, Robert. Checklist for Change: Making American Higher Education a Sustainable Enterprise Print., (New Brunswick, NJ: RutgersUniversity Press, 2013).
 Christensen, Clayton M., and Henry J. Eyring. The Innovative University: Changing the DNA of Higher Education from the Inside Out., 386.