Making SEAD in the Contemporary Research University Kari Elizabeth

The Transdisciplinary Dilemma: Making SEAD in the Contemporary Research University Kari Elizabeth Zacharias Dissertation submitted to the faculty of the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy In Science and Technology Studies Matthew H. Wisnioski Daniel Breslau Gary L. Downey Lisa D. McNair Andrew J. Nelson September 7, 2018 Blacksburg, VA Keywords: interdisciplinarity, STS, ethnography, art and technology, institutions This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial- NoDerivs 3.0 United States License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/us/ or send a letter to Creative Commons, PO Box 1866, Mountain View, CA 94042, USA. The Transdisciplinary Dilemma: Making SEAD in the Contemporary Research University Kari Elizabeth Zacharias ABSTRACT Over the past two decades, many American universities have created transdisciplinary institutes devoted to science, engineering, art, and design (SEAD). These organizations promote research, teaching, and engagement across technoscientific and artistic disciplines, and seek to cultivate creativity and innovation. Their proponents argue that this particular type of transdisciplinary knowledge-making has the potential to transform research universities. However, making and maintaining SEAD institutions is difficult work for the researchers and administrators involved. Practitioners struggle to define the broader goals of their transdisciplinary research; to demonstrate its value; to receive appropriate credit from their peers; and to feel that they belong in their institutions. I argue that these issues result from a fundamental “transdisciplinary dilemma”: the challenge of institutionalizing an ideal of transdisciplinarity that is actually a complex and contradictory set of different actors and motivations. In my dissertation I examine SEAD and transdisciplinarity through an ethnographic study of Virginia Tech’s Institute for Creativity, Arts, and Technology, a research institute that aspires to work “at the nexus of science, engineering, art, and design.” I identify three significant “matters of concern” for SEAD practitioners, each of which is a tension that reveals an aspect of the transdisciplinary dilemma and the challenges of institutionalizing art and technology research. Sponsored collaboration contrasts the idea of transdisciplinarity as an idealized stage of creative knowledge production with the notion of transdisciplinarity as an economic driver for higher education. Value and belonging highlights researchers’ simultaneous desire to exist outside of traditional disciplines and to enjoy the comforts of a disciplinary home. Measurable impact describes the balancing act between institutions’ need for resources and status, and the nature of researchers’ everyday work. Ultimately, I argue, these tensions are irresolvable aspects of SEAD as it exists within the contemporary research university. The persistence of the transdisciplinary dilemma leaves practitioners in a perpetual state of striving to belong, and SEAD institutions continually seeking to (re-)define themselves. The Transdisciplinary Dilemma: Making SEAD in the Contemporary Research University Kari Elizabeth Zacharias GENERAL AUDIENCE ABSTRACT Over the past two decades, many American universities have created transdisciplinary institutes devoted to science, engineering, art, and design (SEAD). These organizations promote research, teaching, and engagement across technical, scientific, and artistic disciplines, and seek to cultivate creativity and innovation. Their proponents argue that this particular type of transdisciplinary research and education has the potential to transform universities. However, making and maintaining SEAD institutions is difficult work for the researchers and administrators involved. Practitioners struggle to define the broader goals of their transdisciplinary research; to demonstrate its value; to receive appropriate credit from their peers; and to feel that they belong in their institutions. I argue that these issues result from a fundamental “transdisciplinary dilemma”: the challenge of institutionalizing an ideal of transdisciplinarity that is actually a complex and contradictory set of different actors and motivations. In my dissertation I examine SEAD and transdisciplinarity through a study of Virginia Tech’s Institute for Creativity, Arts, and Technology, a research institute that aspires to work “at the nexus of science, engineering, art, and design.” I identify three significant “matters of concern” for SEAD practitioners, each of which is an issue that reveals an aspect of the transdisciplinary dilemma and the challenges of institutionalizing art and technology research. Ultimately, I argue, these tensions are irresolvable aspects of SEAD as it exists within the contemporary research university. The persistence of the transdisciplinary dilemma leaves practitioners in a perpetual state of striving to belong, and SEAD institutions continually seeking to (re-) define themselves. Acknowledgements I am deeply grateful to the faculty, staff, and students at the Institute for Creativity, Arts, and Technology, without whose support and understanding this project would not have been possible. Thank you for sharing your workplace, your projects, and your stories with me, and for giving me the “time, space, and permission” to complete my work. My committee members provided valuable feedback that helped to shape my thoughts and sharpen my writing in countless ways. In particular, Matt Wisnioski has been an incomparable mentor, teacher, collaborator, critic, and cheerleader since my first days in Blacksburg. Many other members of the Virginia Tech STS community have read chapter drafts, asked important questions, shared their expertise, and provided much- needed encouragement, none more than Marie Stettler Kleine. Finally, I would like to thank my family and friends near and far for their patience, love, and support. Christoph, thank you for saying yes to this adventure. iv Table of Contents Introduction: SEAD and the Transdisciplinary Dilemma...................................................1 Transformational Institutions: Competing Visions of Change in the SEAD Institute.......29 Sponsored Collaboration: Chasing the Creative and Economic Potential of “Transdisciplinarity”..........................................................................................................70 Value and Belonging: Making a Home Outside the Disciplines.....................................101 Measurable Impact: Seeking Legitimacy through Assessment.......................................135 Conclusion: Managing the Dilemma?.............................................................................166 Appendix A: Timeline of ICAT Events, 1996-2016.......................................................181 Appendix B: Table of ICAT-supported Projects, 2011-2017..........................................186 Appendix C: Annotated List of Figures and Image Permissions.....................................189 Appendix D: IRB Approval Letter..................................................................................190 References........................................................................................................................191 v Introduction: SEAD and the Transdisciplinary Dilemma In August of 2013, I walked into a dingy rented space underneath a coffee shop in Blacksburg, Virginia and, for the first time, met a group of researchers who formed the core of Virginia Tech’s Institute for Creativity, Arts, and Technology (ICAT). The group was an eclectic mix of engineers, artists, educators, and a few who rejected disciplinary identities altogether. All had varied career trajectories and research goals, but for the past two years they had worked together to develop an Institute devoted to creating and supporting projects that crossed disciplinary boundaries between science, engineering, art, and design. Scraping together limited resources, the researchers experimented with motion capture and 3D projection. They instituted an annual summer camp where middle school students created electronic musical instruments. They created installations and art pieces that integrated technology and performance. But by the summer of 2013, the Institute was on the cusp of a major change: its faculty, staff, and graduate students were about to move from their out-of-the-way basement into a newly constructed $90 million arts center and assume a prominent place on campus. The building, and the accompanying expansion of the Institute that its stakeholders anticipated, could help to establish ICAT as a leader among other U.S. university-based institutions devoted to working across the arts and technology. ICAT’s participants were excited about the move. The state-of-the-art facilities in the arts center would enable new ways of creating and expose their work to new audiences and potential collaborators. But they had questions and worries, too. Their Institute had functioned for two years as a loosely defined collective of likeminded researchers. That was about to change, and ICAT’s researchers knew it. For one thing, 1 the researchers wondered how they might make themselves and their work understood on campus. The collaborative projects they pursued at ICAT were an anathema to many at the university, especially when compared to the more traditional

Load more