Blurring the boundaries

Dr. Robert J. Brym of the University of Toronto delivered a fascinating talk entitled Sociology as a Life or Death Issue: The Case of Suicide Bombers on Oct. 13. The talk was one of the events marking SOSA's 40th anniversary. Dr. Brym is a Dalhousie graduate (Abriel photo).

The Department of Sociology and Social Anthropology (SOSA) at Dalhousie University is unique in bringing two disciplines together in one department Ð and keeping them together for 40 years! Faculty members in the department, Liesl Gambold and Alex Khasnabish, reflect on their good fortune to be part of a collegial department where professors and students alike benefit from the richness and breadth of the cross-disciplinary nature of the department.   
 
There are many advantages to teaching, learning, and doing research in an inter-disciplinary department especially one that studies both micro and macro levels of human societies and human behaviour.  ÒI find inspiration in mycolleagues and their different perspectives” reflects Gambold.  ÒThey help me get a more macro level picture that helps me question my perspective or understanding, enabling me to strengthen my own work.  This translates to the classroom as we use examples from each otherÕs work and highlight the variation in our perspective or understanding.” 

Khasnabish, who has always worked from an interdisciplinary perspective himself, notes, ÒThis department gives students a more holistic sense, in general, of how social scientists try to understand social process and allows for an interesting and dynamic focus on issues of power, health, development, and justice. These things combine for a better teaching experience and, hopefully, for a better learning experience for students, too, thatÕs dynamic and contemporary.”
 
Uniting two disciplines

Liesl Gambold did not come from an interdisciplinary background and notes that teaching in the department was at first unfamiliar.  ÒSometimes”, she says, Òcreating the union between the two disciplines in our teaching can feel forced É but I think this is one of the benefits; it keeps us reflecting on the other part of our department, which is a good thing.  I donÕt see the difficulties as negative.  It just keeps me on my toes about the way IÕm thinking.” Alex Khasnabish agrees,  ÒYou have to learn to communicate with colleagues who donÕt speak the specialized language you are used to Ð but thatÕs a positive thing and itÕs fruitful to remember we arenÕt talking the same language and to learn to speak in ways that are intelligible to other people.”
 
This perspective can be challenging for students, too. ÒAs a department we work to blur the two disciplines; that doesnÕt always serve the students well,” remarks Gambold. Despite the interdisciplinarity, Òstudents nonetheless want to know the difference between the two, especially where there are important distinctions.”  At first students may experience Òan immersed blur” of the two disciplines, but they will learn to see the distinction in upper year courses. Interestingly, at this point, students should also be able to bring their increasing understanding of

interdisciplinarity to each discipline to see how the distinct perspectives can be integrated and thus lead to a deeper understanding of social phenomena.  Both Khasnabish and Gambold have developed approaches to teaching in an interdisciplinary department that facilitates studentsÕ understanding and enjoyment of the program.

Blurring the boundaries

ÒItÕs really important in any kind of teaching environment to acknowledge your responsibility as an instructor to create a learning environment that is open, but particularly in an interdisciplinary setting,” says Khasnabish. ÒIn my courses I encourage a great deal of creativity and flexibility with respect to papers so I expect to get different things from different students. ItÕs okay that it reflects their own education and where they locate their interests, as long as they do those things that allow them to test themselves a bit and write in a different way than theyÕd be used to in their own departments. They deal with it very well on the whole.”

He provides constant feedback on student work, believing this is particularly important in an interdisciplinary context. In class, Gambold always tries to take students from the micro to the macro as it enables her Òto touch on the levels that sociology and social anthropology combined would naturally provide.”  She similarly draws on methodologies from both disciplines. ÒAs an anthropologist IÕm always wanting students to think outside of their cultural boundaries. But, in doing so, I want them to use that to reflect back on a better understanding of their own society. Making the strange familiar and the familiar strange is a useful mental exercise.”
 
Students benefit significantly from the interdisciplinary SOSA program, not the least because they experience a diversity of faculty experience and training in one department.   In addition, Gambold is Òconstantly trying to get students to see the fantastic tool kit they will be leaving with in terms of research methods (interviews, focus groups, understanding the big picture, tying information together). A SOSA degree in 2006 is a great degree to have; it reflects so much of society today Ð multiplicity of ideas and views Ð and you see that reflected in our department.”

For Khasnabish the benefits to students can be found in the breadth of SOSA courses, which Òallow students to think critically about issues that they are generally not encouraged to think about on a day-to-day basis, to dismiss, take as common sense, or leave up to the experts.  Those kinds of tendencies need to be fought and students need to be engaged and care about their world and other people.  ThatÕs the kind of thing that good critical SOSA departments do really well.  I think that would ultimately be the greatest testament to this department on its 40th anniversary: that it helped create a critical awareness in students as human beings, not just as students.”