1. www.eurodoc.net Symposium Harmonious career paths: Interdisciplinary voyages 30. August 2012. Stresa, Italy

2. Content EURODOC Interdisciplinarity Workgroup Importance of interdisciplinarity European successfull and unsuccessfull experiences in interdisciplinarity  Reasons to be afraid to venture to interdisciplinarity  What can be done to make it easier for junior researchers to effectively "voyage" through different disciplines? Discussion

3. EURODOC

4. To represent doctoral candidates and junior researchers at the European level in matters of education, research, and professional development of their careers. To advance the quality of doctoral programmes and the standards of research activity in Europe. To promote the circulation of information on issues regarding young researchers; organize events, take part in debates and assist in the elaboration of policies about Higher Education and Research in Europe. To establish and promote co-operation between national associations representing doctoral candidates and junior researchers within Europe.

5. EURODOC PARTNERS: Eurodoc Web Site Newsletter E-mail Distribution Annual Conference

6. EURODOC - structure Board Secretariat Council / General Meeting Workgroups Members Observers Individual Observers Individual Observers Career development Gender equality Interdisciplinarity Mobility Policy research Governance Finance Communication Disabilities Employment and social security

7. Interdisciplinarity Workgroup

8. The main objectives are:  To facilitate discussions about the design of interdisciplinary studies and research.  To analyze carrier structures.  To monitor main trends and key issues in this area.

9. Interdisciplinarity Workgroup DONE:  Workshop in Eurodoc Strasbourg  inspired delegates of Lithuanian Society of Young Researchers to make a conference about interdisciplinarity: Interdisciplinarity: how to make it work.Interdisciplinarity: how to make it work  Work-Group applied to organise a workshop in ESOF 2012 - not accepted.  Two research proposals: 1.Comparison of possibilities of young researchers and doctorate students in fields of science. 2.Involvement of doctoral candidates and early stage researchers in policy making in Europe.  Workshop by ESF: The Good The Bad and The Ugly. The Good The Bad and The Ugly  Eurodoc contributions to ERA - statement concerning the role of the Arts and Humanities.

10. Interdisciplinarity Workgroup KEY INTERESTESTS AT THE MOMENT:  Interdisciplinary mobility.  T-shaped versus "all in one" interdisciplinary specialization.  Preparing workshop at AGM 2013.  Participating in planning of Lithuanian EU presidency conference 2013.

11. Interdisciplinarity Workgroup PROBLEMS:  Weak career structures  Evaluation  Training  Funding  Tradition/ideological barriers  Classification  Institutional clustering/organizational fragmentation  National cocooning

12. Successful stories

13. 1. Case Study Interdisciplinary Grants The Global Grant application  Expert: “Even though the Applicant presents Technical Sciences, he applies as the representative of Social sciences and humanities.” “Scientists’ Initiative” Grant  Expert: “No, it is not – you mention organizational practice, so your work belongs to social sciences.”  Vladislav: “The aim of my work is to develop terminology of socio-material management in English and Lithuanian languages.”  Expert: “The stated aims do not lead to any important scientific nor practical results.”  Vladislav: “Contribution to the field so far”  Expert: “The real contribution can’t be seen.” Criteria: 1.Has the proposed project potential for scientific excellence? 2. Is the proposed project novel, creative and original? 3. What is the innovation potential and impact of the project? 4. How well conceived, organized and state-of-the-art is the proposed activity? 5. Does the project have a reasonable chance of succeeding and what difficulties can be expected? 6. What are the achievements made by the applicants in the research field(s) of the proposed project? Are they competent to conduct the work? 7. Are the requested resources adequate? 8. How novel is the combination of disciplines and what is the scientific added value of the proposed interdisciplinary collaboration with respect to the combined contributions from the partners?

14. 1. Case Study Interdisciplinary Grants Conference Grant Vladislav: “Annual EURAS conference brings together members of different academic communities, as well as members of regional and national government/governance institutions and companies.”  Expert: “Your conference is not an academic event, because it is dedicated to industry participants and representatives of European and international standardization organizations…” Lithuanian Long-Term Science Development Strategy (Section IV. The Mission of the State): 12…. The State’s long term development strategy, based on EU’s Lisbon (2000) resolution recognizes these important aspects of Research & Science development:… 12.3. … create opportunities for collaboration between science and business/industry…”

15. 2. Case Study Teresa: Center on Theories and Practices that Overcome inequalities Dialogue throughout all the research process across disciplines Knowledge from the scientific community Interpretations from social actors Immigrant Researcher Person with disability Researcher Non-academic woman Romani woman

16. 2. Case Study The Dialogic Inclusion Contract Evidences from Scientific Community Actions which have obtained success in other places Developing policies to extend the succesful actions to all social fields. Dialogue with the subjects Successful actions Recreate successful actions in their context INVOLVEMENT OF POLICY MAKERS Achievements: Recognition of the Roma in the Spanish Parliament September 2005 Successful educational actions: Improvements in the school: reduction of absenteeism from 2006 to 2009 School parents work as basketball coaches

17. Motivation (MORE) ‘Career progression goals’ and ‘personal research agenda’ were the top-ranked motivations for mobility among the ‘academic’ researchers, especially important for the EU-US mobility group. Profession-related motives were more important as drivers of mobility than as motivations for mobility, and as drivers of EU-US mobility rather than of US-EU mobility. While personal motivations are driving non-mobility, profession related motivations appear to drive mobility. What are the motivations to become an interdisciplinarian? M1 – EU → US M2 – US → EU M3 – other M4 – non-mobile group

19. Please contact us if you face any problem or hear any wonderful story: interdisciplinarity@council.eurodoc.net For more information, visit our web site: www.eurodoc.net or contact us at: board@eurodoc.net interdisciplinarity@council.eurodoc.net