“DIRT” ACROSS THE DISCIPLINES – AN INTEGRATIVE APPROACH TO
PHYSICAL GEOGRAPHY
Patrick G. Miller and Jay Ireland
Department of Geography and Environmental Engineering
United States Military Academy
West Point, NY 10996
This paper was completed and submitted in partial fulfillment of the Master Teacher Program, a 2-year faculty
professional development program conducted by the Center for Faculty Excellence, United States Military
Academy, West Point, NY 2014.
ABSTRACT: At the United States Military Academy, EV203 Physical Geography (“Dirt”) is a required course
much maligned by cadets as an irrelevant and purposeless class they are forced to endure as underclassmen.
Physical Geography instructors endeavor to create lessons that highlight the relevance of Geography to the cadets’
future profession; military operations inevitably intersect with considerations of the physical and human
environment. However, in the present EV203 instructors need to find ways to engage the cadets and fundamentally
change perceptions of the course by demonstrating how physical geography integrates knowledge from other
courses—specifically from those within the STEM fields. This project examines the development of EV203 from a
standalone course into one that requires cadets to draw upon interdisciplinary knowledge. For example,
exploration of ocean currents and climate controllers can incorporate rotational kinematics lessons in the required
PH201 Physics course. Similarly, the EV203 lesson on global population growth and environmental impacts can
utilize understanding of Malthusian growth models and logistic equations from the MA205 Calculus course.
Although the United States Military Academy core curriculum establishes a foundation of cadet knowledge which
enables instructors and professors to more easily span the disciplines, this interdisciplinary approach to physical
geography can successfully be implemented by other academic institutions. A robust integrative approach to
physical geography reinvigorates the discipline, advances student learning from domain centric to process focused,
and helps instill a bit of a geographer in all.
Keywords: Physical geography, interdisciplinary, core curriculum
“DIRT” ACROSS THE DISCIPLINES – AN INTEGRATIVE APPROACH TO
PHYSICAL GEOGRAPHY
Thanks to the anonymity of social network sites and mobile device applications, today's undergraduate
population blatantly broadcasts displeasures about their academic environs. Lamentations range from complaints
about early class hours and professors' idiosyncrasies to more substantial criticisms of pedagogy and curriculum. At
the United States Military Academy (West Point) everything has an order--despite the protestations, complaints and
ever fickle nature of the Corps of Cadets. That said, whenever negative dialogue appears on the internet's virtual
message boards, people take notice. In a recent post to a very popular discussion application, a subscriber-presumably a cadet--derisively catalogued what he or she deemed "worthless" required courses at the academy.
EV203 Physical Geography, or "Dirt," was one such course. This comment received several replies and upvotes
with cadets voicing their agreement that "Dirt" was unnecessary, unimaginative and irrelevant. Although it seems a
hopelessly quixotic task to change the Corps attitude about EV203, we as educators have a responsibility to address
student discontent with the curriculum and explore ways to improve course format and relevancy.
This article first addresses the importance of the interdisciplinary approach to core curriculum courses and
discusses the nuances that make the interdisciplinary method so potent—especially in today’s academic
environment. Geography is the ideal bridging discipline for integrative interdisciplinary approaches. The broad
scale of geographical thought provides numerous gateways for other disciplines to be incorporated into lessons
centered on the environmental and human landscapes. We then present several small scale examples of how EV203,
specifically, has capitalized on cross-curriculum knowledge among first and second year cadets. We show how
1
fundamentals from other West Point STEM courses are referenced and reflected in physical geography learning
objectives in specific lessons on climatology, population growth and weather patterns. As a follow-up to these
smaller in-class interdisciplinary successes, we also highlight two medium scale projects where cadets draw upon
several core courses, including EV203, to address a significant problem set—a “Modest Challenge.” Following the
small and medium scale projects, we suggest a holistic move towards comprehensive integration of first and second
year course fundamentals throughout the entirety of the EV203 course curriculum. The end goal of this
interdisciplinary project is to reinforce the relevancy of geographic thought while simultaneously buttressing cadet
knowledge in other STEM and social science courses.
The Importance of Interdisciplinary Instruction
The traditional undergraduate population belongs to the “Net Generation” (those born after 1980) and is
usually tethered to a technology leash that includes smart phones and tablets with internet access. As such, it is rare
that any task whether recreational or academic is isolated from the chiming demands of instant messages or
snapchats. There is a vast quantity of literature that explores the whether the Net Generation is more adept at
handling multitasking than its Generation X and Baby Boomer predecessors—particularly in the academic
environment. Regardless of the Net Generation’s multitasking ability, the overwhelming evidence supports the fact
that today’s youth can be engaged in far more activities at any given time than older adults. For example, a few
EV203 instructors noted that cadets appeared more focused and content working on practical exercises with music
playing in the background. As pointed out in a recent California State University study, “Multitasking Across
Generations,” Net Generation students will engage in 3.17 tasks during an intense study session compared to the
1.98 and 2.07 tasks for Generation X and Baby Boomers respectively (Rosen and Blanco, 2008). The adeptness of
the Net Generations at tackling studies while simultaneously texting, playing online games and engaging in social
media can be attributed to its members growing up in technology saturated environment. Resultantly, today’s
students often prefer “frequent task switching over sustained attention during cognitive tasks” (Carrier, et al. 2009).
Teachers should leverage the Net Generation’s penchant for task juggling by implementing an interdisciplinary
pedagogical approach in the classroom, especially in core curriculum courses with broad reach. More simply stated,
instructors should capitalize on the possibility that Net Generation students may learn more effectively with multiple
stimuli and tasks at hand.
Interdisciplinary learning aligns with the younger generation’s “hypertext minds;” students are able to shift
attention quickly, engaging new topics and rapidly recalling previous learning objectives. The rapid shifting focal
points is beneficial to the learning process because it motivates “students by enhancing their understanding of
material including the ability to recall material and to apply newly learned facts to new situations” (Yang, 2013, p.
6). As some researchers have noted of the Net Generation – “A linear though process is much less common than
bricolage, or the ability to piece information together from multiple sources” (Oblinger, 2005). A savvy educator
engages the cognitive flexibility of the student and expands the curriculum to incorporate concepts related to the
main lesson objectives. Ideally, reaching outside the boundaries of the subject at hand serves two purposes: 1) it
helps contextualize lesson material and 2) it engages student interaction. The intersection of interdisciplinary
teaching and the Net Generation’s remarkable ability for multitasking provides an opportunity to advance beyond
single discipline-based learning to process-based learning which challenges students to think critically in order to
understand complex issues and themes. The interdisciplinary, multiple stimulus approach also has the ancillary
effect of creating a more dynamic and engaging classroom experience.
EV203, and geography in general, showcases how integrative teaching can work in the classroom. The all
encompassing nature of geography means that its rich diverseness in topics and subject matter across spaces and
places results in welcoming input from other fields (Baerwald, 2010). In other words, “Geography…increasingly is
seen and valued as a ‘bridging discipline’ – one that can connect to the study of human and natural systems and one
that is capable of intellectual synthesis” (Gober, 2000, p.4). Moreover, Geography is willing to capitalize on the
technical skills and expertise of its interdisciplinary counterparts to further understanding about the places and
spaces being examined. Acknowledging the oft begrudging attention of the captive student audience, EV203
instructors endeavor to break free of the narrow, term-heavy focus on climates, biomes, geomorphology and fluvial
systems and reference cadet learning in other core courses. Accordingly, EV203 course directors reach out to their
sister disciplines to explore how to effectively incorporate lessons from other sciences into discussions of earth
processes.
Bridging the Disciplines in EV203
2
Recognizing that West Point’s academic landscape is immutable as if carved in the same granite as its
architecture, academy professors and instructors generally undertake only slight modifications to curriculum and
pedagogy. EV203 instructors looked for major lesson concepts, referred to as “Student Performance Objectives”
(SPOs), and matched them with SPOs from other courses. For example, the majority of cadets take MA205
Calculus II in their second year of study during which they are also enrolled in EV203. In MA205, the cadets learn
the Exponential Growth Model and the Logistic Growth Model equations. These equations dovetail with the
principles of EV203’s Population Growth lesson. The takeaway from the MA205 and EV203 lessons on growth
models centers on the earth’s capacity, or lack thereof, to sustain an increasing population. EV203 provides the
environmental and human context to mathematical equations (Exponential Growth Model versus Logistics Growth
Model). To help facilitate the geography and mathematic modeling nexus EV203 instructors reached out to their
peers in the math department to discuss incorporation of MA205 principles into their Population Growth lessons.
Although this interdisciplinary foray was brief and focused on only one lesson, the payoff was noticeable in
reinvigorated cadet interest when the blended material was referenced in each class. This combination of
quantitative and qualitative perspectives and the blend of “hard” and “soft” science bridges cadet understanding of
SPOs across two core courses and bolsters student interest in the topics at hand.
Figure 1. Lesson correlations between MA205 and EV203 (Population Growth Equations/Theories)
EV203 is earth science based so instructors reached across to other required West Point science courses to
reinforce physical geography learning objectives. For example, cadets must take two semesters of physics during
which they learn about atmospheric and fluid pressure and are introduced to adiabatic processes. These processes,
along with many physics fundamentals, are relevant to EV203 course material as the PH201 syllabus indicates:
“Physics is the fundamental science because it describes the interactions between objects – whether the objects are
very large, like galaxies, or very small like molecules or atoms (or smaller); on earth or in outer space; whether
solid, liquid, or gas; whether moving in a straight line or circular path; whether rigid, fluid, regular, or amorphous –
the study of physics enables cadets to understand how and why objects move and how devices work the way they
do.” Since EV203 teaches very broad scale concepts like atmospheric phenomenon, climatology and weather, it
makes sense to pay homage to the physics-based building blocks of these processes. As with the cross-discipline
discussion with MA205, EV203 instructors can incorporate the physics principles of fluids and pressures when
discussing how differences of atmospheric pressure causes wind systems which in turn dictate global precipitation
3
patterns. Cadet understanding of physics reinforces how and why high and low pressure systems impact climatic
patterns. Both physical geography and physics also highlight adiabatic processes in a discussion of how heat energy
is gained and lost due to differences in altitudes. Again, cadets can draw upon physics to understand differences in
saturated and dry lapse rates and energy transfer.
Figure 2. Physics and EV203 Atmospheric Pressure and Adiabatic Processes Lessons
EV203 lessons and condensation, evaporation and heat energy exchange are also complemented by
fundamentals from Chemistry 101 (CH101), another West Point required science core course. In addition to the
“study of matter, its atomic and molecular structure, and associated energies involved,” CH101 addresses dynamic
equilibrium processes including phase changes through condensation, vaporization, and sublimation. The cadets’
knowledge of phase changes and phase diagrams is revisited in EV203’s lesson on atmospheric moisture,
evaporation, condensation and sublimation. The various states of the earth’s hydrosphere are contextualized with
the cadets’ understanding of Phase Diagrams in chemistry. Cadets are further exposed to concepts in both
Chemistry and Physical Geography during a discussion about Karst Topography and the dissolution of limestone
through Carbonation. There is currently a plan in place to have both CH101 and EV203 use the same examples to
demonstrate dissolution to show the connections between the two studies. Future iterations of EV203 could also
capitalize on the principles from rotational kinematics and its relationship to the Coriolis Effect, regional weather
patterns and ocean currents.
4
Figure 3. CH101 and EV203 Phase Change and Heat Transfer Lessons
Building a Bigger Bridge – “Modest Challenge”
In a nod to the criticality of interdisciplinary instruction, several departments across West Point have
created collaborative assignments dubbed a “Modest Challenge.” This project envisioned as “modest” due to its role
as an instructional stepping stone to a future larger scale “Grand Challenge” in which designated cadet cohorts
would work together on a large problem set drawing from their academic specialty or major. “Modest Challenge,”
as its moniker implies, revolves around a simpler scaled down problem but still requires cadets to incorporate their
interdisciplinary knowledge. During the 2013 academic year, the “Modest Challenge” presented to second year
cadets asked them to “recommend a [alternative] method of power production for Sante Fe, New Mexico” (Christian
et al., 2014). In their alternative energy proposal, the cadets were expected to draw upon knowledge from several of
their required course including statistics, economics, politics, physics, philosophy and geography to support their
recommendation for either solar or wind power generation. Each discipline provided a guiding question to assist in
the constructing a multifaceted case for whatever energy source the cadet proposed.
Figure 4. Interdisciplinary considerations for “Modest Challenge - 2013” (Christian et al. 2014)
5
The broadness in discipline types incorporated in the “Modest Challenge” with its essential equal distribution of
STEM and humanities courses imprint on the cadets large picture thinking. This multi-dimensional methodology
reinforces the academy’s curriculum twofold: 1) highlighting the real world relevance of core courses and 2)
exposing the Army’s future junior officership to a holistic approach to problem solving.
Despite the somewhat canned nature of “Modest Challenge – 2013,” West Point instructors continue to
utilize the interdisciplinary model in academic year 2014-15. The current iteration of the challenge centers again
around energy production but poses a more complex problem set for the cadets that involves the political,
economical, environmental and ethical considerations. “Modest Challenge – 2014” charges the cadets to provide a
energy strategy to the Governor of Georgia focused on setting the state “on a course to meeting the EPA guidelines
while ensuring [sic] state businesses and residents have reliable access to plentiful energy at a reasonable cost”
(Wynat, 2014). Similar to the previous year’s project, this challenge expects the student to tap into STEM and
social science course fundamentals to create an acceptable energy strategy. However, the current scenario is
complicated by the Governor’s directive that the proposal should include plans for a nuclear power site and a coal
powered electric station. Moreover, the Governor directs that said plans be set in motion prior to a restrictive EPA
policy taking effect. Although the main proponent for the academy’s “Modest Challenge” is Physics, the grading
rubric takes into consideration other contributing disciplines and requires the cadet findings to address “political,
economic, environmental and social impacts of the energy options” they propose. (Wynat, 2014) Cadets are
encouraged to consult with previous instructors across the departments and seek assistance in leveraging their
interdisciplinary knowledge in the challenge scenario. “Modest Challenge” serves as a reminder that these studentcadets will eventually transition into military professionals charged to “anticipate and respond effectively to the
uncertainties of the changing technological, social, political, and economic world” – Core Interdisciplinary Team,
United States Military Academy.
“Grand Challenges” – Progression in Learning
The interdisciplinary approach taps into the progression of learning styles seeking to move beyond simply
understanding discrete topics to a synthesis of concepts and processes. Similar to expectations of military “Spartan”
growth from first year Plebes to fourth year Firsties, West Point also presumes intellectual “Athenian” maturation in
its cadets. (Betros, 2012) Accordingly, West Point’s Dean and Academic Board has painstakingly constructed the
curriculum to evolve first year students from being primarily Stage 1 Learners of Low Self-Direction to Stage 4
Learners of High Self-Direction. (Grow, 1996) These stages of learners are reflective of William Perry’s theory of
intellectual development wherein students progress from dualistic beliefs to learning processes that engage
multiplicity and relativism. Reflective of the treatment of the lower rank and file in military hierarchy, Stage 1
Learners, or Plebes/Yearlings are given “explicit directions of what to do, how to do it, and when” (Grow,1996).
This learning methodology is reflected in the curriculum and expectations of the academy’s first and second year
core courses. Plebes and Yearlings are expected to demonstrate their basic understanding of mathematics and
sciences as presented to them by the departments in the lower level courses. These courses tend to be instructorcentric despite the reliance on the dreaded “Thayer Method” where cadets sit stoically while in essence being forced
to learn. The dependant learning style is pervasive in core curriculum courses where the students are intent on
simply “mastering a settled subject or transmitting a fixed tradition” or as Perry would have it, cadets are firmly
affixed in Dualism where “knowledge is received, not questioned” and there is an unequivocal right answer. (Grow,
1996, p. 168; McKeachie, 2002, p. 296.) As they mature throughout their West Point experience, classroom
expectations of the cadets increase and they are expected to transition from Stage 1 Learners to Stage 2 (Moderate
Self-Direction) and Stage 3 (Intermediate Self-Direction) Learners. In these latter stages, students are more
confident and responsive to motivational techniques and they develop and adopt different strategies in their studies.
This encouragement in learning development surfaces during in-class incorporation of interdisciplinary
thought, during “Modest Challenges” practical exercises and is again reinforced in “Grand Challenges.” Even in the
lower level core curriculum courses, instructors prompt cadets to step outside of Stage 1 Learner roles and engage
deeper in the intellectual process. Again, this serves two purposes: 1) it helps alleviate the forced and admittedly
tedious doldrums of the required courses and 2) evolves the cadets into critical and adaptive thinkers which should
translate in the military leadership development. The “Modest Challenge” asks cadets to recall and apply singular
topics from previous courses and mesh them together to create a solution for a somewhat simplistic problem set.
These practical exercises also serve to advance the cadets in Perry’s intellectual development scheme from dualistic
thinking to that of multiplicity and relativism—where solutions must be created and context is considered.
(McKeachie, 2002) The cadets recall economic principles, philosophical tenets, scientific and mathematical rules,
and political theory to solve a real world concern. However, this exercise scratches only a thin surface of the self
6
directed learning processes sought by the academy. Ultimately, the creators of “Challenge” practical exercises want
to forge Stage 4 Leaner skills within the cadets—students who “exercise skills in time management, project
management, goal setting, self evaluation, peer critique, information gathering, and the use of educational resources”
(Grow, 1996, 148). The “Grand Challenge” builds upon the cadets’ learning progression and ability to synthesize
knowledge as it requires cadets to look deeper into their intellectual reservoirs and bridge disciplines to approach
increasingly complex problem sets.
More complex challenge exercises are assigned to cadets as they mature militarily and intellectually. In the
end these “Grand Challenges” address a wide span of topics and issues ranging from alternative energy sources and
resource management to more militarily applicable projects like non-lethal weaponry and energy efficient housing
units. Recent “Grand Challenge” projects include cadets proposing water cooling systems, power patches, 40mm
grenade non-lethal obscurant, and protective living quarter designs. In all of these projects, the cadets implement
interdisciplinary approaches and subject matter mastery in their designs and proposals. Again, the Perry
development model is evidenced in “Grand Challenges” as the cadets engage in multiplicity and relativism as they
formulate and test solutions to presented problems. For example, one group tackled combat load constraints on
Soldiers due to battery transport. In this case the problem was “Soldier load caused by device power requirements
with batteries.” The Challenge itself inquired how to “Decrease Soldier load with multi-functional batteries
combining structural and energy storage mass.” The cadet’s design proposal and experiment approached the
Challenge from multiple perspectives, drawing from their knowledge in science, mathematics, engineering and
military tradecraft. Yet another Challenge project had cadets examining how Soldiers could counter enemy
unmanned aerial surveillance systems (UAS) by adapting current weaponry capabilities. More specifically, the
cadets proposed a new 40mm munition tailored to neutralize UAS reconnaissance capabilities. Again, in this
Challenge, cadets utilized their intellectual arsenal to solve a real world problem taking into account human,
technological and logistical constraints.
Figure 5. “Grand Challenge” Examples – Projects Day 2013: Promoting Academic Excellence, USMA
Looking Beyond West Point: Methodologies and Issues in the Interdisciplinary Approach
The previous sections of this article have touted the development and successes of interdisciplinary
approaches at West Point both in single course instruction and in multi-disciplinary projects. However, we would
be remiss to not point out the unique academic environment at the United States Military Academy. West Point
faculty retains a certain advantage over their counterparts at most civilian universities and colleges in that their
students, the cadets, are essentially a captive audience. Despite the many activities cadets are laden with on a daily
basis, they remain extremely accessible for face-to-face interactions, out-of-classroom instruction, and accountable
through their chain of command. On the flip side, cadets have unusually unfettered access to their instructors,
especially the military faculty members, which bolsters the quality and quantity of student-teacher interaction.
Also, West Point faculty members have the luxury of knowing that for the most part the cadets’ ultimate objective
from their very first year is to commission as military officers—a more solidly entrenched career goal than the cadet
peers at civilian institutions. Thus, one of the best ways to engrain lessons and reify learning objectives is to put
things into military or leadership contexts. This can be accomplished through a little ingenuity and by drawing
upon the instructors’ career experiences. More importantly, the academy’s rigid and mostly uniform curriculum
allows instructors oversight of the fundamentals being taught across the various departments which in turns allows
7
them to more easily incorporate the interdisciplinary approach. Therefore, the previous classroom vignettes and
“Challenge” examples may appear more optimistically applied at West Point than what is feasible at most civilian
institutions.
That the mountain is difficult to climb should not deter the attempt, however. We believe that universities
of all size and scope of instruction would benefit from some of the integrative work that we discussed in this paper.
Specifically, the use of “Grand Challenges” and “Modest Challenges”, while labor intensive for the faculty, do an
excellent job demonstrate the importance of a student’s integrative experience. The main roadblock for the
institution of truly interdisciplinary studies remains to be the effort required to ensure all of the different academic
departments are on the same page. The challenges at West Point were issued by the Physics department (to the
second year cadets) and the Chemistry department (to the first year cadets). The department that issued the
challenge was responsible to grade the work turned in by the cadets but the various departments that were
considered stakeholders in the challenge were tasked to assign liaisons. For example, as members of the Geography
faculty, we would attend various meetings chaired by the department that was running the challenge and it was our
job to ensure that all of the Geography instructors were made aware of the progress of the different events.
One of the points of friction during the initial run of the challenges was that individual instructors did not
find it often very important to engage in discussions about topics they didn’t receive formal education on. The
question that was most often asked during the challenges was one of how to go about grading the projects. The
Chemistry and Physics department worked through these issues by moving forward with two basic principles. The
first was that the department that was in charge of a specific topic (i.e. Geography would handle geographically
related questions) would help write the grading rubric. Also, each department would send their liaison to
synchronization meetings to explain what they felt was the most important to the other instructors that would do the
physical grading of the assignment. It was also incumbent upon the various department liaisons to return to the
faculty that was teaching the core classes (EV203 in our case) and update them as to what cadets might be coming to
ask about in relation to the “Modest Challenge”. The implementation of this challenge system saw an increase in the
amount of cooperation amongst the different academic departments and also improved the overall collegiality
amongst the teachers as a whole.
If the task of creating these challenges seem too large of a stretch, then it is still possible for the different
academic departments to come together and agree to reinforce each other’s objectives. At West Point, each of the
core classes is chaired by an individual instructor dubbed as the Course Director. These Course Directors have the
responsibility to ensure that the information given to the cadets be presented in a manner that is consistent with the
Dean’s desire to work in an interdisciplinary fashion. It is often much more simple than it seems for two different
Course Director’s to arrange a meeting and discuss the various ways the cadets’ education could be reinforced by
examples from other disciplines. These short bursts of chemistry, mathematics, and physics into a class about Earth
Science may seem on the surface as cursory but for many students, it is a way of showing the interconnectedness of
all of their work.
Conclusion:
An Earth Science course is an excellent way for an undergraduate student to see the principles they learn
from across a wide spectrum of academics. What makes the lessons so salient, and hence the integrative experience
complete, is the knowledge that students see the different processes everyday in their weather, climate, and
vegetation. The use of Physical Geography as a means to act as a bridge amongst different disciplines can be
accomplished by the methods covered in this paper. A university that might have little experience with the
instruction of an Earth Sciences course might want to start small and create a Physical Geography course that
includes the same material taught to the students when they take Physics, Chemistry, Mathematics, Engineering, or
American Politics classes.
The term interdisciplinary studies often briefs very well during a discussion about pedagogy but can be
difficult to figure out the logistics of such an undertaking. An integrated Earth Sciences class is an effective and
relatively low cost way to show the students of a university that the material they learn in all of their classes can
come together for the understanding of larger problems. West Point’s usage of “Grand” and “Modest” challenges
can be applied with some minor adjustments to schools of any size or scope of instruction.
8
REFERENCES
Baerwald, Thomas J. 2010. Prospects for Geography as an Interdisciplinary Discipline. Annals of the Association
of American Geographers. 100(3): 493-501.
Betros, Lance. 2012. Carved from Granite: West Point Since 1902. Texas A&M University Press.
Blanco, Lyzette and Rosen, Larry. 2014. Multitasking Across Generations.
http://www.csudh.edu/psych/Multitasking_Across_Generations_Blanco_and_Rosen.pdf
(last accessed December 26, 2014).
Carrier, Mark L. et al. 2008. Multitasking across generations: Multitasking choices and difficulty ratings in three
generations of Americans. Computers in Human Behavior. (25): 483-489.
Gober, Patricia. 2000. “In Search of Synthesis.” Annals of the Association of American Geographers. 90(1): 1-11.
Grow, Gerald. 1996. Teaching Learners to be Self-Directed. Gerald Grow’s Website.
http://www.longleaf.net/ggrow/SSDL/SSDLIndex.html (last accessed December 26, 2014).
McKeachie, Wilbert. 2002. McKeachie’s Teaching Tips: Strategies, Research, and Theory for College and
University Teachers. Boston: Cengage Learning.
Oblinger, Diana E. 2005. Educating the Net Generation. Washington DC: Educause.
Ryan, Diane. 2014. “Interdisciplinary Learning Assessment, Accreditation, and SENCER Courses: How can they
all fit together?” SENCER Summer Institute, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC. August 1, 2014.
Wyant, Timothy. 2014. “Modest Challenge Prompt: Plant Scherer.” Physic 201, United States Military Academy,
NY, October 30, 2014.
Yang, Shu N. 2013. The development of interdisciplinary thinking in the new postmodern education. Forum on
Public Policy. (1): 1-17.
9