October 23, 2009, 11:00 AM ET

Of Polymaths and Kudzu Vines

In my last post, I referenced "Polymath Syndrome," the mindset that afflicts some faculty members who believe that they can teach pretty much any subject. I thought I would expand that term, though, to entire departments.

Most institutions have a few departments that believe their research and interests are of a high level that they may teach courses in a wide variety of other disciplines besides merely their own. I heard one dean call them "kudzu" departments, because they constantly find ways to invade the curricula of other disciplines and in some cases strangle the teaching loads of those other departments. (Kudzu, for those who don't know, is a prolific vine in the American South that overtakes everything in its path, choking out all other plants). Such incursions can have lasting effects on campus morale and cooperation.

Which disciplines do you think are the worst about producing kudzu departments?

Comments

1. 11142568 - October 23, 2009 at 03:49 pm

This concept is a bit bizarre. At the undergraduate level, a teacher who has come from a solid liberal arts education (my undergraduate education was informed by the ratio studiorum of the Renaissance Jesuits - my AB was 1960 - and my graduate work in philosophy) should be able to teach a solid course in expository writing and introductory interdisciplinary courses that draw on a number of the humane disciplines. Perhaps Aristotle is the great model of a true professor who lecture on topics in biology, psychology, logic, literary criticism, etc. While obviously, these disciplines have come long distances from his time, there is still much that is of value in his "lectures". I think this line of thinking about "kudzu" does not come from the grand tradition of literae humaniores.

2. schultzjc - October 23, 2009 at 05:47 pm

Kudzu brings down silos. Hooray for Kudzu!

3. tangocatz - October 25, 2009 at 08:24 am

One discipline "invading" another? Can you imagine trying to win an IGERT on his campus?

4. sclaroff - October 26, 2009 at 07:55 am

Kudzu can bring down silos -- but it can also fortify silos.

To bring down silos, perhaps team teaching courses across disciplinary boundaries would be better.

5. jffoster - October 27, 2009 at 07:43 am

Romance Languages tend to be a hyperkudzu department. They seem to think they are authorities on anything that happens in a country or region as long as the people, or some people, there speak a Romance Language. Well, a Western Romance language. Most of them don't know anything about Rumanian. (Yes, it' RUmanian, nor "ROmanian".) They try to do social sciences light and do all sorts of boutique course in "Culture of ___" -- in English yet.

English departments occasionally grow kudzu too.

6. jruiz - October 27, 2009 at 05:02 pm

"English departments occasionally grow kudzu too."

Really? In another life my office was next to a classroom, where I heard an English prof tell his students "The Italians invented the sonnet, but the English perfected it."

7. oscarhazel - October 28, 2009 at 09:50 am

As a candidate from an "interdisciplinary" doctoral program, we are consistently told that this is the shape of things to come in the academy. I suspect this proclamation is premature, and have been told that the economic crisis seems to have caused a retrenchment towards disciplinarity. This discussion indicates a divided opinion. I would like to have a better understanding of the pros and cons.

8. jffoster - October 28, 2009 at 10:32 am

I think your misgivings, Oscarhazel (7), are warranted. "Interdisciplinary" programs (as distinct from true, joint, multidisciplinary programs) tend to be traps for the bright and curious but unwary, and / or havens for the intellectually undisciplined.

9. witten426 - November 03, 2009 at 06:39 pm

love the idea but keeo it on the individual level. many of my senior male colleagues in a history department
think they could teach my clsases and some indeed have taught my subject with a lot of dubious help from the history chanel. one of my more naive students on being informed to his surprise,that we have been able to read etruscan since 1975. actually asked me which one of us he should believe