Professional Documents
Culture Documents
4531408
4531408
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://about.jstor.org/terms
Springer is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Policy
Sciences
This content downloaded from 129.199.59.249 on Sun, 22 Jul 2018 13:04:50 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
Policy Sciences 403
Inter- an
Universit
to Education and Innovation
ERICH JANTSCH*
ABSTRACT
In response to various pressures for change arising from the present situation, the unive
have to adopt a new purpose which may be recognized as a means of increasing the capa
society for continuous self-renewal. With this new purpose in mind, the structure of the u
will be determined by the concept of an integral education/innovation system for which
principal levels are considered: empirical, pragmatic, normative and purposive levels. Fr
multi-, pluri-, and crossdisciplinary approaches, all pertaining to one systems level only
university is expected to develop increasingly interdisciplinary approaches, linking two s
levels and coordinating the activities at the lower level from the higher level through co
axiomatics. Ultimately, the entire education/innovation system may become coordinate
multilevel multigoal hierarchical system through a transdisciplinary approach, implying
axiomatics and mutual enhancement of disciplinary epistemology. Current university ap
to develop interdisciplinary links between the pragmatic and normative systems levels a
discussed. Finally, a transdisciplinary structure for the university is briefly outlined; its
elements are three types of organizational units-systems design laboratories, function-o
departments, and discipline-oriented departments-which focus on the interdisciplinary
coordination between the three pairs of levels in the education/innovation system, i.e., o
method and organization rather than on accumulated knowledge. An important role for
sciences is seen in the linkage between the top pair of systems levels.
* Dr. Erich Jantsch is currently Richard Merton Professor at the Technical Universit
Germany. While developing some of the concepts reported in this paper, he held a visiti
ment as Research Associate at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
This content downloaded from 129.199.59.249 on Sun, 22 Jul 2018 13:04:50 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
404 Erich Jantsch
We are living in a t
vastly differing role
entering the discu
transition with resp
for science and edu
present situation-th
postindustrial societ
for the university w
The conventional vi
four theories of scie
any feedback from
of science as an auto
regulating communi
the Polanyi school
interfered with by s
could not interfere w
in the academic com
erally an autonomo
H. G. Johnson and
society, and may b
analogy between scie
dominated through
ment, assumes that
carried out in an or
ture of knowledge.
preserves, like the f
remains unaffected
Science as viewed by
what ought to be.
part of the social o
Only the fourth th
social goals, by focu
establishes a direct r
science and society a
ships between goals
them.
The first three view
by partisans of a m
than in America a
1 Harvey Brooks, "Can
Economic Cooperation
2 See also the correspo
this article.
3 C. West Churchman
4 L. Artsimovich, in a
This content downloaded from 129.199.59.249 on Sun, 22 Jul 2018 13:04:50 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
Inter- and Transdisciplinary University 405
This content downloaded from 129.199.59.249 on Sun, 22 Jul 2018 13:04:50 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
406 Erich Jantsch
We are living in a world of change, voluntary change as well as change brought about
by mounting pressures beyond our control. Gradually, we are learning to distinguish
between them. We engineer change voluntarily by pursuing growth targets along lines
of policy and action which tend to rigidify and thereby preserve the structures inheren
in our social systems and their institutions. We do not, in general, really try to chang
the systems themselves. However, the very nature of our conservative, linear action for
change puts increasing pressure for structural change on the systems, and in particular,
on institutional patterns.
We are baffled by the sudden appearance of such pressures for change in the edu-
cational system by student unrest and by the notion that the current type of education
may no longer be relevant. We are confused by the degrading side effects of technology
on the systems of human living, in the cities as well as within the natural environment.
And we are ridden with doubts about the effectiveness of decisionmaking processe
dominated by short-range and linear thinking and about the piecemeal and passive
way in which scientists and engineers respond to them. Through its three functions-
This content downloaded from 129.199.59.249 on Sun, 22 Jul 2018 13:04:50 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
Inter- and Transdisciplinary University 407
education, research, and service-the university is
pressures for change. To live with them, to absorb th
requires a new purpose and a new structure for the u
Looking at changes, and pressures for change, in all
of the university, we may, inter alia, discern the fol
-Education: From training for well-defined, single-t
duplicating existing skills) toward an education wh
and dynamically changing situations-in other word
renewal of human capabilities, with emphasis shiftin
what."
-Research: From discipline-oriented research over pluri- and interdisciplinary
research toward research on complex dynamic systems-or, from research on the
fundamental level and the perfection of specific technologies to the organization of
society and technology in a systems context.
-Service: From specialized, piecemeal research contributions and passive consulta-
tions to an active role in the planning for society, in particular, in the planning of
science and technology in the service of society.
A synopsis of the pressures for change, as recognized above for the individual
functions of the univeristy, and those for change in society at large, yields a picture of
powerful forces which act disruptively within the existing structures, but seem to
converge reasonably well in their ultimate meanings and implications. The new purpose
of the university may readily be found in this area of convergence of reason. It may be
expressed as the new purpose of the institution itself, not of its members.
In most general terms, the purpose of the university may be seen in the decisive role
it plays in enhancing society's capability for continuous self-renewal. It may be broken
down further in line with the principal characteristics of a society having this capability,
as spelled out by John Gardner12:
-Enhancing the pluralism of society, by bringing the creative energies of the scientific
and technological community as well as of the young people, the students, fully into
play-not for problem-solving, but for contributing to society's self-renewal;
-Improving internal communication among society's constituents by translating into each
other the mutual implications of science and technology on the one side, and social
objectives on the other, and by pointing out the long-range outcomes of alternative
courses of action in the context of broadly conceived social systems;
-Providing positive leadership by working out measures of common objectives, setting
priorities, and keeping hope alive, as well as by promoting experiments in society
through ideas and plans, and, above all, by educating leaders for society.
The new purpose implies that the university has to become a political institution in
the broadest sense, interacting with government (at all jurisdictional levels) and in-
dustry in the planning and design of society's systems, and in particular in controlling
the outcomes of the introduction of technology into these systems. The university
must engage itself in this task as an institution, not through the individual members of
its community.
12 John W. Gardner, Self-Renewal: The Individual and the Innovative Society (New York: Harper &
Row, 1965); and Godkin Lectures (Harvard University, March 1969).
This content downloaded from 129.199.59.249 on Sun, 22 Jul 2018 13:04:50 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
408 Erich Jantsch
3. The Education
If education is accep
becomes an importa
further, we may s
education and inno
and action. Such an
ample for the syste
is a relationship am
mation processing
Scientific, or mor
system in a particul
and innovation. Th
between them no m
considered appropr
of a science/educat
human action mod
way of doing or "a
which differs radic
lined in Section 1. F
multilevel hierarchi
ment of the system
starts from the as
shaping and controll
which, by definitio
13 Mihajlo D. Mesarov
Thought," 30 Novemb
This content downloaded from 129.199.59.249 on Sun, 22 Jul 2018 13:04:50 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
Purposive -\ -- An
Level /Meaning \
Values X n·
This content downloaded from 129.199.59.249 on Sun, 22 Jul 2018 13:04:50 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
410 Erich Jantsch
notion of an integ
"subjective" view in
The traditional dis
disciplines has been
possible to arrive at
observation into a
principle which beco
system. It is no won
for or even an integ
less interdisciplina
interdisciplinarity a
r , Disciplinarity:
Specialization in isolation
EI I I I Multidisciplinarity:
no cooperation
/A
.~/, rK~ ^ education/in ovation system
/i1~ - \ Transdisciplinarity: multilevel
,\^ \u \ ~ coordination of entire
Fig. 2. Steps toward increasing co peration and co rdination in the education/in ovation system.
This content downloaded from 129.199.59.249 on Sun, 22 Jul 2018 13:04:50 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
Inter- and Transdisciplinary University 411
Above all, interdisciplinarity has to be understood
concept. We must ask: Interdisciplinarity to what end
science toward an end, in other words the linking of
education/innovation system, as sketched in Fig. 1.
and coordination among disciplines, as they are cur
educational needs,14 may now be defined in the follow
-Multidisciplinarity: A variety of disciplines, offered
making explicit possible relationships between them.
-Pluridisciplinarity: The juxtaposition of various
hierarchical level (i.e., empirical or pragmatic), grou
the relationships between them.
-Crossdisciplinarity: The axiomatics of one disci
disciplines at the same hierarchical level, thereby crea
disciplines toward a disciplinary axiomatics.
-Interdisciplinarity: A common axiomatics for a
defined at the next higher hierarchical level, thereby
more specifically, we may distinguish between teleolo
between the empirical and pragmatic levels and subleve
signifying the important step from the pragmatic to
question of "good" and "bad" is raised), and purposi
from the normative to the purposive level.
-Transdisciplinarity: The coordination of all discip
education/innovation system on the basis of a gen
from the purposive level) and an emerging epistemolo
It should be noted here that the four hierarchica
further subdivided into a fine structure of hierarchic
are such levels between basic technologies and com
notion of interdisciplinarity may also be applied t
The essential is that a new common axiomatics can
level.
With the above notions of inter- and transdisciplinarity, the education/innovation
system according to Fig. 1 assumes a specific meaning in system-theoretical terms.
Without these notions, it might at first glance appear as a stratified systeml5 where the
different strata signify levels of abstraction. Each stratum would then have its own set
of terms, concepts, and principles. Crossing the strata in the downward direction
would give increasing detailed explanation, while crossing them in the upward direc-
tion would give increasing significance. Empirical science, in many instances, has been
developed in such a stratified way; the example of the biological sciences with their
14 Only the notion of crossdisciplinarity has been added here. The basic evolutionary ladder is
usually well recognized, but the system building character of inter- and transdisciplinarity is not. As
a result, the boundaries between pluri- and interdisciplinarity often become blurred in current discus-
sions.
15 For the different concepts of hierarchical systems, see M. D. Mesarovic and D. Macko, "Founda-
tions for a Scientific Theory of Hierarchical Systems," in L. Whyte et al., eds., Hierarchical Structure
(New York: American Elsevier, 1969).
This content downloaded from 129.199.59.249 on Sun, 22 Jul 2018 13:04:50 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
412 Erich Jantsch
This content downloaded from 129.199.59.249 on Sun, 22 Jul 2018 13:04:50 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
Inter- and Transdisciplinary University 413
autonomous science system would not lead to a mult
level is "alive" with its own purposes, but to a rigid
ample, of the four levels of knowledge proposed
(the sets of objects of distinct sciences); the "conceptu
knowledge, or methodology); the "internal epistem
basic principles and viewpoints); and the "derived
sciences are related to each other, where a generalize
and where approaches can be unified on the basis of
and transdisciplinarity may be understood here n
steps on a rigid ladder of levels, more specifically as s
strata of knowledge.21 This, however, corresponds t
also the social sciences, which is unacceptable. In any
that the design and substance of the education/innova
the purpose attached to it. That is the reason wh
concepts at all systems levels has to start with a disc
Other attempts seek to elaborate on Karl Mann
science, his "Wissenssoziologie," and to conceive scien
construct of reality."22 But, generally, they take a p
which fails to perceive a dynamic and purposive scie
these attempts try to preserve science as a "value-fr
a critical sociology (e.g., Herbert Marcuse) who do
innovation and the role of science as instance of hum
full human potential of purposive design of the
science/innovation system. Moreover, they tend t
approach in a crossdisciplinary way instead of develo
interdisciplinary organization of technology and the
From a systems point of view, the successive steps
between disciplines in the system sketched in Fig. 1
tional principles for hierarchical systems of the foll
-Multidisciplinarity: One-level multigoal; no coo
-Pluridisciplinarity: One-level multigoal; coopera
-Crossdisciplinarity: One-level one-goal; rigid pol
ciplinary goal.
-Interdisciplinarity: Two-level multigoal; coordin
-Transdisciplinarity: Multilevel multigoal; coordin
common goal.
Multi- and pluridisciplinarity involve only the purp
of rigid (disciplinary) "modules." Crossdiscipli
This content downloaded from 129.199.59.249 on Sun, 22 Jul 2018 13:04:50 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
414 Erich Jantsch
approach to reinte
specific (discipli
at the same level.
system becomes "
faces change con
goals. Inter- and t
to education and innovation.
The education/innovation system, as sketched in Fig. 1, is built from the bottom
level upwards. This is inevitable since, in a multilevel multigoal system the upper
organizational levels cannot achieve anything without the activities at the lower
levels, just as a conductor cannot achieve anything without an orchestra. On the
other hand, this means that two major obstacles on the way to inter- and trans-
disciplinarity have to be overcome: one is the rigidity of disciplines and disciplinary
concepts and axiomatics developed at the lower levels; the other one is the application
of lower-level concepts and axiomatics to higher levels. Both obstacles, indeed, prove
very severe in the development of a meaningful social science and in current approaches
toward an interdisciplinary social technology, as will be briefly discussed below.
The empirical level in Fig. 1, with logic as its "organizing language," may be sub-
divided into three bodies of science which all developed on the basis of empirical
observation and logical interpretation: (a) physical sciences, with the traditional
disciplines; (b) life sciences, which occupy a special position and overlap both empirical
and pragmatic levels, also extend from basic knowledge up to complex biological
systems and thus extend over both organizational levels; and (c) psycho-sciences,
which include psychology and the behavioral sciences as well as aspects of human
perception and creative expression, such as the arts and religions. These sciences aim
at describing the world as it is and at being "objective," a concept which is at least
doubtful in the domain of the psycho-sciences. Interdisciplinary types of teleological
coordination have become fruitful particularly between hierarchical levels within the
physical sciences as well as between physical and life sciences (e.g., biochemistry on the
one hand, molecular biology on the other).
The pragmatic level with cybernetics as common "organizing language," represents
a higher level or organization and may be subdivided into: (a) physical technology,
embracing many hierarchical sublevels from basic technology over simple products to
complex technological systems together with their functional interactions with societal
systems; (b) the more systemic part of the life sciences, and natural ecology, which has
been successfully used to develop agriculture; and (c) social ecology, or simply
culture, based on psychosocial sciences, comprising, inter alia, history, sociology,
linguistics, and communication in general, communicative aspects of the arts, micro-
economics, political science (in its narrow pragmatic meaning), cultural aspects of
anthropology, and the traditional ethics of the individual. Or, rather, there ought to be
such a science of social ecology, applicable in a pragmatic way.
One of the two obstacles mentioned above prevented so far the full establishment,
in an interdisciplinary way, of the pragmatic level. The "scientific method," and mainly
its basic empiricism, were transferred to the pragmatic level. Physical technology, in
This content downloaded from 129.199.59.249 on Sun, 22 Jul 2018 13:04:50 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
Inter- and Transdisciplinary University 415
many instances, first developed on the basis of em
interpretation, e.g., the steam engine, the steam turbin
But all these technologies quickly became interdisci
physical sciences when the need for manipulability, an
To what extent the technology-oriented axiomatics "tr
science is demonstrated by chemical engineering or re
plex interactions of microphenomena are cast into han
which suit the needs cf specific pragmatic uses of tec
Such a swift adaptation did not take place in the area
social sciences. Here is the profound reason for the
behind of the social sciences. As Churchman23 rem
ridiculous manifestations of the disciplines of modern
the so-called social sciences," which pursue the same
empiricism as the physical science disciplines. "Inste
itself into special disciplines, it should recognize that
all unless it becomes a natural part of the activities
science ought to express the potentials of human freedo
Instead of yielding to becoming pragmatic or goal-
science, particularly in the United States, is becom
concepts of the behavioral sciences. Neither the o
phenomenological schools of social science tell us ho
tend to discourage us from developing any pragm
dependent, social science by making us believe that
rich and theory-poor. The vigorous development of a
our understanding of the interrelationships betwee
but does not yet provide the building blocks for a nor
The normative level, with planning as its "organiz
systems design, bringing into focus social systems or
its core Churchman's24 "ethics of whole systems" a
social systems technology such as law, macroeconomics
Typically, it focuses on large social and man/enviro
variety of "joint systems" of society and technology.25
have yet found valid frameworks-ekistics may be fart
and the current concepts of law and macroeconomics h
challenge posed to them in the technological era. It
conceptualization of man's active role in shaping h
unfolds.
The purposive level, finally, brings values and val
interactive fields such as philosophy, arts, and religion
plinary way some of the domains at the normative
This content downloaded from 129.199.59.249 on Sun, 22 Jul 2018 13:04:50 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
416 Erich Jantsch
4. Current App
University
How far has the university gone in penetrating the education/innovation system?
Clearly not very far yet. In particular, the education function of the university was not
capable of adjusting to the requirements of interdisciplinary organization beyond the
level of elementary technology. To a large extent, education in technology is still
categorized by disciplines and departments called "mechanical engineering," "elec-
trical engineering," "chemistry," etc. This has led to two grave consequences: One is a
schism between the education and research functions of the university at levels of
higher interdisciplinary-organization, which is already becoming a problem at the level
of complex technical systems; university research and development in these areas is
increasingly set up and carried out outside the educational structures. The other
consequence is a growing mismatch between engineering education and the require-
ments of industry which is reorganizing itself in terms of technological or even
sociotechnological systems tasks. In the contemporary Institute of Technology
26 Hasan Ozbekhan, "On Some of the Fundamental Problems in Planning" Technological Fore-
casting 1 (March 1970).
This content downloaded from 129.199.59.249 on Sun, 22 Jul 2018 13:04:50 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
Inter- and Transdisciplinary University 417
This content downloaded from 129.199.59.249 on Sun, 22 Jul 2018 13:04:50 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
418 Erich Jantsch
30 Victor C. Ferkiss
London: Heineman,
31 This view is obvio
of policy and policy
1970): Yehezkel Dror
Planning to Policy S
32 For a recent list,
nological Forecastin
33 J. Christopher Jo
1970).
This content downloaded from 129.199.59.249 on Sun, 22 Jul 2018 13:04:50 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
Inter- and Transdisciplinary University 419
the normative level, through which "operational" (obv
ary) coordination of science, technology, and the a
also not be overlooked that certain approaches thro
tute but a formalization of basic modes of human thin
level and purpose; calling them a "common languag
thinking as the organizing principle of the education/
The first steps toward a normative interdisciplinary
a link between the pragmatic and normative levels
themes of society or need areas are recognized and
organization of the educational and research disci
technical and the psychosocial sides of the educat
integrated in this approach. It is quite obvious that on
oped structures on both sides can take this approa
versities should deal with technology, or Institutes of
science-a discussion which, in Europe, is still dominate
polarization between scientific-technical and human
cultures")-finds its resolution in the normative system
it still presents a hard-to-overcome obstacle on the un
arity reaching up to the normative level.
Some university structures, corresponding to this ap
function. Significant large-scale examples are:
-The College of Agricultural and Environmental S
the University of California, organized in five broad ar
a systems approach to environmental problems
-The Theme Colleges of Environmental Sciences,
Sciences, and Creative Communication at the Green Ba
Wisconsin, currently geared to undergraduate educatio
preparation
-The Program in Environmental Science and Engineering at the School of Engin-
eering and Applied Sciences of Columbia University
-The planned graduate College on the Human Environment at the Madison campus
of the University of Wisconsin
-A University of Planning (or Environmental Design) at Solothurn (Switzerland),
currently in a preparatory stage
Other structures focus mainly on research and frequently assume the form of inter-
disciplinary centers in which faculty members and graduate students, pursuing their
"formal" careers in traditional departments, may find a "second home." Examples
are various urban centers, the Harvard Program on Technology and Science, the
Center for Research on Utilization of Scientific Knowledge at the University of
Michigan at Ann Arbor, the Center for the Study of Science in Human Affairs at
Columbia University, the Center for Integrative Studies at the State University of New
York at Binghamton, and the Program of Policy Studies in Science and Technology
at George Washington University. A special research domain (Sonderforschungsbereich)
"Planning and Organization of Sociotechnological Systems" has been proposed in the
This content downloaded from 129.199.59.249 on Sun, 22 Jul 2018 13:04:50 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
420 Erich Jantsch
Federal Republic o
for a "focal" appr
weakness of many
failure to attempt
degree necessary
research. To some
the social side may
Of the greatest sig
arity are experim
researchlservice a
engage in "technol
context), as has be
some extent, Schoo
or Environmental D
and have developed
ant areas of social t
national mixture of
truly interdiscipli
More broadly orien
-Specific sociotech
Studies in Systems
logy; Project Metr
System Concept (a
impact by stimulat
latter, for example
transportation syst
of a large decentr
-The Program on
-The Program in
Pittsburgh'
-The graduate Pr
Massachusetts Insti
-The planned Cen
Center, and an Ene
Hartford Graduate
These experimenta
view to becoming t
elements of the fun
design laboratories,
On the other hand
university" to be
mittee and subseq
ation in the momen
became involved. T
This content downloaded from 129.199.59.249 on Sun, 22 Jul 2018 13:04:50 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
Inter- and Transdisciplinary University 421
(IIMT) at Milan (Italy) has now been approved by
basis of providing a framework for six-week trai
public managers.
How do policy sciences fit into this scheme ? If a vie
provide a theoretical and methodological framewo
as the searching for norms and defining of those va
with a dynamically evolving problematic situation
institutional change,35 then policy sciences constitut
the normative and the purposive levels. This lin
link between values and normative planning, between
social systems design. Such an interdisciplinary li
shaping a new anthropology dealing with the conditi
industrial and postindustrial societies, a new view of
well as in planning, a new understanding of element
social policies, from C. G. Jung's archetypal imag
anticipations of the future. It would furnish meanin
systems design.
Needless to say, such an interdisciplinary link at th
an expression in current university experiments. Th
takes place one step down, between the pragmati
number of courses and seminars on values and va
modest beginning. To establish policy sciences in t
tious as it may appear today, is an inevitable step
university. But first, the general concept of policy s
in these terms, and the current confusion with lo
politics ended.
This content downloaded from 129.199.59.249 on Sun, 22 Jul 2018 13:04:50 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
422 Erich Jantsch
choice of specialize
structures beyond
side of the system
hardly been consid
perhaps because a c
section outlines a
author has tried
Institute of Techno
The basic structure
essentially on the f
incorporate their ap
-Systems design l
oratories), bringing
ing and managemen
tasks will not be sh
as "Ecological Syst
Environments," "I
munication System
tional Systems," an
designing and engi
long-range forecas
the simulation of c
and experimental s
for a through-flow
-Function-oriented
technology perform
technologies whic
functions are "Ho
mission," "Autom
communication,"
etc. These functio
than the sociotech
categories which e
these categories im
ment lines, and ke
framework of thes
industry increasin
37 Erich Jantsch, In
Emerging Role of the
Technology, Cambridg
Ekistics, 28 (Novemb
38 Erich Jantsch, "In
in J. Bright, ed., Tec
Prentice-Hall, 1968);
nological Forecasting
This content downloaded from 129.199.59.249 on Sun, 22 Jul 2018 13:04:50 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
Education/Innovation System University Structure
Purposive Level /
S yr /s t e m Sys
Normative Level
Pragmatic Level
y^Z - --L··~~~~~~~~~ - - - - J1 j | -
-
, Empirical Level /I
Fig. 3. Transdisciplinary u
levels of the education/inn
This content downloaded from 129.199.59.249 on Sun, 22 Jul 2018 13:04:50 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
424 Erich Jantsch
from developing t
functions, these dep
side effects of sele
forecasting which
notation, and assessm
of societal systems.
-Discipline-oriente
different scope, com
ary potential (or "v
up in the basic scien
system and in the s
The three layers of
ationof the purposiv
of the education/inn
systems levels-in ot
rather than on the
Figure 3 shows sche
relate to the levels o
Unlike present univ
per se and (in the t
departments will e
already put before
"know-where-to," w
future. The discipli
scious approach to "k
tion of basic poten
"joint systems" of s
entirely new focus t
action between man and environment.
The feedback interaction between the three types of structural units in the trans-
disciplinary university is sketched in Table 1. It is evident that policy sciences in the
"full meaning" outlined in the preceding sections, will be an important aspect for the
work in the systems design laboratories.
We may then envisage a university in which some students go through discipline-
and function-oriented departments only, and others go through all three types of
structural units. As the latter proceed from undergraduate to graduate and doctoral
work they will shift the emphasis of their studies from discipline- and function-
oriented departments more and more to the systems design laboratories, at the same
time getting increasingly involved with purposeful work in technology and actual
sociotechnological systems design and engineering, which will become a full-time (and
paid) engagement during the doctoral work. Work phases and "absorptive" phases
may alternate, with the need for theoretical learning being enhanced and guided by
work. In essence, students will not go through these structural types in sequence, but
interact with them simultaneously during their studies.
This content downloaded from 129.199.59.249 on Sun, 22 Jul 2018 13:04:50 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
Inter- and Transdisciplinary University 425
Such a university will turn out people with a wid
from specialist scientists through mission- and functi
eers to full-scale sociotechnological systems engineers.
will also play an important role in the continuous
probably will come back to the university in much gre
TABLE 1
The higher-level activities in this scheme are always carried out through feedback interaction with the
lower-placed activities in the vertical columns. All activities are horizontally integrated over the university
functions of education, research, and service.
One may believe that the outlined three-level structure will give the education
function greatly increased flexibility in many respects-for specialized as well as
broad (but not superficial) education, for changing tracks, for participation in various
actual projects and in various qualities, for combining student and adult education, for
stimulating leadership and professionalism, for education geared to various types of
careers in the public and private sectors.
An important aspect concerns new dimensions in learning which may be opened up
by the change from receiving training to doing useful work. With the university struc-
ture outlined here, education will take on more and more the form of self-education,
This content downloaded from 129.199.59.249 on Sun, 22 Jul 2018 13:04:50 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
426 Erich Jantsch
This content downloaded from 129.199.59.249 on Sun, 22 Jul 2018 13:04:50 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
Inter- and Transdisciplinary University 427
disciplines.39 However, there does not seem to be any
even say an ecological, approach to science and tech
as indeed it has to be in the present situation.
It is obvious that the traditional concepts of "va
technology will become completely dissolved in the u
proceeds to inter- and transdisciplinarity. On the
psychosocial disciplines also, such as law and soci
disciplinary identity and concepts and become as
Through a transdisciplinary approach, the university
for future situations in which there may be less emph
of social systems design, and more on human and
people expect such a shift in emphasis to become s
century. A more short-range effect of the transdiscip
"faith" in science and technology and a reversal of
interest of students in the scientific/technical side o
The generalized axiomatics of the transdisciplina
shaping up in a variety of interdisciplinary experimen
calls the "science of humanity," the science of ma
transdisciplinary approach thus finding its central th
as the new "universitas," will be humanity-oriente
flexibility to abandon linear organizing principles, su
momentum of technology and its supporting science
For the proper study of man, as Carey41 sees it
shaping science goals and strategies with depth and r
examining the interaction of science with higher edu
cooperation, technological development, and econo
to examine the mix of national investment in scie
quality and social returns of the investment, to iden
to formulate models for investment that are addr
needs that we face-in short, ... a start toward in
science and technology."
It is inconceivable that this task be carried out witho
scientific knowledge and ideas, in other words also th
the planning and design process. The university h
centralized, pluralistic process of shaping the nat
global-science policy. It has to contribute to the deve
society at large, participate in the competitive process
fully responsible for its own tactics which include th
development of technological skills.
The institution envisaged by Carey, may be set up as
This content downloaded from 129.199.59.249 on Sun, 22 Jul 2018 13:04:50 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
428 Erich Jantsch
roughly of the ty
(IDA), which may b
major universities
values as well as to
It would force go
contributions fro
technological syste
The university w
elements of society
and with industry.
government-indust
planning for societ
prime and subcon
universities, and r
disciplinary univer
vative design prop
Conceivably, the
ment and industr
recently establish
symbiosis with We
The task of turni
society and of ind
munity into an act
found change in pu
the university fr
grossly distorted in
permitted to parti
university has been
university in societ
This content downloaded from 129.199.59.249 on Sun, 22 Jul 2018 13:04:50 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms