Kate Park-Sisley

Dal News – Select Articles

Reflective Analysis – MAIS 601: Making Sense of THeory

Kate Park-Sisley

Dr. Derek Britton

MAIS 601: Making Sense of Theory

September 20, 2026

Interdisciplinarity in Practice – A Reflective Analysis of Meek

When I first read Jack Meek’s The Practice of Interdisciplinarity: Complex Conditions and the Potential of Interdisciplinary Theory there were two passages that stood out to me, causing me to pause and examine my views on a multi-dimensional, interdisciplinary approach to problem solving.

When Meek wrote “simply stated, social problems have outpaced traditional solutions” (Meek, 125), I paused and asked myself how many problems, social and otherwise, could be solved if we boiled it down to matter of including different background, perspectives, and disciplines? It seems so simple when spelled out in such a way, but when it comes to decision making, especially on social problems, we, as a society, tend to put a lot of these decisions in the hands of the experts. This approach is certainly warranted, as we need people with experience and understanding driving these conversations, but should the solutions lie in the hands of one field of expertise? Generally, upon reflection, I do not think that is the be-all-end-all of how we should be making public policy decisions.

I work in higher education and I often see students who come from a wide variety of educational backgrounds who are very successful in their programs, often because they are able to bring different perspectives, processes, and practices to their current field of study. Seeing Meek’s paper play out in real time, albeit not at a policy making level, has also been causative in my perspective shift.

The other passage that stood out to me in Meek’s paper is, “Interdisciplinary solution-making practices, illustrated by this case study, may lead to solutions that challenge the status quo or the stability of the very social system it attempts to address.” (Meek, 131). Meek also mentions “tradition” many times in his paper, and it got me thinking about how many things we do, or how many decisions we make, simply because that is always the way we have done things. It also got me wondering if an interdisciplinary approach is inherently threatening to those systems, as meek pointed out, but more importantly, which systems this approach could destabilize the most.

I don’t believe these are the kinds of questions that can be answered in a reflective analysis, but when it comes to the approach I take to make decisions, it has certainly caused me to examine the root of why I make decisions the way that I do, and how that approach could be changed, or bettered, by taking a different, interdisciplinary approach.