Abstracts - Earli

understandings of the discipline captured in much of the literature by drawing attention to thecontext in which a discipline is taught, and the ‘constructed’ nature of disciplines. Therefore, inlight of recent developments in research on learning and teaching/instruction, issues of disciplinaryspecificity in university teaching and learning can benefit from being re-examined. Thissymposium provides an in-depth examination of issues of disciplinary specificity in universityteaching and learning through an examination of four research projects. Those projects adopt verydifferent perspectives on the issue, thus contributing to an expansion of our current understandingof disciplinary specificity in university teaching and learning. An introduction to the symposiumwill situate the four projects in the existing literature on disciplinary specificity while thediscussant will identify similarities and differences among them and clarify their contribution toour understanding of issues of disciplinary specificity in university teaching and learning.Problematizing the nature of the discipline: a socio-cultural approach to apprehending disciplinesin higher educationJoelle Fanghanel, City University, London, United KingdomIn this presentation, the notion of the discipline as a construct essentially reflecting knowledgestructures in a specific field modelled through involvement in a disciplinary culture is challenged.Based on an empirical study which adopted a theoretical approach to teaching and learning thatemphasised the importance of context, construction and ideology in the make-up of a disciplinaryidentity, this presentation explores constructions of the disciplines by higher education teachers.Much of the research concerned with discipline epistemologies is based on Biglan’s distinctionbetween soft-hard and pure-applied disciplines, and presents the discipline as a coherent unit ofanalysis, arguing for example that there are ‘signature’ pedagogies attached to specific disciplines.It is argued in this paper that the epistemological dimension, though important, is insufficient inaccounting for pedagogical practices. In particular, it does not take into account issues of power,agency, and ideology or the structures that frame academic work. This presentation is part of alarger project which examined teaching constructs amongst academics, and established how thosewere shaped by (and at the same time were shaping) the context in which they worked. In thisproject, 18 semi-structured interviews of academics working in seven different institutions andacross 13 different disciplinary backgrounds were carried out, using a dialogic approach, and asocio-cultural theoretical framework. Components of pedagogical constructs were identified inanalysing the data, of which the discipline was one. I present here characterizations of thedisciplines held by academics in varied fields which de-emphasize epistemological determinism indisciplinary constructs, and bring to the fore constructions that highlight the role of ideology,curricular locus, and pragmatism. Some of these constructions give a very tenuous role even to theenculturing role of the discipline.What is the nature of university professors’ discipline-specific pedagogical knowledge?Denis Berthiaume, University of Lausanne, SwitzerlandThis research project investigates the nature of university professors’ discipline-specificpedagogical knowledge (DPK). Traditionally, DPK has been examined with the help of constructsfrom two distinct lines of research: the knowledge base for teaching and disciplinary specificity inuniversity teaching. Yet, the two lines of research have seldom been combined to explore DPK.Furthermore, linkages between those two lines of research point to the potential contribution ofresearch on personal epistemologies. Therefore, the aim of this research is to describe empiricallythe phenomenon of DPK using constructs from those three lines of research. The research projecttakes the form of an instrumental multi-case study of four university professors from four– 159 –