INSTITUTIONAL COMPARISON AND PRACTICAL PATH SELECTION FOR INTERDISCIPLINARY DEVELOPMENT IN CHINESE AND US RESEARCH UNIVERSITIES
Keywords:
Interdisciplinary development, Chinese Research Universities, American Research Universities, Institutional comparison, Pathway innovationAbstract
This study delves into the institutional models and practical pathways for interdisciplinary development in research universities in China and the United States. It analyzes cross-national differences in institutional logic, cultural cognition, and organizational models, and proposes recommendations for optimizing China's pathways. The study finds that China's interdisciplinary development is constrained by traditional disciplinary evaluation and resource allocation systems, whereas the United States has fostered a bottom-up interdisciplinary ecosystem through market-driven flexible mechanisms. In contrast, China's top-down approach often offers advantages in mobilizing large-scale resources for major targeted national priorities. The two countries' models are complementary in innovation demand scenarios: the Chinese model is well-suited for addressing clearly defined technological bottlenecks, while the American model is more conducive to nurturing original breakthroughs. The article suggests that China should optimize its environment for interdisciplinary development through three levels: institutional innovation, shifts in cultural cognition, and reform of organizational models. It calls for establishing a new institutional framework aligned with the characteristics of interdisciplinary research, promoting the transition of interdisciplinary studies from the periphery to the center, and ultimately forming a distinctive system for interdisciplinary development with Chinese characteristics. Finally, these insights provide a very strong comparative foundation for concrete policy and practice.References
[1] Yin Z, Jiang X, Tong P. Research on the organizational structure reform of interdisciplinary disciplines in Chinese universities from the perspective of knowledge management. Higher Education Management, 2025(5): 1–10.
[2] Qian J, Huang Q, Tian X. Interdisciplinary disciplines in China: Development context, basic characteristics, and construction strategies. Journal of Shaanxi Normal University (Philosophy and Social Sciences Edition), 2025, 54(2): 130–140.
[3] Zhang Y, Yu X. Influence mechanism and action strategies for the development of high-level interdisciplinary teams in research universities: A qualitative analysis based on 9 interdisciplinary teams in natural sciences. Research in Higher Education of Engineering, 2025(2): 91–97.
[4] Dai W, Xu M, Liu X, et al. Exploration and practice of cultivating professional degree graduate students in artificial intelligence interdisciplinary disciplines: Taking China University of Mining and Technology as an example. Control Engineering, 2025, 32(1): 185–192.
[5] Hu L, Wang H. Interdisciplinarity: The interaction between social sciences and natural sciences. Tsinghua Journal of Education, 2024, 45(6): 100–109.
[6] Kramer N, Wegner C. Enhancing subject-specific interests through interdisciplinary teaching units. Global Education Review, 2024(1).
[7] Drobnic Vidic A. Comparison of interdisciplinary connections between mathematics and other subjects through student-centered approaches. Journal of Research in Mathematics Education, 2023(1).
[8] Everingham Y L, Gyuris E, Connolly S R. Enhancing student engagement to positively impact mathematics anxiety, confidence and achievement for interdisciplinary science subjects. International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 2017, 48(8).
[9] Wang X, Hu Q. Research on the integrated development path of information disciplines from the perspective of “Double First-Class” construction. Ability and Wisdom, 2025(6): 5–8.
[10] Chen L. An empirical study on discipline system construction from the perspective of building world-class universities: Based on a comparison of 18 Chinese and American research universities. Shandong Higher Education, 2015, 3(12): 42–53.
[11] Wu J. A comparative study on the cultivation of interdisciplinary graduate students in Chinese and American research universities. Doctoral dissertation, Nanjing University, 2017.
[12] Liu Y, Yao G, Shao R. Historical context, realistic dilemmas, and optimization strategies for interdisciplinary discipline construction: An analytical perspective based on field theory. Jiangsu Higher Education, 2025(4): 79–88.