Hybrid programs (and courses) that combine computing science with other disciplines, such as Bioinformatics and Digital Humanities, have gained prominence. They attract a diverse student demographic, including underrepresented groups in STEM subjects, and equip graduates with complementary skills that have a significant social impact and are highly valued by employers. However, the conceptual foundation of such offers remains ambiguous in Computer Science Education (CSEd) research and practice, creating a gap that necessitates research into the ways disciplinary integration manifests. This paper presents a theoretical framework for the study of disciplinary integration and offers empirical and conceptual insights into the ways in which undergraduate computing science students engage at the crossroads of disciplines. Being in such a position influences their academic trajectories and has potential implications for their academic identities. Employing a qualitative case study methodology, we conducted semi-structured interviews with six undergraduate students enrolled in a computing science while concurrently enrolled in non–CS degree programs. We analyzed the data using deductive thematic analysis. The participants were purposefully sampled to ensure the diversity of perspectives. A typology of interdisciplinarity was used to map the’ engagement of students across disciplinary boundaries and characterize their modes of integration. Our analysis reveals a broad spectrum of disciplinary engagement, ranging from multidisciplinary to transdisciplinary. Participants respond to (inter)disciplinary participation in two ways: assimilation or integration. They negotiate interactions with multiple disciplinary cultures through these responses. This study promotes Disciplinary Integration (DI) as a subject of research and a consideration in the curriculum in computing education and beyond. It does so by highlighting the complexity of crossing disciplines as well as the implications of students’ different responses when navigating multiple fields of study. Also, it challenges the common implicit assumption of computing being purely instrumental for other disciplines as uni-directional utilitarian transfer. From a theoretical perspective, this study empirically substantiates the descriptive utility of the theoretical framework while suggesting an extension of a taxonomy of interdisciplinarity with three additional dimensions that are particularly salient in computing education: epistemic proximity of the disciplines, directionality of transfer, and temporal fluidity as a characteristic of student positioning. This work lays a foundation for future research on disciplinary integration and its implications for the evolving role of computing in academia and society.
Mohammed et al. (Mon,) studied this question.