Professor Janet Gail Donald brings twenty-five years of research to bear on this very provocative topic. How do different disciplines pursue knowledge and what is the learning process for each? What may be of more interest is how this impacts our pedagogy. How can we teach effectively?

Her research involved her colleagues at McGill using their disciplines as "guinea pigs" for her clinical studies. The book is the outcome of her research and clinical studies analyses. She states in her "Aims of Book" that she wished to create a framework for understanding students' intellectual development and for learning to think in different disciplines. This approach hones in on the specifics of a student's needs in learning a particular discipline and the thinking process that goes along with this learning in order to achieve the hoped for end product, i.e., to think effectively and produce in a given field. The point is that the learning process and the thinking process differ markedly from Physics to Literature. To teach effectively we must recognize this.

The author establishes what may be termed indices for determining key concepts for each discipline and how these key concepts work in a chosen discipline but more importantly how they work in a cross-disciplinary fashion. She identifies types of thinking that are connected to each discipline. For example: Physics as orderly thinking, Social Sciences, Psychology etc. as multifaceted learning, Law as case versus logic thinking.

The author presents a history and disciplinary context for each followed by standardized themes; students experiences, learning tasks, areas of inquiry such as theoretical approaches etc. as an exposition for the study of acquiring knowledge and learning to think and use the knowledge of each specific discipline in a productive way. For example, for Chapter eight, "Criticism and Creativity, Thinking in Humanities" the author uses English literature as her paradigm. She first explores the historical background of the development of "English Literature" as a special discipline. She notes that the inception of Humanities took place during the Renaissance. At its early stage it was the exclusive purview of Classics. As this discipline entered the nineteenth century divisions began to appear within the macro concept which continue today, such as text versus concept. The author states that English literature, as one of the outcomes, is the epitome of a soft, limitless or unbounded pure discipline. In essence, the study of literature focuses outward to the culture not inward to the specifics of at what degree does water boil. Hence, there are no boundaries of inquiry.

The students' views of learning are discussed within a diary format for a particular class in English lit. A participant-observer provides general observations about the class. These observations are broken down and incorporated into the key concepts established by the professor for that particular course and English Literature in general. The discipline is further broken down into its various components such as theoretical approaches, types of critical analyses etc. The actual process of pedagogy is codified in charts using a structural approach which to my mind has its own inherent flaws. The author's intent is to show how each discipline has its own particular process in moving from memorization to synthesis in critical thinking. How students learn and what methods are used for verification of learning provide a plethora of ideas, none of which is really the "Holy Grail" of teaching English Literature or any other discipline.

The value of this book lies in the explanation of various pedagogies as they apply to different disciplines and more importantly how students learn and think in each. It is worthy of a read especially who pride ourselves on the Liberal Arts tradition. I did not agree with all of the author's assertions or findings but that is my prerogative as a teacher and thinker.

Dorothy Dvorsky-Rohner,
UNC Asheville