隨著科技進步與科學發展，工作型態與任務變得更加複雜，跨領域合作與學習變得至關重要，單一學科的專業知識可能已不足以解決問題與滿足當前勞動市場的需求。這種勞動市場人才需求的轉變凸顯了對跨領域學習的需求，各界廣泛相信跨領域學習有助於學生培養批判性思維、溝通以及有效整合知識解決複雜問題等能力。為回應勞動市場對跨領域人才的需求，高等教育機構近十幾年開始發展與提供學生跨領域學習機會，如短期跨學科合作課程與長期跨領域學士學位，此外，亦逐漸放寬學生修課限制，讓傳統單一科系學生亦能透過選修其他學系課程，進行跨領域學習。

文獻上針對跨領域學習多聚焦於如何在大專院校發展跨領域學習、發展所面對的困境與挑戰，量化分析學習成效相對稀缺，且過往文獻多針對於短期跨領域合作課程，對於長期學位制跨領域學習成效與傳統單一學科學生的跨領域學習的認知與量化分析相對不足。因此，本文運用國立清華大學的獨特行政數據集，藉由迴歸分析來檢視長期跨領域學制與傳統單一學科學生的跨領域學習是否對其技能發展與勞動市場成果造成顯著影響。本論文包含三篇獨立的研究論文，第一篇旨在探討專業跨領域學士學位是否實現其教育目標；第二篇聚焦於傳統單一科系學生，旨在分析跨領域學習對傳統單一科系學生技能發展的影響；第三篇同時考量傳統單一科系學位學生與專業跨領域學位學生，旨在探討跨領域學習對個人畢業後規劃與早期勞動市場成果的影響。

本文的研究結果有助於增進對跨領域學習對學生技能和勞動市場成果影響的理解。在第一篇研究中，我們檢驗專業跨領域學位的教育成果，並比較此成果在不同學科領域間的差異。我們的研究結果表明，專業跨領域學位未必會達成其教育目標，專業跨領域學位的教育成果在不同學科間存在顯著差異；第二篇研究聚焦於傳統單一科系畢業生的跨領域學習對技能發展的影響。我們提出了兩個統計指標，透過計算學生修習其他學院提供的課程學分比例或不同學科領域提供的學分比例，以衡量傳統單一科系學生跨領域學習程度。結果顯示，與預期相反，隨著跨領域學習程度的增加，學生對其技能發展成果的感知可能受到損害。我們的結果進一步解釋，此負面影響與跨領域程度相關，適度參與跨領域學習的學生在技能發展成果方面受益，過量參與跨領域學習則會損害潛在的學習成效；第三篇研究探討跨領域學習對畢業生畢業後成果的影響。結果顯示，跨領域學習增加了在與原本學系領域不同的領域進行繼續求學和就業的可能性。此外，跨領域學習對勞動市場成果的影響顯示，跨領域學習對系所平均薪資與就業率的影響會隨著時間的推移而增加，但效果在不同學科領域之間略有變化。

本文的研究結果對證據、知識、理論和教育政策方面做出了貢獻。在證據和知識方面，本文首次全面性的探討跨領域學習對傳統單一學科和專業跨領域學位的學生技能發展和畢業後成果的影響。在理論方面，本文有助於擴展跨領域學習與技能發展成果之間的概念性連結，並將跨領域學習與學生技能發展成果之間的正向單調關係修改為非單調關係。關於教育政策，本文建議，高等教育機構可透過放寬傳統單一學科的修課限制以提供學生跨領域學習機會。然而，高等教育機構需要確保學生在接受跨領域學習之前獲得基本的單一學科專業知識，過多的跨領域學習缺乏一定程度的單一學科專業知識，可能會損害跨領域學習的淺在優勢。

As technology and science develop, labour market tasks grow in complexity and require collaboration among people across multiple disciplines. Knowledge and expertise in a single disciplinary field may not be sufficient to resolve highly complex problems and meet current labour market needs. Such transition of labour market tasks has challenged the current professional training in higher education and highlighted a need for greater interdisciplinary learning. Interdisciplinary learning is argued to benefit learners in developing skills, such as critical thinking, communication, and integrating knowledge effectively to solve complex problems.

Theories have been developed to suggest that a positive link exists between interdisciplinary learning, skill development outcomes and labour market outcomes. Yet, empirical studies testing these ideas remain qualitative in nature and provide limited quantitative evidence. Quantitative evidence has mainly focused on exploring the impact of particular-discipline interdisciplinary modules on academic performance or skills during university studies. Evidence on the impact of a full range of specialised interdisciplinary degree programmes on their educational outcomes and labour market outcomes remains lacking. Also, a number of studies have seen students majoring in traditional disciplinary programmes as non-interdisciplinary learners. Traditional disciplinary programmes have in recent years tended to incorporate interdisciplinary learning in their programmes. Yet, little evidence exists documenting the effect of interdisciplinary learning on skill development outcomes and labour market outcomes for graduates from traditional disciplinary degree programmes.

This thesis aims to provide a comprehensive analysis of the effect of interdisciplinary learning drawing on a unique administrative dataset from the Taiwanese National Tsing Hua University (NTHU). To this end, this thesis is structured around three research papers. First, it examines whether specialised interdisciplinary Bachelor degree programmes achieve their interdisciplinary programme educational outcomes. Second, we investigate the effect of interdisciplinary learning on skill development for students graduating from traditional disciplinary programmes. Third, we explore the influence of interdisciplinary learning on individual post-graduation plan choices and early labour market outcomes for both traditional disciplinary degree programmes and specialised interdisciplinary degree programmes.

The findings from this thesis contribute to advancing our understanding of the impacts of interdisciplinary education on student skills and labour market outcomes. In the first empirical chapter, we examine educational outcomes of specialised interdisciplinary degree programmes and compare the outcomes across fields of study. Our findings suggest that specialised interdisciplinary degree programmes do not necessarily lead to better student educational outcomes. Our findings also revealed significant differences in educational outcomes between specialised interdisciplinary programmes across fields of study.

The second empirical chapter focuses on the impact of interdisciplinary learning for graduates from traditional disciplinary programmes on skill development outcomes. We propose two statistical indicators to measure the extent of interdisciplinary learning by calculating the proportion of credits that were offered by other schools or by a different field. Results show that students' perception of their skill development outcomes may be damaged with the increment of their extent of interdisciplinary learning. Our results also reveal that only graduates who were moderately involved in interdisciplinary learning benefited in skill development outcomes, relative to those who were more involved.

The third empirical chapter examines the influence of interdisciplinary learning on graduates' post-graduation plans using a set of logistic regression models. We find that interdisciplinary learning increases the probability to pursue future study and employment in a field that differs from the original college degree. We also explore the effect of interdisciplinary learning on labour market outcomes with cross-classified multilevel models. The results indicate that interdisciplinary learning leads to greater average salary and full-time employment over time but outcomes vary slightly across fields of study.
The findings of this thesis have made contributions to evidence and knowledge, theory, and education policy. In terms of evidence and knowledge, this thesis provides the first comprehensive understanding of the effects of interdisciplinary learning on skill development and post-graduation outcomes for graduates from both traditional disciplinary and specialised interdisciplinary degree programmes. In relation to theory, this thesis contributes towards expanding conceptual links between interdisciplinary learning and skill development outcomes and modifying a positive monotonic relationship between interdisciplinary learning and student skill outcomes to a non-monotonic relationship. Regarding education policy, this thesis suggests that it is valuable to develop interdisciplinary education by allowing traditional disciplinary students freely choosing their modules with certain degrees. Higher education institutions need to ensure students get the optimal degree of discipline-specific knowledge before exposing them to interdisciplinary learning and should adjust supporting measures from the experience of successful specialised interdisciplinary degree programmes.

摘要 ------------------------------------------------------------------i
Abstract ------------------------------------------------------------iii
Acknowledgements ------------------------------------------------------v
Declaration ---------------------------------------------------------vii
Contents -------------------------------------------------------------ix
List of Figures ----------------------------------------------------xiii
List of Tables -------------------------------------------------------xv

1 Introduction --------------------------------------------------------1
2 Assessing the Impact of Specialised Interdisciplinary Bachelor Degree Programmes on Educational Outcomes -----------------------------------11
3 Assessing the Impact of Interdisciplinary Learning within Traditional Disciplinary Degree Programmes on Individual Skill Development Outcomes ------------------------------------------------41
4 An Elon Musk Generalist or a Specialist? The Impacts of Interdisciplinary Learning on Post-Graduation Outcomes ---------------67
5 Conclusion --------------------------------------------------------103
Appendices ----------------------------------------------------------117
References ----------------------------------------------------------141

參考文獻
1. Andrews, D., Deutscher, N., Hambur, J., & Hansell, D. (2020). The scarring effects of downturns on young workers. VOX-EU CPER, October, 1.
2. Arcidiacono, P., Hotz, V. J., & Kang, S. (2012). Modeling college major choices using elicited measures of expectations and counterfactuals. Journal of Econometrics, 166(1), 3–16.
3. Astin, A. W. (1993). What matters in college? San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
4. Bada, S. O., & Olusegun, S. (2015). Constructivism learning theory: A paradigm for teaching and learning. Journal of Research & Method in Education, 5(6), 66–70.
5. Badcock, P. B., Pattison, P. E., & Harris, K. L. (2010). Developing generic skills through university study: A study of arts, science and engineering in Australia. Higher Education, 60(4), 441–458.
6. Barnett, S. A., & Brown, V. A. (1981). Pull and push in educational innovation: Study of an interfaculty programme. Studies in Higher Education, 6(1), 13–22.
7. Beachboard, M. R., Beachboard, J. C., Li, W., & Adkison, S. R. (2011). Cohorts and relatedness: Self-determination theory as an explanation of how learning communities affect educational outcomes. Research in Higher Education, 52(8), 853–874.
8. Becker, G. S. (2009). Human capital: A theoretical and empirical analysis, with special reference to education. University of Chicago Press.
9. Becker, G. S. (1962). Investment in human capital: A theoretical analysis. Journal of Political Economy, 70(5, Part 2), 9–49.
10. Benson, T. L., & Miller, R. C. (1982). Five arguments against interdisciplinary studies. Issues in Interdisciplinary Studies, 1, 38–48.
11. Biglan, A. (1973). The characteristics of subject matter in different academic areas. Journal of Applied Psychology, 57(3), 195.
12. Borrego, M. E., Rhyne, R., Hansbarger, L. C., Geller, Z., Edwards, P., Griffin, B., ... & Scaletti, J. V. (2000). Pharmacy student participation in rural interdisciplinary education using problem based learning (PBL) case tutorials. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 64(4), 355–363.
13. Braskamp, L. A., Braskamp, D. C., Merrill, K. C., & Engberg, M. (2014). Global Perspective Inventory (GPI): Its purpose, construction, potential uses, and psychometric characteristics. Glob. Perspect. Inst, 1–35.
14. Brassler, M., & Dettmers, J. (2017). How to enhance interdisciplinary competence - Interdisciplinary problem-based learning versus interdisciplinary project-based learning. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 11(2).
15. Braxton, J. M. (1995). Disciplines with an affinity for the improvement of undergraduate education. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 64, 59–64.
16. Buchbinder, S. B., Alt, P. M., Eskow, K., Forbes, W., Hester, E., Struck, M., & Taylor, D. (2005). Creating learning prisms with an interdisciplinary case study workshop. Innovative Higher Education, 29(4), 257–274.
17. Burkholder, K. C., Devereaux, J., Grady, C., Solitro, M., & Mooney, S. M. (2017). Longitudinal study of the impacts of a climate change curriculum on undergraduate student learning: Initial results. Sustainability, 9(6), 913.
18. Costa, A. R., Ferreira, M., Barata, A., Viterbo, C., Rodrigues, J. S., & Magalhães, J. (2019). Impact of interdisciplinary learning on the development of engineering students’ skills. European Journal of Engineering Education, 44(4), 589–601.
19. Cowden, C. D., & Santiago, M. F. (2016). Interdisciplinary explorations: Promoting critical thinking via problem-based learning in an advanced biochemistry class. Journal of Chemical Education, 93(3), 464–469.
20. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2013). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behaviour. Springer Science & Business Media.
21. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227–268.
22. Dirsch-Weigand, A., Pinkelman, R., Wehner, F. D., Vogt, J., & Hampe, M. (2016). Picking low hanging fruits – Integrating interdisciplinary learning in traditional engineering curricula by interdisciplinary project courses. In Engineering education for a smart society (pp. 97–106). Springer, Cham.
23. Dunning, D. (2011). The Dunning–Kruger effect: On being ignorant of one’s own ignorance. In J. M. Olson & M. P. Zanna (Eds.), Advances in experimental social psychology: Vol. 44 (pp. 247–296). Academic Press.
24. Engberg, M. E., & Fox, K. (2011). Exploring the relationship between undergraduate service-learning experiences and global perspective-taking. Journal of Student Affairs Research and Practice, 48(1), 83–103.
25. Frank, R. (1988). Interdisciplinary: The first half century. In E. G. Stanley & T. F. Hoad (Eds.), Words: For Robert Burchfield’s sixty fifth birthday (pp. 91– 101). Cambridge: DS Brewer.
26. Freedman, L. (2013). The developmental disconnect in choosing a major: Why institutions should prohibit choice until second year. The Mentor: An Academic Advising Journal, 6.
27. Giorgio, D. P., Commission, E., & IZA. (2021). Studying abroad and earnings: A meta‐analysis. Journal of Economic Surveys, 36(4), 1096–1129.
28. Graham, C., & Gareth, W. (2014). Pillars and lintels: The what’s, why’s and how’s of interdisciplinary learning. Journal of Royal Society of Edinburgh, Scatlands National Academy, Scottish Charity, 4(12), 145–168.
29. Grant, A. M., & Schwartz, B. (2011). Too much of a good thing: The challenge and opportunity of the inverted U. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 6(1), 61–76.
30. Hagger, M. S., & Hamilton, K. (2019). Grit and self‐discipline as predictors of effort and academic attainment. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 89(2), 324–342.
31. Hains-Wesson, R., & Ji, K. (2020). Students’ perceptions of an interdisciplinary global study tour: Uncovering inexplicit employability skills. Higher Education Research and Development, 39(4), 657–671.
32. Hart, J. (2019). Interdisciplinary project-based learning as a means of developing employability skills in undergraduate science degree programs. Journal of Teaching and Learning for Graduate Employability, 10(2), 50–66.
33. Inkelas, K. K., Daver, Z. E., Vogt, K. E., & Leonard, J. B. (2007). Living–learning programs and first-generation college students’ academic and social transition to college. Research in Higher Education, 48(4), 403–434.
34. INOMICS Team. (2015). Interdisciplinary degrees – pros & cons. Retrieved from https://inomics.com/blog/interdisciplinary-degrees-pros-cons-287366
35. Ivanitskaya, L., Clark, D., Montgomery, G., & Primeau, R. (2002). Interdisciplinary learning: Process and outcomes. Innovative Higher Education, 27(2), 95–111.
36. Jacob, M., Klein, M., & Iannelli, C. (2015). The impact of social origin on graduates’ early occupational destinations – An Anglo-German comparison. European Sociological Review, 31(4), 460–476.
37. Jones, C. (2010). Interdisciplinary approach – Advantages, disadvantages, and the future benefits of interdisciplinary studies. Essai, 7(1), 26.
38. Joynes, C., Rossignoli, S., & Amonoo-Kuofi, E. F. (2019). 21st century skills: Evidence of issues in definition, demand and delivery for development contexts (K4D Helpdesk Report). Brighton, UK: Institute of Development Studies.
39. Karlqvist, A. (1999). Going beyond disciplines: The meanings of interdisciplinarity. Policy Sciences, 32(4), 379–383.
40. Kay, L. H., & Young, J. L. (1986). Socratic teaching in social studies. The Social Studies, 77(4), 158–161.
41. Khandakar, A., Chowdhury, M. E. H., Gonzales, A. J. S. P., Touati, F., Emadi, N. A., & Ayari, M. A. (2020). Case study to analyze the impact of multi-course project-based learning approach on education for sustainable development. Sustainability, 12(2), 480.
42. Knifsend, C. A., & Graham, S. (2012). Too much of a good thing? How breadth of extracurricular participation relates to school-related affect and academic outcomes during adolescence. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 41(3), 379–389.
43. Knight, D. B., Lattuca, L. R., Kimball, E. W., & Reason, R. D. (2013). Understanding interdisciplinarity: Curricular and organizational features of undergraduate interdisciplinary programs. Innovative Higher Education, 38(2), 143–158.
44. Kolb, D. A. (1981). Learning styles and disciplinary differences. In A. W. Chickering (Ed.), The modern American college (pp. 232–255). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
45. Langfred, C. W. (2004). Too much of a good thing? Negative effects of high trust and individual autonomy in self-managing teams. Academy of Management Journal, 47 (3), 385–399.
46. Lattuca, L. R., Knight, D., Seifert, T. A., Reason, R. D., & Liu, Q. (2017). Examining the impact of interdisciplinary programs on student learning. Innovative Higher Education, 42(4), 337–353.
47. Lattuca, L. R., Voigt, L. J., & Fath, K. Q. (2004). Does interdisciplinarity promote learning? Theoretical support and researchable questions. The Review of Higher Education, 28(1), 23–48.
48. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge University Press.
49. Lazear, E. P. (2009). Firm-specific human capital: A skill-weights approach. Journal of Political Economy, 117(5), 914–940.
50. Lemieux, T. (2006). The “Mincer equation” thirty years after schooling, experience, and earnings. In Jacob Mincer a pioneer of modern labor economics (pp. 127–145). Boston, MA: Springer.
51. Liu, M., & Shi, J. (2015). Chinese university students’ learning styles: Gender and discipline differences. Institute for Learning Styles, 1, 1–16.
52. Mansilla, V. B., Duraisingh, E. D., Wolfe, C. R., & Haynes, C. (2009). Targeted assessment rubric: An empirically grounded rubric for interdisciplinary writing. The Journal of Higher Education, 80(3), 334–353.
53. McQuaid, R. (2017). Youth unemployment produces multiple scarring effects. LSE European Politics and Policy (EUROPP) Blog.
54. Med, C. I. (2006). Multidisciplinarity, interdisciplinarity and transdisciplinarity in health research, services, education and policy: 1. Definitions, objectives, and evidence of effectiveness. Clinical and Investigative Medicine, 29(6), 351.
55. Merrill, K. C., Braskamp, D. C., & Braskamp, L. A. (2012). Assessing individuals’ global perspective. Journal of College Student Development, 53(2), 356–360.
56. Milem, J. F. (2003). The educational benefits of diversity: Evidence from multiple sectors. Compelling interest: Examining the evidence on racial dynamics in higher education, 126–169.
57. Miller, A. L., Rocconi, L. M., & Dumford, A. D. (2018). Focus on the finish line: Does high-impact practice participation influence career plans and early job attainment? Higher Education, 75(3), 489–506.
58. Mincer, J. (1974). Schooling, experience and earnings. Columbia University Press: New York.
59. Misiewicz, J. (2016). The benefits and challenges of interdisciplinarity. In R. DeRosa (Ed.), Interdisciplinary Studies: A Connected Learning Approach. Retrieved from https://press.rebus.community/idsconnect/chapter/the-benefits-and-challenges-of-interdisciplinarity/
60. Monson, R. A., & Kenyon, K. L. (2018). Beyond scavenger hunts and guided expeditions: Rethinking interdisciplinary majors and 21st century liberal education. Issues in Interdisciplinary Studies, 36(1), 66–92.
61. Neumann, R. (2001). Disciplinary differences and university teaching. Studies in Higher Education, 26(2), 135–146.
62. Newell, W. H. (1994). Designing interdisciplinary courses. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 1994(58), 35–51.
63. Noy, S., Patrick, R., Capetola, T., & McBurnie, J. (2017). Inspiration from the classroom: A mixed method case study of interdisciplinary sustainability learning in higher education. Australian Journal of Environmental Education, 33(2), 97–118.
64. OECD. (1996). The knowledge-based economy. General Distribution OCDE/GD(96)102. Oreopoulos, P., Von Wachter, T., & Heisz, A. (2012). The short-and long-term career effects of graduating in a recession. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 4(1), 1–29.
65. Orillion, M. F. (2009). Interdisciplinary curriculum and student outcomes: The case of a general education course at a research university. The Journal of General Education, 58(1), 1–18.
66. Oswald-Egg, M. E., & Renold, U. (2021). No experience, no employment: The effect of vocational education and training work experience on labour market outcomes after higher education. Economics of Education Review, 80, 102065.
67. Park, H. (2015). A study on the horizontal stratification of higher education in South Korea. Asia Pacific Education Review, 16(1), 63–78.
68. Partlo, M., & Ampaw, F. (2018). Using income effects to market undergraduate education abroad participation in higher education. Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, 28(1), 66–89.
69. Pascarella, E. T., Pierson, C. T., Wolniak, G. C., & Terenzini, P. T. (2004). First-generation college students: Additional evidence on college experiences and outcomes. The Journal of Higher Education, 75(3), 249–284.
70. Perry, W. G., Jr. (1981). Cognitive and ethical growth: The making of meaning. In A. W. Chickering (Ed.), The modern American college (pp. 76–116). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
71. Perry, W. G., Jr. (1999). Forms of ethical and intellectual development in the college years: A scheme. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
72. Pharo, E. J., Davison, A., Warr, K., Nursey-Bray, M., Beswick, K., Wapstra, E., & Jones, C. (2012). Can teacher collaboration overcome barriers to interdisciplinary learning in a disciplinary university? A case study using climate change. Teaching in Higher Education, 17(5), 497–507.
73. Piaget, J. (2003). The psychology of intelligence. Routledge.
74. Pitman, T., Roberts, L., Bennett, D., & Richardson, S. (2019). An Australian study of graduate outcomes for disadvantaged students. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 43(1), 45–57.
75. Polk-Lepson Research Group. (2014). National professionalism survey: Career development report. York: Center for Professional Excellence at York College of Pennsylvania.
76. Richter, D. M., & Paretti, M. C. (2009). Identifying barriers to and outcomes of interdisciplinarity in the engineering classroom. European Journal of Engineering Education, 34(1), 29–45.
77. Rienties, B., & Héliot, Y. (2018). Enhancing (in) formal learning ties in interdisciplinary management courses: A quasi-experimental social network study. Studies in Higher Education, 43(3), 437–451.
78. Roksa, J., Kilgo, C. A., Trolian, T. L., Pascarella, E. T., Blaich, C., & Wise, K. S. (2017). Engaging with diversity: How positive and negative diversity interactions influence students’ cognitive outcomes. The Journal of Higher Education, 88(3), 297–322.
79. Rowe, F., Corcoran, J., & Bell, M. (2017). The returns to migration and human capital accumulation pathways: Non-metropolitan youth in the school-to-work transition. The Annals of Regional Science, 59(3), 819–845.
80. Rowe, F., Corcoran, J., & Faggian, A. (2013). Mobility patterns of overseas human capital in Australia: The role of a ‘new’ graduate visa scheme and rural development policy. Australian Geographer, 44(2), 177–195.
81. Rumberger, R. W., & Thomas, S. L. (1993). The economic returns to college major, quality and performance: A multilevel analysis of recent graduates. Economics of Education Review, 12(1), 1–19.
82. Schijf, J. E., van der Werf, G. P., & Jansen, E. P. (2022). Measuring interdisciplinary understanding in higher education. European Journal of Higher Education, 1–19.
83. Schommer, M., & Dunnell, P. A. (1994). A comparison of epistemological beliefs between gifted and non‐gifted high school students. Roeper Review, 16(3), 207–210.
84. Silva, P., Lopes, B., Costa, M., Melo, A. I., Dias, G. P., Brito, E., & Seabra, D. (2018). The million-dollar question: Can internships boost employment? Studies in Higher Education, 43(1), 2–21.
85. Slaughter, S. A., Ang, S., & Fong Boh, W. (2007). Firm-specific human capital and compensation organizational tenure profiles: An archival analysis of salary data for it. Human Resource Management: Published in Cooperation with the School of Business Administration, The University of Michigan and in alliance with the Society of Human Resources Management, 46(3), 373–394.
86. Spence, M. S. M. (1973). Job market signaling. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 90, 225–243.
87. Styron, R. A. (2013). Interdisciplinary education: A reflection of the real world. Systemics, Cybernetics, and Information, 11(9), 47–52.
88. Summers, M., Childs, A., & Corney, G. (2005). Education for sustainable development in initial teacher training: Issues for interdisciplinary collaboration. Environmental Education Research, 11(5), 623–647.
89. Swarat, S., Oliver, P. H., Tran, L., Childers, J. G., Tiwari, B., & Babcock, J. L. (2017). How disciplinary differences shape student learning outcome assessment: A case study. AERA Open, 3(1), 2332858417690112.
90. Tang, A., Perales, F., Rowe, F., & Baxter, J. (2021). The going gets rougher: Exploring the labour market outcomes of international graduates in Australia. International Migration.
91. Taylor, S. (2018). To understand and be understood: Facilitating interdisciplinary learning through the promotion of communicative competence. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 42(1), 126–142.
92. Tomaszewski, W., Perales, F., Xiang, N., & Kubler, M. (2021). Beyond graduation: Socio-economic background and post-university outcomes of Australian graduates. Research in Higher Education, 62(1), 26–44.
93. Umbach, P. D., & Kuh, G. D. (2006). Student experiences with diversity at liberal arts colleges: Another claim for distinctiveness. The Journal of Higher Education, 77(1), 169–192.
94. UNESCO Institute for Statistics. (2014). ISCED fields of education and training 2013 (ISCED-F 2013): Manual to accompany the international standard classification of education.
95. Vygotsky, L. S., & Cole, M. (1980). Mind in society: Development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
96. Walsh, C. M., & Hardy, R. C. (1999). Dispositional differences in critical thinking related to gender and academic major. Journal of Nursing Education, 38(4), 149–155.
97. Weller, M., & Appleby, M. (2021). What are the benefits of interdisciplinary study? The Open University. Retrieved from http://www.open.edu/openlearn/education/what-are-the-benefits-interdisciplinary-study
98. Wu, H., Zheng, J., Li, S., & Guo, J. (2019). Does academic interest play a more important role in medical sciences than in other disciplines? A nationwide cross-sectional study in China. BMC Medical Education, 19(1), 1–8.
99. Yilmaz, R. B. N., Nalbantgil, D., & Ozdemir, F. (2019). Impact of discipline‐based vs. interdisciplinary orthodontic courses on dental students’ performance. Journal of Dental Education, 83(1), 64–71.