Interdisciplinary teaching in higher education is increasingly recognised for its potential to prepare students to address complex problems that cannot be solved within single disciplines alone (Blackmore & Kandiko, 2012; Boix Mansilla, 2006; Boix Mansilla & Duraisingh, 2007; Spelt et al., 2009). Prior research suggests that interdisciplinary approaches are associated with the development of students’ collaborative, problem-solving, and communication skills (Finlay, 2019; Klein, 2006; Lyall et al., 2015; Manathunga, Lant, & Mellick, 2006; Yang et al., 2024). However, much of the existing literature has concentrated on curriculum design and learning outcomes rather than on the instructional processes through which interdisciplinary teaching and learning are enacted in the classroom. As a result, educators often lack empirically informed guidance about how interdisciplinary learning is constructed through interaction between teachers and students (Spelt et al., 2009; Oudenampsen, 2024).

This study addresses this gap by exploring the research question “How are interdisciplinary teaching and learning enacted in practice?” from both teacher and student perspectives. The research is conducted within a single classroom context in a master’s programme on sustainability at a research-focused university in the Netherlands. The course forms part of a interdisciplinary master’s programme focusing on the governance of sustainability, jointly offered by two different departments. The course is taught by lecturers from diverse disciplinary backgrounds and is designed around an integrated group assignment, where interdisciplinary student teams should integrate knowledge while collaboratively analyzing real-world sustainability problems. 

The study adopts a qualitative case study design, drawing on interviews with teachers and students as well as systematic classroom observations. Following data collection, thematic analysis was conducted to identify teachers’ understandings and goals of interdisciplinary teaching, their instructional practices and collaboration with colleagues, as well as students’ perceptions of instruction, learning experiences, and the challenges encountered by both teachers and students in classroom practice.

The findings indicate that interdisciplinary teaching and learning in this course unfold through dynamic and challenging processes involving sustained teacher collaboration and student peer learning. In teachers as well as students, these processes are shaped by reciprocal knowledge exchange, engagement with uncertainty, and ongoing negotiation between disciplinary diversity and instructional coordination. As teachers and students work to integrate disciplinary knowledge, coordinate instruction, and respond to open-ended interdisciplinary tasks, challenges related to uncertainty, knowledge integration, and collaboration become part of how interdisciplinary teaching and learning are enacted in practice.

By providing a detailed empirical account of how interdisciplinary teaching and learning unfold in classroom practice, this study contributes to a deeper understanding of the instructional and interactional processes of interdisciplinary education. The findings offer practical insights for educators and programme designers seeking to create more coherent, supportive, and sustainable interdisciplinary learning environments.

This study adopts a qualitative case study design situated within an authentic higher-education context. The case is a course within an interdisciplinary master’s programme on sustainability at a research-focused university in the Netherlands. Data were collected across the duration of the course using three complementary methods: Firstly, semi-structured interviews were conducted with teachers to explore their understanding of interdisciplinary teaching, instructional goals, instructional strategies, and experiences of collaboration with other teachers. Secondly, the researcher conducted classroom observations focusing on instructional practices and teacher–student interaction during lectures. These observations served as supportive contextual data for supporting the interpretation of interview findings. Thirdly, after course completion, semi-structured interviews were conducted with students to examine their learning experiences, teamwork processes, perceptions of instructional support, and encountered challenges. All interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and anonymized. —three lecturers primarily responsible for delivering course lectures and two instructional staff members who supported the integrated group assignment by providing guidance and follow-up during weekly 20-minute meetings with student teams outside class— as well as fifteen master’s students representing diverse disciplinary backgrounds, from a cohort of sixty-three students total. Student participants were recruited across all eleven interdisciplinary project groups to ensure broad representation. Data analysis followed an iterative thematic approach. Initial open coding was followed by the development of themes related to teachers’ understanding and goals of interdisciplinary teaching, instructional practices and students’ perceptions of instruction, teacher collaboration, student teamwork, and encountered challenges. These preliminary themes are being reviewed, refined, and compared across data sources through repeated engagement with the data. Triangulation across interviews and observations enhanced the credibility and robustness of the findings.

The findings indicate that interdisciplinary teaching and learning in this course are enacted through dynamic and challenging processes involving teacher collaboration and student peer learning. From the teacher perspective, interdisciplinary teaching is enacted through discipline-based integration, sustained collaboration within teaching teams, and ongoing instructional collaboration, as teachers navigate challenges related to disciplinary heterogeneity, structural misalignment, and balancing pedagogical demands. These processes require continuous adjustment of teaching strategies, shared sense-making among instructors, and responsiveness to emerging student needs. From the student perspective, interdisciplinary learning is enacted primarily within heterogeneous project teams, where peer learning, negotiation of disciplinary differences, and collective problem-solving support meaningful learning, while also generating uncertainty, difficulties in knowledge integration, and interpersonal tensions. Engagement with open-ended tasks often involves trial-and-error processes, shifting roles within teams, and the gradual development of confidence in working across disciplinary boundaries. These teaching and learning processes are mutually reinforcing. Teacher collaboration shapes the conditions under which students engage in interdisciplinary learning, while students’ questions, project work, and disciplinary perspectives, in turn, contribute to teachers’ professional learning and inform instructional decision-making. Importantly, the findings indicate that these challenges are not minor or incidental but persist throughout interdisciplinary teaching and learning in practice. Learning often develops as teachers and students work with and negotiate these challenges, rather than only after such tensions have been fully resolved.

Boix Mansilla, V., & Duraisingh, E. D. (2007). Targeted assessment of students’ interdisciplinary work: An empirically grounded framework proposed. The Journal of Higher Education, 78(2), 215–237. https://dx.doi.org/10.1353/jhe.2007.0008 Boix Mansilla, V., Navakas, F., & Fiscella, J. (2006). Interdisciplinary work at the frontier: An empirical examination of expert epistemologies. Issues in Interdisciplinary Studies, 24, 1–31. Blackmore, P., & Kandiko, C. B. (2012). Strategic curriculum change in universities: Global trends. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203111628 Finlay, J. M., Davila, H., Whipple, M. O., McCreedy, E. M., Jutkowitz, E., Jensen, A., & Kane, R. A. (2019). What we learned through asking about evidence: A model for interdisciplinary student engagement. Gerontology & Geriatrics Education, 40(1), 90–104. https://doi.org/10.1080/02701960.2018.1428578 Klein, J. T. (2006). A platform for a shared discourse of interdisciplinary education. Journal of Social Science Education, 5(2), 10–18. Lyall, C., Meagher, L., Gill, J. B., & Kettle, A. (2015). Interdisciplinary provision in higher education: Current context and future challenges. Higher Education Academy. Manathunga, C., Lant, P., & Mellick, G. (2006). Imagining an interdisciplinary doctoral pedagogy. Teaching in Higher Education, 11(3), 365–379. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562510600680954 Oudenampsen, J., Das, E., Blijlevens, N., & van de Pol, M. (2024). The state of the empirical evidence for interdisciplinary learning outcomes in higher education: A systematic review. Review of Higher Education, 47(4), 467–518. https://doi.org/10.1353/rhe.2024.a930107 Spelt, E. J. H., Biemans, H. J. A., Tobi, H., Luning, P. A., & Mulder, M. (2009). Teaching and learning in interdisciplinary higher education: A systematic review. Educational Psychology Review, 21(4), 365–378. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-009-9113-z Yang, B.-H., Lo, K.-W., Li, Y.-S., & Chao, K.-Y. (2024). Effects of integration interdisciplinary learning on student learning outcomes and healthcare-giving competence: A mixed methods study. BMC Nursing, 23, Article 1. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-024-02260-w