The University of Rhode Island English department has hosted the Ocean State Writing Conference for the last eleven years. This distinguished event is planned and coordinated yearly by the creative writing faculty, Mary Cappello, Peter Covino, Derek Nikitas, Jody Lisberger, the conference director, the wonderful Tina Egnoski this year, and the conference administrative director, Michelle Carraccia. In addition, many graduate students volunteer each year with both the preparation and in helping the conference run smoothly for attendees, from registration to cleaning up after workshops and panels. This year we asked several of the graduate students who volunteered and attended workshop sessions with our featured writers about their experiences.
On October 3, 2017 the English department welcomed Dr. Maurice S. Lee of Boston University to present his lecture titled “Testing Literature and Producing Knowledge in Moby-Dick.” Dr. Lee is currently the Hilles Bush Fellow at the Radcliffe Institute for Advanced Study at Harvard University and is exploring the connections between 19th century literature and that period’s information revolution. His current project, Overwhelming Words: Literature, Aesthetics, and the 19th-Century Information Revolution, informed his talk at URI.
On September 19, 2017, hundreds of people packed the Ryan Center to hear primatologist and legend Jane Goodall speak. Goodall, who is most well known for her work with chimpanzees in Tanzania, gave a captivating talk as part of the URI Honors Colloquium, whose theme this year is Origins: Life, the Universe and Everything. The talk began with Goodall describing her childhood, as she became fascinated with animals and nature at a very young age. She credits her mother with fostering this love of nature, and encouraging Goodall to pursue a career outside of the limits set for women in the 1940s and 1950s. Goodall described her first job in the field of primatology as one happening by chance as she visited a friend in Tanzania and was introduced to archaeologist Louis Leakey. This first assignment proved groundbreaking, and after receiving a doctorate from Newnham College at Cambridge University (without even having a bachelors first!), Goodallcontinued challenging contemporary thoughts about primates. Among her discoveries was that she realized chimpanzees have social hierarchies and can have violent tendencies, but also exhibit instances of benevolence, all of which are characteristics of humans and human society.
The parting message Goodall offered was one of hope and a call to action. After her work strictly with primates, Goodall began interacting with native people near the preserve where she was working. Her goal was to help them improve their own lives so that, when not worried about basic survival themselves, they could focus on protecting the natural resources around them. She started the program Roots & Shoots, which has now become largely a school-based environmental education program. Their mission is “to foster respect and compassion for all living things, to promote understanding of all cultures and beliefs, and to inspire each individual to take action to make the world a better place for people, other animals, and the environment” (Roots & Shoots). Children and adolescents are learning the importance of changing our mindsets and habits in order to slow, and hopefully reverse, global warming and its effects. Goodall encouraged each person in the audience to take some type of action toward protecting and renewing our environment, as one individual’s actions combined with millions of others will make a difference.
To watch a video of Dr. Goodall’s talk, go here:
For more info on Roots & Shoots: https://www.rootsandshoots.org/aboutus.
As the new semester begins, we’d like to take a moment to let everyone know about some exciting things that happened over the summer and a few upcoming events that everyone should put on their calendar!
Prof. Kathleen Davis received The National Endowment for the Humanities Next Generation PhD Planning Grant. This project will explore career and experiential learning possibilities for twenty-first century humanities PhD students.
We will be featuring more interviews and spotlights on the blog about this exciting program, so stay tuned! In the meantime, you can learn more about the project at:
Our own Michele Meek and Rachel Boccio started an amazing podcast called Careers in the Public Humanities. This podcast explores the broad range of positions and prospects open to humanities PhDs beyond the tenure track. It aims to encourage cross-disciplinary learning and an engagement in research that serves diverse literary and cultural publics. .
It is being continued by Catherine Winters and Ryan Engley. Check it out at: https://soundcloud.com/user-842420423
Oct. 26 (Thursday) 4:45-5:30
Historical Narratives: The Craft of Writing
Swan Hall 152, Hoffman Room
This discussion with historian, author, and former CFH director Marie Jenkins Schwartz and historical novelist Taylor Polites will focus on the joys and challenges of engaging with history when writing. Research is an essential part of writing any book set in the past. What approaches to research work, and when it is time to stop researching and to start writing? Both Schwartz and Polites will read excerpts from their latest books and explain how their approaches to research informed the stories they tell.
Sponsored by The Center for the Humanities
Oct. 27 (Friday) 4:00-5:30
Ocean State Writing Conference: Keynote by Masha Gessen
Gessen is a journalist and author of ten books of nonfiction including the national bestseller The Man Without a Face: The Unlikely Rise of Vladimir Putin.
Dr. Maury Klein, a URI professor of history emeritus, offered his insights into to the world of historical research through archives and interviews this March at the CI. The event had a wonderful turnout with people from across disciplines at URI—from oceanography researchers to land trust stewards, English doctoral students to urban park managers—all coming out to learn how Dr. Klein makes the most of historical research and the stories it offers which can’t be found online, at the library, or in the field. Though Dr. Klein’s research is not within a scientific field, there were many takeaways for those looking to communicate science effectively to a broad public audience.
Histories Mysteries and Science’s Secrets – Disciplinary Detective Work
He opened by addressing the ways in which scientific and historical research are not so different—both seek answers like detectives in a mystery story—one in the material present, and the other in the recorded past. Though he has researched scientists, such as James Van Allen, he does not do research in labs or in the field. Or, rather, his lab and field lay elsewhere—in the interview room, library, internet, or archive—and most curiously—in the unsuspecting ways these sites overlap to lead him to obscure holdings. He has found key information that allowed him to tell the story of important histories in overlooked bookshelves of family cabins, centuries old train station warehouse dumpsters, or even as a result of a phone call from a stranger.
Nine Rules of Effective Research Learned from Five Decades of Successful Practice
Dr. Klein notes that research, regardless of discipline, shares many of the same characteristics. Keeping these characteristics in mind explicitly is his rule for producing the effective research that led to his nineteen books and numerous essays.
- Patience – the time and effort it takes to comb through all the sources you will need to view for a research project can be overwhelming. This can even seem like more than you can manage. His advice is, rather than think about the whole, to just continue to do the next thing.
- Persistence – even though you can only ever do the next thing, you must continue this effort even if the end is not in sight.
- Imagination – research is directed by the questions you ask. You don’t know what you don’t know, yet, with research you can’t find an answer without a question. You need to be able to imagine a question that reaches beyond what you already know.
- Proportion – knowing when, where, and how to cut off your research is key. Knowing how to limit the scope of a project is a first step towards this despite the imaginative leap that begins an endeavor. It is important to keep in mind that if you never finish the research, especially with something as large as a book or dissertation, it won’t matter since no one will ever see it. You need to be able to decide when to stop looking and start telling the story.
- Clear focus – it is difficult to read things and only look for what you are looking for, but you need to be able to do this or no amount of persistence and patience will turn your research into a story you can tell.
- Making Connections – the core of education is making connections between things you never saw before encountering them in close proximity. He shares how, as an undergraduate he had a common aha moment when he started to see that all the classes are connected despite their different ways of seeing the same things. It is the same at the research level. Things that seem inconsequential end up being connected, and even changing the direction of what you are doing entirely.
- Organization – his method for organizing his sources and notes appears to be almost archival in itself. The more stuff you have the more organized you need to be. You never want to be looking for something endlessly just in order to finish a sentence when you are finally telling the story.
- Style – style is about not just writing but finding a way for how you want to do the research and story drafting itself. This is a way of navigating stuff. The same system won’t work for everyone but everyone needs a system, even if it is of their own making.
- Judgment – you are constantly making decisions as a researcher in small ways—about where you will look, what you will address next, what is important, what the connections are. You also need to decide what will the source allow you to do, what the source tells you, how does it help you answer your question, what is the data telling you? It will not be self-evident. The more contextual and background information you know before you start, the easier it is to decide.
Though all this may sound overwhelming itself, he adds that research is fun if you like doing it. He always used to tell students who would ask: what can you do with a history major? – if you chose not to find a career doing what you like to do you’ll end up a miserable rich person. The research you do comes down to the size of what you are trying to accomplish – small projects will involve more targeted searching, and large ones comprehensive immersions – regardless of size however, you can’t control where the material takes you, and you must be willing to follow it to find the story you need to tell.
Plumbing the Archives
Here are Dr. Klein’s practical tips on doing archival work:
-Don’t take notes. You don’t know what you will need later. Always photocopy, scan, or photograph sources when possible.
-Don’t just look for primary sources, archival holdings of researchers materials also sometimes contain original documents from their own archival work, much of which may have become lost or is now even harder to access.
-You must do the initial leg work to find out where the holdings are which you need to access; this is not as straight forward as typical library searches.
-Go look at things yourself and don’t have someone do your research for you, they will make decisions for you and since you don’t know exactly what you are looking for until you find it, this can lead to missed opportunities.
-You need your own system of determining what is of interest.
-Companies that are around for a long time often hold on to centuries of records comprehensively. Many will allow you access if you ask and have the right connection.
-Large and/or important families often hang on to archival items until the death of the last surviving kin, often things get lost. Many will allow you access if you ask and have the right connection.
-A source on one thing will often convey information about something else; for example, he once found 19th century railway engineer notebooks that contain much flora and fauna notes about surrounding landscape which they were laying track through.
-Periodicals are a great source because they don’t know what is coming next so they are good for giving you the tone of the day.
Dr. Klein notes that, often, there isn’t always enough direct primary source material to make a source driven story, so you may need to branch out. Interviews are both a good way to do this, and to find additional sources. He suggests asking people for introductions to other people you can interview to help you with your story, this often leads back to archival holdings you would not otherwise have found. Inventory who you know. Keep track of who they know. Ask around.
When there is a generation of people outgoing you can often convince a company or organization to debrief the outgoing staff and get a good story that would otherwise have been lost, or good leads. Hence, interviews often lead to unforeseen research directions, and will help you bring your story to life later, connecting it to real and present world. With contemporary history, interviews are more important often than the archival documents. Finally, and most importantly, Klein urges researchers to always record an interview, and back it up ASAP. If you do lose it, however, you can call back and say: I had some follow up questions. Use this call to clarify key information minimizing what is lost.
Telling the Story
For Dr. Klein, how he organizes his notes and sources on archival documents and interviews corresponds to how he will write the story they tell. He picks what stories to tell several ways. Sometimes it is assigned to him – an opportunity presents itself from a publisher, educational organization, or even law firm, and he accepts it if it intrigues him. Other times he decides on his own to pursue something. In this case it is often something he wants to know more about – and what better way. The point is that you never know where a topic will come from. You never know where your research is going to take you or what further avenues it is going to open up for you. It used to always be important to answer the phone as the vanguard of career success, now it is never ignore an email, explore every opportunity. Klein explains one often blunders into things. He seems to say, however, that in order to do so, you must already be immersing yourself in an area, rather than researching narrowly or transactionally. You need to carve out the space to do exploratory work and the story will usually reveal itself. When thinking about how to tell a story – how to present information so that it does not overwhelm a reader, Dr. Klein explains the way you communicate will depend on how you approach the research. For him, this leads to a sort of condensed style. He likes to say as much as he can in as small a space as possible, this leads to succinct and dense sentences and necessitates using active verbs, the opposite of, say, a Victorian style.
Most importantly, you need to be able to see the scaffolding of the story the data will tell. When a story has not been told yet it isn’t usually because the facts aren’t known, so much as it is that researchers haven’t yet found a way to scaffold the information. The scaffolding – or organizational structure – emerges during the research stage, which you make explicit in your telling. When revising his stories, he follows the same style of condensation, rather than altering the scaffolding and reorganizing or removing whole sections. He goes page by page reducing each by an equal percentage. All of this – research and writing – are more achievable if you have regular work habits – a routine that you follow. For him, this is writing seven days a week, every morning at least. He doesn’t take vacations because his work is fun. Regarding the presentation of quantitative data, he suggests always writing at a level comprehensible by a non-technical reader. He also suggests not so much explicating the data as providing it alongside a qualitative narrative which emerged from it.
In the third episode of the Rhode Island Council of the Humanities podcast celebrating the 100th anniversary of the Pulitzer Prize, Margo Jefferson considers the intersection of journalism, the humanities, and the environment. Topics in the interview cover the tension between scholars and journalists, the possibilities for the 21st century essay, and the cultural environments that inform Jefferson’s work. From the traditional essay published as a book to an online version scored to music, the possibilities for this “theater of the mind” have expanded greatly in this last century. A keynote speaker at this last year’s Ocean State Summer Writer’s Conference, the meeting of academics and creative writers is also given attention towards the end of this insightful conversation.
If mood is something that is induced from the outside, then the performance on November 1st by author and Professor Mary Cappello of the English department and pianist Kirsten Volness, called the audience to participate in an event that could alter and influence mood.
The performance was not in the Hoffman Room of Swan Hall where we typically gather for the Read/Write series events, rather it was held in the Fine Arts Building Recital Hall. And so the very space of the occasion was responsible for creating mood. As the audience entered, we were met with hues of violet and indigo and a soundscape of speech accompanied by a musical loop: “eyes remove themselves from your body… and [become] a masterpiece, a work of art…” From the start, this performance rendered an overlapping of thought and mood and posited the necessary connection between our senses and our moods.
Reading from her latest book, Life Breaks In (A Mood Almanack), Professor Cappello gave the audience the opportunity to wonder where mood resides, and to sit with the idea that mood is both of and outside the body.
Professor Cappello brings to her students and the audience and readers of her work, an examination of and reflection on those elements in our lives that we often ignore, that we do not allow ourselves the time to pause and think about. Here we are called by the author to consider mood. This may seem a contradictory exercise, to use our minds to interpret what we feel when mood may be more visceral. For this reason a reading itself is not enough. The multimodal elements of the event created a space for listeners not merely to use their minds to think about what was being read, but color and images and sound, invited us to enter a mood—what Professor Cappello might have in mind when she refers to a mood room.
Words are one medium Professor Cappello uses to create mood. Words transmit to the audience Cappello’s childhood memories. Her mother’s words and sounds constitute a sonorous envelope—a term coined by Édith Lecourt, which Cappello builds off of, “a common zone…. created by the mother’s voice, which, though originally affiliated with contact, ‘will subsequently exist on its own, without the body contact that accompanies it’ ” (305). These sounds surround us in our formative year and may continue to reside both in our memories and somewhere outside our bodies throughout our lives. Words are also the tools of thinkers and writers such as Roland Barthes and William Gass that inform Cappello’s reflections on mood. Thus through the blending of all of these voices, we are left with the recognition that words are a fusion of sound and thought carrying with them the both meaning and mood.
The performance also included the work of Berlin based trumpeter and composer Paul Brody’s sound instillation, “Talking Melodies.” The piece overlays music with recordings from interviews Brody conducted, turning speech into something melodic and musical. Words and tune combine again invoking thought and emotion to induce mood.
A little over a week after the performance, I am also left thinking of the ethereal nature of mood. By projecting images of clouds behind her as she read, Professor Cappello used these stunning visuals as a metaphor for the transitory and ethereal nature of mood. Clouds shape shift as we gaze at them, the air currents sculpting their form before our eyes. They change color when the angle of light changes.
We are invited into Professor Cappello’s mind by the words she shares with us to describe the studious mood. We might assume such a mood is fixed. In one of the chapters from which she read, “In a Studious Mood,” we follow her from the initial proclamations of what mood is not, “It doesn’t begin: ‘Now is the winter of our discontent made glorious by this sun of York,’ ” to the study of anatomy books furnished with intricate descriptions of the ear and precise scientific language. We are taken into Cappello’s study, designed to let in more light, imagining this will help in creating the studious mood, influenced as much by the outer as it is by interiority. But in this studying, this dismantling and excavating of ideas that Professor Cappello leads us through, as listeners it is possible that we do not remain in the studious mood. The reading closed with her reflections on three sounds made by her partner Jean: footsteps the “ ‘puh’ ” sound of a wooden door stuck to its frame,” and the laying of keys on a table. And though as she reads, it might be that like Cappello, it is our inhabitation of a studios mood that allows us to stumble upon unknown mysteries—including those related to the people we love—as a listener, hearing this recounting of sounds made by a loved one, I was transported from my own attempt to soak in ideas, to think in new ways, and be engaged in studious reflection, to a mood more akin to wonderment and reverence. Which may indeed be essential to the studious mood. And so the cloud of mood continues to dance in the currents.
The evening’s performance ended with wordless sound—the music of Kirsten Volness. The audience entered into a space where the music, which lies outside of the body, travels to the body through the ear. We are reminded that our body functions as a type of interpreter. And as the evening’s presentation came to a close, Kirsten Volness’s piano composition with notes ethereal and rooted tones, provided a space in which to give ourselves up to mood—reflective, invigorating, studious, serene.
In the front of the room sits a panel of four veterans, all prepared to talk about their unique experiences with homecoming. The event, supported by the Rhode Island Council for the Humanities, is a unique opportunity for both the veterans and audience to engage with literature, film, and historical writings as a way to situate and relate their own experiences. The event opens with an introduction from Prof. Widell of the History Department. He talked about the importance of humanities texts in interrogating the language of homecoming and stressed that what people often forget in history is that it is not only about telling stories, but about listening. The panel of veterans was asked to read and watch several different texts selected by the event organizers. For this particular panel, focusing on texts dealing with World War I, Prof. Widell selected works from WEB du Bois, Allen Berube, Ira Katznelson, and Donnie Williams. Tom Conroy from Film and Media asked the panelists to watch The Best Years of Our Lives and read a companion piece to the film. Molly Hall from English chose works by Mary Borden, James Europe, and JD Salinger.
After a brief introduction from each member of the committee outlining the specific works they chose for the panel, Prof. Widell opened the floor to the panelists, asking them to first identify themselves and give a short biography. Chad McFarlane spent five years in the Army as a tanker, eventually earning the rank of Sargeant. He is currently a senior at URI. Michael Steiner, also a senior at URI, joined the Navy and worked as a Radar Tech, serving through three deployments in the Persian Gulf and one in the western Pacific. Denny Cosmo was already in infantry school when the twin towers were hit in NYC. He served with the 325th Infantry Airborne division as an intelligence collector in Iraq. He is currently attending CCRI. Finally, Ashley Aldarondo-Martinez spent four years in the Army as a Human Resource Specialist and currently works for the Department of Veteran Affairs.
After their introductions, the panelists were asked to respond generally to the materials they had read and seen. “Blind,” a selection from Mary Borden, seemed to touch many of the panelists for the ways in which Borden deployed blindness as a metaphor. In the excerpt, the panelists noticed that soldiers seemed blind to the other men lying on cots right next to them, the nurses had to in many ways be blind to the suffering they saw, and those that welcomed the soldiers back seemed blind to their experience. Du Bois was also popular for the ways in which he encouraged black soldiers to dedicate themselves to the war effort in order to gain more rights back home in America. Building on this reading, Chad recalled a moment when, after returning from basic training he entered a dry cleaning store. Initially, he received a less than warm welcome, but when he pulled his uniform out the clerk’s eyes lit up and his whole demeanor changed. It seems that the uniform acted as an equalizer. Each panelist agreed that The Best Years of Our Lives captured the ambivalence of homecoming. While none believed that their time in the service were “the best years of their lives,” they identified with the strong sense ofcomradery the men felt in the film that was in some ways lacking upon their return.
The question and answer session was also very lively with a lot of audience participation. One of the best questions of the afternoon concerned what each of the panelists would recommend as “improvements” or modifications to the current process of discharge and reintegration. Panelists mentioned a greater focus on entrepreneurship and putting veterans’ unique skills to use in starting their own businesses, a better explanation and guidance in maximizing the GI Bill and specific skills to succeed in college, and a focus on asking veterans where they wanted to fit into society and what they wanted to be doing instead of attempting to take skills learned in the service and translate them directly into a job.
The session was brought to a close when a gentleman in the audience, a veteran himself, thanked all of the panelists for not only their service but their willingness to partici
pate in this forum. His sincerity was echoed by, I think, everyone in the audience and underscored the importance of opening up spaces in which people have the chance to truly listen to others’ experiences. The next session focuses on texts centered on the Vietnam War and is being hosted by the Providence Public Library on Oct. 16 at 2pm. More information, as well as links to the works the veteran panel will be reading can be found here: http://rivetsspeak.weebly.com/
On April 11, Marta Werner presented the URI community with a glimpse into the Amherst College Archives in an inspiring talk titled “Weathering: Reading the Snell Family Meteorological Journal in the Long Days of the Anthropocene.” The Snell family journals are a multivolume collection of weather recordings written by Ebenezer Snell and Sabra Snell from 1835 until 1902. Werner’s talk meditated on the value of contemplating the hourly and daily functions of the weather, but she also asked her audience to consider what else these journals might have to say. The journals collectively are a scientific effort to document the climate of Amherst over a period of time. But Werner suggested that we also look at them as a project of shared authorship between father and daughter – a project started by a father and continued by a daughter for a quarter century after his death. As Werner pointed out, the journals survive them; they are what the Snells have left behind.
Today, the journals exist in the archives as a historical document. Werner’s talk interrogated the term “historical document” and invited us to contemplate what it means. “What is a document?” she asked a room full of students, staff, and faculty members. She pressed the question further, considering the various associations we might have with this particular word. Often, it’s a word associated with proof and evidence, but Werner suggested that much of what a document has to offer its readers remains unsettled. A document doesn’t have clearly defined beginnings and endings as some might assume.
The same may be said for what is found in the archives. It’s a common misconception that the archives are a place of order, organization, and completeness. Instead, Werner’s experiences working there have led her to understand the archive as a place with indistinct boundaries between author and reader, between past and present, between what we write and what is being written. Her work insightfully questions its seemingly arbitrary nature, asking, “Why do some documents speak to us while others we leave behind?”
In response to this question, Werner considers working in the archives as occupying a space of chance meetings. When someone enters this space, there is no telling what may be found. Some documents speak to us; others seem to have nothing more to say. As Werner understands it, the archive is a place of accidental meetings between the present moment and a moment from the past. She recognizes that all historical documents outlive those who have written them, and her work has allowed her a space to make connections between the living and the dead. In this sense, Werner considers the Snell meteorological journals as a “living archive,” a message that still speaks: “If you keep looking, even the most unpromising thing can be luminous.”
On April, 9th, 2016 the Department of English hosted the 10th Annual URI Graduate Conference. This year’s theme was “Trans(form): New Insights and New Directions,” a topic chosen by the Conference Committee with the intent to highlight interdisciplinarity and encourage students from every research field to contribute. According to the co-chairs, PhD students Jenna Guitar and Serap Hidir, transdisciplinarity was utilized “to help us think beyond the borders of disciplines while also allowing graduate students from any discipline to participate.” That is exactly what happened this year, with the theme of transdiciplinarity explored through the lens of chemistry, engineering, sociology, geosciences, psychology, literature, philosophy, and media. Transcultural. Transect. Transition. Transcend. Translation. Transportation. Transfuse. Transplant. Transformation.
With more than 100 participants, over 30 panel sessions, 3 roundtables, and 15 posters presented, GradCon2016 can be defined as a huge success. Graduate students not only from Rhode Island but from the east coast to Canada reached URI to participate and present their research: 16 different universities were represented, Salve Regina University, University of New Hampshire, Hofstra University, Southern Connecticut State University, University of Pennsylvania, University of Toronto, and many others.
Paul Bueno de Mesquita, professor of psychology at the University of Rhode Island and director of the URI Center for Nonviolence & Peace, was the plenary speaker. His inspiring lecture titled “Eclectic Visionary Synthesis: The Transformative Power of Kingian Thinking,” opened the proceedings.
Paisley Currah, professor of political sciences and women’s & gender studies at Brooklyn College and the Graduate Center at CUNY, concluded this year’s GradCon with a lecture titled “Transgender Beside Itself: Paradigms, Paradoxes, and Other Exemplary Subjects.” His lecture was the perfect conclusion for such an intense one-day conference. Professor Currah, who is also a co-founding editor of Transgender Studies Quarterly, discussed the notion of gender as a social, political construct, and described how apparent contradictions in sex classification policies reflect fragmented state projects.
The poster sessions – with their “inventiveness and possibilities” according to the Director of Graduate Studies, Professor Jean Walton – highlighted the idea of transdisciplinary research, as presenters from humanities and sciences shared the same space and time, and used the same medium -the poster- to show the results of their academic work.
Participants reframed and reshaped the notion of transdisciplinarity by interacting, discussing, debating, and creating a vibrant exchange of ideas across disciplines in the spirit of what a graduate conference means. The presence of professors Stephen Barber, Peter Covino, and Jean Walton from URI’s Department of English strengthened the idea that URI GradCon is more than an occasion for presenting your work; it is the place for establishing an intellectual connection, and creating a positive, inspiring environment for the future of our research. Any research. In Biocultures Manifesto Davis and Morris made clear how interdisciplinarity has become a rule in academic research: sciences and humanities, biology and culture, have always interacted, interweaving their paths in many ways, but now –according to Davis and Morris – they are not considered as distant fields anymore. URI GradCon translated this concept into reality by creating an interdisciplinary
Thinking, inspiring and being inspired, reflecting, dialoguing. Brainstorming around a prefix. Trans(forming). Moving into new directions. Moving forward. GradCon 2017.and transdisciplinary space and place for scholars.