Considers (88) H.R. 9586, (89) H.R. 334, (89) H.R. 2043, (89) H.R. 3617, (89) S. 111, (89) S. 310, (89) S. 315, (89) S. 316, (89) S. 1483.

In the United States, broad study in an array of different disciplines â€"arts, humanities, science, mathematics, engineeringâ€" as well as an in-depth study within a special area of interest, have been defining characteristics of a higher education. But over time, in-depth study in a major discipline has come to dominate the curricula at many institutions. This evolution of the curriculum has been driven, in part, by increasing specialization in the academic disciplines. There is little doubt that disciplinary specialization has helped produce many of the achievement of the past century. Researchers in all academic disciplines have been able to delve more deeply into their areas of expertise, grappling with ever more specialized and fundamental problems. Yet today, many leaders, scholars, parents, and students are asking whether higher education has moved too far from its integrative tradition towards an approach heavily rooted in disciplinary "silos". These "silos" represent what many see as an artificial separation of academic disciplines. This study reflects a growing concern that the approach to higher education that favors disciplinary specialization is poorly calibrated to the challenges and opportunities of our time. The Integration of the Humanities and Arts with Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine in Higher Education examines the evidence behind the assertion that educational programs that mutually integrate learning experiences in the humanities and arts with science, technology, engineering, mathematics, and medicine (STEMM) lead to improved educational and career outcomes for undergraduate and graduate students. It explores evidence regarding the value of integrating more STEMM curricula and labs into the academic programs of students majoring in the humanities and arts and evidence regarding the value of integrating curricula and experiences in the arts and humanities into college and university STEMM education programs.

The contributed volume "Multidisciplinarity and Interdisciplinarity in Health" is a health-centered volume of the Integrated Science Book series. Lack of confidence, lack of expertise, complexities of healthcare, the confusing nature of healthcare environments, and lack of organization and standardization can become obstacles to successful communication. This volume establishes how extensive is the interface between formal sciences and medical sciences on health-related issues. The book provides an overview of the value of the integration of formal, biological, and medical sciences and related products, i.e., health informatics and biomedical engineering, to frame a holistic approach to health systems, healthcare, medical practice, drug discovery, and medical device design. The book also focuses on innovative solutions to the most critical issues of different health crisis, including obesity, infectious outbreaks, and cancer that can be found by using an integrative approach. It also contains the fascinating crossroads between medical sciences, physics, and mind that is discussed from multiple perspectives on cognition, neuroscience, and psychiatry. These multidisciplinary considerations will expand the concepts of creativity, leadership, aesthetics, empathy and mental health.

Traditional critical editing, defined by the paper and print limitations of the book, is now considered by many to be inadequate for the expression and interpretation of complex works of literature. At the same time, digital developments are permitting us to extend the range of text objects we can reproduce and investigate critically - not just books, but newspapers, draft manuscripts and inscriptions on stone. Some exponents of the benefits of new information technologies argue that in future all editions should be produced in digital or online form. By contrast, others point to the fact that print, after more than five hundred years of development, continues to set the agenda for how we think about text, even in its non-print forms. This important book brings together leading textual critics, scholarly editors, technical specialists and publishers to discuss whether and how existing paradigms for developing and using critical editions are changing to reflect the increased commitment to and assumed significance of digital tools and methodologies.

Reports for 1980-19 also include the Annual report of the National Council on the Arts.