When I first came to Oberlin, I was excited about the idea of exploring multiple fields. I had always been interested in how business, law, politics, and economics interact in the real world, and Oberlin seemed like a place where interdisciplinary learning was encouraged. But as I started planning my courses and getting deeper into my major, I noticed something that felt a little off: even though we talk a lot about connecting ideas across disciplines, our academic departments don’t seem to do much of that in practice.
To be clear, I’m not saying that professors aren’t supportive or that individual departments aren’t doing important work — they are. I’ve had some incredible classes and conversations that have really challenged me and helped me grow. But what I’ve also noticed is that if you want to study how two or more subjects interact, it’s largely on you to make those connections. The College itself doesn’t always provide the structure or support to do that easily.
Take my own experience as a student with an interest in law, politics, and business. These are fields that clearly intersect, especially when you consider the real-world overlap between corporate regulation, public policy, finance, and ethics. But when I look at how my courses are set up and how departments operate, it feels like there’s very little intentional collaboration between them. I’ve found myself in classes covering similar ideas, like leadership, justice, or economic inequality, but from totally different angles, with no reference to how those conversations might inform each other. Sometimes I’ve even felt like I was learning the same thing twice, just with slightly different language or frameworks.
It can be frustrating. Not because the content isn’t valuable, but because the lack of integration feels like a missed opportunity. Why aren’t departments working together to flesh out courses that reflect the kind of complexity we’ll face after college? Why aren’t there more spaces where students and faculty from different disciplines can come together to talk about shared themes or problems? It’s especially strange because Oberlin is the kind of place where students already think beyond disciplinary boundaries. My friends care about things like environmental justice, ethical business, public policy and tech accountability — all topics that require knowledge from multiple fields. But when we try to pursue those interests academically, course structures don’t always support us.
And I know I’m not alone in feeling this way. I’ve talked to students in Politics, Environmental Studies, Sociology, and Comparative American Studies who’ve run into the same thing. They’ll take one class that touches on a big issue like climate policy or incarceration, and then another class in a different department that covers a similar topic but with no connection or reference point to the first. It’s like we’re expected to assemble our education like a puzzle, without a clear picture of what the final image should be.
To me, the solution isn’t to get rid of departments or make everything interdisciplinary. Each department has its own important focus, history, and methods that students need to learn. But what Oberlin can do is create more intentional bridges between those departments. That could look like more StudiOC courses, where faculty from different fields collaborate to design courses together. Or it could mean organizing more panels and discussions that bring together different academic perspectives on the same topic. It could also mean offering more flexibility in course requirements for students pursuing interdisciplinary paths, so we’re not boxed into choosing between two equally relevant but “unrelated” options.
Advising could be another place for improvement. Right now, if you’re pursuing a double major or trying to craft a path that touches multiple fields, it’s on you to figure out how everything fits together. That’s a lot to expect from students, especially when they’re new to a subject or unsure of how departments interact. What if there were joint advising sessions or designated interdisciplinary advisors who could help students navigate those complexities more effectively?
Oberlin has so many resources already in place. We have passionate faculty doing interesting research, students who are intellectually curious and socially aware, and a campus culture that encourages critical thinking. But we’re missing some of the structural support that could help all of those things work together more cohesively. And if we really want to prepare students to address the kinds of problems they care about — climate change, systemic inequality, corporate accountability, global health — we need to be doing more to model that complexity in the classroom.
The truth is, most of the world doesn’t operate independently. The most urgent challenges we face don’t belong to one discipline or career path. They require people who can think across boundaries, communicate with people in different fields, and build solutions that account for social, economic, political, and ethical dimensions. That’s what interdisciplinary education is really about, not just taking classes in different departments, but learning how to connect those ideas in a way that feels real and relevant.
Oberlin has the potential to be a leader in this space. We already talk about being forward-thinking, creative, and socially conscious. Encouraging more collaboration between academic departments would be one of the most impactful ways to make those values part of our academic experience, not just our marketing materials.
