Read on Twitter
This is its own kind of journalistic genre now, and it's a problem.
A big problem. (And a thread) https://theconversation.com/academics-can-change-the-world-if-they-stop-talking-only-to-their-peers-55713?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=twitterbutton&fbclid=IwAR0C6z2_Sg9f5-g1aIntaTVQHVRQX522CjCqIsd2Rbw8IvK4nrvtGAAxwuM
A big problem. (And a thread) https://theconversation.com/academics-can-change-the-world-if-they-stop-talking-only-to-their-peers-55713?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=twitterbutton&fbclid=IwAR0C6z2_Sg9f5-g1aIntaTVQHVRQX522CjCqIsd2Rbw8IvK4nrvtGAAxwuM
Stories like this will be published over and over again because *no matter what direction it’s coming from* it plays to stereotypes about academia held by many who don’t know better while also serving as an effective anti-intellectual weapon for a segment of those who do.
(Points below drawn from Ted McCormick's "Historians, Public Intellectuals in Waiting.")
1. Journal articles are not failed attempts to reach the public. Treating them as such is dishonest. They are generally designed to share research and new discoveries with other specialists in the discipline, which is a vital part of creating and shaping new knowledge.
2. Writing for specialists is not better or worse than writing for the public. It just serves a different purpose.
3. In fields that are actually generating new research, writing for specialists is necessary. For any given researcher, writing for the public may or may not be.
(Note: there's little incentive to engage in public scholarship. It doesn't count towards tenure, funding, salary, nothing. It's a service.)
4. Writing for the public requires different skills than writing for specialists. Not more, not better; different.
5. Public and specialist audiences are not in competition with each other, except for an individual’s time. There is no general prescription for how to apportion that.
6. Nearly everyone writing these pieces *knows* all this. To that extent, this genre is inherently dishonest.
7. It is important that research be publicized and made accessible to those interested in it. And this has, for significant reasons, been one of the pushes behind Open Access publishing in multiple disciplines.
But it's a hard sell as most journals and publishers have no interest in making less money on this work.
8. It is a depressing irony that so many arguments about making academic work accessible to the public should draw their force from amplifying popular stereotypes about the nature of academic work. It is hard to believe this is any way to fix a real problem.
9. In practical terms, this kind of argument, by failing to explain how academic research *happens* (treating it instead as a given, to be shared or not) contributes to the popular misconceptions it pretends to address. Whether this is intentional or not is, in a word, academic.
10. Here are some things we do when not writing for the public:
Teach
Supervise research
Read/absorb new research
Conduct new research
Edit/peer review/critique new research
Plan, secure funds for, undertake, write up, present, revise, and publish our own research
Teach
Supervise research
Read/absorb new research
Conduct new research
Edit/peer review/critique new research
Plan, secure funds for, undertake, write up, present, revise, and publish our own research
Which of these things is dispensable?
11. Arguing about the value or purpose of academic work as if it is merely a matter of publication, without dealing with how the knowledge published is produced in the first place, is a waste of time.
It's the highbrow version of saying Ken Burns videos should replace teachers.
It's the highbrow version of saying Ken Burns videos should replace teachers.
12. And lastly, I will add my own particular pet peeve - A lot of academics, a lot of us, ARE writing for the public. We are active on social media platforms, write blogs and magazine articles, appear on documentaries, give interviews on podcasts, and all manner of other things.
Part of the problem we are facing is that the public isn't listening to us, and in worse case scenarios, doesn't want to listen to us because we challenge their comfortable preconceived notions about the world.
I can't "publish" my way out of any of that.
I can't "publish" my way out of any of that.
