Why is the vast majority of social science research junk? The answer is based in how academics are trained in graduate school. What’s perhaps most disturbing is the complete disinterest of professors training PhD students in emphasizing the importance of practical research, to be used in some way to improve democracy and society. This goal is rarely idealized in graduate training. Typically, students randomly pick topics they personally think are “interesting” within a vacuum, despite the fact that most topics of choice are so narrow and esoteric that they are of little interest to even most of those within the discipline itself. Over-specialization leads to a mismatch between research agendas and teaching. Most research has little value for the typical undergraduate, leaving many professors ill-equipped for their teaching duties.
Professors that prioritize being public intellectuals, writing for popular as well as academic audiences, are often filtered out during the hiring process in many schools (at very best this quality is rarely valued in job searches). There seems to be little room in higher ed today for people committed to making the world a better place. The neutering of research serves a broader social purpose, however. If professors – those with great resources to expose social injustices and improve the quality of democracy – are disinterested in applied research, then they will play an instrumental role in tacitly reinforcing official propaganda, deception, and societal indoctrination. Political and economic elites don’t have to worry about intellectual challenges from the academy in social scientists produce academic gibberish and psychobabble. full: http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/09/19/academic-fraud-and-the-ponzi-scheme-of-higher-learning/ _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
