next »

[aandsdean]

Can anybody tell me how reputation, research and education are incompatible? Since the only one making this claim seems to be our original poster, maybe he's the one that can substantiate it?

Because they are not put on equal footing.  If there was a balance of these forces, things might be okay.

But when reputations are valued so much more than anything else, it means that necessarily education and research must suffer.

It's like this: in a balanced situation you spend 1/3 of your energy on teaching, 1/3 on research, and 1/3 on reputation.  If you spend 80% of you energy on reputation, then necessarily teaching and research are left with only 20% of your energy.  

But academia is supported by public funding.  The public would be quite upset of they knew that most of the energy they put into the academic system does not go to its true purpose.

Like the others, I call B.S. on the bolded statement.  In addition, only a very very small fraction of those engaged in higher education are at institutions whose primary mission is research (which, again, is where reputation comes from).  A tremendous majority of professors have effective teaching as their primary task, and 90% (maybe a little less, but not much) of the colleges and universities in this country are primarily teaching institutions.

But of course I'm neither a shaman, seer, nor prophet, nor have I ever felt called to be one of these, so what do I know?

[symbolicsorcery]

Can anybody tell me how reputation, research and education are incompatible? Since the only one making this claim seems to be our original poster, maybe he's the one that can substantiate it?

Because they are not put on equal footing.  If there was a balance of these forces, things might be okay.

But when reputations are valued so much more than anything else, it means that necessarily education and research must suffer.

It's like this: in a balanced situation you spend 1/3 of your energy on teaching, 1/3 on research, and 1/3 on reputation.  If you spend 80% of you energy on reputation, then necessarily teaching and research are left with only 20% of your energy.  

But academia is supported by public funding.  The public would be quite upset of they knew that most of the energy they put into the academic system does not go to its true purpose.

Like the others, I call B.S. on the bolded statement.  In addition, only a very very small fraction of those engaged in higher education are at institutions whose primary mission is research (which, again, is where reputation comes from).  A tremendous majority of professors have effective teaching as their primary task, and 90% (maybe a little less, but not much) of the colleges and universities in this country are primarily teaching institutions.

But of course I'm neither a shaman, seer, nor prophet, nor have I ever felt called to be one of these, so what do I know?

I wasn't trying to make those figures realistic.

Still no one has confronted me on the issue of whether or not reputation is the main thing that matters in academic life.

There's lots of good people out there doing research and teaching, and are not in academia.  They don't care about reputation, and derivation of reputation from research and teaching is merely a consolation.

Why do you guys care so much about reputation?  Shouldn't your work speak for itself?

[european]

It doesn't matter whether reputation is "the main thing" in academic life. Who cares about the motivation for people to pursue an academic career? That is a private matter. What matters is their actual behavior, e.g. how they interact with their peers, how they teach, and how they research.

[sciencephd]

Still no one has confronted me on the issue of whether or not reputation is the main thing that matters in academic life.

In the world of real people, reputation matters.  In fact, much of one's professional identity can probably be summed up by the term "reputation".   This is true in any field or venue.

[symbolicsorcery]

It doesn't matter whether reputation is what matters in academic life. Who cares about the motivation for people to pursue an academic career? That is a private matter. What matters is their actual behavior, e.g. how they interact with their peers, how they teach, and how they research.

Fine.  Just don't go around pretending to be the one and only valid institution of truth and knowledge, and then lambast anyone who takes a different approach to truth and knowledge.

Obviously I'm not implicating you in this, but I have observed this problem in many situations.

[concordancia]

You've got a bad reputation that's a what you got
A bad reputation but I like it a lot
A bad reputation and it's all over town
A bad reputation and it's going around

~Reverend Horton Heat

[dalekk]

Does anyone else think Utah should be the national champion?  I mean, Florida is good and all, but considering their lackluster performance against Oklahoma and the fact that they have a loss, I think Utah should be the champion.  

I meant for this post to be completely unrelated to OP, but now that I think about it, you could make the argument that Florida is the national champion based on their reputation and that Utah got screwed, much like OP.  

Thoughts?

Also, feel free to comment on the Cubs prospects for 2009.  I say this is the year, but I could be wrong.

[symbolicsorcery]

Still no one has confronted me on the issue of whether or not reputation is the main thing that matters in academic life.

In the world of real people, reputation matters.  In fact, much of one's professional identity can probably be summed up by the term "reputation".   This is true in any field or venue.

But is it the bottom line?  Do you value your acadmic reputation more than your ideas or your students?  Is there a conflict of interest when the public is paying for your job, but most of your effort goes towards playing ego games?

[grasshopper]

Just don't go around pretending to be the one and only valid institution of truth and knowledge, and then lambast anyone who takes a different approach to truth and knowledge.

Uh, but what if I actually am the one and only valid institution of truth and knowledge?

Still no one has confronted me on the issue of whether or not reputation is the main thing that matters in academic life.

In the world of real people, reputation matters.  In fact, much of one's professional identity can probably be summed up by the term "reputation".   This is true in any field or venue.

But is it the bottom line?  Do you value your acadmic reputation more than your ideas or your students?  Is there a conflict of interest when the public is paying for your job, but most of your effort goes towards playing ego games?

Here's what you don't get: my academic reputation IS my ideas and my students.

[sciencephd]

Still no one has confronted me on the issue of whether or not reputation is the main thing that matters in academic life.

In the world of real people, reputation matters.  In fact, much of one's professional identity can probably be summed up by the term "reputation".   This is true in any field or venue.

But is it the bottom line?  Do you value your acadmic reputation more than your ideas or your students?  Is there a conflict of interest when the public is paying for your job, but most of your effort goes towards playing ego games?

My reputation derives from my ideas and students.  Do you understand the meaning of the word "derives" ?  

Of course, if my students are stoners or nutjobs, I tend to kick their ass out (note that this point follows from the premise in sentence #1).

[european]

Here's what you don't get: my academic reputation IS my ideas and my students.

Well, there are exceptions to this - e.g., people like Finkelstein.

[kedves]

I don't give a damn 'bout my reputation
You're living in the past it's a new generation
A girl can do what she wants to do and that's
What I'm gonna do
An' I don't give a damn ' bout my bad reputation
Oh no not me

-Joan Jett

[symbolicsorcery]

Just don't go around pretending to be the one and only valid institution of truth and knowledge, and then lambast anyone who takes a different approach to truth and knowledge.

Uh, but what if I actually am the one and only valid institution of truth and knowledge?

Still no one has confronted me on the issue of whether or not reputation is the main thing that matters in academic life.

In the world of real people, reputation matters.  In fact, much of one's professional identity can probably be summed up by the term "reputation".   This is true in any field or venue.

But is it the bottom line?  Do you value your acadmic reputation more than your ideas or your students?  Is there a conflict of interest when the public is paying for your job, but most of your effort goes towards playing ego games?

Here's what you don't get: my academic reputation IS my ideas and my students.

That is good.  I'm actually glad to hear this finally.

But the question I have is: what is the bottom line? Do you work on ideas and work with students so that you can beef up your reputation?  Are you motivated to work on ideas and teaching because of how it might affect your reputation?

What is the main motivation?  Is it building a reputation, or helping make the world a better place?

[symbolicsorcery]

Still no one has confronted me on the issue of whether or not reputation is the main thing that matters in academic life.

In the world of real people, reputation matters.  In fact, much of one's professional identity can probably be summed up by the term "reputation".   This is true in any field or venue.

But is it the bottom line?  Do you value your acadmic reputation more than your ideas or your students?  Is there a conflict of interest when the public is paying for your job, but most of your effort goes towards playing ego games?

My reputation derives from my ideas and students.  Do you understand the meaning of the word "derives" ?  

Of course, if my students are stoners or nutjobs, I tend to kick their ass out (note that this point follows from the premise in sentence #1).

Hehe, you're asking someone who has mastered the calculus if he knows what derive means.  Don't be silly.

Why aren't you answering any of my questions?

[european]

That is good.  I'm actually glad to hear this finally.

But the question I have is: what is the bottom line? Do you work on ideas and work with students so that you can beef up your reputation?  Are you motivated to work on ideas and teaching because of how it might affect your reputation?

What is the main motivation?  Is it building a reputation, or helping make the world a better place?

How does this even matter? What is the impact of one's motivation on academic activity? Does it matter if you research out of selfish reasons or out of idealistic reasons, if the results are the same anyway?