[1] From: Brad Inwood <inwood@chass.utoronto.ca> (24)
Subject: Re: 10.036 more on tenure
[2] From: Paul Douglass <pdouglas@email.SJSU.EDU> (1)
Subject: Re: 10.036 more on tenure
[3] From: "Michael P. Orth (Michael Orth)" (5)
<morth@cymbal.aix.calpoly.edu>
Subject: Re: 10.036 more on tenure
--[1]------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 10:39:17 -0400 (EDT)
From: Brad Inwood <inwood@chass.utoronto.ca>
Subject: Re: 10.036 more on tenure
Jim Gardner's opinion piece on humanities scholarship is well-timed and
welcome. But his views about the value of articles as opposed to books in
the humanities seem extreme. Sure, scientists and social sciences publish
more articles and virtually no books -- for some of the reasons he
adduces. But I don't know anyone who thinks as he does that the article is
an intrinsically inferior form of scholarship or that cutting edge
research in the humanities cannot be accommodated in that form. In the
fields I know well (Classics and History of Philosophy) such a view would
be absurdly out of touch with reality, and in other areas where I am less
in touch I doubt it is much different.
This is an important issue: differences in disciplinary culture do
distort incentives and evaluation in the humanities and do impair our
standing in the modern university. But even in a newspaper opinion piece
(or perhaps especially there) it is vital to present the humanities as
they are. In many fields of the humanities the authoritative work is often
done in articles; in many fields new evidence does come to light with
regularity; and in many cases the big authoritative book builds on the
foundations laid by a long series of articles which are all the better for
having passed through the critical filter of peer-reviewed journals, which
is often more rigorous than the appraisal and vetting to which book
manuscripts are subjected.
----------------------------------------------------
Brad Inwood
Department of Classics Toronto, Canada
University of Toronto M5S 1A1
--[2]------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 09:03:36 -0700 (PDT)
From: Paul Douglass <pdouglas@email.SJSU.EDU>
Subject: Re: 10.036 more on tenure
Thanks for the forwarded message about Minnesota. Are you aware that the
story is opn the cover of the current CHRONICLE OF HIGHER EDUCATION? PD.
--[3]------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 13:57:48 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Michael P. Orth (Michael Orth)" <morth@cymbal.aix.calpoly.edu>
Subject: Re: 10.036 more on tenure
Oh Dear, oh dear. Jim Gardner protests that professors with a six hour
teaching load are being accused by the Minn. press of "not pulling their
weight." It is hard for those of us with 12 teaching loads, plus the
same research expectation you guys have, to keep from agreeing with the
bad guys (the ignorant public) in this.
The Kraken===============end of file=================/;->?9