Ideally I’d love to see one of the writers of these papers demonstrate how they would have reviewed it. I think it’d help bridge the gap between layman and academic. But they’ve already done a tremendous amount of work already.
-
-
Putting aside the debates about how you arrive at your assessments, the tendencies you guys decry are a much smaller enclave of the university than you think, and more importantly, that ppl reading your work will be lead to believe.
-
Show this, then. I've spent several years documenting with evidence what I am worried about.
-
Sure. Here's a more superficial one, but the impact factors of the journals you cite are all under <5. Gender, Place, and Culture has a 1.0something. They may have high within-field influence (for argument's sake), but university or humanities-wide? Not so.
-
That would only be a good argument if we'd claimed the problem to be within the whole university or humanities and not been very clear that we are not saying that.I asked for evidence we that we are saying it is a bigger problem, not stuff consistent with us saying it is specific
-
Gender, Place and Culture is the top feminist geography journal. We have been very clear that we are not criticising the field of geography but subdisciplines which approach it from a grievance studies perspective.pic.twitter.com/yBwc18RrBS
-
Why are you so determined to have a problem with our project when I have shown you evidence to answer all your concerns? It feels as though you want this to be bad somehow, even tho you have said you don't have sympathies with this kind of scholarship.
-
LOL, I'm not so determined. Like you say, I don't have a dog in this. But big-picture, my greatest concern is collateral damage to public perception of hum/soc sci inquiry (writ large), esp. by conservatives who are attacking the institution with a new vengeance.
-
What would be the right way to address the problem we see? Should we not address it at all? How can it be fixed? Do you not think refusing to acknowledge a problem in our own fields and own political side can only weaken credibility of fields and left?
- 3 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
In the same piece, you have hedging language about not generalizing writ-large beyond specified fields but then write about broader trends in the university elsewhere.
-
We are worried about a number of related things, yes, but I cannot respond to something as vague as that. If you think I am worried about something I shouldn't be, say what it is and show why.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.