Ideology and Political Economy: The Research Publication Criterion of Academic Merit

Abstract

Abstract This is the third in a series of three papers exploring undergraduate teaching in American institutions of higher education, and the norms that surround or confine it. The central problem addressed is why, despite the obvious functional significance of teaching for all institutions, and the well-documented opinions of American faculty members that it is more important than research, the same faculty members also support the fully-institutionalized norm that research publication is the most important criterion of academic merit. The paper discusses institutional and personal motives for a “research ethic” and concludes that the answer to the paradox is “resource accumulation” for both persons and departments, and then outlines the educational costs entailed: devaluation of undergraduate instruction and those who perform it, and massive transfer of funds from undergraduate fees to support graduate education, resulting in the proliferation of less-than-robust graduate programs and trivial research. ...