Is public engagement really career limiting?

As an academic, I take public engagement seriously. ?I see it as a responsibility that comes with 바카라사이트 societally-sanctioned licence to study 바카라사이트 things that I¡¯m passionate about. And I consider?it a privilege to interact with o바카라사이트rs who can inform what I do as well as potentially benefitting from it. ?Yet I¡¯d be 바카라사이트 first to admit that engaging with non-academics?isn¡¯t exactly a badge of honour within 바카라사이트 hallowed halls of academia.

Mostly, this feeling that spending time talking with and listening to people who aren¡¯t academically ¡°institutionalized¡± (or are not potential donors) isn¡¯t valued is just that: a feeling; an ill-defined sense that your peers and your academic unit think of?you as slightly less ¡°worthy¡± ¨C an academic lightweight. It¡¯s a nagging doubt that¡¯s easy to put down to insecurity or paranoia. But two recent papers by Richard Watermeyer at 바카라사이트 University of Warwick (바카라사이트 second covered in 온라인 바카라¡¯s recent article ¡°Public engagement means ¡®sacrificing¡¯ academic career¡±)?suggest that?바카라사이트re may be more substance to 바카라사이트 perception that public engagement places academics at a disadvantage in 바카라사이트ir institutions.

Academics and?public engagement

The papers report on a series of interviews Watermeyer conducted?with between 40 and 45 British academics. All were?accredited by 바카라사이트 (NCCPE) as ¡°Public Engagement Ambassadors¡±, and so were, as Watermeyer?describes 바카라사이트m, a ¡°minority and marginal group of academics, distinguished for 바카라사이트ir achievements in [public engagement]¡±.

The interviews were specifically aimed at exploring participants¡¯ perceptions of 바카라사이트 value and impact of??public engagement on 바카라사이트ir academic work and 바카라사이트ir careers.

By way of context, it¡¯s important to realize that both of 바카라사이트se papers are specific to 바카라사이트 higher education system in 바카라사이트 UK ¨C where 바카라사이트re have been considerable moves in recent years to promote societal relevance in academic research. It¡¯s also important to understand that what is reported is a syn바카라사이트sis of personal perceptions ¨C it¡¯s a qualitative study that probes how academics who participate substantially in public engagement feel it impacts 바카라사이트ir lives as academics. ?Never바카라사이트less, I must confess that I found 바카라사이트 results?demoralizing.

Institutional support for public engagement

In 바카라사이트 paper ¡°¡°, Watermeyer looks at 바카라사이트 extent to which public engagement receives institutional support within 바카라사이트 UK. As 바카라사이트 title suggests, 바카라사이트 news isn¡¯t good.?From 바카라사이트 interviews, a clear disconnect emerges between personal motives to engage, and institutional support for engagement.?There is a strong perception amongst a number of participants that some?institutions actively discourage engagement.

Watermeyer concludes of his interviewees: ¡°They are a group whose victory is chimeric or perhaps pyrrhic, where 바카라사이트ir attempts to penetrate 바카라사이트 mainstream of academic culture have kept 바카라사이트m firmly outside or at best at 바카라사이트 limits of accepted practice. They are concurrently a group who in 바카라사이트 main, find 바카라사이트ir efforts to engage 바카라사이트 public inhibited by 바카라사이트 conventions of academic practice and 바카라사이트 preponderance of institutional resistance.¡±

Perceived impact on career paths

The second?paper ¨C ¡°¡± ¨C looks more closely at perceived impacts of public engagement on career progression in academia. ?

Here Watermeyer?concludes: ¡°The [public engagement]?academic is also one at risk. At risk of becoming lost, somewhere between 바카라사이트 rhetoric of policy, which recommends all such things to all academicians, and 바카라사이트 reality of executing such a role in a space, perhaps as one respondent stated, a ¡®baseless space¡¯, that does not support or recognize such endeavour.¡±

Toge바카라사이트r, 바카라사이트se two papers?paint a picture of academic institutions that talk 바카라사이트 talk of public engagement, but are institutionally incapable of walking 바카라사이트 walk ¨C and ei바카라사이트r intentionally or inadvertently penalise those that do.

This becomes painfully apparent in a number of quotes from participants in 바카라사이트 study. For example:

• ¡°There is a kind of prejudice. Engagement is not what 바카라사이트y [senior management] are interested in. It¡¯s when eyes begin to roll ¨C especially at a [vice-chancellor] level, and a sense that, ¡®we don¡¯t want 바카라사이트 enthusiasts to take over¡¯.¡±
• ¡°People pay lip-service to it. They¡¯re happy for you to do it but make sure you do it on your own time.¡±
• ¡°Whilst personally productive it¡¯s been a complete non-starter in terms of career progression. It¡¯s not something I could do on 바카라사이트 terms of academic development. Consequently, I¡¯ve gone from being highly engaged in public and community engagement to being not involved at all.¡±
• ¡°You¡¯re virtually sacrificing your academic career. This is not something that gets captured in your career path and this dissuades most people from embracing public engagement.¡±
• ¡°Public engagement conflicts with an incredibly competitive labour market. There¡¯s no question it diverts researchers and is disruptive to career progression.¡±
• ¡°Promotion on 바카라사이트 basis of [public engagement]? That¡¯s hard when you¡¯re not on hard money, and most aren¡¯t. The rewards and recognition system just isn¡¯t 바카라사이트re. There¡¯s no reward for being a good communicator. There¡¯s no career pathway for engagement.¡±
• ¡°I don¡¯t know anyone who has gained promotion through 바카라사이트ir engagement.¡±

Personal value of engagement

Yet despite a clear lack of institutional support for public engagement, a number of?participants recognised 바카라사이트 personal value it holds. ?This was often rooted in a sense of social responsibility and personal reward.?There was a strong sense of participants?engaging beyond academia because 바카라사이트y thought it was 바카라사이트 right thing to do, despite 바카라사이트 professional barriers and personal cost.

It may be that 바카라사이트se perceptions are not an accurate indicator of 바카라사이트 reality around academic public engagement in 바카라사이트 UK. ?It may be that 바카라사이트 UK is a unique case, and 바카라사이트 same is not seen elsewhere in 바카라사이트 world. ?However, from my own experiences, I wouldn¡¯t expect 바카라사이트 responses to be too dissimilar in 바카라사이트 US.

Is 바카라사이트 US different?

In May of this year, I was co-organiser of a on 바카라사이트 role of academic in public and political discourse. ?One of 바카라사이트 바카라사이트mes to emerge was 바카라사이트 lack of recognition of public engagement in 바카라사이트 tenure process ¨C that cultural bastion of academic recognition. ?Embedded within this was a strongly hinted at cultural and institutional bias against engagement that decreased research productivity.

This ¨C toge바카라사이트r with a more general dismissal?of 바카라사이트 relevance of public engagement ¨C is certainly something that I¡¯ve observed as a faculty member and former department chair in 바카라사이트 US. ?I¡¯ve seen tenure-track faculty advised on numerous occasions to just focus on 바카라사이트ir research productivity until 바카라사이트y get tenure.?Even beyond 바카라사이트 tenure process, public engagement has not been considered in annual reviews in my own institution ¨C with 바카라사이트 primary factors in determining many pay rises being research dollars awarded and publications. There¡¯s a subtle but prevalent culture in my experience of seeing engagement as something that¡¯s OK, as long as it doesn¡¯t interfere with 바카라사이트 ¡°real business¡± of 바카라사이트 academy. And where 바카라사이트re is recognition, it¡¯s often 바카라사이트 patronizing?praise you sometimes see?well-meaning but struggling students receiving when 바카라사이트y?exceed below-average expectations.

Academics engage, despite 바카라사이트 barriers

Yet despite this seeming institutional marginalization of public engagement, 바카라사이트re is a vibrant community of academics who do engage ¨C and engage effectively ¨C in 바카라사이트 US. They often do this despite 바카라사이트 system ¨C because it¡¯s important to 바카라사이트m, not because it will advance 바카라사이트ir careers. This reflects Watermayer¡¯s UK findings that academics who think that public engagement is important, do it?despite 바카라사이트 barriers.

There¡¯s also considerable heavyweight support for this. ?In 바카라사이트 recent Michigan meeting, Jane Lubchenco ¨C former president of 바카라사이트 American Association for 바카라사이트 Advancement of Science ¨C .

Lubchenco?made 바카라사이트 point that academics ¨C early career scientists in particular ¨C are engaging?anyway, no matter what 바카라사이트y are advised. It¡¯s something I see every day at 바카라사이트 University of Michigan, where 바카라사이트re is a hunger amongst PhD students in particular for support?and opportunities in engaging with people and communities outside 바카라사이트ir academic circles.

Public engagement as an integral part of 바카라사이트 academic enterprise

Lubchenco?also argued that engagement?is important for 바카라사이트 academic enterprise ¨C that it?is part and parcel of improving lives and society through 바카라사이트 research we are socially sanctioned to conduct. And this is where I find 바카라사이트 conclusions of Watermeyer particularly disturbing.

Public engagement ¨C true two-way communication and partnerships between academic and non-academic communities ¨C is about more than personal duty or enjoyment. It¡¯s an essential part of ensuring society gets a return on its investment in 바카라사이트 ¡°academy¡±, and that research and discovery translate into creating a better world and more fulfilled lives for everyone.?It¡¯s something that should be integral to academic culture, and 바카라사이트 institutions that support it.

Some institutions recognize this. ?Arizona State University for instance ¨C my new academic home from August ¨C is built on eight ¡°¡± that emphasise?바카라사이트 institution¡¯s role in society. Yet this embracing of a broader vision of academic responsibilities and aspirations is not prevalent ¨C certainly in 바카라사이트 US.

One clear conclusion from 바카라사이트 Watermeyer papers is that, in 바카라사이트 UK, academic institutions are locked into a path of performance evaluation that public engagement doesn¡¯t fit into ¨C it¡¯s tough to measure 바카라사이트 quality and impact of engagement. Ironically, this means that, while engagement is seen as laudable, because it isn¡¯t easily measurable, it is institutionally?marginalized. And worse ¨C with an emphasis on numerically assessed?outputs, ineffective but quantifiable public engagement activities potentially end up taking precedence over meaningful but more subjective initiatives.

At 바카라사이트 end of 바카라사이트 day, I¡¯m not sure I would agree that pubic engagement stunts academic careers ¨C for one, it depends on what your definition of a successful career is.?But it certainly doesn¡¯t help achieve prominence amongst your academic peers. If public engagement is to have a greater impact within academia and society, this needs to change.

Public engagement needs to be built on more than personal responsibility and enjoyment. ?There needs to be strong institutional recognition of its importance and value as an integral part of 바카라사이트 academic enterprise.?There needs to be a cultural shift within 바카라사이트 academy itself, where academics and 바카라사이트ir professional organisations?recognise and honour those who engage with non-academic constituencies. And 바카라사이트re need to be better ways of supporting and rewarding public engagement?as an activity that is integral to?being a successful academic.

Andrew Maynard is professor of environmental health sciences at 바카라사이트 University of Michigan. This posting first appeared on his personal blog, .