the importance of peer review

Revisiting the FIPSE issue:
When politicians intervene in the awarding of grants for academic work, it’s never good news. Federal grant programs–which, in addition to FIPSE, include the National Science Foundation and the National Endowment for the Humanities–are usually competitive; grants are judged through a process called peer review (see Wikipedia entry) by volunteer scholars who are experts in the field. So if you submit a FIPSE application that is related to, say, environmental science, the program administrators try to get people who are experts in environmental science to review your proposal. These experts make their recommendation to the program administrators, who then make the decision on whether to fund your application.
You would think that someone with as much experience in the federal government as Ralph Regula (R-OH) would understand how the system works. But here’s what he says in the Chronicle of Higher Education article:

“Fipse doesn’t have all the knowledge in the world,” Mr. Regula said. “The bureaucracy in Washington doesn’t always have the last word on what is valuable to society.”

That’s right. That’s why FIPSE asks experts in the relevant field to review the applications. Regula is either ignorant or lying when he says he thinks “[t]he bureaucracy in Washington” is deciding whether to fund these projects.
This is where it gets really good: under the old system, bureaucrats in Washington did not judge the proposals. Under the new system, justified by Regula’s bureaucrat-bashing rhetoric, they do. Oh, irony, thy name is Republican Party!
This sets a dangerous precedent. FIPSE isn’t really that generously funded a program, but the NSF is, and the NEH is no small potatoes, either. Imagine what would happen if Congress gets used to the idea of taking over funding decisions–in other words, taking away the current, peer-reviewed process. Might we start to see funding dwindle even more for scientific research that contradicts conservative dogma regarding the origin of species or human sexual behavior? Perhaps the NEH will no longer support work on writers who don’t represent family values.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

how to f’ up higher education…

…and the disinterested pursuit of knowledge.
This is truly outrageous news from The Chronicle of Higher Education:

The Education Department has canceled its annual grant competition for the Fund for the Improvement of Postsecondary Education because Congress has earmarked the bulk of the program’s $163.6-million budget for pork-barrel projects.
The program’s budget, set in the spending bill for the 2005 fiscal year that Congress approved last month, contains more than 400 pork-barrel projects ranging in size from $25,000 to $5-million and costing a total of $146.2-million. That leaves only $17.4-million to continue support for existing grants, which means that Fipse program managers will not be able to finance any of the 1,530 preliminary proposals that have already been peer-reviewed.

What kinds of things has FIPSE paid for in the past? Well, for one thing, The Classroom Electric: Dickinson, Whitman, and American Culture. But now, instead of paying a few thousand dollars for an educational resource (and perhaps a few dozen others every year), built by world-class scholars, that can be used the world over for free, Congress has decided to support projects like the $5 millon Strom Thurmond Fitness and Wellness Center at the University of South Carolina? (Is that a joke? What’s next? The Jayson Blair Center for Journalistic Integrity or maybe the Charles Manson Center for Peace Studies?)
Apparently Congress is getting its porky fingers on the FIPSE money because the tax cuts and the war in Iraq have drained the budget of a good bit of discretionary money.
See, and y’all thought I was just being sarcastic when I made fun of Bush during the debates.

Continue reading

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

again with the mla?

Last year, I posted the titles of all the papers on British Literature that were presented at MLA 2003.
This year, I’m doing it again. Why? Because people in the press and in the blogosphere tend to pull out a few paper titles, argue that they’re silly or worthless, and then imply first that most of the papers at MLA are silly or worthless and second that contemporary scholarship in language and literature is.
It makes for amusing commentary.
But not only is such commentary intellectually shallow (mocking paper titles? please); it’s demonstrably wrong. As I wrote last year, the majority of papers presented at MLA are “the kind of interesting work one would expect scholars of language and literature to be doing.”

Continue reading

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

mla 2004: philadelphia — blogger meetup?

The 2004 meeting of the Modern Language Association will take place in Philadelphia, 27-30 December. I would like to repeat my suggestion that academic bloggers who will be at the conference get together at some point.

Interested? Let me know.

Please also consider putting a notice on your own blog.

Update: Participants so far

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

mortality of the humanities

“When the academic humanities are finally, definitively destroyed by the studied, self-important irrelevance of theorists’ dogmatically inaccessible progressivist stance, no one will be able to complain that there were not cogent warnings of what was to come.” –Erin O’Connor

If the academic humanities are finally destroyed–and reports of this impending destruction are greatly exaggerated–it will not be because of theorists. Death will come when people finally give in to the notion that institutions of higher education should be financially profitable enterprises run like corporations, and when they give in to the notion that the purpose of higher education is to allow those who partake of its benefits to earn more money at their jobs. What chance do the humanities have then? It won’t matter if humanities academics are writing like Jacques Derrida or like Cleanth Brooks. All the good writing in the world will not save the academic humanities at that point.

“This thing upon me like a flower and a feast. This thing upon me crawling like a snake. It’s not death, but dying will solve its power … And as my hands drop a last desperate pen in some cheap room they will find me there and never know my name, my meaning, nor the treasure of my escape.” -Charles Bukowski

Print Friendly, PDF & Email