“Kevin McCaffree and Colin Wright identify critical challenges for academe in their op-ed "A Way to Challenge the Groupthink of Scholarly Journals" (May 28). Consider these five additions to their blueprint for addressing the crisis in academic research:
First, identify authors of research as institutions -- not individuals. This forces department chairs, deans, provosts and research vice presidents to own the veracity of every proposed publication. Existing oversight frameworks have proven woefully inadequate.
Second, require data sharing and replication prior to publication where reasonably feasible. If done properly this would be only a minor delay. Moreover, it would offer a powerful endorsement of the veracity of the research findings and, of course, reduce the growing number of retractions.
Third, publish research that meets the criteria of relevant research -- studies that answer questions that are timely, describe real problems, for which answers aren't obvious, and for which findings are operationally valid.
Fourth, limit the publication of frivolous research. Shockingly little of the research published by academics is ever cited. Yet many universities continue to reward publication based on quantity, not quality.
Fifth, meaningfully reward peer review in both pre- and post-tenure evaluations. If the "closed system that protects shoddy and politically motivated research" is to be improved, efforts to challenge falsehoods must be appropriately awarded.
Charles Crespy
Dean emeritus
Central Michigan University
Mount Pleasant, Mich.
---
A nonscientific layman like me would think that the scientific community would already have mechanisms like this in place. But, alas, human nature is apparently stronger than so-called honest expertise, even among scientists. I guess that once again proves that the Founders knew more than progressives like Woodrow Wilson did about how to govern our institutions. Having truly unbiased experts in anything is possible, but whether in government or even science, human nature too often gets in the way.
Patrick G. Brown
Orlando, Fla.
---
I have stopped reading the peer-reviewed journals in my field because they are nearly all of the same cloth. The articles in the journals seem to reflect the political and intellectual preferences of the in-group rather than a range of ideas, viewpoints and ways of researching.
Gaetano A. LaRoche, Ed.D.
New York” [1]
1. Can Experts Rid Themselves of Groupthink? Wall Street Journal, Eastern edition; New York, N.Y.. 04 June 2026: A14.
Komentarų nėra:
Rašyti komentarą