TED Conversations

Poch Peralta

Freelance Writer / Blogger,


This conversation is closed.

Is the academic promotion system inherently flawed?

Is Academia Getting In the Way of Today’s Geniuses?
Should citations alone be used to judge scholarly performance? Or should merit include a qualitative review of a scholar’s work by their peers?

'...two of this year’s laureates have stepped forward, alleging that the academic publishing and promotion system is inherently flawed. Whatever your career, everyone wants to advance further and see financial rewards for their hard work. But according to Peter Higgs and Randy Shekman, the academic game isn’t as much about merit as it is about quotas. If their argument is valid, it implies career-changing consequences for the scholars of today.

'Peter Higgs was already famous before winning his Nobel, as one of the researchers who discovered the origin of mass. In an interview with “The Guardian,” Higgs says he wouldn’t even be employable at a university today because he’s not considered productive enough for the system...'


Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • thumb
    Jan 16 2014: Scholarly objections to TED
    'Research Isn’t Always Racy, and Value Is Not the Same as Profit
    The ubiquity and power of the TED brand and network could facilitate intellectual superficiality. It could lead to the unholy Gladwellification of complexity, in which self-promoters foist trendy but reductionistic arguments on a fawning and uncritical global network. Some TED talks are great; others are mediocre or underwhelming. And is there any real-world follow-through?

    'But the deepest worry, I think, is that society could be duped into conflating any “idea worth exploring” with the sexiest, most of-the-moment topics that can be branded and sold by a speaker dressed like a cinematic ninja with a powerpoint presentation...'

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.