The Emerging Scholars Blog

Marie Curie, winner of two Nobel Prizes and 1st female professor at the University of Paris

Last week, the New York Times reported that women are making gains at Harvard, five years after former Harvard President Lawrence Summers made some ill-advised remarks about women that eventually led to his resignation. NYTimes reporter Tamar Lewin describes some of the changes that Harvard has made to recruit more women faculty members, such as:

• A task force on women in science
• Improved childcare facilities
• Grants to help junior faculty pay for childcare on research trips

Lewin also notes that Harvard replaced Summers with its first female president — Drew Gilpin Faust — but that it’s not clear what effect, if any, Faust’s presidency, has had on the gender balance at Harvard. The percentage of women on the Harvard faculty is up past 25% now, an all-time high, though it varies dramatically across disciplines. In addition, Harvard’s academic culture is running into conflicts with a generational culture of younger faculty who want to spend more time with their families.

“Our biggest challenge is this misperception that Harvard doesn’t tenure its own junior faculty,” Dr. [Elena A.] Kramer [biology professor] said. “And because many of our wonderful senior faculty women came up in the ’70s and ’80s and don’t have families, some young women who know they want families might look at them and say, ‘I don’t want that kind of life’ and take themselves out of the pipeline.”

While I’m not sure about her “misperception” point (see this Crimson article), I agree that there is a change of faculty assumptions about career choices taking place.

My question: What can universities — as well as groups like ESN — do to encourage women who pursuing academic vocations?

Before leaving the comments to you, let me recommend our partner ministry, The Well, published by InterVarsity’s Women in the Academy and Professions. They consistently great articles about women, vocation, family, and related topics (which I often borrow for publication in the Emerging Scholars Review).

Yesterday, I had the opportunity to hear a professor/practitioner of family medicine share how to address errors in the medical profession.  Yes, the university hospital provides a unique environment for research, student-faculty-staff relationships, and connection with the world beyond the campus which it serves, but all members of the university community make mistakes (even sin).  Gasp!

As you journey through Lent, join me in meditating upon living out the Greatest Commandment by taking some time to

• consider how loving your neighbor fits in relationship to being/following Jesus the Christ in one’s vocation/discipline.
• acknowledge, confess, and release when/where/how you have fallen short … Note: we are not perfect.   We will err at times in our inter-personal interactions, spelling, presentations, research, articles, web posts/comments, patient care, advice, etc.  But when we purposefully hide mistakes to our own benefit, point fingers at others to avoid the consequences, or turn frustration with our self into agitation with others, we encounter sin and the evil one coming forth to destroy all it can.
• seek reconciliation in broken relationships.
• be intentional about blessing those whom you’ve been called to serve through the resurrection power of Jesus the Christ.

Would enjoy reading some comments from those outside of the Medical profession as to how you might translate these thoughts from a Medical professor to your place in higher education (Note: the below section is just an excerpt from a larger presentation which included much more material).  Also would you have any resources to recommend in addressing mistakes and/or offering apologies?  From those within the Medical profession, any points to add?

When we are at risk of committing errors

• Tired:  know your limits
• Under the influence (eg., alcohol, drugs, over the counter drugs)
• Competing demands
  • Work stresses
  • Family stresses (Note to those married:  open communication between family members is very important)
• Practicing outside the usual scope of practice/expertise or attempting a procedure after it’s been awhile since one’s regular practice of it Read the rest of this entry »

In InterVarsity and many other Christian organizations, we’re used to thinking of Christians as a minority – even a persecuted minority – within the academy, particularly at the more prestigious universities. For example, responding to a common question asked by many faculty and graduate students, we recently published an essay by Ken Elzinga of the University of Virginia titled “Being Open About My Faith Without Turning People Off.” There is another way of looking at Christianity in the university, however.

Photo credit: Interfaith chaplaincy banner at Nichols College, by Svadilfari via Flickr. Click for larger image.

Last week, my friend Julie forwarded me a link to Tricia Seifert’s article, “Understanding Christian Privilege: Managing the Tensions of Spiritual Plurality” (PDF). Comparing “Christian privilege” to the more commonly used terms male privilege and white privilege, Seifert identifies several areas of university life in which structure or assumptions favor Christianity over other religions, such as:

• the academic calendar, which includes breaks for Christmas and sometimes Easter, but not High Holy Days, Ramadan, or other religious festivals

Read the rest of this entry »

American Flag at William Jewell College

On Friday, our week in review linked to Patricia Cohen’s article about political liberalism in the academy, “Professor is a Label That Leans to the Left.” The article was based on the work of sociologists Neil Gross (U. British Colombia) and Ethan Fosse (a PhD candidate at Harvard, where Gross worked until recently), who propose that academic liberalism is due to typecasting, similar to how nursing is considered a “woman’s job” by most Americans.

The academic profession “has acquired such a strong reputation for liberalism and secularism that over the last 35 years few politically or religiously conservative students, but many liberal and secular ones, have formed the aspiration to become professors,” they write in the paper, “Why Are Professors Liberal?” (PDF) That is especially true of their own field, sociology, which has become associated with “the study of race, class and gender inequality — a set of concerns especially important to liberals.”

Photo Credit: bbaltimore via Flickr

Read the rest of this entry »

Did you make any New Year’s Resolutions? I made a fairly modest one – to keep track what books I read this year. I attempted to make a list of everything I read in 2009, but it was much more difficult than I thought – last January is just a blur! So, this year, I plan to keep a running list, starting with James K. A. Smith’s Desiring the Kingdom.

But enough about me. Did you make any New Year’s resolutions?

Fighting over the climate

No, not those politics. I’m talking about the real stuff: academic politics. How should Christians navigate the deep waters of academic politics?

Photo by Marshall Astor via Flickr

“ClimateGate“¹ is now a couple of weeks old. The theft and release of private emails between climatologists has sparked any number of editorials, which either celebrate the exposure of these world-shaking emails or insist that the whole thing is much ado about nothing. (Just this morning, Paul Krugman weighed in on the latter side.) I want to avoid debate on climate change, and instead focus on the peer-review process, as described in these emails. At least one email argued for changing how a particular journal was regarded in the scientific community.

In a 2003 response to an email complaining about a paper in the journal “Climate Research” which questioned assertions that the 20th century was abnormally warm, Dr. [Michael] Mann [of Penn State] wrote, “I think we have to stop considering ‘Climate Research’ as a legitimate peer-reviewed journal. Perhaps we should encourage our colleagues in the climate research community to no longer submit to, or cite papers in, this journal.”

Dr. Mann said Monday that he didn’t think there was anything wrong in telling his colleagues that “we shouldn’t be publishing in a journal that’s activist.”

In academia, peer-review is the currency of the realm, and it’s disturbing to see an alleged manipulation of that system. Judith Curry of Georgia Tech, a climatologist who has gained a reputation for engaging climate change skeptics, has written that “climate tribalism” could seriously damage the scientific process and the public voice of scientists, even when criticisms aren’t based in science.

In summary, the problem [of scientific tribalism] seems to be that the circling of the wagons strategy developed by small groups of climate researchers in response to the politically motivated attacks against climate science are now being used against other climate researchers and the more technical blogs (e.g. Climateaudit, Lucia, etc). Particularly on a topic of such great public relevance, scientists need to consider carefully skeptical arguments and either rebut them or learn from them. Trying to suppress them or discredit the skeptical researcher or blogger is not an ethical strategy and one that will backfire in the long run.

When careers, funding, reputation, and, let’s face it, power are at stake, we shouldn’t be surprised that people take ethical shortcuts to defend their turf. (This cuts both ways: Mann’s email is fishy, but illegally hacking into a computer and stealing data is even fishier.) Considering that climate change has an additional factor – i.e. the possible end of civilization! – we should expect a certain level of “street fighting.” I’m surprised there haven’t been fistfights.

We’ve seen similar incidents in that other arena of controversial science: evolution. (Richard Sternberg comes to mind.) I’ve heard conflicting positions from Christian biologists – not about evolution, ID, creationism, etc., but about the purpose and practice of peer-reviewed research. Several scientists have said to me that, if someone could clearly demonstrate that Darwin was wrong, they would be heralded as the, well, Darwin of our age – the genius who overturns our understanding of the universe and brings in the next paradigm. It would be the greatest scientific discovery in decades, so why would they want to hide their light under a bushel? Other scientists have told me the exact opposite: they can’t even express the smallest skepticism of Darwinism, because their career would effectively be over at that moment.

Thomas Kuhn and Michael Polanyi would not be surprised at “ClimateGate.” Kuhn would say that this is a classic example of paradigmatic thinking. Of course climate change skeptics will be harassed by other scientists, because their ideas lie outside the current scientific paradigm. Polanyi, meanwhile, would note that no scientific research is objective, and that all scientists will bring their personal commitments into their research, whether they acknowledge it or not. And, because politics are personal, personal relationships will affect which scientific research gets a hearing and which does not. I tend to agree with those ideas.

So then, back to my original question: How should a Christian navigate these deep waters of academic politics? If the inherent quality of your research and ideas are not enough, then what’s next? How should our faith in God affect our approach?

Last week, I wrote about Advent, so, in true American fashion, I’m skipping straight ahead to Christmas. :) (Don’t worry – I believe Tom is taking a more spiritual approach this week.)

Yesterday was my three four-year-old daughter’s birthday, and she has this “wish list” thing nailed down. She was very clear about what she wanted: a Frisch’s Big Boy bank, a snow globe, and a gingerbread house. (Her name is Ginger, so gingerbread is very near and dear to her heart.) I’m not nearly so good at knowing what I want or expressing it, so I get a lot of gift cards. Still, a few standard wishes include board games (Ticket to Ride has been wished for several years, and Carcassonne expansions are always welcome) and books of assorted varieties, mostly theology and references. It looks like IVP has put together a Christmas gift guide, and I couldn’t say “no” to any of those.

But enough about me. What’s on your wish list?

P.S. If you creating a wish list, check out Lifehacker’s five best wish list tools.

P.P.S. If you are going to Urbana, don’t miss out on the November discount code!

…that you wanted to be an academic?

Urbana 09 – InterVarsity’s triennial student missions conference – is coming up next month, December 27 to 31. This year features a special “In the Workplace and In the Academy” set of seminars to introduce students to a robust theology of calling. I’ll be leading a seminar called “Serving Christ as a Professor: 10 Things You Need to Know.” It will include some “missional” ideas of why the university matters to God and some pragmatic advice on graduate school and career prep, but I also hope to give students some resources for discerning whether they ought to pursue an academic vocation.

So, how did you know that you wanted to be an academic? What do you tell students who are thinking about a faculty career? I’d love to share your stories and advice with the students at Urbana. Feel free to email me if you’d rather not leave a comment.

Two more Urbana-related notes:

Get credit: Trinity Evangelical Divinity School is offering credit for Urbana, through a wrap-around course on Global Christianity. Register for Urbana first, then register for the course.

Save money: Register before December 1 and save $50 by using the code novu09 when you register.

Our Week-in-Review feature has a new format. We know there’s way too much to read out there already, so we’re going to be highlighting the top five articles, books, websites, etc., that we’ve been reading or thinking about the past week. If you have items you’d like us to consider for the top five, add them in the comments or send them to Tom or Mike.

The Millennial Muddle (Eric Hoover, Chronicle of Higher Education, October 11, 2009) takes awhile to wade through but is worth it. Tom’s placing this topic on his to post about list ;-)  Anyone with research, reflections, or personal testimonies regarding how to understand/categorize/define/relate to (?) the Millennials?

Speaking of Speaking (Chronicle of Higher Education, October 15, 2009) by a Female Science Professor gives tips on public speaking, in particular how the type of introduction can have a significant effect, at least at the beginning of my talk, on my mood and presentation strategy. She gives several illustrations which you might find of benefit. Any illustrations of best/worst speaker introductions you’ve heard?

Tweed: Oh, You Lucky College Professors! Adjuncts, Too (Chronicle of Higher Education, October 14, 2009).  Do you agree with …

Memo to America’s college professors: You have the third best job in the country.

This is according to a list of “the top 50 careers with great pay and growth prospects” that will appear in the November issue of Money magazine. OK, so you’re behind systems engineers and physician’s assistants, but No. 3 wins you a red ribbon, right?

What Has Theology Ever Done for Science? – Quite a lot actually, writes Denis Alexander, Director of the Faraday Institute for Science and Religion at St. Edmund’s College, Cambridge, in reply to a question that Daniel Dennett has been fond of asking lately. (HT: Bede Journal and Faith-Science News)

More on Souls in Transition – Christianity Today has published an interview with Christian Smith about his new book, Souls in Transition.  Smith and his fellow researchers followed up with the teens from Soul Searching to learn how their religious lives changed as they entered their early to mid-20s.  Overall, says Smith,

Most of what happens in emerging adulthood works against serious faith commitments and putting down roots in congregations. Most emerging adults are disconnected from religious institutions and practices. Geographic mobility, social mobility, wanting to have options, thinking this is the time to be crazy and free in ways most religious traditions would frown upon, wanting an identity different from the family of origin—all of these factors reduce serious faith commitments.

But – good news! – attending college is no longer the “faith killer” that it was in years past. Smith:

If anything, college is no different in terms of the faith corrosion outcomes on youth. It may even strengthen the faith of some. We think this is partly about a growing number of evangelical faculty at secular colleges. Another factor is the increasing presence and legitimacy of campus religious groups and ministries [InterVarsity Christian Fellowship, Campus Crusade] that provide support systems—not just fellowship, but also intellectual engagement that may have been lacking in past decades.

The culture has also changed: “spirituality” is more acceptable now than in past decades. Most faculty know you cannot say stupidly anti-religious things in the classroom and get away with it.

Can we imagine a day when the college experience becomes known for introducing students to the spiritual and historical depths of the Christian faith?

Cover of "The Outrageous Idea of Christian Scholarship"

George Marsden, Notre Dame’s Francis A. McAnaney Professor of History Emeritus, wrote The Outrageous Idea of Christian Scholarship (New York:  Oxford University Press, 1997) to take a step toward clarifying what the ancient enterprise of relating faith and learning might mean in the academy today (preface).  How can this be accomplished in a time when the university has lost the ability to have substantive conversation regarding not only religion, but also anything that goes beyond the practical to the larger issues of life?  Marsden boldly asserts that the assumptions of our hollow contemporary university culture must be re-examined, in particular our rejection of ancient religious learning and its bearing on what one thinks about (p.4).  Over the course of The Outrageous Idea of Christian Scholarship, Marsden delineates guidelines for religiously informed scholarship; guidelines that he believes will lead to scholarship that can be accepted as legitimate in the mainstream academy.

Is that outrageous?  What do you think?  Note:  If you haven’t already done such, time to pick-up the book and begin reading ;-)

The Outrageous Idea of Christian Scholarship emerged from Marsden’s responses to the critiques and questions raised by his provocative Concluding Unscientific Postscript to The Soul of the American University: From Protestant Establishment to Established Nonbelief (New York:  Oxford University Press, 1994).  His Concluding Unscientific Postscript digs into

1. higher education’s a priori rejection of all religiously based claims as unscientific
2. pluralism as a basis for imposing uniformity
3. academic freedom
4. relationship between church and state.

Marsden wraps up with this challenging summary:

In many of the American colonies all the citizens were taxed for the support of the established religious group, regardless of the citizen’s religious affiliations.  In the nineteenth century the Protestant establishment became informal and declared itself nonsectarian.  Today nonsectarianism has come to mean the exclusion of all religious concerns.  In effect, only purely naturalistic viewpoints are allowed a serious academic hearing.  As in earlier establishments, groups who do not match the current national ideological norms are forced to fend for themselves outside of the major spheres of cultural influence.  Today, almost all religious groups, no matter what their academic credentials, are on the outside of this educational establishment, or soon will be, if present trends continue.  Americans who are concerned for justice ought to be open to considering alternatives (440).

As we begin our on-line conversation of The Outrageous Idea of Christian Scholarship, please share your thoughts on some/all of the below questions.

1. What’s so outrageous about Christian scholarship?  Why does the term Christian scholarship stimulate a negative knee-jerk reaction by some Christians and non-Christians?  Do nonreligious viewpoints receive special privilege in higher education (24)?
2. Has a negative knee-jerk reaction to Christian scholarship (or religiously informed scholarship in general) receded in higher education over the past decade?  Is Christian scholarship (or religiously informed scholarship in general) now accepted through the lens of pluralism?  If so, please share some examples to bless one-another.
3. In your experience, how do you find Christian faith and scholarship to helpfully (and possibly unhelpfully) relate?
4. Do you agree with Marsden that faith precedes and conditions understanding? (p. 9)
5. Any particular points/quotes in the introduction or first chapter which you desire to draw our attention to and possibly even discuss?

Note:  as mentioned in a previous post, if you’d like to host a face-to-face book club coinciding with our online discussion, we recommend that you download the ESN discussion guide.