SSHRC in their Transformation added the new value of “interactive engagement” to what social science and humanities research should involve. At McMaster we discussed how researchers can engage the broader public better and more. It is not as easy as it sounds. Intellectual Entrepreneurship: The New Social Compact by Richard A. Cherwitz (Inside Higher Ed, March 9, 2005) is a short opnion piece that nicely sets out the challenges. He argues that professors are becoming (should become) intellectual entrepreneurs – something I have heard in other contexts regarding intellectual property and research. Cherwitz believes,
Public intellectual practice is a noble quest – one that doesn’t inherently or automatically require us to choose between a commitment either to research or service or between disciplinary and interdisciplinary knowledge.
The issues that came up in the consultation at McMaster were practical:
- If we have to spend time engaging the public, what are we not going to do?
- Could graduate students do it, and if so, how would it affect their completion times?
- Can we do it or are academics bad at engagement? What would we have to learn to do it well?
- Do the arts have a role to play?
The general feeling here was that profs should not have this forced on them, though we should recognize those that do it well and respect that as important to the academic mission. In the meantime I have signed up to give a “Science in the City” public talk – so I’ll see if I can find a public voice.