3 ms·

I'm far from convinced that science is less productive as a whole than it was in 1900, though I'm sure the average scientist today isn't as productive as Max Pl

I'm far from convinced that science is less productive as a whole than it was in 1900, though I'm sure the average scientist today isn't as productive as Max Planck (but of course he was above average in his own day as well). Something I think would help the incentive situation is providing more incentives for teaching and service. My grandfather was a professor emeritus and I can't find any record of him authoring a research paper (or a PhD thesis for that matter) but even 30+ years since he last taught I still run into people who rave about the formative experiences they had in his classes. He's a minor celebrity among local engineers of a certain age. Such a person could still provide a lot of value, but it's harder to measure.

mmmmpancakes 4y ago
That's a nice story, but teaching =/= research and I fail to see how this is related to research productivity. If anything the relation is inverse because, as you said, he doesn't have a publication record, so from the perspective of research he was basically useless. If we are trying to improve research productivity, then removing or dramatically reducing teaching responsibilities for researchers sounds a lot more sensible. Besides, modern pedagogy is getting increasingly complicated and having teaching specialists can be much more beneficial to your average 1-2 year undergrad. Not to diminish his teaching career, it sounds very valuable, but not in a way that's directly relevant to the OP.
- jrumbut 4y ago
  It's simple! Grant applications are so hard because they are so competitive. They are so competitive because a lot of people want to be professors. Currently, to succeed as a professor you need a research grant. If, instead, we made it easier to advance your career as exactly the kind of pedagogy specialist you described (as well as through leadership in professional organizations, work in the community, and all the other kinds of service), I believe you would get fewer applications to those research grants. It might result in better post-secondary education as well.

mmmmpancakes 4y ago

That's a nice story, but teaching =/= research and I fail to see how this is related to research productivity. If anything the relation is inverse because, as you said, he doesn't have a publication record, so from the perspective of research he was basically useless. If we are trying to improve research productivity, then removing or dramatically reducing teaching responsibilities for researchers sounds a lot more sensible. Besides, modern pedagogy is getting increasingly complicated and having teaching specialists can be much more beneficial to your average 1-2 year undergrad. Not to diminish his teaching career, it sounds very valuable, but not in a way that's directly relevant to the OP.

jrumbut 4y ago
It's simple! Grant applications are so hard because they are so competitive. They are so competitive because a lot of people want to be professors. Currently, to succeed as a professor you need a research grant. If, instead, we made it easier to advance your career as exactly the kind of pedagogy specialist you described (as well as through leadership in professional organizations, work in the community, and all the other kinds of service), I believe you would get fewer applications to those research grants. It might result in better post-secondary education as well.