Academia - Blog Posts

"Cherie, keep walking. Shut your eyes. We are headed for the bridge. We are going to cross it."

-Joyce Carol Oates, After the Wreck, I Picked Myself Up, Spread My Wings, and Flew Away

A Call for Constructive Engagement

As leaders of America’s colleges, universities, and scholarly societies, we speak with one voice against the unprecedented government overreach and political interference now endangering American higher education. We are open to constructive reform and do not oppose legitimate government oversight. However, we must oppose undue government intrusion in the lives of those who learn, live, and work on our campuses. We will always seek effective and fair financial practices, but we must reject the coercive use of public research funding. [...]

Signed by so many leaders of colleges and universities, even by some high profile ones such as Yale, Princeton and Brown.

https://www.aacu.org/newsroom/a-call-for-constructive-engagement

The Message that goes unheard

Science and scientists are not the enemy. We're on the same team.

We scientists are servants to society. We are here to serve you. We're supposed to find, share and defend the truth. We're supposed to listen to your concerns and investigate them rigorously. It's our job to serve you. We are your servants, not your enemies.

Policymakers and government officials are supposed to consult us, scientists and experts so that when they're making decisions they do so in ways that benefit society that protect you. That doesn't always happen and it wouldn't be the first time in history that we scientists have had to take governments to task for their failure to protect you, for their failure to take decisions that benefit society.

The scientific community, independent academic scientists are completely distinct from pharmaceutical companies who hire scientists, they need people with scientific training, but they are distinct. The independent academic scientific community is its own thing. We, scientists. Regulators.

We are here to protect you from those companies. Think about Francis Kelsey in the 1960s who refused to approve thalidomide because there was a lack of evidence to support its safety. Think about the Chernobyl disaster in 1986 when the Soviet state tried to hide the scale and danger of the incident, not just from its own citizens but from the world. It was we scientists, independent scientists, both in and outside of the USSR, who exposed the truth. We gathered data, generated evidence and shared it so that the global community could respond to the crisis and contain the destruction to the best of our ability.

We academic scientists spend most of our early career earning less than a minimum wage. And we do not benefit financially from producing one outcome over another. Private companies do. Politicians and policy makers do.

Science, like all human institutions, is not perfect and it is not entirely immune from corruption. However, the scientific method and the academic system is built such that it's pretty well insulated from corruption. Much better than private business, politics, which are environments in which corruption not only happens freely, but is specifically rewarded. The system is stacked such that those behaviours are rewarded.

Scientists are your servants. We stand with you. And this is precisely because we are among the most powerful weapons you have in your armoury to push back against corruption and exploitation.

It's precisely for that reason that you are being led to believe that you cannot trust scientists and experts. That was deliberate.

Dr. Rachel Barr

https://vm.tiktok.com/ZNdYxJSW8/

International Students

How many international students are there at the moment who want to enroll in a US university? The threat to block Harvard from enrolling international students is so hollow. As if this administration cares about international students. There won't be any anyway.

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/17/us/politics/trump-harvard-international-students.html

So Harvard has decided not to give in without a fight

"No government — regardless of which party is in power — should dictate what private universities can teach, whom they can admit and hire, and which areas of study and inquiry they can pursue," said Alan Garber, Harvard’s president, in a statement to the university on Monday.

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/14/us/harvard-trump-reject-demands.html

This is a powerful and much-needed statement. Academia feels a glimmer of hope that not every university and not everyone in academia will give in without a fight. At the same time, the reasons are more strategic than simply protecting science, students, faculty and academic freedom.

Why Harvard Decided to Fight Trump

[...] any path the university chose seemed just as likely to lead to ongoing turmoil, and [...] officials at Harvard, [...] feared the White House would renege on any agreement.

[...] a strategy of "negotiation and conciliation seems to have no acceptable ending point."

[...] Harvard might have tried to negotiate just as Columbia did, "if it had assurance that the administration was negotiating in good faith."

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/15/us/why-harvard-resisted-trumps-demands.html

There is no faith, no trust in the permanence of anything at this point. No decision, no agreement, no law is immutable, even for the shortest time, if the administration decides to change its mind. The ultimate goal is to dismantle academia anyway. So why even try to negotiate.

Good Research Practice and Academic Freedom

There's a lot to discuss about what's going on in the United States, but we all have limited time and capacity, so it's important to focus on some aspects that you feel you can address or help mitigate. It's also important not to judge others on which aspects they choose. Anyway.

Scholarly and Science Communication

I'm an expert in scholarly and science communication, so I was particularly alert to the news that not only future, but also already submitted and even accepted manuscripts by CDC researchers would have to be reviewed and cleaned of certain terms.

"CDC Researchers Ordered to Retract Papers Submitted to All Journals — Banned terms must be scrubbed from CDC-authored manuscripts" https://www.medpagetoday.com/opinion/faustfiles/114043

The Terms

Unfortunately, the terms in question did not surprise me. They are all related to trans and gender diverse people. There are so many layers to unpack and be outraged about. I want to focus on two and end with a third.

The Aspects

The first is good research practice. Censorship aside, it can be argued that, at the very least, it is not good research practice to replace accurate and medically correct scientific language with language that is very likely to be inaccurate or at least ambiguous, leaving room for misunderstanding. This is highly dangerous and damaging to the global scientific knowledge base. I must therefore question whether these articles can be accepted for publication or published at all.

Without ignoring censorship, the second aspect is that this is the beginning of the end of academic freedom, not just for the CDC, but for the whole country. They're restricting language and science.

The third is just to make it very clear that this is harmful to so many people. They're erasing people.

A New Meaning of the Ivory Tower

This kind of turn can begin anywhere, anytime — like right this moment, here and now — wearing the mask of pragmatism and accommodation: let’s not make waves, let’s not use words or make speeches that draw attention, let’s make friendly connections to state legislators, let’s rename that program, let’s quietly defund that one center. Let’s not grant tenure to that person. Let’s encourage that professor to retire. Let’s look for a leader who is acceptable to interests that really hate the university and its values. Let’s take the money for an independent institute that pushes far-right economic philosophy. Let’s take away some governance from faculty, because they tend to provoke our enemies too much. Let’s compromise. Let’s be realistic.

Burke, T. (2022, Juni 30). Academia: Waiting for Heideggers. Eight by Seven. https://timothyburke.substack.com/p/academia-waiting-for-heideggers

We think it's necessary, that not much can be done, that it's just this one little thing, that it's not that important, that we're just protecting our people, at least most of them, forgetting that it won't stop there. We are gradually eroding our freedom one tiny step at a time. We are leaving people behind one tiny step at a time.

To understand what happens from the perspective of those we leave behind through compromise, we should consider the concept of slow violence.

By slow violence I mean a violence that occurs gradually and out of sight, a violence of delayed destruction that is dispersed across time and space, an attritional violence that is typically not viewed as violence at all. [...] a violence that is neither spectacular nor instantaneous, but rather incremental and accretive, its calamitous repercussions playing out across a range of temporal scales.

Nixon, R. (2011). Slow Violence and the Environmentalism of the Poor. Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.4159/harvard.9780674061194

So what can we actually do? Well.

Watch for those who will come forward with the aim of making us easier to deliver on a platter to some future monstrosity, and block their path whenever they step forward. Start building the foundations for a maze, a moat, a fortress, a barricade, for becoming as hard to seize as possible. Time for the ivory tower to take on new meaning.

Burke, T. (2022, Juni 30). Academia: Waiting for Heideggers. Eight by Seven. https://timothyburke.substack.com/p/academia-waiting-for-heideggers

What and how we research

I know it's constantly stated that science is objective. I constantly emphasise that researchers are human beings and that their backgrounds, experiences and lives influence not only what they research, but also how they do it. That's why diversity in science is important. Yes, science is based on good scientific practice, transparency and reproducibility, but the what and how have degrees of freedom and are shaped by those who do the research.

’[...] But most of the research I do is more focused on sapphics, which would make sense, considering I am one.’ Wow. I don’t think I’ve ever had an openly queer teacher before. ‘That’s so cool,’ I say [...]. ‘Do a lot of professors end up researching things that, uh, also apply to them?’ ‘It depends,’ Fineman says. ‘In some fields, yes; a lot of my colleagues have a personal connection to their work. But not always. In any case, we’re very passionate about what we do.’

Zhao, A. (2024). Dear Wendy. Macmillan USA.

I don't know if I would do research on queer perspectives in library and information science if I wasn't queer myself. I don't know if I would choose a transformative research design if I didn't see inequalities and a need for change. Who we are shapes what we do and how we do it, whether it's in research or anywhere else.

The slow professor

Academic work is by its nature never done; while flexibility of hours is one of the privileges of our work, it can easily translate into working all the time or feeling that one should.

This is just too true.

We need to take the time to read things that we don’t "have to" read. Just because reading cannot be easily quantified does not undermine its worth. In response to "what did you work on today?" many of us adopt an apologetic tone when we reply, "just some reading."

That pretty much sums up why I've started reading again, what I find personally interesting, and not just what is related to a paper I need to write or a lecture I need to prepare. That's why I'm sharing such a wide range of quotes and literature here.

We do need time to think. We do need time to digest.

Some of the things you read take time to sink in, to become relevant at some point in the future. Or not.

Connected to the imposition of neoliberal ideology on research culture is a dramatic decrease in collegial culture [...]. As academics become more isolated from each other, we are also becoming more compliant as resistance to the corporatization of the academy seems futile.

Both loneliness and belonging are contagious.

Resistance is not futile.

Berg, M., & Seeber, B. K. (2016). The slow professor: Challenging the culture of speed in the academy. University of Toronto Press.

my developmental psychology textbook reads like a tumblr post

My December reads. The Woman in White has been attempted many times, but I'm determined to finish it this time around. Feeling powerful and capable now that I've discovered audiobooks.

from a fall walk home

i walked a stranger's footsteps today,

there seemed a poem in that

i turned my feet to match his gait

slowed mine to his own crooked path

he walked with haste irregular

tempo change could not meet the eye

but i felt it, for a minute, we were one

on that path, in that space, he and i

he does not know, for a minute there

another walked his rhythym

his stride was longer, his steps were quicker

perhaps he sought to make haste

and sure, it was weird

he would have found it so, too

but for that minute i was him in delay

i understood his perception

and the give of his limbs

i knew of his body's affections

soon our steps fell into disfavor

before leaf underfoot gave way

we were entities once more, unique paths on the ground

before my door, i turned but he walked away

maybe i will see him again, on my mellow walk home

maybe our eyes will connect

i would not know him by feature nor face

but maybe i’d fall into step

and recognize a gait from a dream long ago

a temporal space once inhabited

it was you, i would think, i was you for a minute

and we’d pass by and walk on again

my new years resolution is to create a "Doctor" list where if you're on it you can only refer to me at Doctor once I get my Psy.D. Currently the only person on this list is my mom's boyfriend because, according to him, "non-medical" doctorates dont count, and he won't call anyone without a medical degree "Doctor". He'll be in for a rude awakening soon

i love that when writing cover letters, i have to keep going back to my resume, going "wait, what skills do i have again? oh right, i can read that kind of graph. let's put that down."

passive voice needs to stop. because sometime i forget how english works and i have like three different clauses in my sentence and i just- can't.

papers are hard.

seriously, it's not even a content issue anymore (i mean, we have those in spades, but that's not the point right now—)

how acknowlegements???? like??? titles??? full names??? what if they're a child, because you're also a child trying to publish something? what do you do then? if someone has a doctorate but did less do you put them first or last in that acknowledgement category??? what???

delighted to be back in my happy place of bacteria, and not in the utterly horrifyingly confusing world of genomics.

...that said, i seem to have cornered myself into a deadline again, so here goes at least another three cups of tea.

cloisters of magdalen college, oxford

The aesthetics of my insomnia:

crying over TikToks because you love women (/pos)

googling fake Shakespeare quotes (it turned out to be a quote from Tumblr)

writing down an idea for a drawing that you dreamed of in your half-sleep

learn by heart a poem by Lermontov or Pushkin

changing three pillows (one of the pillows is a sweater with a scarf), eventually just falling asleep on a mattress

doing 20 push-ups at five in the morning, because it's better than scratching your skin and quieter than hitting a pillow

looking up the translation of a word (from the language you're learning) that came to mind and you're not 100% sure what it means

i am so sorry i am only reading the secret history for the first time because i feel like i am missing a lot of details that can only be noticed by re-reading the book. i'm on chapter three and so far every chapter talks about immortality and "living forever." i am wondering if this will last longer and how it will be mentioned in the chapter with bunny's murder. if it will be mentioned at all?

and the whole third chapter can probably be considered the character's first test of the idea of ​​immortality. and already here he faces reality - the proximity of death for any person, the fragility of life (and btw, it is significant that he does not fully realize that he can die, since life among his Greek circle makes him not think about it, they constantly repeat to him 'live forever' no one discusses death).

AND THIS IS WHEN MOST OF THE THINGS HE DID CARE TO TELL WERE LIES

CAN YOU IMAGINE A STRANGER ENTERING YOUR SMALL GROUP, HE IS VERY QUIET AND MYSTERIOUS. HE SAYS VERY FEW THINGS AND IN ALMOST EVERY CONVERSATION HE LIES

Honestly, this is the best scene that shows Henry's madness.

Interestingly, in the first class Richard attended, Julian asks about the one desire we all have. And Camilla says it's the desire to live. And Bunny adds:

"To live forever"

After all, he is the one who will be killed. And because of this, he will always live in the memory of others. Always young and never old

I kinda hope The Secret History never gets a movie adaptation because being forced to read the book is a test you have to pass to get into this fandom.