Rick Hess in his opinion piece here was explicit with understanding on what it takes to be a purpose driven scholar.
His perspective comes in this summary.
In today’s academic landscape, two fundamental premises hold undeniable significance: ideas matter, and the value placed on activities directly influences the effort devoted to them. While academia excels at recognizing disciplinary scholarship, it often falters in appreciating scholars who bring their ideas into the real world of policy and practice. This shortfall, while negligible in fields like physics or Renaissance poetry, becomes critical in disciplines like education policy, where the translation of research into actionable solutions is essential.
The challenge lies in finding a balance. Researchers should neither drive policy unilaterally nor ignore the biases inherent in their work. Decisions around education policy are value-laden, necessitating a blend of empirical evidence, ethical considerations, and practical wisdom.
Despite these complexities, scholars play a vital role in questioning conventions, scrutinizing reforms, and exploring better alternatives for education systems. However, this requires a commitment to responsible and constructive engagement.
A useful analogy is the ideal of the “five-tool” baseball player—one who excels at running, fielding, throwing, hitting, and hitting with power. Similarly, exceptional public scholars demonstrate prowess in five key areas: disciplinary research, scholarly analysis, popular writing, collaboration, and public communication. These individuals break academic silos, inspire fresh thinking, and translate complex research into accessible insights that influence policy and practice.
Unfortunately, the contemporary academy often rewards narrow, specialized research over this broader, integrative approach. This creates a vacuum in the public square, where voices of advocacy often overshadow those of meticulous, complexity-driven scholars. The imbalance underscores the need to celebrate and incentivize “five-tool” scholars who navigate both academic and public domains with rigor and clarity.
One initiative aimed at addressing this gap is the Edu-Scholar Rankings. These rankings blend scholarly output and public influence, using diverse metrics to gauge a scholar’s footprint in academia and public discourse. They serve as a conversation starter, not a definitive measure, highlighting those whose work transcends traditional boundaries to shape meaningful debates.
The rankings have found utility in surprising ways. University deans and provosts use them to identify candidates for leadership roles, while scholars leverage them to demonstrate their impact during job applications, grant proposals, or tenure reviews. Prominent institutions have even spotlighted their faculty’s performance in these rankings, showcasing contributions to public discourse that often go unnoticed.
Yet, it’s important to approach these rankings with caution. They offer a “wisdom of crowds” perspective rather than a precise evaluation of scholarly contributions. They neither measure the social benefit of a scholar’s work nor assess the quality of their engagement. Instead, they provide insight into which scholars wield significant influence and the methods they use to achieve it.
This raises an intriguing question: how do we reconcile scholarly influence with the broader responsibilities of academia? Public impact is undoubtedly crucial, but it does not encompass other vital aspects like teaching, mentoring, and community service. While rankings spotlight public influence, they do not capture the holistic contribution of scholars to their fields or society at large.
Moreover, public scholarship demands a delicate balance. Scholars must engage with real-world issues without overstepping the limits of their expertise. Reckless forays into policy advocacy can undermine credibility, while disengagement risks rendering valuable insights irrelevant. The ideal lies in thoughtful, measured participation that enriches public discourse without compromising academic integrity.
This brings us back to the core idea: the importance of valuing and rewarding scholars who bridge the gap between academia and society. By fostering a culture that celebrates interdisciplinary engagement, critical inquiry, and public communication, academia can better fulfill its role as a catalyst for positive change.
Ultimately, the Edu-Scholar Rankings serve as a mirror reflecting both the potential and the challenges of public scholarship. They remind us of the transformative power of ideas and the need to nurture scholars who can bring these ideas to life in ways that resonate beyond the ivory tower.
In this endeavor, the academic community has much to learn from its exceptional members—those who dare to step outside their comfort zones, challenge conventions, and enrich both their disciplines and the world at large. Such efforts not only redefine the role of scholars but also reaffirm the timeless truth: ideas matter.
