Article from June 6 in the New Yorker by Louis Menand (author/professor) that asks about the “why” behind higher education—and also asks “what are we (students) learning, if anything?”

The question Menand brings up of a meritocracy as opposed to a democracy in higher education is interesting, I think, when you apply it to the world of academic publishing –in order to “succeed”, you must publish articles, books, editions, and be good enough to get publish. But what if, for reasons that have nothing to do with your merit, such as a glut of dissertations, or increasingly selective journals, you can’t get published? Should academic publishing provide something in the way of a democratic system to allow graduate students and junior faculty a chance to publish and get ahead?

– Mary

Team Scholastica