Research in the Algorithmic Envirusment
As much as I am all for the expansion of legitimacy, authority, and knowledge access, what often is lost in that convo is…
Learning how to conduct different types of research is a collection of skill sets.
Most researchers are specialists, only trained to do some research types.
I’m not saying people without formal research training are not capable of learning how to comprehensively read, interpret, and make their own claims.
But what I am saying is that laypeople who read research articles written for topic experts are bound to have misunderstandings.
Practically zero bachelors programs right now even teach folks how to conduct any kind of research beyond probably grazing over a few peer reviewed academic journal articles, and learning how to cite / quote / summarize something in MLA/APA/Chicago style in the most basic sense.
PhD programs are a training process.
That’s all they are. They give people, more often than not, unless they’re incredibly privileged and have therefore had unusual access to mentors, resources, and funding, the opportunity to conduct their first major research project — ever.
By design, having no degree and having a PhD is the difference between having had training in conducting research.
Fancy pieces of paper don’t make anyone better than anyone.
We need to expand who is seen as an “authority” / “expert”.
And you either have training or don’t.
With that said, research training and skills are just like anything else. You either have committed time and effort to learn how to hone those skills, or you haven’t. This age is full of charismatic folks with no research training, yet good marketing, who gain huge followings.
Like I’ve said multiple times over the course of the last 6ish years, I do believe it’s necessary we learn from the way authority is breaking down, for better and for worse (in this case, both). I’m just not sure how and where we go to make research training and skills equitable.
There are countless formal researchers who aren’t getting paid for their work, while people with zero training are paid.
Meanwhile, getting a PhD throws many of us $160k+ in debt. So many trained researchers can’t afford to pretend we can frivolously provide training for free.
There must be ways to both ethically strive toward making access, providing higher level research training, and an extension of critical literacy. But I don’t forsee that happening so long as for profit higher education exists, and, we can’t destroy it without a replacement.
It’s almost like because people have access to more information they’re falsely conflating being able to access something to being able to do research themselves. Those are not the same thing.
Equating those two things completely misconstrues the fact that research is a collection of skill sets that requires training. We live in this society that is not equal. That can and must change.
I look forward to ongoing conversations about this. I just don’t know how we fix this shit fuck of an inequitable system, with all these things in mind. Do you?
Again, reminding someone that they don’t have formal research skills or training isn’t an insult. It just means they don’t have experience. It’s like not being a painter or any other craftsperson.
Researchers and our research approaches, methods, and processes are never neutral.
Academia is deeply flawed, biased, and has a history / present of using / abusing language, reinforcing falsely Objective / non-universalizable canonical claims.
All of this is can / must change.