Ph.D. life

What's it all for?

I recently came across this piece that I wrote during a darker moment of my grad school experience. I was finishing up my coursework and preparing to start working on my dissertation. I decided to get my Ph.D. because I thought that if more high quality research existed, and was accessible to the public, that more education professionals would use it to improve education policy and practice. My dissertation research taught me otherwise, and I know better now. I also now know that research that is conducted and published with usability in mind often advocates a particular point of view or way of doing things. I once thought that producing usable research and the pursuit of truth are compatible. Now, I’m not so sure. None the less, this piece still resonates with me, as I still question the purpose of academic research.

---

I wake up at 5:30 a.m. so that I have time to work on my own writing, which typically is not connect to any of my coursework. I write best in the morning. My apartment complex is quiet, and I have a clear(ish) mind. If only I didn't have class at 9:30 a.m.; I could wake up at least an hour or two later.

I frequently pull myself out of bed with a headache and tight jaw, after clenching it throughout a moderately restful night's sleep. I look in the mirror to find puffy, bloodshot eyes and dehydrated, pimply skin, from a combination of lack of sleep and the over-consumption of coffee and under-consumption of water. 

It's this is the first day back from Thanksgiving break, so I should feel well rested. 

I pull back my hair into a ponytail and there they are, the countless number of grey hairs I've acquired over the past few years. And as I have numerous times, I ask myself, is getting this Ph.D. worth it? 

We are nearing the end of the semester, and the professor of my Monday morning class gives a little "farewell, do good" speech. Part of her speech addressed her dismay with the academy, which I feel pretty regularly, but it's been particularly intense lately. She mentioned her growing doubt that the academy is a place where change can spring from. She talked about the author of the book The New Jim Crow, Michelle Alexander, and how she has abandoned her attempts at trying to use evidence and truth to compel ideological, self-interested politicians to do what's right for their constituents. Alexander now studies theology because she thinks a seminary is a better place for truth seeking.

My professor's speech causes my mind to wander and contemplate all the times I proclaimed I will abandon this life and teach yoga on an island where I can have no access to TV. I typically loath the phrase "ignorance is bliss" because why would you want to live life in ignorance? Well, does being knowledgeable, well-educated, and pragmatic pay off if everyone else is concerned with what will benefit them and their "friends," even if their idea of truth and what's right has no basis in reality? 

Her speech also led me to think about a recent encounter I had with a school district research participant. She waited until we were off the record to share her disdain for academic research because it is not accessible to her and her colleagues or the public—tangibly or because of the way research papers are written.

She's right. The incentive structure does not exist in the academy to share findings with the public. We are incentivized to publish in expensive, inaccessible journals, which only the academics in our field, as well as undergraduate and graduate students, will read. Even if "outsiders" were able to easily access the journals, most of the articles would not be helpful in their day-to-day work and career lives. 

I used to work for an advocacy organization that used flimsy research evidence to claim a program was worth government funding. I currently criticize these organizations for the power they wield and the influence they have over the policymaking process, despite their flimsy evidence. But sometimes I wonder: do they deserve any more criticism than academics? Motives aside, at least they are trying to improve the lives of children and young adults.

Academics have the knowledge, and they can distribute or translate the findings, but many of them don't. Frankly, I don't think many of them care to because if they did, the system and incentives would change. I think many academics are quite comfortable researching and writing about what they are interested in and not worrying about sharing their research or using it to inform policy or practice.

But, I guess we can debate whether usability is the point of research. However, if it's not, then what is the point?