Ethics of Authorship--Part 2
By exploitation of the learner I mean using the textbook as a medium to advance one's hidden agenda or to trash another's. An undergraduate introductory textbook is not the place for liberal, conservative, radical, reactionary, religious, or feminist posturing, grandstanding, or proselytizing. Yet, I see this all the time. Authors screen facts through their ideological filters, which is fine and probably unavoidable, but then present those nuances or distortions without alerting the (usually naive) reader that this is what is happening. This is not okay. The ethics of authorship require self-awareness and honesty, especially wherever we depart from objectivity. The reader has a right to know (and a responsibility to understand) the sources of your thoughts as well as your words.Whatever happened to those values? Sometimes I think that objectivity, for one, must be part of the post-modern world we are leaving behind as we enter Brave-New-World times for real. Subjectivity (intellectual anarchy?) reigns. Literary and social criticism of the 21st century seems to insist that facts are fictions, that even science is storytelling, that all reality is alternate. In which case, nobody is really wrong and it doesn't matter what we believe! Bring me back to when we at least still tried to discover and speak truths (even if doomed to fall short of any absolutes). In any case, clearly stating your frame of reference and theoretical or ideological perspectives, and explaining how they might affect what you say, is de rigeur in textbook publishing. Students, even neophytes, have a right to this.
Exploitation of naive readers takes other forms as well--undocumented assertions, for example, when readers don't even understand the significance of a missing source citation, don't realize that a conclusion is being drawn without reference to any authority or body of knowledge other than yours. Students also have a right to know what is not being said, and why. They don't care about this stuff, you may say. True enough, but they would if we worked harder at bringing them to the intellectual level we claim to prefer in a student. They would question what they read. They would question your conclusions along with your grounds for making them. And this would be good, right?
So, to me, the second ethical principle of authorship after honest representation is a little humility, that and firm restraint against exploiting students' ignorance and gullibility. This relates to the third ethical principle: We should not neglect learners. Neglect will be the subject of my next post. I hope you are reading these, by the way. The SiteMeter so far says not yet.
All the best,
Mary Ellen
Labels: ethics, textbook authorship
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home