Inside doctoral education in America: Voices of Latinas/os in pursuit of the PhD

Journal of College Student Development, Jul/Aug 2002 by Gonzalez, Kenneth P, Marin, Patricia

Two students considered how editorial boards serve as one mechanism for perpetuating the market culture of the academy. They stated:

Alex: I wanted to kind of piggyback on what Michael said, and I actually think of it as scary. I'm trying to figure out why your advisor said, "Why are you doing this Latino stuff?" And I'm trying to figure her out. She's a young, bullet of a professor. And she sits on editorial boards, right? And those editorial boards, say, "Okay, we did our diversity stuff last year." And members of editorial boards serve for 2 or 3 years discussing, "This is the kind of work that we want to see published." And so she's seen that. The scary part about that is that it's research for notoriety. It's research for reputation. And that's what it's all about. And in her mind-set, I think she represents the very core of the academy that's just about reputation, publishing, and being at the best research institution. And so if she wants to be the best, then there are certain topics that need to be done. In other words, if you do these topics, then you're going to be the best. And if she wants to be known as the best, she needs to get her students to be doing those certain topics. It's like a machine. And that's the scary part about it ... especially in these large elite institutions. And so I think that plays out on us when we talk about our dissertation topics. There's this whole other world going on out there. And the implications of that world end up being played out on us in some ways. But you've [to Paula] had kind of a different experience, because you've had support from your institution. But I think it's support with them thinking that there would be some production.

Paula: There's a payoff for them.

Alex: Yes! There's a payoff for them. But if there's not a payoff for them ... and [your advisor] definitely doesn't think there's a payoff for you [to Michael]. And if it's not a payoff for you, it's not a payoff for her.

Much of the dialogue that occurred was sobering. It was sobering for us to name the various forces pressuring individuals to act in certain ways. Editorial boards were identified as one powerful force perpetuating the status quo-in this case, the academy's market culture. It was this kind of status quo mechanism that discouraged us from pursuing research topics that resonated with our identities.

Elitism. In addition to the market culture, we shared consensus that elitism, manifested in the form of individual and institutional obsessions with prestige and status, also reinforces the academy's restrictive, conservative, and racist nature. Two students highlighted how faculty preoccupation with prestige and status restricted their personal interests and goals:

Corina: Oh, our faculty, they wouldn't even, they would die. Our faculty won't write you job recommendations for institutions that they don't deem worthy enough ... regardless of what your personal plans or goals are. If that institution is not a top-tier institution, you can just forget it. Everybody knows that. And it's just ridiculous.