MOVING TO FRONT AGAIN FROM JULY 4--INTERESTING AND SUBSTANTIVE DISCUSSION IN THE COMMENTS, MORE THOUGHTS WELCOME
MOVING TO FRONT FROM JUNE 21--NOW OPEN FOR SUBSTANTIVE COMMENTS (e.g., explaining why his misconduct should or should not affect whether his work is assigned)
I was surprised to see this in the latest article concerning allegations about Prof. Pogge:
Prior to news articles published last month by BuzzFeed and HuffPost, some professors had been working behind the scenes to share what they knew about Pogge’s behavior and to encourage other academics to shun him. Those sorts of individual efforts are continuing in light of the public allegations.
Sterba, for instance, said he’s no longer including Pogge’s work in exams for his graduate students.
“You don’t need him. He carries too much baggage — he doesn’t have to be cited anymore,” Sterba said. “He’s a negative image and we don’t need that. Maybe if he was Einstein we’d have to cite him, but he’s not.”
I fully understand not inviting Prof. Pogge to conferences, given the allegations that he uses them as dating opportunities (or worse), but not assigning his work when it is relevant to the topic? Really? That's educational malpractice, as far as I can see. But let's see what readers think.
UPDATE: So with almost 300 votes in the first hour-and-a-half, here's what the results look like:
|
|||||||||||||||
When I have time to moderate comments (probably not before July 1), I'll open a discussion so that the "no" and "undecided" voters might explain how they are thinking about things.
FINAL RESULT: So with nearly 500 votes (497 to be precise) after about four hours, here are the results:
|
|||||||||||||||
As I won't be able to post again about this for awhile, I'll treat this as the result, a snapshot of some professional opinion. More in a week or so when I can moderate comments.
