February 6, 2008
Kaimin unfair in criticism of Professor Paul Haber
On Jan. 31 a news article written by Alex Tenenbaum entitled “Texts Written by Professors Could Intimidate Students” ran on the front page of the Montana Kaimin. In the piece it detailed the controversy of professors teaching their own books in their classes. The article made example of a specific book and specific professor, Paul Haber and “Power from Experience”. I also read this book last semester in one of Dr. Haber’s courses and thought it critical to present another perspective that will help “nurture diversity and debate” for the benefit of your readers.
I’d first like to start by saying my experience was absolutely different than the one individual you interviewed in regards to Haber. The dense academic book, the subject of which was completely omitted from the original article, covered the very specific topic of the politics of social movements in Mexico. I found that the booked opened up an intense and otherwise difficult debate to wade in, that with the book as a guide, could be picked apart and digested in a delectable atmosphere. I know many students in my class felt the same way. The experience of the ones that enjoyed the book was far from the classroom environment that the interviewed student describes.
To me, if Paul Haber has any faults, it is that he attempts to provide too many perspectives on the subject being discussed and it becomes overwhelming, unlike the news article written about him. Furthermore, many times Haber was the first to critique his own theories and more than anything he encouraged discussion and criticism of his perspectives.
The next point I’d like to bring up is how the writing itself mistreated the professor. For example, in the second paragraph you make the assertion that the University of Montana has policies to prevent financial conflicts of interest with regards to professors teaching their own work. Yet when Paul Haber refused to comment, which is his right by the way, to an obviously one-sided and targeting piece of journalism, you wrote “it is unknown where the royalties from this textbook end up.” A reader who is following the article closely will realize that the quoted material is innocent due to the University’s policies on the matter. We just don’t know where the royalties end up. However to someone glancing at the article who takes this quote out of context, and I’m sorry to burst your bubble but not everyone obsessively reads your newspaper cover to cover everyday, this quote explicitly charges a suspicion of guilt upon the professor as to the motivations of teaching his own book.
Finally I’d like to point that the student interviewed on the second professor who taught his own book was quoted as saying, “If it’s a subject where there’s a lot written already, like WWI … or something, I would question why the professor is using his own text. But if it’s a narrow subject like, in this case the history of human rights, I don’t think it’s a problem.” As this material is being presented as news, I’ll take the point made here as objective fact. I went to Amazon and did a little research, “the history of human rights” provided 6061 results, and “the history of social movements in Mexico” provided 257 results. The fact of the matter is we pay professors to teach what they know, and many times they write academic papers and books on what they know. Why would we ever limit a professor from expressing his vast knowledge to students because he literally wrote the book on the topic? I for one am proud to have been given the opportunity to question and debate with a professor on his twenty years of research. It illuminated me.
– Winslow Hansen
UM student
This story has been viewed 159 times.
Comments
There are no comments for this story yet.
