IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/uhejxx/v87y2016i3p363-389.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Honor in the Academic Profession: How Professors Want to Be Remembered by Colleagues

Author

Listed:
  • Joseph C. Hermanowicz

Abstract

Achievement in the professions is situated relationally. Work comes to constitute contribution only by the judgments of colleagues. This is paradigmatically the case in science and scholarship, where colleagues not only sanction others but also create their legacy. Normatively, it would stand to reason that colleagues would be held in high regard; the work of academia, and the careers of academics, depend on them. The present work, however, examines how professors value colleagues in actuality. Taking the field of physics, the article examines one aspect of the social significance of colleagues by asking how physicists might desire being remembered by them. Data came from interviews with 60 physicists at distinct career stages and employed at distinct university types. The results reveal a highly delimited number of ways physicists wish to be remembered. In addition, their responses vary by departmental tier, age, and productivity. The discussion exposes two sets of purportedly unequal and contradictory social codes used by academics to project a legacy: professional attributes that are code for “charisma” and personal attributes that are code for “morality.” Anticipation of the self in memoriam is argued to constitute a principal means by which people intersubjectively construct status.

Suggested Citation

  • Joseph C. Hermanowicz, 2016. "Honor in the Academic Profession: How Professors Want to Be Remembered by Colleagues," The Journal of Higher Education, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 87(3), pages 363-389, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:uhejxx:v:87:y:2016:i:3:p:363-389
    DOI: 10.1080/00221546.2016.11777406
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/00221546.2016.11777406
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/00221546.2016.11777406?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:uhejxx:v:87:y:2016:i:3:p:363-389. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/uhej .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.