Conference Report: AERA 2009 and UCEA Clark Seminar

Another AERA come and gone. I was a very good conference attendee this time; my session stamina was unusually strong, plus there were a number of panels directly related to my dissertation topics.

My favorite session was an exchange between Michael Feurer, executive director of the Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education in the National Research Council (NRC) of the National Academies, and Richard Shavelson, professor of education and psychology (by courtesy) at Stanford University. The two went back and forth about the relationship between research and policy. They seemed to be largely in agreement that policymakers have, at best, a technical advisory role in public policy formation. On both of there views, policy makers cannot pass judgment on which policies are better or best, as these are ethical judgments. On Feurer's view especially, such judgments are beyond the expertise of researches.

What seems to undergird both thinkers positions is a commitment to ethical noncognitivism--the belief that ethical judgments have no significant cognitive content and are thus beyond the scope of rational debate--that is, debate which uses evidence or reason. This is a fairly common position, even in professional philosophy (for instance, given Michael Katz's objections to a paper I gave last Tuesday, it is a position he at least partially endorses). But I don't think that it is defensible. In my dissertation in philosophy, I argue that the fact/value distinction is not only philosophically problematic, but that it creates confusions for other critical debates about the relationship between the public and private, experts and lay people, and human nature and human conduct.

Of course this argument is too long for a blog post. The exchange between Feurer and Shavelson was fantastic, both for the helpful insights they provided as well as for the evidence it provided of a need for a richer dialogue between philosophy and social science.

I spent the final two days of the conference as a fellow at the UCEA David L. Clark National Graduate Student Research Seminar. I conferene quite a bit, and I have never witnessed anything like this. I wish every professional organization would adopt the UCEA model of mentoring young scholars. The faculty had read our abstracts and each seemed genuinely excited to talk with us about our careers. I highly recommend the experience to anyone who is nearing dissertation stage.