"Public Scholarship" -- by Any Other Name Would Be as Sweet?

Definitions and discussion of the terms "Public Scholarship," "Public Intellectual," "Civic Engagement," and "Service Learning."

 

There is no one consensus for a definition of public scholarship. Research on the term leads to a labyrinth of related terms and concepts -- some of which appear to be so closely related as to be synonymous, while others address similar interests but differ in substantial elements. While there are several terms that address the idea of scholarship that contributes to public understanding and welfare, four terms appear throughout the disciplines and can be seen to encompass the idea of public scholarship. These terms -- particularly the first three -- overlap a great deal, with Service Learning coming under the umbrella of Public Scholarship, but differing the most in its intent and process. Each of the following sections provides a sampling of scholarly definitions of a particular term, with an effort to be broad and representative. Links to internet sites are provided, and attention has been paid to interdisciplinary understandings and employment of the terminology.

 

Public Scholarship

 

 

 

Public scholarship is defined perhaps more by what it does than by what it is. While there is no simple consensus, many sources do agree on the following elements in the use of the term “public scholarship.”

 

Public Scholarship:

· Begins with scholarship which is rooted in rigorous research and held to the standards of the academy.

· Considers its “public” to be defined in the broadest sense possible, which may include a diversity of communities and voices from around the globe.

· Considers its efforts to benefit not only the community outside of the academy, but also to benefit those within.

· Seeks to engage members of the public as active participants while being mindful of preserving its scholarly freedom and integrity.

 

The University of Washington and the University of Minnesota are two institutions that have attempted formal definitions of public scholarship in an effort to promote the practice while at the same time honoring the integrity of the academy. The Public Scholarship Committee Council on Public Engagement at U. Minn advances this definition: “At the level of the institution, public scholarship means optimizing the extent to which University research informs and is informed by the public good, maximizes the generation and transfer of knowledge and technology, educates the public about what research the University does, and listens to the public and what research needs to be done.”

 

The [www.com.washington.edu|Department of Communication at the University of Washington] has formed a draft statement on public scholarship which states that “public scholarship is more than merely public education; it is the fusion of research, education, public outreach, and community dialogue.” To achieve this fusion, the draft prescribes criteria including the rooting of such scholarship in the scholar’s area of expertise and the impact of the scholarship across a diversity of communities in which it provides “opportunities for active public involvement.”

 

Both the University of Washington Department of Communication] and the U. Minnesota committee consider public scholarship an obligation of the academy. “Scholarship and citizenship go hand-in-hand,” states the U.W. draft. “Educators and scholars in higher education share a civic obligation to take their research goals and findings beyond the academy.” The U. Minnesota definition “assumes that the University has an affirmative obligation to inform the public about its work … in this way, the very process of academic scholarship – whether in and of itself ‘public’ – contributes to the intellectual capital of our State.”

 

The participation and inclusion of the public in primary research is a subject for intense debate among many scholars. New York University journalism professor and press critic Jay Rosen writes that “public scholars begin with the realization that they don’t know something, and the something can be known in only one way: through a process of inquiry conducted with others in public” (qtd. in Wolfe 1997). In this, Rosen reflects the third element of the above list: that public scholarship benefits the academy as well as the public. But to what extent does the research involve the public? Descriptions of public scholarship differ on this point.

 

The slogan “nothing about us without us” has been put forth from disabilities rights communities and used as a paradigm by the United Nations in its research and activism within those communities. Disability studies author James I. Charlton considers this stance an echo of other civil rights movements – that “when others speak for you, you lose” (Charlton 2000).

 

Furman University communication professor Sean Patrick O'Rourke sees public scholarship as one of the responsibilities that accompanies privilege. “We are citizens as well as scholars,” he writes, “devoted to the wise use of knowledge as well as to its creation, discovery, preservation, and advancement” (O’Rourke 2006).

 

Boston University professor Alan Wolfe disagrees with the necessity – or value – of including the public in research. Wolfe observes that what has been labeled public scholarship has at times been a device for the government or a particular activist group to push its own agenda. The only “obligation” that a scholar has to the public, argues Wolfe, is to one’s “quest for understanding” (Wolfe 1997). In fact, Wolfe writes, “To owe the public something, I must spurn both its lack of interest and its attention” (1997). However, Wolfe adds that most scholars agree with the idea that academics should strive to make their research known to the broadest possible public, and that far too much research is “self-referential” – written by academics for academics – or simply trivial (Wolfe 1997).

 

The Center for the Study of Public Scholarship at Emory University refers to public scholarship as “scholarly work that crosses the boundary between the academy and the public … (and which) has the potential to address and engage with a broad range of different communities” (Center 2006). In his essay Public Scholarship: A New Perspective for the 21st Century, Brown University emeritus professor of history Stephen R. Graubard argues that the very notion of the “public” needs to be broadened. He notes that the term public scholarship “implies that there is a public, more extensive than the one that exists in the United States, that needs to be served by scholarship less wedded to the needs of a single society” (Graubard 2004)

 

John, Graham and Coe define public scholarship as "academic work that transcends academic borders to engage or serve the public" (John 2003). The authors acknowledge that there are many terms that are used to express this concept, including "socially relevant scholarship," "engaged research," "service to the public," and "outreach scholarship," but conclude that the term "public scholarship" is the more common and most inclusive.

 

Graubard calls for continuing discussion on the concept of public scholarship. He asks, “Has the time not come for the concept of ‘public scholarship’ to be given new meaning as something more than useful scholarship intended to resolve specific problems that relate principally to America’s social, political, economic, and defense dilemmas?” (Graubard 2004).

 

 

Web links to sources cited above:

 

Emory University Center for the study of Public Scholarship

 

Sean Patrick O'Rourke's website from Furman University

 

Public Intellectual

 

 

The term "public intellectual" is the most common to be used in the discussion of public scholarship. It is used by some as synonymous for the term "public intellectual," while others use it to represent a very different type of person.

 

Alan Lightman (2006)has written about the role of the public intellectual for the online MIT communications forum. Lightman describes a heirarchy of levels for the Public Intellectual, which he defines as a person who "is often trained in a particular discipline, such as linguistics, biology, history, economics, literary criticism, and who is one the faculty of a college or university. When such a person decides to write and speak to a larger audience than their professional colleagues, he or she becomes a 'public intellectual.'" Lightman's hierarchy of levels include level one, in which the public intellectual speaks or writes for the public exclusively about his or her own discipline; level two, applying that knowledge to the greater social, cultural, and political arenas; and level three -- what Lightman calls "by invitiation only" -- where the intellectual "has become elevated to a symbol, a person that stands for something far larger than the discipline from which he or she originated (2006). Lightman considers a level three public scholar to hold an awesome responsibility, which can be used responsibly or irresponsibly; the latter particularly when a public intellectual moves without caution into an area beyond their expertise, or when such a person fails to "acknowledge his personal prejudices ... he has enormous power to influence and change, and he must weild that power with respect" (2006).Lightman names Albert Einstein, Gloria Steinam, and Lester Thurow as examples a level three public intellectual.

 

Sociologist Herbert Gans was one of seven members of a forum on public intellectualism put together by Basic Books in 2001. Gans described public intellectuals as coming in two types: "First, there are the ones that everyone has been talking about, the generalists, the pundits, as I think of them; and second are the disciplinary public intellectuals. The public sociologists, the public economists, the public humanists -- public, plus a discipline. And these are the people who apply the ideas from their own disciplines to a general topic" (Panel 2001).

 

Sociologist Jeffrey Goldfarb states simply that "intellectuals help societies talk about their problems. They contribute to a democratic life when they civilize political contestation and when they subvert complacent consensus; when they provide enemies with the discursive possibility to become opponents and when they facilitate public deliberations about problems buried by the norms of civility" (Goldfarb 1998, p. 1).

 

Richard A. Posner, a U.S. Court of Appeals judge and lecturer and the University of Chicago Law School, has written extensively on the role of the intellectual in public life. In his book Public Intellectuals: A Study of Decline (2002), Posner defines the public intellectual as a person who enters into the arena on issues of widespread interest, and acts as a commentator -- almost an interpreter -- for the general public.

 

While the term "public scholar" is rarely used to describe someone who has approached celebrity status, the term "public intellectual" has been used for such an individual. Sanford Pinsker calls this "the elevation of the public intellectual into something approaching celebrity status" (Pinsker 1995). These "celebrity academics" are the ones most tempted to stray from their paths of expertise, Pinsker warns, adding that "those with the most sweeping prescriptions for what ails us ought to be regarded with the greatest suspicion," and adds that we are more likely to be interested in the person of the "celebrity scholar" than his or her ideas. Contrast to the narrower definition of the public scholar, whose research is more likely to be known than the researcher. According to a 2005 British magazine poll reported in The Guardian, the top three public intellectuals in the world are American linguist Noam Chomsky, Italian novelist and academic Umberto Eco, and Oxford University Professor Richard Dawkins (Chomsky 2005).

 

Then there are the views of a public intellectual as nothing resembling the common descriptions of public scholar: Julian Benda's public intellectual as the "conscience of mankind ... those whose activity is essentially not the pursuit of practical aims, all those who seek joy in the practice of an art of a science or metaphysical aims" (qtd. in Ramirez 2004), and its polar opposite: public intellectual -- what Ramirez labels an "amateur intellectual" -- as an unabashed social activist who "is not merely one who speaks out from a moral imperative, but one whose moral obligations outweigh their professional ones" (2004, emphasis mine). Perhaps Ramirez's definition of such an "amateur professional" could be seen to act as a means of finding distinction between public scholar and activist:" the former begins his journey with theory preeminent; the latter begins his journey with social imperative preeminent. Whether or not the two are mutually exclusive is the topic of endless debate.

 

Web links to sources cited above:

 

The MIT Communications Forum

 

Civic Engagement

 

 

While the public scholar and the public intellectual may be defined by the nature and integrity of their research, the individual involved in "civic engagment" is defined by what he or she does for a specific community. The focus is less on the scholarship that drives the action than the action itself. Of the four terms discussed on this page, civic engagement -- also referred to as "public engagement," or just "engagement" -- is the one used most broadly; it can be used in a manner not dissimilar to "public scholarship," or in a manner virtually identitical to "service learning." Observe the diversity and broad application of the following definitions.

 

The Council on Public Engagement(COPE)at the University of Minnesota states that "Civic/Public engagement means an institutional committment to public purposes and responsibilities intended to strengthen a democratic way of life in the rapidly changing information Age of the 21st century" (Bruininks 2005). Note the difference between this definition and that from the 2003 interim progress report from the same council, which referred to "engaged research" but focused on defining "public scholarship" as optimizing the extent to which University research informs and is informed by the public good, maximizes the generation and transfer of knowledge and technology, educates the public about what research the University does, and listens to the public about what research needs to be done." COPE's newer, streamlined definition does not mention research nor transfer of knowledge, but instead focuses on strengthening democracy in the age of technology. Interestingly, an intermediary definition from COPE contained elements from both of the definitions: "(Civic Engagement is) the partnership of university knowledge and resources with those of the public, civic, and private sectors to enrich scholarship and research; enhance curricular content and process; prepare effective, productive citizens; address critical social issues and solve public problems; and in general contribute to a democratic way of life" (Civic 2004).

 

Compare the above definition to the following offered by the on Institutional Cooperation, (CIC)a consortium of twelve American universities that sponsors a number of committees, including a Committee on Engagement. This committee defines engagement as "the partnership of university knowledge and rerources with those of the public and private sectors to enrich scholarship, research, and creative activity; enhance curriculum, teaching and learning; prepare educated, engaged citizens; strengthen democratic values and civic responsibility; address critical social issues; and contribute to the public good" (2006). If the definition sounds familiar, it is because the University of Minnesota is one of the universities in CIC's consortium.

 

Many of the CIC consortium member universities do present a mission statement or definition of engagement. The University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign frames public engagement as "faculty members, staff and students collaborating with communities, agencies, organizations, business and government to address critical societal issues and to share the University's intellectual and cultural assets" (2006), while Ohio State University's elements of engagement include "that aspect of teaching that enables learning beyond the campus walls; that aspect of research that makes what we discoveer useful beyond the academic community; and that aspect of service that directly benefits the public" (2006).

 

The American Psychological Association provides this definition of civic engagement: "(Civil engagement is) individual and collective actions designed to identify and address issues of public concern. Civic engagement can take many forms, from individual voluntarism to organizational involvement to electoral participation" (2006)

 

The Center for Communication & Civic Engagement is located in the Department of Communication at the University of Washington. The CCCE's primary focus is "to understand how new information technologies can supplement more traditional forms of communication to facilitate civic engagement" (2006). The center, which is co-sponsored by the Department of Political Science, brings faculty, staff, and students together to develop and implement programs and projects that are seen as encouraging citizen engagement in a democratic society.

 

Commonalities between these uses of civic/public engagement, then, include the necessity for interaction between academy and community, the strengthening of democracy, and the preparation of effective, knowledgeable citizens. It is perhaps this last element which is particularly focused upon in civic engagement, and which differentiates it from the applied research locus of public scholarship and from the focus on the individual scholar that is found in discussions of the public intellectual.

 

 

Web links to sources cited above.

 

University of Minnesota Council on Public Engagement

 

Committee on Institutional Cooperation's Committee on Engagement

 

Center for Communication & Civic Engagement

 

 

 

 

Service Learning

 

 

Of the four terms discussed here, "service learning" is the one most commonly found to have a definition that is markedly distinct from the research-centered approach found in descriptions of public scholarship. The term "service learning" is used by education institutions to indicate a particular teaching pedagogy meant to benefit the student and to reflect coursework content, while also benefiting society.

 

The Service-Learning Research and Development Center at UC Berkeley operates out of their school of education, states that "as a pedagogical strategy rooted in experiential education theories, service-learning allows learners not only to apply theories to authentic and practical situations, but is also helps to provide service to the local community ... (it is) the engagement of students in service activities that are integrated into the academic curriculum" (2006).

 

The American Psychological Association differentiates between the terms "civic engagement" and "service learning" The APA definition reads: "Service learning and civic engagement are not the same thing in the sense that not all service-learning has a civic dimension and not all civic engagement is service learning. For definition's sake, civic engagement is the broader motif, encompassing service-learning but not limited to it"(2006). The APA also cites Bringle and Hatcher's definition of service-learning as "a course-based, credit-bearing educational experience that allows students to (a)participate in an organized service activity that meets identified community needs and (b)reflect on the service activity in such a way as to gain further understanding of course content, a broader appreciation of the discipline, and an enhanced sense of civic responsibility" (Bringle & Hatcher, 1995, p. 112)

 

Many educational institutions also clearly differentiate between "civic engagement" and "service learning," and this is reflected in their establishment of different programs and centers for each. The University of Washington and the University of Minnesota, for example, have centers for "civic engagement" (COPE at U. Minnesota; CCCE at U. Washington, as discussed above) that are completely separate from their centers for "service learning," and which serve different purposes.

 

The University of Washington's Carlson Center, which serves only undergraduate students, states that "service learning provides students a unique opportunity to connnect coursework with life experience through public service ... service learning provides students an opportunity to experience theories traditionally studied within classrooms come to life, through volunteering in the community" (Service 2006).

 

The University of Minnesota Career and Community Learning Center aims to promote "community involvement and service-learning," and defines service learning as "a pedagogy that links service and academic study so that each strengthens the other" (2006). As with public service and civic engagement, the beneficiaries of service learning are seen to include not only community members, but student and faculty as well. The Career and Community Learning Center takes care to distinguish service learning from volunteerism, community service, internships, and field education, none of which are seen as providing "intentional integration of service and learning and the reciprocal nature of both the service and the learning among all parties in the relationship."

 

There are a great many other colleges and universities that have established service learning centers or programs. Here are a sampling of them along with their definitions of the term:

 

The UCLA Center for Community Learning has as its mission the engagement of "UCLA undergraduates, faculty and community partners in programs that integrate teaching, research, and service" (2006). The Center considers this part of its "obligation as a public institution to educate persons who are good global citizens."

 

Cal Maritime offers a Community Service Learning program, and describes community service learning as "a teaching method that promotes student learning through active participation in meaningful and planned service experiences in the community that are directly related to course content" (2006) It is to be noted that Cal Maritime specifies that the service be directly related to academic content. Other "service learning" programs do not; rather, they describe service learning as providing value to the student's overall educational experience.

 

At the University of Pennsylvania Center for Community Service Learning, service learning does not have to be tied to a particular course or academic focus. Instead, students are engaged in projects including literacy tutoring and school-to-work programs in a effort to fulfill what its founder, Benjamin Franklin, described as "the great aim and end of all learning'" -- the service of society.

 

Bentley Service-Learning Center has the intent of promoting academic learning through service, with the belief that "students' community involvement outside of the classroom contributes significantly to what they learn within it" (2006). The Bentley approach does not necessarily directly tie the service project to academic curriculum or scholarship, although it does require a reflective component that promotes "greater student understanding of both the subject-matter and themselves." Bentley sees its service learning component as reflecting the goals of the National and Community Service Act of 1990 (42 USC 12401; 104 Stat. 3127) Public Law 101-610, which encouraged United States citizens to participate in community service projects, such as those designed to increase literacy, , job skills, and environmental preservation.

 

The Edward Ginsberg Center for Community Service and Learning, located at the University of Michigan, uses programs, local initiatives, and publications to "engage students, faculty members, university staff, and community partners in a process which combines community service and academic learningin order to promote civic participation, build community capacity, and enhance the educational process" (2006)

 

[http://www.plymouth.edu/hub/cslc/] Plymouth State University has establishe a Community Service Learning Center based on the idea that the university should "connect students, faculty and staff with service opportunities in Plymouth and surrounding communities ... (to) raise awareness of local, national, and international concerns" (2006)

 

State University Service Learning Center has a succinct description of service learning: "Learn to be as good at doing things as you are at thinking good thoughts" (2006) The center seeks to connect students to pressing community needs in the Grand Rapids area.

 

 

In addition to specific college and institutional programs, there are many national and international centers for service learning. These include the [http//www.servicelearning.org/welcome_to_service-learning/index.php|The National Service-Learning Clearinghouse], which offers information and resources on service learning for educators from K-12 through higher education, describes service learning as a "teaching and learning strategy that integrates meaningful community service with instruction and reflection to enrich the learning experience, teach civic responsibility, and strengthen communities ... service learning combines service objectives with learning objectives with the intent that the activity change both the recipient and the provider of the service" (2006).

 

The Amizade Global Service-Learning Consortium partners with educational institutions to provide international service learning experiences for undergraduate and graduate students, who can earn academic credit for their participation. " offer riven volunteer programs and service-learning programs.

As with the National Service-Learning Clearinghouse, the value of the educatinal outreacch experience is seen in its benefits to both volunteer and recipient: "At the heart of the cross-cultural service experience is the belief that bringing cultures together creates understanding, compassion, and sense of purpose in people" (2006)

 

The Corporation for National & Community Service sponsors a program called Learn and Serve America encourages students to serve within their own communities "using what they learn in the classroom to solve real-life problems" (2006). The program is centered on the premise that service-learning provides a multitude of benefits to the student as well as strengthening the local community.

 

The Nation Service-Learning Partnershipfocusing on younger students of middle school and high school age. The partnership reflects the growing inclusion of service learning as a core element of every student's educational experience.

 

The National Youth Leadership Council defines service learning as a "teaching method that enriches learning by engaging students in meaningful service to their schools and communities. Young people apply academic skills to real-world issues, linking established learning objectives with real-world issues" (2006)

 

Campus Compact is a coalition of 950 college and university presidents that promotes service learning for the purposes of "educating students for responsible citizenship in ways that both deepen their learning and improve the quality of community life"and challenges "all of higher education to make civic and community engagement an institutional priority" (2006)

 

A strong portrait of service-learning emerges from these descriptions: the experience is first of all a teaching tool; it is primarily meant to enhance the student's overall educational experience; it does not necessarily tie in directly with course content, although it may; it is seen as a civic duty of educational institutions.

 

Summary of the compilation

 

We come full circle, then, to the idea of public scholarship as benefiting both the scholar and the public. The public scholar, the public intellectual, the civic/publically engaged scholar, and the service-learning scholar share a similar core purpose of understanding that knowledge does not have to remain in a cloistered environment, but that its introduction into the public can bring benefits to all involved.

 

In addition, there is a broad consensus that public scholarship is, in fact, a obligation of higher education. The Council on Public Engagement puts it this way:

 

And from Vanderbilt University Communication Studies professor Sean O'Rourke:

 

 

Sources

 

"About the Center." Edward Ginsberg Center for Community Service and Learning. University of Michigan website. Retrieved June 8, 2006 from

 

Ad Hoc Committee on Public Scholarship. (2004, March 4) Draft statement on public scholarship. Department of Communication, University of Washington, Seattle, WA.

 

Bringle, R., & Hatcher, J. (1996). A service learning curriculum for faculty. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning, 2, 112-122.

 

Bruininks, Robert.( 2005) \"About Public Engagement.\" University of Minnesota's Council on Public Engagement website. Retrieved June 6, 2006 from http://www.umn.edu/civic/about/index.html

 

Center for Communication & Civic Engagment. (2006) University of Washington. Retrieved June 6, 2006 from http://depts.washington.edu/ccce/Home.htm

 

Charlton, James I. (2000). Nothing About Us Without Us: Disability Oppression and Empowerment. Berkely: U of California Press.

 

Chomsky named top intellectual: British poll. (2005). Breitbart.com. Retrieved June 1, 2006 from http://www.breitbart.com/new/2005.

 

\"Civic Engagement.\" (2006) Association of Psychology website. Retrieved June 7, 2006 from http://www.apa.org/edu/slce/civicengagement.html

 

Civic Engagement News. (2004) Council on Public Engagement. Retrieved June 6, 2006 from http://www1.umn.edu/civic/news/index.html

 

\"Definition of Engagement.\" (2006)Committee on Institutional Cooperation. Retrieved June 6, 2006 from http://www.cic.uiuc.edu/groups/CommitteeOnEngagement/index.shtml 

 

\"Discover service-learning.\" National Youth Leadership Council website. Retrieved June 10, 2006 from http://www.nylc.org

 

Goldfarb, J.C. (1998). Civility and subversion: The intellectual in democratic society. New York: Cambridge University Press. 

 

Graubard, Stephen R. (2004) Public Scholarship: A New Perspective for the 21st Century. New York: Carnegie Corporation. Retrieved online May 30, 2006 from www.carnegie.org/pdf/Carnegie_txt.pdf.

 

John, Sue L., Erica S. Graham and Kevin Coe. (2003) Open to the Public: An Evaluative Model of Public Scholarship. Paper presented at the 2004 International Communication Association Convention.

 

Lightman, Alan. (2006) The Role of the Public Intellectual. MIT website. Retrieved May 30, 2006 from http://web.mit.edu/comm-forum/papers/lightman.html

 

National Service-Learning Partnership website. Retrieved June8, 2006 from http://www.service-learningpartnership.org/site/PageServer

 

\"O'Rourke's public scholarship combines rhetorical knowledge with activism to produce op-ed pieces.\" (2006) National Communication Association website. Retrieved May 30, 2006 from http://www.natcom.org/research/Profiles/O'Rourke.htm

 

Panel discussion. (2001, Feb. 12) The Future of the Public Intellectual: A Forum. The Nation, 272(6), 25.

 

Public Engagement. (2006) The University of Illinois. Retrieved June 6, 2006 from http://www.oc.uiuc.edu/engagement/old

 

Public Scholarship Committee Council on Public Engagement. (2003, April). Interim progress report. University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN.

 

Ramirez, Rudy. (2004) Authorizing Activism: Arundhati Roy and the Performance of the Public Intellectual. Unpublished paper. Retrieved June 1, 2006 from www.sims.berkeley.edu/~dmb/papers/others/RamirezOnRoy.doc

 

\"Service Learning.\" (2006) Carlson Center at the University of Washington. Retrieved June 7, 2006 from http://depts.washington.edu/leader/3_service/

 

\"Service Learning Is ...\" National Service Learning Clearninghouse website. Retrieved May 5, 2006 from http//www.servicelearning.org/welcome_to_service-learning/index.php

 

Wolfe, A. (1997). The promise and the flaws of public scholarship. The Chronicle of Higher Education, 43 918, B4.

 

Web links to sources cited above:

 

http:www.csps.emory.edu

 

[http://www.csps.emory.edu|The Emory University Center for the Study of Public Scholarship

 

The Emory U Center for the Study of Public Scholarship web site.

[http://facweb.furman.edu/dept/comm/Orourke/orourke.htm]

Sean Patrick O’Rourke’s website from Furman University, featuring his statement on public scholarship.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Comments from others

 

On Public Scholar vs. Public Intellectual:

While these two terms and concepts can easily be conflated, there seem to be key differences in the public intellectual and the public scholar. The public intellectual holds a specific, highly-lauded position in the public sphere based on intellectual or personal accomplishments which then seem to grant them an image of authority or intellectual prowess. The public intellectual, then, is someone who might be called on to lead or comment on any number of political or social issues in order to provide a 'reasoned' or orienting viewpoint for the public. The public scholar, by contrast, is predominantly focused on work or publication that brings the accomplishment of their own individual scholarship to bear on any particular social 'issue.' Public scholars advance the findings or conclusions of their own work in the public domain in an effort to create an elevated level of discussion or other social progress to the public forum. posted by mlacoste

 

This section of the Public Scholarship website was developed by Elizabeth Scherman, a Ph.D. student in the Department of Communication at the University of Washington.