However, someone clearly found this idea controversial and perhaps gave the editor and publishers the impression that it might be too controversial for their own good:
Retraction of "A Teachable Ethics Scandal"The following article has been retracted by the editor and publishers of Teaching of Psychology:
Handelsman, M. M. (2017). A teachable ethics scandal. Teaching of Psychology, 44, 278-284. doi: 10.1177/0098628317712789
The retraction is based on the ongoing events surrounding the foundation of this article. We believe it is prudent to wait until the case is resolved before teachers use these events in their classrooms.
Needless to say, "We believe it is prudent to wait until the case is resolved" is a funny kind of justification for retracting a peer-review-passing article on a matter of highly-relevant recent history in the profession of psychology.
Are climatologists obliged to "wait until the case is resolved" (until fossil fuel companies agree that climate change is real and human-caused) before teaching about climate change? Even to the extent controversies exist between equally respectable parties, equally committed to the truth, and with equally valid arguments and evidence backing up their differing sides, is there any legitimate reason not to teach about the subject matter of the controversy? In my experience, it is precisely these kinds of controversies that offer the best teaching opportunities.
I understand that SAGE may be facing threat of a frivolous Donald Trump-style lawsuit by one or some of those who are implicated by the Hoffman Report. If SAGE decides, at some risk to its financial security, to do the right thing in the face of this threat, we at PsySR will take steps to reach out to those who might compose a legal defense team for SAGE, and to generally raise hell. I imagine that this is a matter that would be of interest, for example, to the American Civil Liberties Union and the Center for Constitutional Rights.
It is important, after all, that free speech not fall victim to the fact that old guard APA leaders might feel "triggered" by being reminded of the shameful role they played (and, it would appear, are still playing) in recent history. Political correctness (that is, cowering obedience to the most powerful and threatening bully) should not silence academic speech.
With the consideration that all who believe in academic freedom are stakeholders in this matter, I hope that SAGE will make a clear and unambiguous statement that the journal will not be retracting the peer-review-passing article in question, that SAGE fully supports the publication of other articles on this important subject, and that SAGE has no intention to chill academic freedom, or to whitewash one of the more disturbing historical examples of professional collusion with moral horror.
We live in a time when courageous decisions need to be made with much more frequency, so I hope that SAGE will choose courage over fear. If SAGE shows that courage, we at PsySR will strive to match it.
Thanks much.
Sincerely,
Ian Hansen, PhD
Next Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
1
1
1
