What do we, as historians, value? We value knowledge: the ability to understand our society and the processes that have created it, and to participate as engaged citizens. We value the skills inherent in historical thinking and writing. We speak of history degrees in terms of their monetary value and the employability of graduates (or the perceived lack of value). We value research, and often lament the devaluing of humanities research in relation to other fields. Clearly, historians are concerned with value. And yet, within history departments and organizations, definitions of value remain rooted in hierarchies that privilege traditional academic modes of production, while outside of that world value often carries the weight of return on investment or salary. This roundtable will explore the limitations of such definitions and how a more expansive understanding of value could help graduate students and historians working outside the academy find their place in discourses of the profession.

Traditionally, peer-reviewed scholarship has been the primary currency of academia. Within this value system, people whose jobs do not involve or adequately support the production of this scholarship (most jobs outside of research universities) hold less “value” than those whose positions that allow them to more easily engage in scholarship for which there is no direct monetary compensation. Centrally valuing the increasingly rare research-focused tenure-track academic positions in turn marginalizes a host of other values that contribute a fulfilling life, such as financial security, long-term relationships with friends and romantic partners, close ties to a local community, and time with family.

This session explores the issue of "value" and its contested interpretations, pulling together both the critiques and the practicalities of career diversity. The panelists represent a variety of career paths - in public history, librarianship, and nonprofits - and they welcome audience engagement to broaden the conversation further. They will discuss questions such as: Is it possible or desirable for the academy to shift its value model away from one in which the production of scholarship is the primary metric of success? What might such a model look like in a graduate program? What structures (both practical and cultural) would need to be put in place for those who enter career paths outside of research universities to continue to feel valued as historians? Can those jobs be valuable as intellectual endeavors, not only a source of income? Ultimately, can we create a better model for the profession that values historians’ work and lives together? And, how could such a model create new ways for us to value history?