Research at a teaching institution

The Irascible Professor, who teaches in the same system as Dad the Historian of Graeco-Roman Egypt, has a nice post about the relationship between scholarship and teaching at comprehensive colleges and universities. Prof. Shapiro mentions one advantage of such a school: there's no real pressure-cooker when it comes to research. Many comprehensives (especially those with 4-4 or--yikes--5-5 teaching loads) require minimal publications and no books for tenure; as a result, if you want to write a book, you certainly can, but you don't have to turn them out on an assembly line. I'd add another advantage: there's far more freedom. Faculty at Research I universities frequently report that their colleagues don't just demand evidence of publication; they try to control the "what" and the "how" of the projects themselves. Hence, for example, the pressure to adhere to certain theoretical approaches or to avoid particular topics. Moreover, research universities can also squelch attempts to branch out into other fields. By contrast, departments in comprehensive schools are less likely (not altogether unlikely, but certainly less likely) to care about the projects themselves and more likely to be pleased just by signs of scholarly activity. If you don't want to do cultural studies, or you think postcolonial theory doesn't make much empirical sense, or you suspect Foucault might be better if his histories stood up to further examination--well, then, golly, nobody cares.