<p>
</p>
<p>Excuse me, but people in the humanities do research. It usually doesn’t require fancy labs or big-ticket expenditures. But then neither does most mathematical research, or for that matter theoretical physics. </p>
<p>Some classicists translate and interpret previously untranslated texts, or re-translate and reinterpret texts, or do literary criticism on ancient texts, or do historical research either in aid of interpretation or simply to advance our historical understanding of ancient periods. Classical archaeologists might spend months or years in field research. See, e.g.</p>
<p>[Yale</a> University, Department of Classics : Research](<a href=“http://www.yale.edu/classics/research.html]Yale”>http://www.yale.edu/classics/research.html)</p>
<p>Historians obviously do original research, often spending months or years working with archives or other troves of data which they can mine for clues to the past.</p>
<p>Academic philosophers doing original philosophy (as distinct from merely teaching about what other philosophers have done) rightly regard their work as a type of research, advancing the state of human thinking on big and difficult theoretical questions.</p>
<p>No less than the sciences, these disciplines are not just about handing down existing knowledge; they’re about making new discoveries, creating new knowledge, and pushing the boundaries of human understanding. And just as in the sciences, that doesn’t just happen; it’s the product of hard, careful, painstaking work by people who are not only bright and clever and creative and singularly focused, but also well-trained and highly skilled in the technical aspects of the craft. And just as in the sciences, passing the baton to the next generation certainly requires “mentoring,” but it also requires supervised apprenticeship training in actually doing the type of research that is done in the discipline.</p>
<p>I can’t speak for LACs generally, but that type of academic apprenticeship seems to be mission #1 at my D1’s LAC, Haverford. Having spent most of my life around research universities, including some of the very best publics and privates, my impression is that Haverford is more singularly focused on this at the undergrad level than most top research universities are. But it’s not for everyone. Most college students will never become academics, and in many fields the employment outlook for academics is pretty dire, making a Ph.D. program in the discipline a questionable career move. But as for preparation for graduate work, I actually think Haverford does a better, more thorough, and more systematic job of that with its undergrads than any major research university I know.</p>