But the underlying hostility is a problem that bothers me a lot and I have
been trying to think of ways to bridge the gap.

My understanding has been that historically, edits to articles from academics with strong credentials are not treated any differently than edits from anyone else. This has resulted in many academics spending loads of time editing an article only to be 'reverted' by a single click from a Recent Changes Patrol, or to be slapped on the wrist with "citation needed". This has resulted in many misunderstandings, which often did not get a chance to be discussed in public, because academics often don't have time to go round and round with someone on Wikipedia talk page.

I believe the culture at Wikipedia has always been that knowledge from anyone is treated equally. While I admire that principle, it doesn't quite jive with the academic credential culture, where opinion based on experience and authority actually counts for something. Go to a faculty meeting, and you shall see a Full Professor's opinion being weighted more than an assistant professor just starting out on tenure clock.

There is in operation a Wikimedia Foundation Education program that is small and
will not, in my opinion, scale up easily to the size needed.

Agreed. It's a culture that you're trying to change. Yes, an bridge program can help, but it won't 'solve' the fundamental cultural differences.

--Ed