linking teaching and research richard towell. initial reaction “he is distinguished from fe by...

Linking Teaching and Research

Richard Towell

Initial Reaction

“HE is distinguished from FE by research activity;

therefore all teaching in Higher Education must be research led:

therefore all teachers must be research active

But realising that:

• Research is:

• Pure• Applied• Enterprise

• Teaching is:

• Teaching for Education

• Teaching for Training

Means that the issue needs to be placed in the context of a wider

question:

How can we make best use of the finite resource which the government is prepared to make available to HE in order to ensure that 50% of the 18-30 population gets the appropriate relative amounts of education and training- informed by pure, applied or enterprise led research – in order for them to realise their individual potential and contribute effectively to the economy, whilst, at the same time, enhancing world-class research?

The White Paper as an answer can be glossed

as follows:

1. If we are going to fund some universities at the level necessary to make them world-class in science and engineering, then we cannot afford to have all universities doing research.

2. We will therefore remove the QR funding for research below the international level, creating greater selectivity. Along with the selectivity operating through the research councils, this will ensure that all the dual funded research will then be of international standard.

3. We will group this work in a limited number of institutions to create critical mass, allowing for some cross institutional collaboration to preserve the highest quality work which would otherwise be left high and dry.

4. We will then deliver high quality, well-rewarded teaching mostly through non-researchers, some of whom will presumably Grade 4 or 3 ex-researchers whose time will have been freed up by the funding decisions. Furthermore, we will allow for the possibility that whole institutions might be non-research active.

5. The safeguard against the ill-informed teaching might result is that the staff who are not research-active will be expected to keep up-to-date through relevant “scholarship”

What is meant by “scholarship”?

“It is clear that good scholarship is essential for good teaching

But not that it is necessary to be active in cutting-edge research to be an excellent teacher” WP:4.31

“We see scholarship as intimately related to, but separate from, research.

It is true that in some of the Humanities, the activities that we consider to compromise scholarship would be difficult to distinguish from research and some activities termed “scholarship”

However, in other disciplines the distinction between the two is clearer… it is also the case that scholarship is not necessarily dependent on links to classic forms of research.

The scholarship required to inform teaching may be closely linked to professional or practice-based activities in some disciplines, to consultancy or work with industry in others.” Report HEFCE 2000: para26.

Reliance on dichotomies:

• Pure and applied

• Teaching and research

• all working to assist greater selectivity which is designed to deliver world-class research.

The forces working towards greater selectivity

RAE: HEFCE Stage

Interpretive Stage One: The Panel Interpretive Stage Two: Research Managers

Stage One: determined by power base presentat the time (tradition or innovation)?

Stage two: determined by conservativeChoices focused on “double-think”.

Consequences:

• World-class

• And

• Wipe out

Rationality?

Illustrative example

• Foreign Language Teaching

• Professional teachers with great scholarship

• Research denigrated (?)

BUT• Adapts to change

• Pure, applied and enterprise research in complementary roles

• Not “central” to any RAE area = wipe out?

• Already loss of momentum

The White Paper proposes effectively to separate teaching from research as a new principle for Higher Education in Britain.

The White Paper arrives at the conclusion that this is a necessary step for entirely the wrong reasons and prescribes inadequate solutions, notably the horribly fudged notion of “scholarship”.

The White Paper is thus misguided both

• In its policy towards research

• And towards teaching

• Instead of arguing that we should narrow the research base in British universities in order to make it world-class

• The White Paper should argue in favour of a diversified research base with several funding streams, all of which feed into teaching.

We should combat the random conservatism of the RAE mechanism with a rational analysis of where pure, applied and enterprising research has a role in British HE. All have the potential to be world-class and funding mechanisms should support that potential.

We should encourage all members of staff to undertake one of these research roles in addition to the shared teaching duties.

Three key statements:

1. Every discipline taught in any British HEI, including subject-based pedagogy, must have a sufficient research base.

2. Mechanisms must be in place to ensure the maintenance of that research base in the face of greater selectivity.

3. Pure, applied and enterprise researchers must all be given their role in feeding teaching.

Only with this in place can we ensure that enthusiastic, motivated, committed practitioners of this research will transmit their commitment, enthusiasm, knowledge and skills to the next generation through a multi-facetted approach to teaching.