Madam, – While I agree with many of the suggestions made by Brian Lucey and Charles Larkin (Opinion, August 23rd), I question the necessity of having academic staff that “must be active researchers throughout their careers”. The rationale for this recommendation is to “ensure that students are exposed to the frontiers of thinking”.
However, the vast majority of material students learn as undergraduates is well-trodden ground, and far from active areas of research. Indeed, a strong grounding in the basics of a discipline is what we should expect an undergraduate education to provide. The key to achieving a strong grounding is good teaching, rather than physical proximity to research excellence.
Furthermore, why should we expect academics to achieve expertise in two distinct (and equally difficult) fields; his/her own specific area of research, and teaching? In fact, with such a dual mandate, it is often the teaching side that loses out. As well as being under constant pressure to publish original research, many lecturers have no formal training in the art of teaching. They’re expected to “pick it up along the way”, a standard that was long ago rejected as inadequate at primary and secondary levels.
Rather than blindly enforcing the dictum “Every scholar a teacher, every teacher a scholar”, we should have some flexibility: let those who want to pursue research do so, and those who want to teach (either primarily or exclusively) do so. In each case, let’s ensure what’s being done is being done well, by people who are qualified and capable. – Yours, etc.