editorially speakinq Who Will Teach the Undergraduates? Scholars do research and are, thus, inexorably bound to teaching. Webster tells us that research is a critical and often exhaustive investigation designed to uncover new knowledge. In other words, research is an advanced version of learning because it is the acquisition of knowledge, specifically new knowledge. Teaching, on the other hand, is the process of imparting knowledge. Thus, it seems logical that society has charged the academic scholar with the dual responsibility of acquiring new knowledge (research) and transmitting that knowledge to others (teaching). This is a rational and efficient point of view. Ideally the dissemination of should be linked as closelv to its - - -- ~- -~ ~ ~new - - - knowledge ~ discovery as possible. The fewer intermediaries involved, the less will be lost. Academic scholars bear a special burden; society expects much of them. The del~catebalance between scholarship and teach~ng was affected, some say adversely, by the events that led up t.o.World in the Cold War. Kesearch - - - W3r ~ ~ ~ I1 - and - culmmated ~ has been an important part of the national agenda since the early 1940's, and, accordingly, has been reasonably well supported by the Federal government for the specific purpose bf produ&ng new knowledge necessary for the national well-being. During this time it became possible for "pure researchers" to find positions in industry as well as in academia in which the obligation to teach what they have learned was suspended (or significantly reduced) in order to allow them to concentrate their attention on their research. Those who became academics were now in a position to produce more of their kind. Gradually there amse a reasonably comfortable ambiance in many universities where teaching could be ignored and research stressed. Most of the research-only oriented graduates of these programs could be easily &commod~tedby this expanding new system, so there was little or no need for concern about either their lack of interest or skills in teaching. The end of the Cold War, the onset of the "new world order," the concomitant financial reordering of national andinternational priorities, and the recent focus on undergraduate education have shaken the foundations of the research-onlv attitude in academia. Although there appears to be a &eater need for new knowledge to improve the citizens' lot in today's world, there is also a newfound imperative for academics to do more classroom teaching. Many academic departments seem to be content with developing a two-tier faculty: the researchers and those
-
~
~
whose primary responsibility is undergraduate teaching. Positions that stress underaaduate teachine with less insistence on demonstrated research capability, and. often not on the tenure track, are becoming more common. Development of a two-tiered faculty-teachers and researchers-is probably a mistake. The latter will probably prevail over the former when it comes to garnering resources. especiallv from external sources. Will a department be abie, under such circumstances, to respond & the basic societal need for more faculty to helo students learn science? Or, will it revert to the production of more new scientific knowledge that cannot be assimilated by a citizenrv that does not comprehend, let alone appreciate, the .importance of science in their lives? The process of training PhD students is i m ~ o r t a n tfor the intellectual develop--ment of the graduate students involved, not necessarily for the new knowledge produced. If graduate students are educated in an academic environment that does not value teaching, is it so strange that they don't want to teach? Also, many who are initially interested in teaching have that interest beaten out of them by the overemphasis on their research. The more difficultpath for departments to take is to develop a faculty that can and will both teach and do research. The early, and formative, steps on this path begin with the graduate students in a department; from their ranks will come the future faculty. Any program espousing this point of view requires increased dupervlsion and mentorine bv focultv. ".lessenme the time available for them own instructional and research activities. Research and teaching will always be in competition for a oerson's limited time and resources. The relative merits of one activity over the other will be judged differently by different individuals and different institutions. But, the key question, which is seldom explicitly addressed by students, involves the formulation of their career goals and the pursuit of activities that will lead to attainment of those goals. A student who wants to work in an industrial setting or in a research university clearly needs to develop different aualifications from one who wishes to teach in a liberal arts or community college. Departments and their faculties need to be able to respond to such diverse goals.
-
-
~~~~~
U
"
-
JJL
Volume 70 Number 8 August 1993
607
