- 最后登录
- 2012-10-27
- 在线时间
- 438 小时
- 寄托币
- 1220
- 声望
- 77
- 注册时间
- 2006-8-16
- 阅读权限
- 30
- 帖子
- 19
- 精华
- 3
- 积分
- 1019
- UID
- 2242949
- 声望
- 77
- 寄托币
- 1220
- 注册时间
- 2006-8-16
- 精华
- 3
- 帖子
- 19
|
TOPIC: ISSUE50 - "In order to improve the quality of instruction at the college and university level, all faculty should be required to spend time working outside the academic world in professions relevant to the courses they teach."
WORDS: 596 TIME: 01:22:17 DATE: 2008-7-26 12:15:01
Is it necessary for all faculty members at the college and university level to spend time working outside the academic world in professions relevant to the courses they teach, as the speaker asserts? While I concede there are certain areas where these time are spent worthwhile toward improving the instructional quality, there are far more circumstances that are opposite to this assertion.
I agree with the author insofar as in some academic fields, experiences and fresh information outside the academia are useful or even necessary. After all, there are branches of science that are primarily purposed at utility. Consider, for example, the information technology (IT), where vast information is burgeoning as every moment past by. Not only do students in this profession need to master the basic theories and technical proficiency in order to achieve an academic degree, but also they need to be informed the latest explorations and innovations in the area so as to be better adjusted for a future career. An instructional guidance would be of great help if he/she has caught the latest trends through self experiences. Needless to say, working outside the academic world will be beneficial for professors in this area. Another apt illustration of the assertion involves the science of architecture. As an traditional science as well as a practical technology, architecture involves not only theorized knowledge such as architectural history, genres and so forth, but also it embraces a much wider ken of applicable skills, crafts, cooperation ability with other experts, and so forth, which are never to be fully mastered through written materials. A real-world working professor would adjust his/her curriculum according to self experience gained through outside working. By showing the students possible choices of careers, hardships and solutions in future jobs, the professor can contribute a lot to students' better accomplishments.
Aside from its utility in pragmatic academic branches, however, the time spent on working outside the academia has little merits, or even harmful to a complete and instructional education. Consider, for example, the divinity. Hardly any useful information would the students gain were the professor working outside the academic world. After all, what would a expert in divinity do outside academia?
Or consider the medical field. Not only would students gain nothing more from their instructor's outside working experience-considering the ample experiments and internship they already have, but rather, a job outside college or university would render both careers part-time-the education and the job in any medical organization. Common sense informs us that everyone has only 24 hours per day, and that sharing the working hours with an additional job would inevitably cut down on the original working hours for instruction, thereby lowering the quality.
Regardless of fields of study, any emphasis on outside experience would be harmful to instructional quality were this emphasis over amount. After all, a main and dominating assessment of a instructor's academic quality involves the pedagogical ability to educate. An instructor would never be a respected one if no marked academic accomplishment is achieved by his/her students. Sole credence to outside experience or neglect of indoor theory will lead to a harmful misunderstanding of the subjects. Such misunderstanding can easily come into being in student's minds if the teacher spends too much time working outside and refers too much in academic classes.
To sum up, for instructor of academic fields where experiences and up-to-date information domain, it is worthwhile to work outside the academic world in professions relevant to the courses they teach. Otherwise, neither in a nonempirical branch of science nor over emphasis of outside experience would nor be advisable. |
|