我是十分迷茫的grer 求拍 必回拍

肥女文文UID: 2764973

Issue 50 In order to the quality of instruction at the college or university level, all faculty should be required to spend time working outside the academic world in professions relevant to the course they teach.
The author claims that all faculties should spend time working outside the academic world in professions relevant to the course to improve the quality of introduction at the college or university level. College teacher should be encouraged to spend more time working outside the school so they may share more insights with their students. Nevertheless, the practice may not be feasible or suitable for all faculties and should be all checked to reduce the negative side-effect.
The reason why I agree with the speaker’s partial claim lies in the benefits of doing so. Indeed, connecting the knowledge on the book with the practical work can improve and broaden the teaching quality of some subjects, such as medicine, economics and electronics. For these subjects, the effective instruction does not only let the students absorb the knowledge from the textbooks, but also facilitate them with some practical experience. Take the electronics as an example, because the electronics is improving quickly, if the instructors do not know the latest mobile technology, the latest network program, they can not catch up with the development of emerging technologies. Beside, if the instructor is in a big company outside the academic world, he can teach his students some professional techniques out of his experience. It surely will come out naturally and deep root in the brain of the students. The students will learn from the instructor's cases vividly rather than those outdated examples in the text book.
Beyond this concession, however, I disagree with the statement. What work outside academia is there for professions of literature or philosophy? It is neither necessary nor possible for researchers in these areas to apply their knowledge to practical work. Obviously, teachers in these academic areas should devote all their time into university life, working outside merely serving as detrimental to their educational responsibility and scientific research. Except for universities and research institutes, organizations seldom need a physicist knowing well about the structure of atoms or historian researching the middle age in Europe. Furthermore, if all faculties must link the subjects with the practical work, or the quality of teaching may not improve, those disciplines which are full of theory and abstraction will stop developing. But up to now, these disciplines are stable, positive developing.
Moreover, encouraging faculty to work outside will do little to their academic ability while distracting them from the research and instruction work they should concentrate on. For they put all the experience on the off-campus work, even the off-campus work is more promising than the school work, so teachers may lose their responsibilities and their duties. Even if the teachers gain improvements of the experience and capability, but the students do not obtain sufficient knowledge, either the practical instructions or the theoretical instructions.
Finally, many other factors contribute to the improvement of subjects, and not just practice, such as the long-term academic accumulation, the sufficient teaching facilities, the free and tolerant academic atmosphere, the good timing birth of geniuses.
To sum up, before encourage faculties to spend time outside the school, we should clearly know how to improve the quality of each discipline. Some subjects need the practical experience to assist the contents of the books. However, some disciplines aiming at cultivate students’ logical and imaginary skills, need abilities of independent and critical thinking, creativity and the desire to explore the unknown territories.