issue50，弱弱的处女座，求拍~~~

maomaorui1020UID: 2680569

The speaker asserts that all faculties of college should take part in an off-school job, which is related to their teaching course, so that the quality of instruction will be improved. Maybe this is an effective method for some of the subjects, but it may not apply to all subjects. I think the speaker’s viewpoint is too one-sided. For several reasons, I disagree with the assertion.

In the first place, the fact should be affirmed that the combination of work and course does contribute to improving the quality of instruction in some of the subjects, such as economy, engineering, law and medical science. Firstly, the information in the textbook may be impractical and outdated. According to the faculties’ working experience, the shortcomings of the textbook can be made up when the knowledge is taught to the students. There is no doubt that the efficiency of learning is improved. Besides, from the view of students, the experienced faculties can be a model for them to reach, and to beyond. Because of inspiration, the desire and motivation may be increased. Moreover, for the college and university, the achievement of their faculties can be a piece of magnet to attract more students to register in the college. This approach also brings benefits to the college.

Secondly, the method may not apply to all of the subjects. On the contrary, the combination is in vain for improving the quality of some theoretical subjects like mathematics, philosophy, and astronomy. It is difficult and unrealistic for such subjects to be combined with actual work. In the researching and teaching of such theoretical subjects, what is really needed is continuously exploration and speculation, rather than actual work. If the speaker’s assertion that requiring all the faculties spending time on off-school work in order to improving the quality of instruction is universal and feasible, then the education and development of theoretical subjects will be stopped one day.

Thirdly, in addition, the energy of a person is limited, excessive participation in off-school work may result in dispersion of energy. They spend so much time on the work that the significance of teaching is ignored. For instance, some professors of engineering in some college also work as employee in architecture institute. They spend too much time and energy on undertaking the project, designing the architectural drawings. The time they spent on the course is occupied by the work. Naturally, their interest in teaching is greatly reduced. That must have negative effect on the teaching quality. After all, the responsibility of the faculties is more focus on academic research than the exploration of work experience.

Finally, it is true that some subjects are developing amazingly fast nowadays. The fact leads directly to the problem that the knowledge in textbook can hardly catch up with the fast pace. A certain part of knowledge that students learned is out of touch with today’s situation of technology development. Maybe that is the reason why more and more graduates complain that what they learned in college is not as useful as they imagined when they join work. However, in addition to encourage faculties to work outside, there are many other methods to promote instruction quality. Given that academic lecture is easier to be held in the campus. The college can also send their faculties to train, improve their teaching equipment, organize students to visit and practice. Those will do good to the quality of instruction.

To sum up, the speaker’s approach does contribute to part of the subjects, but not to all. To improve the instructing quality, too many factors should be taken into consideration. The proposal just cannot achieve the desired consequence.