Issue50【天下无G askme习作】第18次作业

askmeUID: 2264776

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: 696          TIME: 0:45:00          DATE: 2007-2-24

Nowadays, people are growing concerned about the quality of instruction at the college and university level. It, hence, often causes debates and most of them are over the issue: whether or not all faculty should be told to work outside the academic world in professions relevant to the courses they teach. While, it is helpful to ask faculty to do such things insofar as they will improve faculty's knowledge of practice and market, yet, as universally acknowledged, any good thing will become bad if going to its extreme; it is unwise to require all faculty to spend too much time outside.

To begin with, working outside the academic world brings knowledge in practice, which improves the quality of instruction. As we know, neither theory nor practice is able to provide an insight into true knowledge; it is the interplay of theory and practice that helps us have a new perspective on essence behind things. Particularly, to faculty, working outside the academic world is a typical kind of practice. Thus, it will surely render them more familiar with what they study and teach, which, in turn, contribute to quality of instruction. For supporting example, one need look no further than a professor on biology in my university. In order to gain direct and vivid description on what he teaches, every year, he spends several months working in a hill to study kinds of plants and animals on his own. Thanks to these experiences, not only does he avoid mistakes existing on some books, but also he makes his lessons vivid and interesting. All of these are vital to both his success in professional field and popularity among students. As a result, anyone who would like to receive better instruction should encourage faculty to work outside.

Furthermore, working outside will bring faculty not only practice knowledge but also the information about market. It is universally acknowledged that market changes rapidly and requires people to care about it all the time. Familiar with what society needs, faculty are more likely to discover something close to market, which brings to lots of patron, part of which can be used to improve equipments and hire more excellent professors, to colleges and universities. This statement brings immediately to minds my university. Compared to my university in the past, which was a pure research institute without its own companies, nowadays, it, collaborating with many high-tech companies, not only improve efficiency of research, which is hasten by market, but also gain enough money to improve the level of laboratories, libraries, faculty and so on, all of these eventually improve the quality of instruction. Thus, there is good sense in requiring faculty working outside the academic world.

However, as a coin has two sides, spending too much time working outside might be harmful to the quality of instruction. As a general rule, the major duty of faculty is to impart knowledge to students, but the time used in working outside will undoubtedly reduce the time used in teaching. Thus, people should be cautious about this phenomenon. For example, some professors, who nearly devote themselves to market, show little, if any, interest in study and teaching. To them, what are most important are not research papers, let alone the grades of students, but the revenue from their companies. If such phenomenon continues, our college universities will lose their purity and purposes as sources of knowledge. In all, if preceding teaching, working outside is sinister.

In addition, it is unnecessary to require all faculty to spend time working outside. Generally, among faculty, different person has his or her own professional characteristic. While some fields need burying in libraries, some fields require working outside. Thereupon, coercing all faculty to do the same thing, working outside, might goes against their characteristics, which exert negative influence on morale and thus the quality of instruction. For instance, professors, studying mathematics, might gain little or nothing from working outside. That is because mathematics is not physical but intellectual activity. Accordingly, we should treat different people with different requirement according their majors.

To sum up, when proper conducting, requirement faculty to spend time working outside is both wise and necessary. Meanwhile, we should prevent faculty from spending too much time working outside.

jacanaUID: 2292520

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."


Nowadays, people are growing concerned about the quality of instruction at the college and university level. It, hence, often causes debates and most of them are over the issue: whether or not all faculty should be told to work outside the academic world in professions relevant to the courses they teach. While, it is helpful to ask faculty to do such things insofar as they will improve faculty's knowledge of practice and market, yet, as universally acknowledged, any good thing will become bad if going to its extreme; it is unwise to require all faculty to spend too much time outside.

To begin with, working outside the academic world brings knowledge in practice, which improves the quality of instruction. As we know, neither theory nor practice is able to provide an insight into true knowledge; it is the interplay of theory and practice that helps us have a new perspective on essence behind things. Particularly, to faculty, working outside the academic world is a typical kind of practice. Thus, it will surely render them more familiar with what they study and teach, which, in turn, contribute to quality of instruction. For supporting example, one need look no further than a professor on biology in my university. In order to gain direct and vivid description on what he teaches, every year, he spends several months working in a hill to study kinds of plants and animals on his own(这才真的叫学术啊……). Thanks to these experiences, not only does he avoid mistakes existing on some books, but also he makes his lessons vivid and interesting. All of these are vital to both his success in professional field and popularity among students. As a result, anyone who would like to receive better instruction should encourage faculty to work outside.
难道学术中就没有实践么？

Furthermore, working outside will bring faculty not only practice knowledge but also the information about market. It is universally acknowledged that market changes rapidly and requires people to care about it all the time. Familiar with what society needs, faculty are more likely to discover something close to market, which brings to lots of patron, part of which can be used to improve equipments and hire more excellent professors, to colleges and universities. This statement brings immediately to minds my university. Compared to my university in the past, which was a pure research institute without its own companies, nowadays, it, collaborating with many high-tech companies, not only improve efficiency of research, which is hasten by market, but also gain enough money to improve the level of laboratories, libraries, faculty and so on, all of these eventually improve the quality of instruction. Thus, there is good sense in requiring faculty working outside the academic world.
key sentence说的是information， 后面讲的是怎么从大公司拿钱……感觉说到熟悉的东西就收不住了……

However, as a coin has two sides, spending too much time working outside might be harmful to the quality of instruction. As a general rule, the major duty of faculty is to impart knowledge to students, but the time used in working outside will undoubtedly reduce the time used in teaching. Thus, people should be cautious about this phenomenon. For example, some professors, who nearly devote themselves to market, show little, if any, interest in study and teaching. To them, what are most important are not research papers, let alone the grades of students, but the revenue from their companies. If such phenomenon continues, our college universities will lose their purity and purposes as sources of knowledge. In all, if preceding teaching, working outside is sinister.

In addition, it is unnecessary to require all faculty to spend time working outside. Generally, among faculty, different person has his or her own professional characteristic. While some fields need burying in libraries, some fields require working outside. Thereupon, coercing all faculty to do the same thing, working outside, might goes against their characteristics, which exert negative influence on morale and thus the quality of instruction. For instance, professors, studying mathematics, might gain little or nothing from working outside. That is because mathematics is not physical but intellectual activity. Accordingly, we should treat different people with different requirement according their majors.

To sum up, when proper conducting, requirement faculty to spend time working outside is both wise and necessary. Meanwhile, we should prevent faculty from spending too much time working outside.