Hi A number of years ago, Rushton, Murray, and Paunenon found no relationship between measures of research productivity and quality of teaching. See the following thoughtful essay by Ian Johnston citing this study and addressing the very issue you are concerned with. Don't miss the follow-up 10 years later (follow the Caliban link) to get some idea of the reactions you might expect if you challenge the orthodox view.
http://www.mala.bc.ca/~johnstoi/essays/RESEARCH1.htm It might be worthwhile to do a citation analysis of Rushton et al to find more current work. My recollection is that their work was intra-institutional (U of Western Ontario, probably), which raises such issues as restriction of range (I can't remember if they address that in the paper). Of course, between-institution comparisons would raise a host of confounded variables (class size, ta resources, ...). I think there might also be cohort effects that could qualify the Rushton et al findings. Certainly today even research-oriented graduate students get a healthier dose of teaching training and experience, at least in the psychology departments I am familiar with. And there appears to be more resources to support teaching at larger institutions (subjective impression), just as there is more of lots of things. An overlapping issue would be the education level of faculty hired at institutions with different mandates. Is a PhD (one measure of at least past research experience, even if not current) irrelevant to university teaching? Would universities without a research mandate be able to hire quality PhDs as readily as research institutions? Take care Jim James M. Clark Professor of Psychology 204-786-9757 204-774-4134 Fax [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 21-Aug-07 2:44:11 PM >>> Sorry for cross-posting. Our small-to-middle sized university has been going through an identity crisis the past decade, wanting to be a bigger university. As a result, there has been a push to increase the focus on research productivity--and although NO ONE would ever say it out loud, it means reduce the focus on teaching. After all, most people can't manage grant writing, research productivity, and publications while teaching 3 courses per semester with no TAs and an expectation sold to parents of extensive faculty student interactions. So, one of the arguments I hear made all the time is that doing research makes teachers teach better. And when I ask for data, all I get is personal anecdotes, and rolled eyes. So, does anyone here know of any research that indicates that there is a positive relationship between "doing research" (read that as having publications) and better teaching? Annette Annette Kujawski Taylor, Ph.D. Professor of Psychology University of San Diego 5998 Alcala Park San Diego, CA 92110 619-260-4006 [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- To make changes to your subscription go to: http://acsun.frostburg.edu/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=tips&text_mode=0&lang=english --- To make changes to your subscription go to: http://acsun.frostburg.edu/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=tips&text_mode=0&lang=english
