Quote:
|
Originally Posted by MikeWaters
what is an excellent undergrad institution? I guess that means you have great teachers, who are not leaders in their field and don't do research, but somehow despite that have gained a great understanding and are able to teach it.
And oh well, if there is no exposure to good research experience when you are an undergrad.
I just don't buy the model. You are either after excellence or you are not.
|
The idea that just because someone is a great researcher or a "leader in their field" means they can be a good teacher is laughable. I've had professors that were brilliant researchers and leaders in their field but had the communication skills and teaching skills of a gnat. The corollary (i.e. the idea that just because someone that isn't a "leader in their field" or isn't a great researcher is unqualified to teach undergraduates about the basics of a subject) is also fallacious.
Excellence in research does not necessarily equate to excellence in undergraduate education. The traits of being a great researcher and a great teacher are neither mutually exclusive nor mutually inclusive.
I'm of the opinion that the concept of "The Academy" is pretty much bullshit. Hmmm, perhaps that's why I was largely unsuccessful as a student.
