Colleges And Universities Should Require All Faculty To Spend Time Working Outside The Academic World In Professions Relevant To The Courses They Teach

Forcing the faculties to work outside the academia may have some benefits, but its certain disadvantages render the author’s claims untenable.

To begin with, working outside the academia, has its undeniable mutual advantages. This makes the faculty to touch the real needs of their society and makes the teachings of the faculty more practicable. The professor can tell his/her students that the exact material they are currently studying would help their society to observe its needs. Therefore, students also become more motivated in their study as they see the immediate practicality of what they are studying. Furthermore, being in touch with the society enables faculties to usher the students to the available jobs.

However, there might be negative impacts overshadowing all the positive points of such a requirement. First, faculties might not be convenient with being obliged to work outside the academic ambiance. Since professional academic careers might be quite busy in teaching or researches, they might not have any further time to spend in the society. For instance, consider the faculty members in a research team which is on the cusp of finding a clue for the early diagnosis of cancer. When they are on something very important for the whole human beings, there is no justification in requiring them to work outside the academia.

Furthermore, there is no place for some fields to require its faculties to work outside the academia. Fields, such as philosophy and its branches, theoretical physics, pure mathematics and so on, are some of the fields that there is not a defined proper job outside the academic ambiance. These fields indirectly influence other fields and the society receives their benefits indirectly. Therefore, they should remain in the academic place as nowhere else is suited for their profession.

Finally, to have the benefits of being in touch with the outside society, there are better ways. Instead of sending faculties out, conversely, universities can invite professionals and specialists from outside the academia to the academic ambiance. With workshops, for instance, the invitees can introduce the demands of the society and also can offer jobs for the students who find interest in fulfilling them. This shows the students the importance of what they are learning.

In short, as discussed, despite the possible advantages, the recommendation of forcing all the faculties to work outside the academia does not hold true. In order to reap the benefits of being in touch with the society, there are better ways which the author failed to consider.