Colleges and universities should require all faculty to spend time working outside the academic world in professions relevant to the courses they teach.Write a response in which you discuss your views on the policy and explain your reasoning for the posit

Unlike centuries ago, when most science and technology development is directly inspired by the difficulty or confusing phenomena in the real life, with the division of labor, the academic world has an increasingly widened gap with real world. Most science disciplines have developed its own research modes and methodologies. In such context, the problem whether scientists should reestablish the connection with the real world is a meaningful and thought-provoking issue. In my perspective, the policy simply to require all faculties to spend time outside the academy has its advantages and disadvantages. Nevertheless, another version of the policy could better serve our purposes.

Communication with real world outside academy could help faculties reasearch and teach. For one thing, many disciplines, especially applied science research such as architecture and chemistry has its value only when the research outcome could be put into practice in real life. Such contact would be conducive to the application of their research and guiding professors to realize the needs of the market. Without such access to the real world, academic researcher may be indulged in their ivory tower and hardly make any contribution to the manufacturing. For instance, a new theoretical chemical material synthesis method has to be tested in the real life manufacture process to be fully evaluated. The time working in factories could help researchers understand the costs and profits of the method, thus contributing to future research.

For another, the quality of teaching could be enhanced by the communication of faculties with outside career world. Students are insterested in the discipline prospects and job opportunities in the market to better make relevant career decisions. Such contact would help professors to talk about not only knowledge in the textbook, but also stories and what abilities are appreciated in the career.

Though communication could help faculties a lot, in certain circumstances, it may engender unwelcomed consequences. First, some disciplines are intrinsically theoretical, such as mathematics and theoretical physics. They have little association with job markets, or their outcome contributes most only to the academic world. For such subjects, it would a waste of time to require professors to spend time outside the academy, which could detract them and interfere with their research program. On the contrary, they should concentrate only on the academic study.

Second, it is the right of professors and faculty members to decide their own research. Their persuing for the truth and research plan should be respected accoding to the independence of science. Thus the colleges does not have the legitimacy to force them to work outside the academic world. It may diminish the morale of the professors and worse the relationship between institutions and faculties.

To sum up, based on the discussion above, the influence of the policy has its boons and banes. We cannot easily judge which side is dominant. However, should a weaker version of the policy be implemented, we could avoid most of the adverse impact and keep most of positive effect. Say, colleges and universities encourage faculties to spend time outside academy to better understand the situation of the market and facilitate the process. Thus, all the faculties still have their own rights to make decisions. For applied disciplines, they could easily find a relevant occuapancy to realize the constraints in real life and take those facts into account when turning back to research. For theorectical subjects, the professor could well continue their research without unnecessary interuption.