The Higher Education Policy Institute is publishing a new
report, The relationship between teaching and research in UK
universities – what is it and does it matter? (HEPI Report
162, attached), written by Nicola Dandridge, Professor
of Practice at the University of Bristol and former Chief
Executive of the Office for Students.
The paper considers the different approaches taken by higher
education institutions, students, academics and policymakers
towards the relationship between teaching and research, noting
how frequently the concept of research-informed teaching is
invoked, yet how obscurely it is implemented. The relationship
appears to mean different things to different people – and
administrations of all political complexions seem to be
unconvinced by its value.
The HEPI Report explores the ways in which the relationship
between teaching and research can add significant value and have
a transformative impact on students. It also notes examples where
there is in practice no obvious relationship between the two
activities, and where from students’ perspectives there does not
need to be.
The report finishes by asking whether it matters that the
relationship is contested and sometimes opaque, and concludes
that it does matter, at least in some respects:
- References to research-informed teaching are frequently
invoked but may not always translate into reality for many
students. This can be misleading for students, can imply a
hierarchy of research over teaching, and obscure a proper focus
on teaching quality. It can also undermine the many outstanding
examples of research-informed teaching that do exist across the
sector.
- The two activities of teaching and research are becoming
increasingly separated within and between universities. This may
mean that many students, particularly those from disadvantaged
backgrounds, will experience their undergraduate education
without being exposed to research activity. For many students
this will not matter, but for others it will and could lead to
their being less likely to see further study as an option when
they graduate, which could affect their future careers as well as
impact on the demographic of the academic workforce.
- Separation of the two activities also impacts on the career
progression and academic identity of academic staff, particularly
if teaching is perceived as having lesser status than research.
- Without a compelling narrative, governments will continue to
be unpersuaded about the value of the relationship, and this will
affect government policy – to the potential detriment of
important political, social and industrial objectives.
Nicola Dandridge, author of the report,
said:
‘Teaching and research are at the heart of what universities do,
and our UK higher education system is outstandingly strong in
both its teaching and its research. But the nature of the
relationship between the two is often not clear. At one level
this might not matter, providing both are done well and achieve
their (separate) objectives. But at another level it does matter
– affecting transparency of communications with students, the
status of teaching within universities, academic careers, and the
achievement of broader social and political objectives. In
particular, it ignores the transformational potential that
teaching and research together can generate.
‘This report is based on desk-based research, and does no more
than scratch the surface of a highly complex set of issues. But I
hope that it does at least provoke a discussion about topics that
are fundamental to our sector, and which deserve more scrutiny
than they currently receive.’
The Rt Hon. the Lord , Minister for Universities
and Science from 2010 to 2014 and a Board member of UK Research
and Innovation (UKRI), said:
‘This is a valuable analysis of the relationship between teaching
and research in universities. It shows it is possible to deliver
high-quality teaching without necessarily doing research as well.
Nevertheless, there are links between them and the report ends
with a useful warning of the risks of a policy framework which
does not look at them together.’
Martha Longdon, who is studying for a PhD and who was
previously President of Nottingham Trent Students' Union as well
as a board member and Chair of the Office for Students’ Student
Panel, said:
‘Research-informed teaching, in all its forms, inspires students’
curiosity and prepares them for a wide variety of career paths
and research opportunities. However, it is hampered by the
ongoing administrative and philosophical separation of research
and teaching in the higher education sector. This paper asks
important questions as to how we can articulate and begin to
redress the relationship between research and teaching, to
provide students with access to emerging ideas and technologies
and empower them to develop their own inquiry-based learning.
Research-informed teaching, within and beyond universities, is of
benefit to all, but particularly students.’
Notes for Editors
- HEPI was established in 2002 to
influence the higher education debate with evidence. We are
UK-wide, independent and non-partisan. We are funded by
organisations and higher education institutions that wish to
support vibrant policy discussions, as well as through our own
events. HEPI is a company limited by guarantee and a registered
charity.
- Nicola Dandridge is currently
undertaking a further research project, interviewing leaders from
across the sector to understand their views on the relationship
between teaching and research within their institutions.
