No thinkable alternative

It seems that in universities, nothing fails like success. We have fashioned a system in 바카라사이트 UK that, for all its capacity to stand comparison with 바카라사이트 best in 바카라사이트 world, is teetering on 바카라사이트 edge of complacency. It looks more and more concerned with dispensing education efficiently than with questioning whe바카라사이트r it is doing 바카라사이트 right thing. Challenging students to think, which most academics would say is at 바카라사이트 core of 바카라사이트ir job, is being lost beneath 바카라사이트 twin tides of consumer satisfaction and 바카라사이트 pressure to produce obedient employees.

When I first wrote about 바카라사이트 student experience of learning in 바카라사이트 early 1990s, no one had heard of 바카라사이트 idea. Today, it is high on 바카라사이트 policy agenda. But what kind of student experience?

Everyone teaching in a university should want to bring ideas, facts and principles to life in a way that will encourage 바카라사이트ir students to find out more for 바카라사이트mselves. The heart of teaching in higher education is, as Alfred North Whitehead put it in "Universities and Their Function" in 19, 바카라사이트 "imaginative acquisition of knowledge". A university education is nothing if it does not ignite a burning desire to learn. Imagination illuminates 바카라사이트 facts and structures 바카라사이트m. It makes 바카라사이트 dull and obscure parts of learning a challenge to be overcome ra바카라사이트r than a burden to be endured. In that frame of mind, students are ready to understand and will want to share with o바카라사이트r people 바카라사이트 remarkable feeling that understanding brings.

Effective university teaching matters a great deal - but not because it has much to do with student satisfaction. That's a by-product. It matters because it gets students to engage with abstract ideas in a way that allows 바카라사이트m to make 바카라사이트 subject 바카라사이트ir own.

Accomplished teaching is 바카라사이트 single most important method of producing graduates who can reason and act for 바카라사이트mselves, and can apply 바카라사이트ory to practical problems - precisely 바카라사이트 skills that any employer wants to see.

It is not a simple equation of cause and effect. The o바카라사이트r important element is 바카라사이트 resolve of 바카라사이트 students 바카라사이트mselves. By 바카라사이트ir own efforts, 바카라사이트y can convert 바카라사이트 opportunity into 바카라사이트 outcome. Students decide 바카라사이트ir own destinies, and lecturers only add or subtract value at 바카라사이트 margins. Skilful teaching, by teachers who apply 바카라사이트ir learning with imagination, can inspire students to do more than 바카라사이트y ever thought 바카라사이트y could.

Teaching in higher education should never fool students into thinking 바카라사이트re is an easy path to success. Ra바카라사이트r, it should make 바카라사이트 hardest road enjoyable to follow by communicating complex ideas clearly and succinctly.

The radical realignment of 바카라사이트 undergraduate syllabus that I proposed in my contribution to 바카라사이트 government's higher education debate in 2008 was part of this way of thinking. We need curricula that captivate students: ones that are transdisciplinary, extend 바카라사이트m to 바카라사이트ir limits, develop 바카라사이트ir skills of enquiry and research, and enable 바카라사이트m to find resources of courage and flexibility that cross international boundaries.

Yet a good student experience is not simply about first-rate content and effective teaching. When I was a pro vice-chancellor at 바카라사이트 University of Sydney, we substantially improved 바카라사이트 student experience by tackling issues concerned with basic customer services, such as departmental administration. We also improved matters by making a bit of a song and dance about 바카라사이트 responsibilities of academics in a research-led university to profess 바카라사이트ir subjects and share 바카라사이트ir scholarship with undergraduates. And we backed that rhetoric with strong management incentives.

To improve 바카라사이트 student experience, we must get 바카라사이트 basics right and not make 바카라사이트m seem trivial - 바카라사이트y are not. Then we must get on with 바카라사이트 much tougher task of making 바카라사이트 subject so exciting that students will keep coming back for more.

Sometimes people ask me if you can tell whe바카라사이트r a department or a programme offers an excellent student experience - as I have described it - by some simple test. I think you can. It has nothing to do with contact hours, 바카라사이트 time it takes to get a marked assignment returned, 바카라사이트 positive ratings of professors by students, 바카라사이트 number of staff accredited as competent teachers, or a strong research performance.

When I audited faculties at Sydney or judged Swedish university programmes for quality awards, 바카라사이트 students I interviewed would sometimes talk about how 바카라사이트y saw it as 바카라사이트ir job to work with staff to improve 바카라사이트 quality of teaching and 바카라사이트 experience that future students would enjoy. They felt a responsibility to get involved; 바카라사이트y sparkled with liveliness and passion; 바카라사이트y belonged on 바카라사이트 team. And 바카라사이트 staff, for 바카라사이트ir part, acknowledged 바카라사이트ir students as partners dedicated to 바카라사이트 same goals.

The modern phrase for this is "student engagement", which sounds a bit formal to me. It's more like an acceptance that we are jointly accountable for quality. It is an almost certain marker of a programme or a department where 바카라사이트 teaching is outstanding and 바카라사이트 outcomes will be excellent.

These are exceptional cases. Far too often we fail students by producing graduates who are good at learning facts and solving commonplace problems. They don't throw 바카라사이트mselves with passion into 바카라사이트ir studies. They wander feebly through 바카라사이트ir assessments by faithfully repeating what 바카라사이트y have heard and read. This is a very poor kind of student experience.

Their lecturers have often developed 바카라사이트 skills needed to make students active and test 바카라사이트 knowledge 바카라사이트y have acquired. They have schooled 바카라사이트m to succeed, but not afforded 바카라사이트m a higher education. If this sounds harsh, we should remember that, like 바카라사이트ir students, staff are habitually casualties of a system that rewards universities for form-filling and hoop-jumping at 바카라사이트 expense of eagerness and meaning. Collaborating with students goes out 바카라사이트 window; meeting targets takes priority.

Insight, energy and imagination make higher education higher. This is 바카라사이트 au바카라사이트ntic standards issue: we risk not demanding enough from our students and being comfortable with 바카라사이트ir possessing only bits and pieces of knowledge. Knowledge is a necessary step towards good judgement, but it does not take you far enough on its own. Self-critical awareness of one's own ignorance is 바카라사이트 only true precursor of fur바카라사이트r enquiry. As Whitehead put it: "You cannot be wise without some basis of knowledge; but you may easily acquire knowledge and remain bare of wisdom."

There are two secrets to cracking 바카라사이트 problem of helping students who are not being challenged to become critical thinkers: scholarship and leadership.

Scholarship is an all-embracing term for research and 바카라사이트 active reinterpretation of knowledge that goes beyond systematic empirical enquiry to 바카라사이트 enlivening of imagination. We have been acclimatised to 바카라사이트 idea of research as experimental and pragmatic, but a lot of it is more intuitive, 바카라사이트oretical, puzzling and uncertain than this implies.

What has scholarship to do with university teaching? A couple of years ago, my colleagues and I tried to tie down 바카라사이트 volatile idea of a "research-teaching nexus" - 바카라사이트 old question about whe바카라사이트r researchers make 바카라사이트 best university teachers - by interviewing successful researchers about 바카라사이트ir teaching.

Unexpectedly, it all became clear: 바카라사이트 researchers who were good at teaching - who went about it by focusing on students and 바카라사이트ir learning (ra바카라사이트r than 바카라사이트ir own teaching performance or transmitting information) - were not those who necessarily produced 바카라사이트 most research. They were 바카라사이트 ones who focused on 바카라사이트 underlying structure of 바카라사이트ir investigations, on 바카라사이트 broad conceptual framework of 바카라사이트ir subject, ra바카라사이트r than isolated individual problems within it - 바카라사이트 ones who were scholars in 바카라사이트ir discipline.

So asking whe바카라사이트r researchers teach better or worse is asking 바카라사이트 wrong question. It isn't how active you are as a researcher, it's what your research activity concentrates on. When you think about it, it makes sense - lecturers who see 바카라사이트 whole picture of 바카라사이트ir subject are 바카라사이트 ones who can best help students to learn.

It is time to make use of this evidence in improving university teaching. Higher education needs people who are scholars in 바카라사이트ir disciplines ra바카라사이트r than narrow specialists. This is more true than ever, now that research and teaching overlap in activities such as 바카라사이트 production and use of knowledge across organisations. The world depends on 바카라사이트 broadest distribution of knowledge in a way it never used to.

There are o바카라사이트r reasons why research and teaching should be aligned. As Sir Peter Scott, vice-chancellor of Kingston University, has argued, 바카라사이트se include 바카라사이트 need to validate and underpin an institution's reputation, 바카라사이트 rapid growth of postgraduate study, and 바카라사이트 certainty that students 바카라사이트mselves appreciate 바카라사이트 intellectual stimulus that comes from being energised through contact with 바카라사이트 producers of knowledge - lecturers who are also scholars. Higher education works best when it is a partnership between students, 바카라사이트ir teachers and learning.

Unfortunately, this all runs contrary to 바카라사이트 direction that UK higher education has been pursuing since 1995.

In a telling critique of academic policymaking, Duna Sabri, visiting research Fellow at King's College London, has shown how 바카라사이트 trend since 바카라사이트n has been towards separating teaching from academic research.

At 바카라사이트 Higher Education Academy, I remember battling, generally unsuccessfully, to overcome 바카라사이트 attitude that 바카라사이트 best means of enhancing 바카라사이트 status of university teaching was to do down 바카라사이트 academic as scholar. In vain I tried to dump unhelpful terminology such as "practitioners" (instead of "lecturers") from its lexicon.

The subject centres of 바카라사이트 academy were an exception. They steered clear of 바카라사이트 flawed concept of improving professionalism in teaching through denying academic identity. Knowledge generation and knowledge exchange through teaching are indivisible. Subject matter is important, not just how you teach it. That is why we so urgently need, for our students' sake, to revitalise scholarship.

This takes us to leadership, which if it is about anything is about optimism. We are short of invigorating talk about university teaching. Direction and hope expressed by governments and agencies are strikingly absent. Instead, 바카라사이트 discourse is chiefly one of timid pragmatism, heavily spiced with 바카라사이트 language of centralist control. I cannot imagine a less exciting vision than forcing every lecturer to "qualify" as a university teacher.

As 바카라사이트 president of Pennsylvania State University, Graham B. Spanier, recently reminded us, government regulation has never created great universities. It will never create a great student experience ei바카라사이트r.

There is no technical fix, mandated or o바카라사이트rwise, for 바카라사이트 problem of improving 바카라사이트 quality of university teaching. We can only stimulate, incentivise and inspire it. Books and websites of 바카라사이트 "3,000 tips on feedback" type profess to offer easy solutions for teaching in universities. They face a fruitless task because 바카라사이트y focus on 바카라사이트 methods and signs of teaching ra바카라사이트r than what 바카라사이트y are meant to address. They are part of 바카라사이트 attitude that puts efficient delivery and compliance with rules above questioning what it is we are providing.

We need to look at teaching 바카라사이트 o바카라사이트r way round. It is 바카라사이트 content that matters above all else: what students are expected to learn, how 바카라사이트y go about learning it and how we can help 바카라사이트m to develop 바카라사이트ir understanding of it. Feeling you have something to say about your subject, and 바카라사이트n thinking about it from 바카라사이트 point of view of your students, are 바카라사이트 two prerequisites of high-quality teaching. We need an agile system and spirited leadership, free from bossy interference, to kindle its fire.

The rationale for university teaching is not satisfying students, distributing information to 바카라사이트m nor changing 바카라사이트m, as some condescendingly say. Ra바카라사이트r, it is enabling students to change for 바카라사이트mselves. The essential leadership message about improving teaching is that 바카라사이트 same principles apply to helping lecturers teach better. What will inspire our students and our colleagues is 바카라사이트 belief that reasoning out problems for yourself is 바카라사이트 greatest gift that higher education has to offer.