The Importance of Research for Teaching

Higher education is currently under siege and facing many challenges including declining public confidence and trust, funding cuts, and political interference.  Amongst the many questions being raised concerns whether university professors need to teach more, with greater prioritization of teaching over research.  When addressing this question, the public, politicians, and even professors and provosts often assume that research and teaching are mutually exclusive activities.  This stovepiped view of research and teaching has some conveniences, but the reality is that the best professors create a strong synergy between research and teaching to the benefit of students.  

During my 30 years at the University of Utah, I have served as the lead or co-principal investigator on more than 30 external research grants, but have also won college and university teaching awards.  I am classified by my department as a "research intensive" faculty member, but I also care deeply about teaching.  I know many other faculty who are similarly committed to both research and teaching, and recognize that there are many benefits of research for teaching (and vice versa).  

In many ways research is teaching because a good deal of external research funding supports graduate and undergraduate students.  Well over half of my grant support (maybe more than 75% in some cases) goes to graduate and undergraduate students and, as a result, much of the time I spend on research is actually spent mentoring graduate and undergraduate students.  This includes guiding them through their research and helping them become scientists who can innovate, create new knowledge and techniques, work in a team, and be effective if not outstanding communicators.  

In other words, teaching.  

Research also enables the latest advances to be brought into the classroom.  Readers of this blog are well aware of the products on weather.utah.edu.  Although we get no direct funding for the web site, we have developed it to provide access to the latest forecast techniques and enable their use in the classroom.  For example, students can use the Utah Snow Ensemble, which uses downscaling and machine learning techniques to produce a large snowfall ensemble.  This product is not only being used in upper-division atmospheric sciences classes, but even introductory ones such as Atmos 1000: Secrets of the Greatest Snow on Earth.

Research funding also provides experiences for students who may not be a formal member of my research group, including those in physical labs or in the field.  I nearly always build in a research experience opportunity for students into my National Science Foundation grants.  For example, we have brought the Doppler on Wheels (DOW) radar to Utah on two occasions to teach students about radar meteorology and mountain precipitation.  

Fun times in the Doppler on Wheels

For this winter we are planning a large field campaign focused on the northern Wasatch.  We currently have undergraduate and graduate students helping to configure and deploy observing systems for that campaign.  During field operations, students will launch weather balloons and operate DOW radars.  All of this because of research.  

Finally, teaching also benefits research.  Having to teach classes requires a much deeper understanding of fundamental subject matter, which makes you a better scientist, but it also exposes gaps in understanding.  Classroom discussions have helped me to identify or refine research questions and ideas on many occasions.  

This synergy between research and teaching, and the benefits of research for teaching, seems to be missing in the public dialog about the future of higher education.  In fact, I would say it is even inadequately considered on college campuses.  Most policies for evaluating faculty productivity or workload, for example, very clearly distinguish between research and teaching, which are often treated in near isolation for faculty reviews.  

It is for the reasons above that I am opposed to sledgehammer proposals to simply increase faculty teaching assignments.  In some disciplines or for some faculty members this might make sense, but in other situations, it could harm the mutually beneficial balance of research and teaching that benefits students.  It would certainly harm the quality of instruction in scientifically intensive disciplines that are evolving rapidly.