I would say that the reverse - an accomplished scholar is a great teacher - is more to the fore. When I started my scientific career there was a more clear distinction between those who did research (quite many did almost no teaching at all, except for PhD level courses, based on notes or an advanced book) and those who did teaching at the bachelor or master level. The former had PhD students, but in several cases quite little teaching, while those who did not have PhD students spent many hours in class. There still are a few who do a lot of teaching but little or no research - but they are near their pension. Nowadays regardless of your position - be you a PhD student, a lecturer or a professor - you are expected to contribute hours in class. The exception is perhaps the postdoc, whose position may come with 100% research.

Thanks Michael. Good insights!

You raise an important issue: whether teaching and research are "complementary" compared to "conflicting" areas.

Higher education policy and decision-making may reflect the one ("complementary") compared to the other ("conflicting") perspective - with consequences for faculty, students, and institutions.

with good wishes - Mary

Article Research, Teaching, and Publication Productivity: Mutuality ...

Dear Mary,

Thank you for sharing the article. It is insightful and helpful. Best wishes for the new year.

amir

Teaching at any level is not solely about how much one is acomplished in their field, but more about how to teach it. I had a lecturer who had a droning voice and pretty much recited what was in the text book, I didn't need a lecturer to do that, I could have done that myself. Teaching is not just about how to teach the subject matter either. Teaching successfully is very much about understanding what the other person is thinking and most importantly understanding how the other person is interpreting what is being taught. Looking through the eyes of children is especially difficult to do, but master that and an educator can teach anything.

I agree but even a great teacher may not be able to transmit knowledge if he/she doesn't know much about new developments in their field.

IMHO, without research activities, an academic of any level is closer to a school teacher than a scientist. I guess we have to first define the term 'good'. My definition of a good academic teacher is a person that is capable to teach a undergrad/postgrad course according to a specific curriculum while his/her scientific capabilities and insights are very much more than the level of his/her perfect student. The scientific capabilities is best measured by researcher, and supervision activities.

Thank you.

I also agree with you that " even a great teacher may not be able to transmit knowledge if he/she doesn't know much about new developments in their field" because a professor must be able to know, and contribute in the scientific advances.