| |
|
|
 |
Plagiarism
- Vol. 11 No. 2, May 2008 |
 |
Independent Learning
- Vol. 11 No. 1, Jan 2008 |
 |
Undergraduate Research
- Vol. 10 No. 1, Jan 2007 |
 |
Engaging Students
- Vol. 9 No. 2, Jul 2006 |
 |
Learner-centred Teaching/Learning
- Vol. 9 No. 1, Apr 2006 |
 |
Annual Teaching Excellence Award
- Vol. 10 No. 4, Sep 2007
- Vol. 10 No. 3, Aug 2007
- Vol. 9 No. 4, Sep 2006
- Vol. 9 No. 3, Aug 2006
- Vol. 8 No. 7, Oct 2005
- Vol. 8 No. 6, Sep 2005 |
 |
Lifelong Learning
- Vol. 8 No. 5, Aug 2005 |
 |
Balancing Theory and Practice
- Vol. 8 No. 4, Jul 2005 |
 |
Learning with Technology
- Vol. 8 No. 3, May 2005 |
 |
Reflective Learning
- Vol. 8 No. 2, Mar 2005 |
 |
Active Learning
- Vol. 8 No. 1, Jan 2005 |
 |
Balancing Teaching and Research
- Vol. 7 No. 7, Aug 2004 |
|
|
 |
Preparing for the First Lecture/Class
- Vol. 7 No. 6, Jul 2004 |
|
|
 |
Interactive Technology in Education
- Vol. 7 No. 5, May 2004 |
|
|
 |
Collaborative Learning
- Vol. 7 No. 4, Apr 2004 |
|
|
 |
Student Motivation/Teacher Motivation
- Vol. 7 No. 3, Mar 2004 |
|
|
 |
Discussion in the Classroom
- Vol. 7 No. 2, Feb 2004 |
|
|
 |
IT-supported Learning Strategies
- Vol. 6 No. 9, Sep 2003
- Vol. 6 No. 8, Aug 2003 |
|
|
 |
Heterogeneous Student Body
- Vol. 6 No. 7, Jul 2003 |
|
|
 |
Postgraduate Supervision
- Vol. 6 No. 6, Jun 2003 |
|
|
 |
PDP-T Research Projects
- Vol. 6 No. 5, May 2003
- Vol. 6 No. 10, Oct 2003
- Vol. 6 No. 11, Nov 2003 |
|
|
 |
Cultivating Leaders
- Vol. 6 No. 4, Apr 2003 |
|
|
 |
NUS Outstanding Educator Award
- Vol. 6 No. 2, Feb 2003
- Vol. 7 No. 8, Sep 2004
- Vol. 7 No. 9, Oct 2004 |
|
|
 |
Constructivism
- Vol. 6 No. 1, Jan 2003 |
|
|
 |
Continuing Education
- Vol. 5 No. 1, Mar 2002 |
|
|
 |
Cross-disciplinary Teaching
- Vol. 5 No. 2, Apr 2002
- Vol. 9 No. 5. Oct 2006 |
|
|
 |
Curriculum Design/Programme
- Vol. 4 No. 6, Dec 2001
- Vol. 3 No. 5, Oct 2000
- Vol. 2 No. 5, Nov 1999
- Vol. 1 No. 1, Apr 1998 |
|
|
 |
Demonstration-Based Teaching
- Vol. 4 No. 1, Feb 2001 |
|
|
 |
Discipline and Counselling
- Vol. 5 No. 5. Aug 2002 |
|
|
 |
Emotional Intelligence
- Vol. 2 No. 1, Mar 10, 1999 |
|
|
 |
IT in Education
- Vol. 10 No. 2, Apr 2007 - Vol. 5 No. 3, May 2002
- Vol. 4 No. 4, Oct 2001
- Vol. 4 No. 3, Aug 2001
- Vol. 3 No. 6, Nov 2000
- Vol. 2 No. 2, Mar 15, 1999
- Vol. 1 No. 2, Oct 1998 |
|
|
 |
Large-Group Teaching
- Vol. 4 No. 5, Nov 2001 |
|
|
 |
Learning Styles
- Vol. 5 No. 6, Sep 2002
- Vol. 5 No. 7, Oct 2002
- Vol. 7 No. 1, Jan 2004 |
|
|
 |
Problem-Based Learning
- Vol. 3 No. 3, Aug 2000 |
|
|
 |
Small-Group Teaching
- Vol. 2 No. 3, Apr 1999 |
|
|
 |
Spoon Feeding
- Vol. 3 No. 2, May 2000 |
|
|
 |
Student Assessment
- Vol. 2 No. 4, Aug 1999
- Vol. 6 No. 3, Mar 2003 |
|
|
 |
Student Management
- Vol. 4 No. 2, Apr 2001
- Vol. 3 No. 4, Sep 2000 |
|
|
 |
Teaching Evaluation
- Vol. 3 No. 1, Jan 2000 |
|
|
 |
Thinking Skills
- Vol. 5 No. 4, Jul 2002 |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
| Balancing Teaching & Research |
|
| |
|
| August
2004, Vol. 7, No. 7 |
Print-Ready |
| Strengthening
the Teaching-research Nexus |
Assistant
Professor Lionel Wee
Department of English Language & Literature |
| In
the study of language planning, particularly when looking at
how languages are accommodated in multilingual societies, it
has been observed that language policies typically adopt a strategy
of ‘unilingualism’, where they attempt to carve
out unique spaces for individual languages. For example, a language
like Mandarin may be specifically assigned to particular domains
of social life while some other language such as English is
assigned to yet other domains. The goal here is to avoid overlapping
functions so that there is minimal competition between the different
languages. But despite the intentions behind such policies,
actual linguistic practices indicate that speakers, rather than
formally separating the two languages, may sometimes instead
code-switch back and forth between Mandarin and English within
the same situation. The result, over time, may even be the emergence
of a hybridised variety that contains elements originally traceable
to Mandarin and English, but this new variety is in fact a distinct
and fully developed language in its own right, no longer reducible
to its linguistic parents.
The same considerations, I believe, apply to any attempt
to balance those activities that are more concerned with teaching
and those concerned with, say, research. A common mindset
is that specific blocks of time must be set aside for each
activity. In extreme cases, one sometimes hears the lament
that term time is completely dedicated to teaching and it
is only during term breaks (or sabbatical or study leave)
that research becomes a real possibility. While it is certainly
useful to try to create separate ‘time-zones’
dedicated to teaching and to research, it is also unrealistic
to wait until teaching is ‘done’ before beginning
research. So, rather than aiming for a ‘unilingual’
approach to balancing teaching and research, one should seriously
consider attempting to intertwine the two, switching and mixing
them such that the boundaries become blurred. The advantage
to having such an interaction between teaching and research
means that one can view teaching as an opportunity to do better
research, and research as an opportunity to improve one’s
teaching. Time spent on one activity does not necessarily
detract from the other, as it would in a zero-sum game. Consequently,
the idea of balancing teaching and research does not mean
finding the time to do each of them separately, but finding
ways of creating synergy between them so that one is regularly
involved in a research-teaching nexus.
As a result, one’s teaching becomes ‘porous’
in the sense that it is infused with research-oriented considerations.
And importantly, ‘porous’ teaching means that
one should not have to apologise for tailoring a module syllabus
to cater to one’s own research agenda. Students can
only benefit from the teaching once they realise that the
issues being discussed are not purely pedagogical but are
intimately linked with ongoing scholarly debate, in which
their module lecturer is actively engaged. Conversely, the
lecturer herself can find renewed vigour and enthusiasm in
teaching a module if the topics reflect research questions
that she is dealing with even outside of the class. The passion
of the lecturer can come through as she runs through different
theoretical or analytical perspectives; the students can sense
this passion and oftentimes, themselves become infected so
that their own learning is no longer just viewed with a kind
of cynical detachment; and it is even entirely possible that
they might provide critical viewpoints and comments that could
contribute to the research outcome.
In my own case, I regularly issue a caveat that the readings
and topics in my modules are subject to change, both in response
to the students’ own interests and to new research directions
that might offer themselves in the course of the semester.
I have also adopted the practice of using the ‘Notes
to contributors’ section of international refereed journals
as part of my instructions to students concerning their submission
of essays. This is to encourage the students to see themselves
as potential members of a research community, and to concretise
for them the idea that essays are not merely written to fulfil
some form of assessment, but that there are people who actually
spend a significant amount of time and effort in trying to
publish their work, because of their intellectual commitment
to the ideas that they are trying to develop. I also habitually
incorporate into the module ideas and articles that I am grappling
with in the papers I am attempting to complete. And if in
the course of a semester, I receive drafts of papers from
overseas colleagues that are relevant to what I am teaching,
I happily incorporate these into the class discussions so
that rather than receiving knowledge that has the veneer of
final authority, students are given an appreciation of how
the process of academic debate may or may not lead to some
kind of scholarly consensus.
Perhaps it is appropriate to end this article by acknowledging
that arriving at an optimal research-teaching nexus is never
easy. No doubt, there are external constraints that some of
us can do little about. For example, it is probably much easier
to incorporate research into teaching if one is chairing an
Honours or postgraduate module rather than a first year introductory
module. But what this serves to highlight is that the search
for an optimal balance between teaching and research is an
ongoing process. To use an Asian metaphor, it is much like
the desire to balance one’s yin and yang, where one
has to continually make sure that one eats appropriate amounts
of cooling and heaty foods; there is no final state except
death.
|
|
|
Back to Top
|