The "Academic Ratchet": Reseach vs. Classroom Instruction

           The argument of whether or not faculty members have devoted more time to conducting research rather than teaching in the classroom. What has been coined as “academic ratchet”, the gradual increase of faculty members that are conducting more research rather than teach inside of the classroom has become more controversial amongst scholars throughout higher education. Michael Paulsen and John Smart noted in their book Finance of Higher Education: Theory, Research, Policy, and Practice, faculty have grown to devote less time to teaching in the classroom, but has continued to pursue more research outside of institution (Paulsen and Smart, 2001, p. 221). Per Paulsen and Smart, academic ratchet is described as “the steady, irreversible shift of faculty allegiance away from the goals of a given institution, toward those of an academic specialty” (Paulsen and Smart, 2001, p.221). Although research is a detrimental part of higher education, it has been described as a hindrance in leveraging the higher costs that have affected a student’s ability to pay for college.

            In the state of Texas, there has been dialogue back and forth between legislatures, faculty members, and even students as to whether or not faculty research has overshadowed faculty members spending more time in the classroom. The administration at Texas Tech has claimed that the rising costs associated with higher education have been due to instructors spending more time doing research. According to Chancellor Kent R. Hance, if the faculty returned to the classroom, then costs would decrease by millions of dollars (Mangan, 2008). Lewis Held, biology professor and member of the Faculty Senate at Texas Tech, believes that requiring faculty to spend more time in the classroom would impede them from conducting valuable research, as well as preparing the necessary grant proposals needed for funding the research, advising students, and serving on committees, which is also required for faculty members (Mangan, 2008). Based on the school’s report, the faculty spends more that 4 hours per semester away from the classroom when it is required that they teach at least 9 student credit hours per semester, with an allowance of 3 student-credit hours away from the classroom. It was predicted that the university would gain at least 100,000 student-credit hours and take in at most $16 million in revenue. The faculty, however, believe that they are spending less than what was reported away from the classroom (Mangan, 2008).

            At one of the other Texas colleges, there are students that believe that the amount of research now being reported has not had a negative affect on the classroom and the students’ education. The students and former students of the University of Texas appreciate the value of the research conducted by its faculty members. The students believe that coming from a highly research institution adds value to their degrees and increase their chances of obtaining positions at various organizations (Mangan, 2011).

            There are faculty members from other institutions that agree with the administration from Texas Tech. Kenneth G. Mann, a professor of biochemistry at the University of Vermont, disagrees with some of the faculty members from Texas Tech and the students at The University of Texas. According to man, the costs associated with research have grown to take away from the money that should go towards teaching in the classroom. Mann maintains that 22% of his salary as an associated professor at the University of Minnesota back in 1970 consisted of grants money. Currently 60% of his salary is grant money, with about $3 million comes in as support from federal funding (Basken, 2011).

            There has to be a balance to satisfy both parties that support research and faculty spending more time in the classroom. Richard M. Losick, biology professor at Harvard University, believes that there needs to be a balance between continuing research and returning to the classroom to improve the quality of the education received by the students. Not only should there be a balance between the two sides, but also to improve teaching practices for the faculty members (Basken, 2011). Not only should teaching practices be updated, but there should be a change in obtaining tenure – tenure and promotions should be based on teaching skills (Basken, 2011).

Basken, P. (2011). Scientists Fault Universities as Favoring Research Over Teaching. The Chronicle of Higher Education. http://chronicle.com/article/Scientists-Fault-Universities/125944/.

Mangan, K. (2008). Texas Tech Faculty Members Challenge Report’s View of Their Teaching Time.  The Chronicle of Higher Education. http://chronicle.com/article/Texas-Tech-Faculty-Members/698/.

Mangan, K. (2011). In Texas Debate Over Research vs. Teaching, Students Champion Value of Research. The Chronicle of Higher Education. http://chronicle.com/article/In-Texas-Debate-Over-Research/127260/.

Paulsen, M.B., Smart, J.C. (2001). The Finance of Higher Education: Theory, Research, Policy & Practice. Agathon Press; New York.