That research-intensive universities value research over teaching is probably not news to many. The clue is in the name given to such a category of institution.

But by definition, a research-intensive university is also one where teaching is supposed to be led by research, and in the current era of university staffing where an academic¡¯s work is tightly defined by the terms of his or her contract ¨C which increasingly may be research-only or teaching-only ¨C there is a problem.

Of course there are some academics who hold contracts that allow both research and teaching. But the evidence suggests that the use of teaching-only contracts is on the rise, particularly for those who work part-time.

As Abel Nyamapfene, a senior teaching fellow at University College London, points out,?those on teaching-only contracts do not have the time to research, nor is it part of their job description.

³ÉÈËVRÊÓƵ

So how can an academic who does no research teach in a way that is led by research? It is a question that research-intensive universities that employ staff on binary research-only or teaching-only contracts have not addressed adequately.

And what about their students? Are those who choose a research-intensive university, presumably for its research credentials, getting a bum deal if their teachers are not researchers?

³ÉÈËVRÊÓƵ

Dorene Ross, professor emeritus at the University of Florida, who conducted the research studying the views of top lecturers, thinks not, although she concedes that undergraduates at research-intensive universities are unlikely to be taught by faculty who are highly engaged in research.

She said that undergraduates are most likely picking a research-intensive institution because it is highly ranked in league tables or has a strong reputation ¨C both of which, ironically, tend to reflect the work of the university¡¯s research faculty, not necessarily its teachers.

holly.else@tesglobal.com