Stephen Vasciannie
FIRST, WE can clear up a grammatical quibble: universities do not exist to tell people that they should not normally end their sentences with a preposition. Primary and secondary schools must prevail in that particular region of grammarian disputation. But, beyond that elementary point prompted by the title for this column the role of universities seems to be a constant source of debate.
One reason for the seemingly endless stream of argumentation on the subject comes from the fact that different universities have different purposes. The Americans have, of course, long recognised this fact, so that the university experience at an Ivy League institution will be fundamentally different from that at a community college. Horses for courses is an appropriate aphorism in this context.
Horses for courses suggests that institutions have different objectives, and they attract students with divergent skills and qualifications. But it also suggests that different institutions should concentrate on specific aspects of the learning process: thus, research-oriented institutions should concentrate on creating new knowledge or on applying the latest insights in particular fields to a given region or area in the world.
Other institutions may choose to pay more attention to the teaching function of the university, and as a result, direct the bulk of their resources to the development of a team of specialist teachers and instructors.
EMPHASIS
Clearly, however, the matter is usually one of emphasis. At Oxford, All Souls College - one of 30-something colleges - is open only to professors and other qualified academics, and their primary, if not exclusive, function, is to undertake research. They may take one or two graduate students with an eye to the future, but they are not obliged to do so. The academic fellow in this context, the don properly so-called, is sovereign over his or her research: he or she is left alone to publish.
Most academic institutions of repute find themselves somewhere along the spectrum of research and teaching. In other words, they require their academics to undertake both research and teaching, on the assumption that research must inform teaching, and that the exchange of ideas with serious students may sometimes stimulate research.
But where should the balance lie? In particular contexts, should hybrid universities give priority to teaching? Or should they regard research as the core, with teaching being an important, but secondary, component of the university's mission? Alternatively, should more resources be pumped into teaching, on the view that those who are properly taught can then go into the wider society, ready to spread the knowledge acquired from master teachers?
ANSWERS WILL VARY
The answers to these questions will vary from place to place, and may even differ from time to time. It seems to me, however, that every developing country must set aside at least one institution for the generation and promotion of new knowledge and of new ways of looking at the world. In short, specialist, research institutions must be encouraged, even if this means, in some cases, placing emphasis on the research efforts over the teaching function.
The research function the generation of new knowledge is important for all societies. In developing countries, some people take the view that we should not be bothered with primary research, for, after all, we can acquire the products of highly financed research from others. This, of course, is unacceptable.
For one thing, outsiders will probably not be inclined to undertake relevant research on a given developing country; and, for another, persons based in the developing countries are apt to have specialist knowledge that can enhance the research enterprise.
Perhaps more importantly, the emphasis on research is well-placed because research does not take place in a vacuum. Good research is built on the substructure of existing knowledge, so that properly conducted research starts with what is known, and then pushes forward the contours of the field. To do this, the researcher has to be an expert in the field. As a result, if you place emphasis on research, you will eventually attract the stronger people in the field, a result which cannot lightly be ignored.
Some people suggest that this line of argument minimises the role of the teacher. Some also argue that at a time when we should be expanding access to tertiary education, the teaching function should actually be given greater, not reduced, attention. In a world of infinite resources, both the research and teaching functions could be given full financial support, but scarcity is an inherent part of our existence, and it requires us to identify priorities.
In the identification of priorities, some universities will concentrate on teaching, as noted above. My only point today is that we should have at least one institution dedicated to research, and that this institution should know that its primary role is research.
Stephen Vasciannie is a professor at the University of the West Indies and a consultant in the Attorney-General's Chambers.
