Disproportionate Emphasis on Research in Modern Academia: Implications for Teaching and Scholarship

Introduction

Whenever academic rankings are released, they trigger a significant reaction within the global academic community. These rankings bestow prestige upon educational institutions, captivate students in their choice of institutions, contribute to shaping education policy outcomes and impact budgetary provisions and resource allocation for the development in the educational sector (Teichler, 2011).

An inherent issue associated with the current ranking systems is their notable emphasis on research metrics, often overshadowing the significance of other academic duties, such as teaching. Vernon et al. (2018) observe that research outcomes are believed to be quantifiable and measurable, making them a primary criterion for evaluation and comparison. Consequently, the subjective nature of teaching, which cannot be easily quantified, tends to be overlooked, leading to disregard in rankings. This can lead to a misalignment of priorities within higher education, where teaching becomes undervalued in comparison to research activities. Moreover, in order to prioritise research activity, institutions may allocate fewer resources and less support for professional development initiatives that enhance teaching skills and improve student learning experiences (Marginson & Wende, 2007).

As a result, there is a potential decline in the overall quality of the education system. When teaching quality deteriorates, it hampers the development of a well-educated workforce, undermines the reputation of educational institutions, and ultimately impacts the future progress of society as a whole.

Historical Emphasis on Teaching

While higher education has diverse global roots, this overview focuses on the Western lineage that shaped contemporary academic structures. Although the precise origins of Western higher education remain ambiguous, the precursors to modern universities emerged following the decline of formal Roman educational structures. As Europe relied on monastic and cathedral schools, Arabs established advanced centres of learning during the ninth and tenth centuries (Scoyoc, 1962).

The formal foundation of the modern university subsequently took shape in medieval Europe. Initially, these institutions were not called universities; the Latin term universitas originally denoted an independent collective entity or guild (Hattie & Marsh, 1996). Instead, from the twelfth to the fifteenth centuries, celebrated communities of scholars were commonly known as Studium generale (Leinster-Mackay, 1977). It was within these prestigious scholarly guilds that individuals were granted the ius ubique docendi—the universal and highly respected license to teach anywhere.

In this tradition, the University of Paris emerged as one of the first formal universities, establishing written statutes by 1208 (Rashdall, 1936). It was soon followed by British institutions like Oxford and Cambridge, which formed as students migrated due to regional and religious conflicts. From their earliest inception, these institutions were fundamentally designed as sanctuaries of learning. Their primary, noble purpose was not research but rather dedicated teaching and dissemination of knowledge to eager minds (Newman, 1992).

Shift Towards Research

The modern mainstream academic culture actually started in eighteenth-century Germany. Berlin University, established in 1810 (later named Humboldt University), was at the forefront with the principle of promoting increased academic liberty (McClelland, 2019). This principle quickly permeated every German university, serving as the cornerstone for Germany’s prominence in the global research landscape during the nineteenth century (Scoyoc, 1962). It pioneered the use of scholarly seminars and scientific laboratories where professors and their students collaboratively explored challenges within their respective domains.

Around the middle of the century, a number of American students headed to Germany. These scholars, educated in Germany, returned to the USA equipped with the crucial knowledge that played a pivotal role in instilling the concept of fruitful research as the guiding principle of American higher education (Clark, 2019). As the USA established its world hegemony and started to lead the world in terms of knowledge and power, its model of higher education spread across the world. While this shift towards research in universities may seem like a natural improvement, it may also bring about some adverse effects, potentially undermining universities’ primary objectives.

Impact on Teaching Quality

Modern academia, rooted in the tradition of nineteenth-century German universities, has taken the principles of the Humboldtian model of higher education to a more intense manifestation (García-Gallego et al., 2012). As a result, there has been a notable shift in emphasis, placing research at the forefront and making it the predominant criterion by which the quality of a university is assessed. Universities perceive their position through prestigious international rankings, and their allocation of funding is primarily contingent upon their scholarly achievements. This focus on research has become overwhelming, overshadowing other aspects of academia.

Ideally, research and teaching exist in a symbiotic relationship where scholarly inquiry informs and revitalises pedagogical practice. Active researchers can enrich the classroom by introducing cutting-edge discoveries and fostering a culture of inquiry among their students. On the contrary, in modern academia, the intense focus on research has marginalised teaching. Because career advancement relies heavily on research metrics, academics naturally devalue instruction, which harms holistic student development and well-being (Marsh & Hattie, 2002). Consequently, poor classroom performance often stems from prioritising publications over teaching duties. Furthermore, teaching and research compete for limited time and energy, driven by conflicting reward systems that heavily favour scholarly output. Ultimately, these roles may be fundamentally incompatible, prompting universities to increasingly segregate undergraduate teaching from full-time research roles (Barnett, 1992).

These changes in modern academia have not gone unnoticed by some of the stakeholders. Speaking at the Universities UK annual conference at Guildford, UK, in 2015, the then Universities Minister, Jo Johnson, said university professors are increasingly prioritising the development of their personal brands and the pursuit of their research endeavours over their commitment to teaching (Espinoza, 2015). Sir Anthony Seldon, vice-chancellor at the University of Buckingham, put it aptly. He said universities regard students as ‘necessary nuisances’ to secure research funding but are failing young people when it comes to looking after their well-being (Adams, 2015). He pointed out a tacit collusion between teachers and students: educators are unwilling to dedicate significant time and effort to grading essays, as it diverts attention from research, and simultaneously, students are disinclined to engage in rigorous coursework that interferes with their more preferred activities.

Impact on Research Quality

It is indeed ironic that the entire system endeavours to promote and prioritise research, yet the very quality of research it produces is not beyond question. Despite the overarching goal of advancing knowledge and pushing the boundaries of human understanding, various factors may affect the quality of research output.

One contributing factor is the increasing pressure within academic circles to produce a high volume of research output (Al-Adawi et al., 2016). The emphasis on quantity often takes precedence over the meticulousness and rigour required for conducting thorough and impactful research (Casati et al., 2010). As researchers strive to meet publication quotas and secure funding, corners may be cut, leading to compromised methodologies, inadequate data analysis or rushed conclusions (Hasgall, 2019). Some researchers may be tempted to divide research results into as many partial publications—a practice known as ‘salami slicing’ or to publish non-reproducible results prematurely. This compromises the integrity and reliability of the research itself.

Additionally, the increasing commercialisation of research and the influence of vested interests can also impact the quality of research. Funding sources from industry or special interest groups may introduce biases or conflicts of interest, potentially compromising the objectivity and independence of the research findings (Cardinal, 1999).

The pervasive ‘publish or perish’ model also severely harms academics’ mental health (Lee, 2012). Constant pressure to meet publication quotas in prestigious journals breeds chronic stress, anxiety and a persistent fear of failure (Dalen & Henkens, 2012). Furthermore, routine setbacks like manuscript rejections exacerbate feelings of inadequacy and imposter syndrome. Consequently, there is an urgent need to foster a healthier academic culture that prioritises well-being and evaluates success beyond mere publication output.

The detrimental effect of modern academia is perfectly captured by Nobel laureate Peter Higgs, the British physicist renowned for the Higgs boson. In a 2013 interview, Higgs expressed that under today’s academic framework, no university would likely hire him due to his perceived lack of ‘productivity’ (Aitkenhead, 2013). The emeritus professor authored fewer than 10 papers following his groundbreaking research.

Conclusion

Historically, universities placed significant importance on teaching and the dissemination of knowledge. However, in today’s academic landscape, there is a strong emphasis on research, which ironically may undermine the primary objective of modern academia, that is, the advancement of research. Modern academia assumes dual roles as both a teacher and a researcher, but unfortunately, both of these roles are at risk of being compromised. The prioritisation of research diminishes the focus on effective teaching, negatively impacting the educational experience for students. Simultaneously, compromised research practices erode the integrity and trustworthiness of scholarly work. As a result, both teaching and research suffer, leading to a decline in their respective quality and significance. In addition, the academic sphere has shown notable resistance to change, with research already cemented as a revered aspect of academia.

However, this should not serve as a justification for preserving the current state of affairs. It is unacceptable to perpetuate the deception of the general public by claiming to prioritise the education of their children, while in academia, the prevailing notion prioritises research as being of greater importance. While the pursuit of knowledge creation holds significant value, it is equally crucial to emphasise the dissemination of knowledge.

Undoubtedly, the task of generating new knowledge is inherently challenging. Throughout history, only a select few individuals possessed the ability to undertake such endeavours. However, contemporary academia imposes this demanding responsibility on all academics, regardless of their aptitude, leading to sub-par performance in both research and teaching. As a consequence, the community suffers from a dearth of quality service in both aspects. It is crucial for modern academia to recognise these limitations and establish an environment that neither undermines the quality of research nor relegates teaching to a secondary role.

To achieve this, greater importance must be attributed to teaching in considerations of tenure, promotion and institutional funding. Simultaneously, it is imperative to recognise that the quality of research cannot be assessed solely based on the quantity of publications or journal impact factors. True scholarship requires sufficient time, conducive environments and unwavering focus. Modern academia must urgently acknowledge this reality and endeavour to create conditions that facilitate the production of both high-quality research and exceptional teaching.