Higher Education

, Volume 23, Issue 3, pp 273–295 | Cite as

Associations between research and teaching in Australian higher education

  • Paul Ramsden
  • Ingrid Moses
Article

Abstract

This article describes results of an empirical investigation of the relationship between research and undergraduate teaching in Australian higher education. Two research indexes (weighted number of publications, and number of research activities) were used. Scores on a Likert-type scale of reported commitment to teaching undergraduate students formed the main criterion of teaching effectiveness. This was supplemented by student ratings in one of the aggregate-level analyses. The results revealed typically no relation or a negative relation between teaching and research at the level of the individual and at the level of the department, across all subject areas. The only exceptions concerned one group of former colleges of education. Further analysis by staff self-rating of academic quality showed that there existed one group of staff, mainly in the universities, who were committed to teaching and highly active researchers. However, the data did not support a causal interpretation of the association. It is concluded that there is no evidence in these results to indicate the existence of a simple functional association between high research output and the effectiveness of undergraduate teaching. Some implications for policy and student course choice are discussed.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Abrahamson, S. (1991). ‘The dominance of research in staffing of medical schools: time for a change?’ The Lancet 337, 1586–1588.Google Scholar
  2. Bowden, J. A. and Martin, E. (1990). Report on Validation Study of Course Experience Questionnaire. Wollongong, N. S. W.: Centre for Technology and Social Change.Google Scholar
  3. Elton, L. R. B. (1986). ‘Research and teaching: symbiosis or conflict?’, Higher Education 15, 299–304.Google Scholar
  4. Feldman, K. A. (1987). ‘Research productivity and scholarly accomplishment of college teachers as related to their instructional effectiveness: a review and exploration’, Research in Higher Education 26, 227–297.Google Scholar
  5. Jenssen, J. (1988). ‘Research and teaching in the universities of Denmark: does such an interplay really exist?’, Higher Education 17, 17–26.Google Scholar
  6. Leary, L. (1959). ‘The scholar as teacher’, School and Society 87, 362–363.Google Scholar
  7. Mathews, R. L., Brown, P. R. and Jackson, M. A. (1990). Accounting in Higher Education: Report of the Review of the Accounting Discipline in Higher Education. Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service.Google Scholar
  8. Moses, I. (1989). ‘Academic work - research, scholarship and teaching’, in Dennis, N. C. (ed.), Research and Development in Higher Education (Volume 10). Sydney: HERDSA.Google Scholar
  9. Moses, I. (1990). ‘Teaching, research and scholarship in different disciplines’, Higher Education 19, 351–375.Google Scholar
  10. Moses, I. and Ramsden, P. (1991). ‘Academics and academic work in colleges of advanced education and universities’, paper presented at the conference ‘25 Years After the Martin Report’, University of New England, February 1991.Google Scholar
  11. Ramsden, P. (1991a). ‘A performance indicator of teaching quality in higher education: The Course Experience Questionnaire’, Studies in Higher Education 16, 129–150.Google Scholar
  12. Ramsden, P. (1991b). ‘Study processes in grade 12 environments’, in Fraser, B. J. and Walberg, H. J. (eds.), Educational Environments. Oxford: Pergamon.Google Scholar
  13. Ramsden, P. (1992). Learning to Teach in Higher Education. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  14. Robbins, L. (1963). Report of the Committee on Higher Education. Cmnd 2154. London: HMSO.Google Scholar
  15. Rudd, E. (1988). ‘The evaluation of the quality of research’, Studies in Higher Education 13, 45–57.Google Scholar
  16. Scott, P. (1991). ‘Beyond the dual-support system: scholarship, research and teaching in the context of academic autonomy’, Studies in Higher Education 16, 5–13.Google Scholar
  17. Shore, B. M., Pinker, S. and Bates, M. (1990). ‘Research as a model for university teaching’, Higher Education 19, 21–35.Google Scholar
  18. Smith, D. M. (1988). ‘On academic performance’, Area 20, 3–13.Google Scholar
  19. Stenhouse, L. (1985). Rudduck, J. and Hopkins, D. (eds.). Research as a Basis for Teaching. London: Heinemann.Google Scholar
  20. The University of Melbourne (1991). Discussion paper on the Higher Education Council's ‘Higher Education: The Challenges Ahead’.Google Scholar
  21. Westergaard, J. (1991). ‘Scholarship, research and teaching: a view from the social sciences’, Studies in Higher Education 16, 23–28.Google Scholar
  22. White, A. (1986). Teaching and research: independent, parallel, unequal. ERIC Document no. ED 28150.Google Scholar
  23. Williams, R. J. P. (1991). ‘Science in universities: teaching, research and autonomy’, Studies in Higher Education 16, 15–22.Google Scholar
  24. Williams, G. and Blackstone, T. (1983). Response to Adversity. Guildford: SRHE (Leverhulme Report Volume 10).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • Paul Ramsden
    • 1
  • Ingrid Moses
    • 2
  1. 1.Centre for the Study of Higher Education, University of MelbourneParkvilleAustralia
  2. 2.Centre for Learning and Teaching, University of TechnologySydneyAustralia

Personalised recommendations