From the Church News, Feb. 18,2018

Anyone notice this in the C.N.?:

Full ending of above line: "faculty encouraged to focus on teaching rather than research".

I wonder why. Could it possibly be because that way, both the faculty and students can remain ignorant regarding church history and doctrine?

Nothing to do with ignorance. All it means is that Ricks High School (ahem... BYU-I) is a crappy little school and the church doesn't want it to have delusions of anything greater.

There are basically two kinds of universities: research institutions that grant doctorates and non-research institutions that just teach and grant undergrad and maybe master's degrees. The former tend to be more prestigious and almost always do a better job of educating. The latter are just there to grind through more students.

It sounds like someone in Rexburg was trying to make the place better and got shot down for their effort.

Probably some BYU-I professors applied for sabbatical to write a book or do something or other, and this is their answer.

Not to put too fine a point on it or be argumentative, but the first reply to the OP was a tiny bit off the mark. I apologize if I seem insensitive. I don't mean to be.

There are not just two (2) different kinds of institutions of higher education - those that do research and those that do not.

Colleges and universities are not usually "just research" or "just teaching" universities that issue baccalaureate and some masters degrees. And those colleges and prestigious universities that focus on research are not necessarily better at educating despite their prestige as major research universities. A significant number of undergrads who attended large prestigious universities often complain about the lack of teaching ability of research professors.

I'm a former Director of Research and Sponsored Programs (I know--so what! :), and can tell you that faculty at some community colleges conduct "prestigious" applied research. Of course they are committed to and focus on teaching, but some of their intrepid faculty members understand that research can often enhance their teaching. Prestigious research and teaching are found at all levels of higher education.

Predominantly undergraduate institutions (baccalaureate granting colleges and universities called PUIs) may focus on teaching undergraduates as their specialty but frequently bring in millions of dollars from grants devoted to applied and theoretical research as well. The research awards vary from a few million to tens of millions. Again, though the focus is on teaching and undergraduate degrees, they conduct meaningful research, leading to patented devices or processes that benefit society. Though they award mostly baccalaureate degrees, many also award masters and doctoral degrees (think state universities that used to be called state colleges in the 1960s), and have expanded their roles.

Large and prestigious research universities can be publicly funded (University of Washington), or private institutions (Stanford, Harvard). Indeed they are prestigious and they bring in Billions in research grant award money to conduct theoretical and applied research.

But contrary to the reply above, students at these large and prestigious universities are often (and often not) frustrated that during the first two years of undergraduate work they are forced into huge sections of undergrad classes, and feel like cattle being put on an assembly line to run through as many "cattle" to get their baccalaureate degrees as they can. (College funding mechanisms force business decisions that cause this situation, at many universities.)

Large undergrad courses frequently use adjunct (part time) teachers or grad assistants to teach those courses. This defeats the idea that you are getting a top notch researcher you teach you the sciences or humanities, etc.

Lawsuits have been filed by frustrated students who have found it nearly impossible to understand the language of their teachers at the "prestigious" research institution. And if the prestigious profs, are forced to teach the intro undergrad classes, are sometimes the worst teachers. They can do research but cannot teach well. Lucky is the student who has a proficient researcher and good teacher. Even luckier is the student who has the good researcher, good teacher, and is invited to participate in research and publish findings with the excellent researcher/teacher. Less prestigious universities are sometimes more adept at this than the larger ones who use predominantly grad students for research assistants.

Finally, the most skilled teachers are found at every level; in large research universities as well as community colleges. And some of the worst teachers are found in all levels of higher education as well.

I spent enough time both as a student, faculty and professional staff member before my retirement, to know that blanket overgeneralizations about where one will find the best teachers, or even the best researchers is bound to be contradicted by dozens of exceptions.

I used the terms, theoretical and applied research. The National Science Foundation's annual report on research explains the difference. Both are valuable. Or you can google it.

Well said.

Of course when they want people to think BYU is the most fabulous thing ever, they will quickly forget they said it was primarily an undergraduate teaching institution.

Adding to ‘Kenc’s comments. I’m faculty at a research university and here is an additional reason. Research record = portability (non-academic speak for being able to get a job at another university). There is a lot of competition for faculty positions. Being able to find a different academic job means you need something like research/publications to set you apart enough from the pack. I expect coming from a place like ‘Ricks’ (BYU-I), where faculty are already ‘tainted’ with the BYU-I Mormon brand. Publish or perish no matter where you are.

I think this is just part of keeping faculty inline and ‘church broke’. There is no real concept of ‘tenure’ at the BYU’s. No TR you are fired. Talk publicly in non-positive way about anything church, you’re not renewed. There is nothing in place to protect faculty.

And I second ‘Kenc’s point that great reasach work goes on in all kinds of places. And faculty engaged in research tend to keep themselves current and that helps teaching.

Adding to ‘Kenc’s comments. I’m faculty at a research university and here is an additional reason. Research record = portability (non-academic speak for being able to get a job at another university). There is a lot of competition for faculty positions. Being able to find a different academic job means you need something like research/publications to set you apart enough from the pack. I expect coming from a place like ‘Ricks’ (BYU-I), where faculty are already ‘tainted’ with the BYU-I Mormon brand. Publish or perish no matter wheregg you are.

I think this is just part of keeping faculty inline and ‘church broke’. There is no real concept of ‘tenure’ at the BYU’s. No TR you are fired. Talk publicly in non-positive way about anything church, you’re not renewed. There is nothing in place to protect faculty.

And I second ‘Kenc’s point that great reasach work goes on in all kinds of places. And faculty engaged in research tend to
Keep themselves current and that helps teaching.

Since 2004 I have taught chemistry as an adjunct instructor at community colleges. Before that, I worked in industrial and medicinal chemistry, mostly in research, since 1974.
I have a double-major B.S. from a (then) small, non-LDS-but-religious-affiliated liberal arts college, now much larger and with a Masters program.
I have two M.S. degrees from large state universities. The research project for the first was well put together, and I still feel good about it today. The research program for the second would be hard to describe without using vulgar four-letter words. I held on as long as I could still see a Ph.D. at the end of it, and then one day--almost literally in one day--everything collapsed and I settled for a second M.S.
My old undergraduate college now has numerous internship/fellowship programs with various companies, hospitals, and other institutions in the local area, including two where I worked later. Several of the other companies I worked for had similar relationships with nearby academic institutions. I myself worked with some student researchers in the lab here and there. It was like looking through a time warp to see yourself back when you were still young and idealistic.
In many academic institutions research has become the be-all and end-all, closely connected with government grant money. At state university #2, part of the curriculum was writing grant proposals. Grant application deadline dates were utter chaos as everyone worked feverishly to finish up their applications and get them out by FedEx at the last moment. The academic ads in that era were full of positions available for researchers who could get money out of the government. The school would usually provide some start-up funds; but within a very few years you would be expected to generate grants covering some large percentage of your salary and expenses--up to 100% and beyond. All this was clearly stated in the ads. I haven't looked lately, but I wouldn't be very much astonished if the same ads were still running today.
Nowadays as an adjunct, I think of myself as working on the ground floor again. Many community colleges have slowly evolved into full four-year institutions. My state university #1 mentioned above started out in 1912 as a "normal school" or teacher's college. Others, like Auburn and Texas A&M, started as small "land-grant" or agricultural colleges.
Sometimes I also think that I am battling the effects of fifty years of political correctness in public education. Now and then I get some encouraging feedback in that area from the students. Besides, it's indoor work with no heavy lifting; you're insulated from departmental politics; and you don't have to wear a necktie or punch a time clock. Could be worse.
Re-reading this whole thread, I was reminded of the story of the two Roman soldiers at the foot of the cross:
Soldier # 1: Somebody told me this guy was supposed to be a good teacher.
Soldier # 2: Naaah--he never published anything.

It's amazing what can be seen in the rear view mirror when you actually take in all that's there, versus trying to cherry pick from the different scenarios to come up with a more exciting version of how you got from where you started to where you ended up.

And then there's the musical score to go with it!!

Well, to be fair...I don't find it that weird. Not all schools are research schools. BYU-I was a small college not too long ago.

Mormon professors can't get past peer review. Their beliefs are indefensible as research of any kind. These teachers will never be able to leave the church "universities." They can't publish.

I can't comment on all professors at BYU, but I work with several chemistry professors who are fact some of the most well respected researchers in the world. So if your comment was meant as a blanket statement about EVERY professor at BYU it is factually incorrect. As an aside, go Utes!

Hard sciences and professional I would agree. But for humanities and other liberal arts not so much. My UG is BYU Provo in hard sciences and had excellent professors.

Are you saying that there are chemistry professors at BYU who are amoung the most respected in the world? How do you know they are so respected? Are they highly published, Fellows of their professional organization, national award winners, or did they just tell you that?
I'm glancing through the publishing record of BYU chemistry faculty and there is only one that is impressive.

"or Did they just tell you that"

First, I find your insinuation insulting.

Second, I don't know where you are looking but you are not looking hard enough and/or in the right places.

I'm an engineer who works on a device invented and patented by said BYU prof. The device is used mostly by the military. He speaks at symposiums and conference all over the world. He chairs a number of societies. Not going to give many more details because I am a closet non-believer and outing myself would probably get me fired (or at the very least ostracized by mostly Mormon co-workers). That proof enough?

I second 'JustHangingOn@57'. There are many kinds of active scholarship and likewise publishing outlets and dorms that are idiosyncratic to disciplines - even within the same college.

For example, in the Engineering and Physical sciences writing proposals for and getting grants is one of the most important measure in research universities. In some disciplines one of the key outlets for publishing are conference proceedings. In some publishing is directed towards sub-discipline studies.

The only way to figure out what is considered scholarship is to either be an active academic in the particular field or to talk with someone who is and ask "what counts towards tenure here". 'Top 20' institutions typical focus on a pretty narrow set of outlets. The next 80 down have a much broader set of outlets. In some places writing 'teaching cases' is key dimension (many departments at Harvard have this as generating teaching cases for outside sale to other institutions a priority, while at a school like NYU, Columbia, and most others it does not 'count' at all.

I am a research scholar (research is half my job and teaching the other half - typical for business schools) and while I know 'what counts' as scholarship for me I would have to do some legwork to figure out what counts in other departments in my own college. And to figure this out for departments in other colleges I'd really need to sit down over lunch with a faculty member, preferably the department chair, in that area.

The BYU's define themselves as an 'undergraduate research university'. I expect their scholarship follows that theme. I know several very good BYU Provo academics who are regarded as being at the very top internationally in their areas in business schools. I know others at BYU who do less primary research, teach more classes to offset, and write for outlets that are more consumable by the general public.

I could go on, which I already have, but I'd be very hesitant to paint things in a broad brush. I have another comment on this thread which goes more into why I think BYU-I (Ricks) may be doing what it is. And BTW, faculty often 'resist' and go about focusing on 'what counts' in the outside BYU world and as long as they don't get cross-wise by say starting an LGBT(AQ) student group they are OK if their work is considered good by the outside world.

Figure drawing classes at BYU have banned nudity. Book of Mormon classes are fraud. I stand by my words.

I submit the late Henry Eyring as an exception; and there may be a few others out there.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Eyring_(chemist)

Never taught at BYU or even BYU-I
I had his son as a chem professor at the U; good instructor.

There are a lot of good liberal arts colleges where one can get a good undergrad education. In a large State university the professors are busy with research and grad students and the undergrads are often being taught by TAs. Depends a lot on the department and the school. So I don't think its a such a bad thing that the professors are asked to focus on teaching. Hopefully they are also staying on top of their field with some study of the current literature, attending conferences, etc. Otherwise they can get behind, but if you're teaching freshman chemistry what you teach is hardly changing.

The problem with BYU-I and BYU, perhaps to a bit lesser extent BYU, is the fact that you are in an insulated enivronment where everyone is nearly the same religion, and mostly the same politically. Where people don't actually think but are told to rely on "feelings" and what they are told by leaders. Attending college should be about broadening your mind and getting to know people from different backgrounds and with different ideas.

At least in their business school, BYU-Provo provides some of the best support (funding) for faculty to travel to and participate in conferences around the world and purchasing other items (like equipment, software, etc.).

I graduated from a small college where "publish or perish" wasn't a faculty issue. The focus was on teaching.

The degree from that little Midwestern school has served me well.

Third highest paid faculty in the country at the time.

I think the word university is being abused all over the place. Mormons are just one example.

Provo COULD let Hickburg have a slice of the research pie, in say, Underwater Basket Weaving(?)...

How about Buggy-Whip making . theory & methods...research

Or genetics? How about Tapir Breeding 101?

kenc got it right. It just means they concentrate more (or probably exclusively at BYU-I) on undergrad programs rather than graduate programs. That's a bit unusual for a 30,000 student school like BYU, but not at all unusual for smaller universities.

That means there are fewer outside-funded research projects going on. OTOH, more of the undergrad courses are taught by experienced PhD faculty than by grad students and adjunct faculty. There are advantages and disadvantages either way.

I know at BYU, they would actually prefer that the students go to another school for graduate training. I know of a Sunstoner (might have been Bryan Waterman, but I'm not sure) who applied to the BYU MBA program and got rejected, and got accepted by Harvard (Princeton? whatever). He was a BYU undergrad.

BYU goes out of its way to discourage students from hanging out as students at BYU for half their adult life. Some students attempt to do that anyway. That is part of their motivation for not emphasizing graduate programs.

Grad programs are also expensive, but they also can bring in lots of money, so I don't think that is a prime factor.

BUY Provo, yes. They are actually categorize themselves as an 'undergraduate' university. They stopped adding Phd programs some time ago. I'm not sure if they've phased any out over the last 30 something years since I was there. When I interviewed there years ago they emphasized the importance of training (indoctrinating) the next generation of Mormon youth. As a TBM it was a compelling 'mission' but luckily I found the notion of mixing work and church seemed like surrendering a measure of my agency, so I passed. They do have a number of professional degrees (e.g., MBA, Accounting, Law, masters in engineering, and so forth) that they invest in and maintain. Now I know little about Ricks (BYU-I) but my experience is that most schools want permanent faculty (tenured/tenure-track) to be engaged in external scholarship - broadly defined. I expect that BYU-I wants its faculty to remain inwardly focused and 'church broke '

Can't (properly, effectively) "teach" without (STUDY) research.

Keeping members in the dark by discouraging the light (truth).

M@t

How about focusing on science rather than religion.

Imagine the effect of having to take one science class per semester, instead of one religion class per semester!

That could only happen in europe or asia

Yeah, a lot of this scientific rssearch these days depends on who's funding it. Most of them want profit off the back of it, or to try and provide validation for a dodgy product or idea. The weapons companies are heavy investors in such research as are cosmetic firms. It's naive to suggest they want unbiased resesrch.

No one wants to say it but many academic institutions are corrupt - a little bit of money off the PRC and suddenly China's government is wonderful. Most universities take corporate funding which comes with strings attached. BYU is perhaps no different.

As I drove by the Rexburg exit on I-15 a week ago I gestured towards that shithole in an appropriate manner.

Excellent!
I do the same thing every time I pass by the San Diego temple on I-5 :)

You should have detoured to Rexburg and said 'hi' to my Rigby Hall, and to your Ensign Hall, now Biddulph Hall, both faculty offices now.

What Ron say it isn't so! I was hoping that you would be the devotional speaker and maybe give a lesson on appropriate adult beverages to be consumed in the Austin bldg.

I went to Berkeley, a truly renowned research institution. They have plenty of Nobel prizes to back that up.

It would have been nice to have some actual good teachers, especially in the first two years, rather than someone outlining the material that we would have to teach ourselves and be responsible for on the upcoming test.

I get the undercurrent that it is best for any Mormon who wants to remain Mormon not to dig deeply (or even shallowly) into Mormon history. But in other areas, having people truly dedicated to teaching is really what undergrads need.