Topics

I must say I was surprised to hear L's suggestion.

"My friend, I could understand why basic scientists are not the best people to teach medical students anatomy or physiology, but, isn't it too much to say they are disruptive?" I raised my arms and protested.

"Alas, the conclusion is difficult to swallow, but it is nevertheless true," my friend insisted on his point, "The root of the problem is, they are employed as teaching staff. The two very consequences are, first, they are each evaluated for their teaching performance - may not be for promotion, but, to say the least, for substantiation of their contract - and, second, in terms of their department, the manpower depends on their workload on teaching."

I was speechless - beginning to see what my friend was getting at.

"You see? The combination of the two motives means that basic scientists will try to expand the amount of teaching they offer, but only on areas that they feel interesting and important. As a result, students may get 10 hours of lecture and tutorial on the theory and practice of a certain molecule, but only 30 minutes on the structure of our heart!"