HED/POL/2007/PI/35

Presented ain

Teaching/Learning and Research Nexus in Higher Education

Phuong Nga Nguyen

t the Regional Seminar “Competition, Cooperation and Change the Academic Profession: Shaping Higher Education’s

Contribution to Knowledge and Research”

18-19 September 2007 Hangzhou, China

UNESCO Forum on Higher Education, Research and Knowledge Paper produced for the UNESCO Regional Research Seminar for Asia and Pacific

Teaching/learning and Research nexus in Higher Education

Phuong Nga Nguyen Director, Centre for Education Quality Assurance and Research Development, Vietnam National University, Hanoi Vietnam

17-18 September 2007, Hangzho, China

2

Introduction Globalization in the 21st century accompanied by rapid expansion of “the knowledge-based economy” from the developed countries to the developing countries has greatly impacted higher education system of every nation. The Asia Pacific Region is where there could be considered to exhibit various positive and negative influences of the knowledge-based economy on higher educations systems with a diversified forms of changes to cope with the demands of the international trends and globalization of higher education. The Asia Pacific Region consists of developed and developing countries with multi-cultures and multi-linguistics. Thus there can be seen differences in the state of national higher education development as well as national government policies towards higher education in the international market mechanism. The market internationalization mechanism coupled with the knowledge-based economy have driven nations and higher educations from a mutual benefit cooperative environment into competitive trends at various directions: top-down and bottom-up that is from international system to within national boundaries and within each university and individual academic staff. However, “competition” itself would not exist alone without “cooperation”. They are like a two-sided coin with a dialectic relationship that would enhance each other or cause negative consequences depending on how higher education systems and particularly each university exploit them. Within that current state of the world, this paper focuses on the teaching/learning and research nexus in higher education on the ground that the general roles of higher education are: training (as knowledge economies need skilled human resource), research (higher education conducts both basic and applied research for knowledge economies), innovation, social cultural criticism and repositories of knowledge for society (Altbach, 2007, p.xxi). Additionally, Altbach points out that higher education roles are essential to the knowledge-based economy, or to put it in other words, universities integrate information, training and research. This paper in the first section gives a critical analysis of various concepts of the nexus of teaching/learning and research in the literature available to the author. In the second section, the author discusses the positive relation that brings about benefit to academic staff and students. In section three, drawbacks of the relation are reviewed with comparatively examination of some cases in developed countries with a focus on the Asia Pacific Region. Section four exploits the institutional strategies in enhancing the potential relationship of teaching/learning and research. The analysis in this section also looks at how national government policies toward higher education would promote or inhibit a supportive environment for the maximizing of beneficial relationship of the nexus within higher education institutions. The last part of the paper concludes with some suggestions for enhancing the positive relation and minimizing the negative impact of the teaching/learning and research relationship. Concepts of the teaching/learning and research nexus in higher education In the literature recently, there has been a strong focus on investigation into concepts underlying the notion of teaching and research nexus (Jenkins, 2000; Woodhouse, 2001; Jenkins and Healey, 2005; Trowler and Wareham, 2007). Research findings indicate different assumptions or assertions of the teaching and research nexus.

3

The term “nexus” as pointed out by Trowler and Wareham (2007) is referred to in the literature as multiple sorts of linkages and relationships: teaching and research integration, the influence on students doing research, academic staff doing research, teaching and curriculum being informed by contemporary research, contextual research cultures, and so on ... In their current project, Trowler and Wareham (2007, p.3-5) categorized the relationship between teaching and research into seven dimensions in terms of the different uses, benefits and possible dysfunctions of each dimension as follows,

1. Learners do research 2. Teachers do research 3. Teachers and learners research together 4. Research embedded in the curriculum (research influences the what and the how of

curriculum design) 5. Research culture influences teaching and learning 6. The nexus, the university and its environment 7. Teaching and learning influences research

In addition to the description of the seven dimensions of the “nexus” of teaching and research, Trowler and Wareham (2007, p.6-8) portrayed their points of view on approaches to teaching in association with research approaches/process. For them, the “Traditionalism” is the teacher-focused approach, in which teaching is information transfer focusing on the discipline requiring rigour and hard thinking, disciplinary focus; there are clear boundaries between research and other activities; “Progressivism” is student-focused approach in which teaching is viewed as developing students’ minds in the sense that research-based learning, interpretive inquiry and critical thinking are essentially focused; “Social Reconstructionism” enables students to look into the dialectic relationship of events in the world so as to change it in the research process of critique and questioning; “Enterprise” is the teaching approach that equips students with skills to operate in their careers - this approach involves integrative research approach where business and research are closely connected.

A conceptual theory of a phenomenon could be an ever-lasting debate, and has hardly ever been tested empirically, an agreement or an understanding of the nexus of teaching and research would not be researched otherwise. Furthermore, to the knowledge of this author and the literature available, researchers in the field seemed to explore the connection between “teaching” and research, but not the nature of the nexus in association with “teaching” and “learning” as two terms (actions) used interchangeably. During the last three decades of the 20th century, in response to students’ needs and the development of the developed world, academic staffs shifted their teaching method from “teacher-centre approach” into “learners-centre approach” as described by Trowler and Wareham above (the terms are loosely different in the wording but meaning the same). Furthermore, in parallel with the rapid development of knowledge-based economy, the “learners-centre approach” has been exploited and applied in a broader sense. Thus “teaching” at higher education institutions means more than facilitating learning environment where academic staff and students are “working together”; teaching and learning are interwoven towards the needs of students and the demands/challenges of the knowledge based economy. On the basics of that ground, this paper attempts to analyse the relationship of teaching/learning and research at a broader angle. The seven dimensions of the nexus which was categorized by Trowler and Wareham (2007) are now suggested to be classified into 5 variables. For the analysis in this paper, these five variables are mapped together to form one continuum of

4

development. The starting point of this Continuum is the exhibits of the relationship of teachers’ role and students’; the process stage is the active involvements and interactions of teachers and students, the outcomes are the university research culture, the university and its contributions. The relationship is much of dialectic materialism or causal interrelationships described in Figure 1 bellow:

Figure 1. The Continuum of the Teaching/Learning and Research nexus

This causal inter-relationship Continuum constitutes of five variables: 1. Teacher doing research, 2. Students doing research, 3. Teachers and students researching/working together, 4. University research culture and 5. University and its contributions. The author assumes that the causal linkage of the five variables would result in both positive and negative impacts on academic staff (teachers), and students (post-graduates and undergraduates) that consequently lead to benefits and drawbacks to the university in particular, the local communities, and the involvement of the university itself in the development of the national knowledge-based economy. The positive relationship between teaching/learning and research

1. Teachers doing research

2. Students doing research

3. Teachers & students

researching/working together

4. University research culture

5. University & its local contributions

5

What to do to enhance positive relationship between research and teaching/learning has been one of the most concerns in the developed countries since the last two decades of the 20th century. As developing countries entering the 21st century, with their recognition of the competition of the knowledge-based economy globally and internationally, this concern has also attracted the attention of not only their higher education systems but also the governments. Generally, in developed countries it is a common thinking that post-graduate students experience more or less the benefit of research-teaching/learning links, whether or not their enrolments are in research programs or coursework at a research university or at a comprehensive one. This common thinking is rooted in the university research environment for post-graduate students in which academic staffs and post graduate students are involved in researching together: students as research or teaching assistants and teachers as supervisors critically discuss/examine disciplinary issues and/or conduct research together. However, this positive relationship has highly been seen in higher education institutions in the developed countries in North America, Europe as well as those in Asia Pacific Region like Australia, New Zealand, Japan. In comparison with higher education institutions in USA and in Europe, those forms of positive relationship are not often found in the post graduate courses at higher education institutions in the developing countries like Thailand, Vietnam …, let alone the undergraduate courses. Given the different conditions that help reveal the positive relationship, the paper puts its analysis in the higher education institution in the developed countries worldwide with a reference to higher education institutions in Asia Pacific Region and what lessons/experiences higher education institutions in developing countries can gain. On the examination of Variable 1 “Teacher doing research” in the Continuum above, the paper shares the concepts of the literature in the field (Jenkins, 2005; Trowler and Wareham, 2007) that normally the curriculum designed on the exploitation of the teacher’s research skills/experiences and research findings, thus help reinforce teachers’ professional research activities, critical thinking and passion for teaching and researching. This curriculum design approach results in the positive impact on Variable 2 “Students doing research”. This is interpreted as learning activities are research-based learning approach in which students develop theoretical concepts and research skills, and community practices. This analysis is illustrated by a number of case studies in English speaking countries where the economy is developed, such as UK, Australia and New Zealand (Woodhouse, 2001; Jenkins and Healey, 2005; Baldwin, 2005). Based on their research findings in UK, Jenkins and Healey (2005) stated that there are potential values of staff research to student learning, however, the benefit would not be gained automatically, but needs to be constructed systematically into the curriculum and nurtured by the department/university strategies and investment. At Melbourne University (Baldwin, 2005), the teaching/learning research nexus is built in several ways. Concerning Variable 1 and Variable 2 mentioned above, academic staffs, based on their personal research, design courses and learning activities around contemporary research issues, bring in research passion together with latest research in the field into the classroom teaching/learning context for evidence-based decisions; the value of the research findings is enhance in the contextual teaching/learning environment; students step by step get familiar with research based learning approach, ambiguity and mistakes … in research, and unconsciously being infused with the university research culture so as to develop their research skills. The benefits students gained is that they become familiar with the nature of research and get to know the new discovery and/or knowledge created.

6

The higher level of the Continuum is the involvement of both teachers and students in collaborative research represented by Variable 3 “Teachers and students researching/working together”. Students, having gone through the first two stages (variable 1 and variable 2), being equipped with some research knowledge and skills, involve in departmental research projects as research assistants (post graduates), and/or small-scale research activities like assignments (undergraduates) (Baldwin, 2005; Jenkins and Healey, 2005; Trowler and Wareham, 2007). It is noted that participation of undergraduate students in research is much different than that of post-graduates; it would be beneficial to involve undergraduates in working in research teams with the supervision of academic staff or research assistants. Teacher-student cooperative relationship developments that promote motivational environment for teaching/learning and doing research and students’ research skills including critical and creative thinking, challenging events, etc. are reinforced. The outcomes for the highest level of the Continuum are Variable 4 and Variable 5; in this level of the Continuum both academic staffs and students (postgraduates as well as undergraduates) embedded in the university research culture, go beyond the university boundaries so that knowledge transfer takes place in various forms: knowledge and skills-training for industries, consultations for local communities and business enterprises, conducting projects addressing needs and problems of the society. Consequently, the institution’s reputation and its roles have been recognized by the communities and industries, and at the same time have brought in additional revenue for the institution. These positive relationship were proved by studies of a number of researchers (Jenkins, 2000; Woodhouse, 2001; Jenkins and Healey, 2005; Baldwins, 2005; Trowler and Wareham, 2007) in mostly English speaking countries where the higher education system have long history and the economy is developed. It is unfortunate that studies in this field in developing countries in the Asia pacific Region is not known to the author of this analysis. Higher education institutions in the developing countries in the Asia Pacific Region would learn from those experiences and creatively apply to their national contexts. Negative impact of the teaching/learning and research nexus It is not surprising that there are more evidences in the literature about negative impacts of the relationship between research and teaching/learning. This fact is reasoned that teaching and learning had been thought and in practice to be separated from research in the history of higher education worldwide. The drawbacks of the relationship have been found in almost studies of higher educations available in the literature, but the revelation is somewhat different depending in the institutional/departmental and disciplinary contexts. The negative or drawbacks from the relationship were termed by Trowler and Wareham (2007) as “dysfunction”. For them, the dysfunction revealed from Variable 1 “Teachers doing research” is that time and energy of academic staff have been devoted to research that sacrifices teachers’ involvement in teaching and are replaced by teaching assistants (commonly, post-graduate students). Consequently, students are reluctantly to receive lower level of expertise, feeling neglected by academic staffs and the department. Academic staffs might also face resistance from students (possibly more from undergraduates) due to classroom time constraints, and the modularized curriculum, and poor coverage of the curriculum that make it impractical for undergraduate teaching and learning. Further, because of the essential role of research in the

7

development of knowledge-based economy, more priority has been given to doing research nationally and internationally; national governments, and consequently higher educations institutions put more emphasis on resources for research at university, essentially applied research (Jenkins and Healey, 2005) that could quickly return revenue to the university. UK is one of cases that should be examined. Gibbs (2002, p.9) based on his personal experience of a leading university stressed the negative relationship of teaching and research at departments where the departmental policies were to drive academic staff to preserve their time for research, and shortened time from teaching duties. Consequently, what students suffer are:

- Modules where all coursework has been dropped, and now there is only an exam; - Limiting students’ access to their project and dissertation supervisors - in one case to just two - Meetings for a final year project; - Halving the number of seminars, or doubling their size - Stopping all marking of lab reports and of ‘problem sheets’ - Replacing experienced research-active lecturers with postgraduates who have limited research

and teaching experience. (Gibbs, 2002, p.9) For Variable 2 “Students doing research”, the poor experience that students felt was that they were recipients of research rather than involved in its production (Zamorski, 2002). A research-led university with up-to-date labs, very good infrastructure, computer network, library may be seen to restrict undergraduate students’ access to some parts of its infrastructures (Housel, 2002). In a study of the link of teaching and learning with research during 2004-2005 at University of East Anglia, Guven-Uslu (2005) found out that 76% of students admitted that they were not engaged with research during their studies. It is assumed that Variable 3 “Teachers and students researching/working together” would bring about positive rather than negative impacts. However, if the design of the curriculum was not balanced between the disciplinary knowledge and skills, and “the learning-by-doing” via participating in research work or research project, there would be lack of time to cover the curriculum. Additionally, in some higher education systems, there is no university/departmental policy to pay for the research work done by students in the name of research assistants. Variable 4 “University research culture” is a form of an outcome of the three variables discussed above, if exploited reasonably, this Variable would not have resulted in drawbacks, but the trend of commercialization of the knowledge-based economy has driven higher education universities as well as academic staffs into prioritizing applied research (or elsewhere termed industrial research) for purposes of generating revenue for universities (Chen et al., 2006; Xue, 2006; Trowler and Wareham, 2007). Thus, teaching and student supervision would be paid less attention to or tailored due to time constraint or the unavailability of academic staff for university teaching and supervision. This tendency is seen clearly in Chinese universities where “too much commercial activity on campus has changed the academic environment”... Moreover, many faculty members and graduate students are no longer engaged in academic research. Rather, they are doing applied research work the commercial value of which is far greater than its academic value (Xue, 2006, p.30). Variable 5: “University and its contributions” is the utmost outcome of the development of the Continuum of the causal inter-relationship between teaching/learning and research in a university ideal and favourable context. However, the relationship could be driven in

8

unexpected directions that lead to negative impacts on several aspects of university. Those aspects could be university mission or the university strategies in that financial and human resource investments would be for applied research that could quickly return revenue for the university; policies and management addressing the university strategies would greatly change academic staff’s activities and manners, the academic and teaching/learning environment would become “commercialized research environment”. China is an example of the commercialisation of universities and its negative effects on the linkages of teaching/learning and research at university (Chen et al, 2006). In the study of the effect of the international commercialization trend of Chinese universities on university research capacity, Chen et al. commented that Chinese universities were converted themselves into corporation and “the commercialisation let towards the incompetence in the construction of research capacity of Chinese universities” (Chen et al, 2006, p.3). Since 1985, Chinese government policy has been seen focusing on pushing universities to offer research services to the market. This helps forging a close linkage of universities and industries, and research funding from industry has become a major source of revenue for universities; at the same time, it has tired down the linkages of teaching/learning and research at higher education. Statistics reveals that in Chinese universities, basic research expenditure has decreased from 34% in 1978 to 11.8% in 1992, and that applied research has been the dominant R&D activity. “Since 1991, the percentage of applied research expenditure of the total R&D funds in universities and colleges stayed above 55% until the year 2000, when this percentage began to drop”, but still above 50% (Xue, 2006, p.9). Institutional strategies to link teaching/learning and research nexus Studies of the relationship between teaching and research were seen increasingly in the last two decades of the 20th century, (Boyer, 1990; Hattie and Marsh, 1996). And their research findings confirmed the assumptions of the benefits that students, academic staffs and the university as a whole gained from the nexus. But still “It is perhaps surprising how relatively few institutions have specific policies in place to either monitor, or to develop and maximize these beneficial synergies” (JM Consulting, 2000, p.16, cited in Jenkins and Healey, 2005, p.6). Experiences learned from the higher education systems in the developed countries (Jenkins and Healey, 2005, p.8) suggests that enhancement of the linkage of teaching/learning and research should begin first with institutional policies, and would be more viable if they are supported by national policies, as “the institution is an increasing important shaper of teaching-research relations”. These researchers also stressed that the key factor to generating more efforts from institutions is increasing the national and international competition. Governments’ policies toward teaching and research at higher education institutions are found so much different from country to country. New Zealand Government’s policies appear to support the enhancement of the teaching-research relationship at its higher education institutions:

“The Education Act 1989 (as Amended in 1990) states that in universities research and teaching are closely interdependent and most of their teaching is done by people who are active in advancing knowledge” (Woodhouse, 2001)

9

Further, the National Academic Audit unit, in 1999-2001, conducted the audit of all New Zealand institutions; the focus of the audit was the linkage of teaching and research at institutions and its academic staff and students benefit from the link (Woodhouse, 2001). The findings from the Audits indicated that the relationship between research and teaching has been broadened “from referring to products only to include research and teaching process and culture … Incentives has been introduced for linking teaching and research, and making the link explicit” (Woodhouse, 2001, p.13)

Australian higher education policy was found to be quite opposite that of New Zealand. In March 2005 at the National Press Club, the Australian Minister of Education, Science and Training stated,

“… In every University in the country, there are educational or teaching courses that are being run where there is no research going on in that particular field. … If teaching is so important, if teaching is to be informed by research, what are Australia's teachers doing? … We need to ask ourselves: Why does every University have to offer all things to all people? … But we need to ask ourselves: Why does every University, thirty-eight of them, public ones, why do they all have to be doing research, teaching and scholarship and struggling to do it in so many areas? Why can't we have Universities that make a conscious decision to specialise in outstanding teaching and scholarship but do very little research? Why can't we have formal affiliations, one specialising in teaching and another research, between our domestic Universities?” (Nelson, 2005).

It has always assumed by educational policy-makers, managers, academic staff and students that at research universities in the US, students would benefit more on the positive linkage between research and teaching/learning. On the contrary, the practice appealed to be totally unexpected: ‘The research universities have often failed, and continue to fail their undergraduate populations and thousands of students graduate without seeing the world-famous professors or tasting genuine research’ (Boyer Commission on Educating Undergraduates in the Research University, 1998, p.3). That picture of US research universities was changed somewhat later:

A survey of US research-based universities three years afterwards showed progress by institutions in prioritizing teaching and better ensuring that undergraduates benefited from the universities’ research environment. This study concluded that ‘the rhetoric has changed: undergraduate research, for example, is a staple of most universities’ curricular vocabulary.’ But such research-based curricula were still mainly for the most able students. (Boyer Commission on Educating Undergraduates in the Research University, 2002, p.29, cited in Jenkins and Healey, 2005, p.17).

It is apparent that more and more universities in the developed countries recognize the beneficial relationship of teaching/learning and research that they have launched their strategies to promote the benefits. There is a very long list of universities/institutions that stress or incorporate strategies for enhancement of the nexus of teaching/learning and research in their missions. The followings are just a number of cases for illustration:

- In USA: Hampshire College, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Stanford University, Corney University ...

- In Canada: University of Alberta, University of Ottawa, University of British Columbia, McMaster University …

10

- of Sydney, Monash University, Australian National University ... - In Denmark: University of Roskilde ... - In UK: University of Southampton, University of Gloucestershire, University of York,

University of East Anglia, University of London, Oxford Brookes University … - In New Zealand: Massey University, University of Canterbury ... - In Australia: The university of Melbourne, University of New South Wales, University

The picture of the nexus of teaching/learning and research at higher education systems in the developing countries in Asia and Pacific Region, due to their poor research capacity, is totally different than that of developed countries. So the focus in the developing world must be first to strengthen and revive university system’s research capacities (Sanyal and Varghese, 2006). The major obstacle is that universities in the developing countries in the region, such as, Vietnam, Thailand, Indonesia, India, Myanmar and so on maintain very strong teaching functions, and very poor research work. Research so far has not been considered as one of responsibilities of academic staffs. So to emerge in the knowledge-based economy and the international trend of commercialization, it is an urgent need to develop a research culture/environment in universities in these countries. This can happen only when the universities themselves see their role as teaching and research institutions (Sanyal and Varghese, 2006, p.10). Given the situations that limited funds, the deterioration of staff facilities and the poor quality of services operated within universities did not help to promote research activities, the best way to promote university research and research-led teaching approach is to maintain, preferable increase, public funding in R&D activities for universities. In some leading universities in developing countries in Asia Pacific Region, there are a small number of research are being conducted for generating income rather than for solving issues of national concern. (Sanyal and Varghese, 2006, p.8) Vietnamese higher education is much less developed than that of developed countries. University research and teaching capacity are far lower than required by the knowledge based economy. A lack of incentives for academic staff to undertake research along with high teaching workload meant that research did not play a significant role in universities in Vietnam. The Vietnamese Government in its “Five Year Socio-Economic Development Plan 2006-20010” specifies priority to higher education system. With the World Bank Loan higher education project, it is designed to strengthen teaching and research in Vietnamese universities by building research capacity, supporting integration between university teaching and research and facilitating and establish closer linkage between universities and the industries, national, regional and international cooperation in university teaching and research. Conclusion The benefits from the nexus between teaching/learning and research have been confirmed by a number of studies in mostly the English speaking countries in either the North America (USA, Canada), Europe (UK, Denmark) and the Asia Pacific Region (Australia, New Zealand). However, the benefits would not be generated automatically at higher education institutions, but require systematically construction and investment. In order to maximize the benefit and minimize the harmful consequences of the nexus, institutions need to intervene strategically. Intervention can take any forms depending on individual university, department and academic disciplines. University should encourage departments to work out how best to maximizing the benefit of teaching/learning and research nexus in their own context. Similarly, the way research is most likely to benefit undergraduates is varying widely between departments within a

11

university (Gibbs, 2002, p.11). Gibbs (2002, p.13) proposed some strategies for departmental intervention in promoting the beneficial nexus of teaching/learning and research as follows,

- Enhance the curriculum to make more explicit research-led and research-based elements - Integrate research-based/led learning - Develop the profile of pedagogic research. - Ensuring that research-teaching links are nurtured through staff development policies - Using workload planning to encourage more integrated management of teaching and research - Encouraging staff to use sabbaticals to develop research-based or research-led teaching - Encouraging contract research staff to participate in teaching - Ensuring that senior researchers teach across programme levels, helping to embed a research-

led teaching culture for students. Based on the analysis of the five variables of the Continuum of the teaching/learning and research nexus, it is suggested that the university and/or departmental interventions can happen with any single variable or at the same time with five variables simultaneously. There would not be any common single strategy that can interven into the nexus most effectively. Universities in the developing countries of Asia and Pacific Region should learn from developed countries’ experience, knowledge, and absorb them or make appropriate modification to apply them in their context. Developed countries within the Region should also cooperate, and give guidances/consultation as well as financial supports for the less developed universities in the region. On the other hand, national government policies also play essential factors that either help further or inhibit the supportive environment for promoting the nexus’ potential benefits. Furthermore, healthy competition and cooperation nationally and internationally are vital in the contribution to the increasing the benefits of the nexus of teaching/learning and research in higher education worldwide. Given the important roles of higher education as training, research, information transfer and innovation in the knowledge based economy, it should be essentially significant that higher education worldwide ensure that students, particularly undergraduates, are actually merged in research-led learning and research-led teaching environment where they learn-by-doing and participating in research work.

12

REFERENCES Altbach and P.McG. Peterson (eds), Higher Education in the New Century: Global Challenges

and Innovative Ideas. Rotterdam, the Netherlands, Sense Publishers, pp.xvii-xxiv. Altbach, P.G. 2007. The underlying realities of higher education in the 21st century. P.G. Australian National University (Australia): www.anu.edu.au/CEDAM/ilearn/inquiry/index.html Baldwin, G. 2005. The Teaching - Research Nexus: How Research Informs and Enhances

Learning and Teaching in the University of Melbourne. University of Melbourne, Centre for the Study of Higher Education, http://www.cshe.unimelb.edu.au.

Boyer, 2002. Commission on Educating Undergraduates in the Research University. Reinventing Undergraduate Education: three years after the Boyer Report. Stony Brook: State University of New York at Stony Brook, http://www.sunysb.edu/pres/0210066-Boyer%20report%20Final.pdf

Boyer, E.L. 1998. Commission on Educating Undergraduates in the Research University. Reinventing Undergraduate Education: a Blueprint for American’s Research Universities. Stony Brook: State University of New York at Stony Brook, http://naples.cc.synysb.edu/Pres/boyer.nsf/

Boyer, E.L.1990. Scholarship Reconsidered: Priorities of the Professoriate. Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, Princeton, NJ.

Chen, Y., Sanders, R. and Wang, J. 2006. The Commercialisation of Chinese Universities and Its effects on Research Capacity.

Gibbs, G. 2002. Institutional strategies for linking research and teaching. Exchange: Ideas, Practice, News and Support for Decision. Issue 3, Autumn 2002, pp.8-11.

Guven-Uslu P. 2005. Research-Led Teaching and Learning in Higher Education. Hampshire College (USA): www.hampshire.edu/fl ash/index.php Hattie, J. and Marsh, H.W. 1996. The relationship between research and teaching: a meta

analysis, Review of Educational Research, Vol. 66, No. 4, pp.507-542. Hounnsel, D. 2002. Does research benefit teaching? And how can we know? Exchange: Ideas,

Practice, News and Support for Decision. Issue 3, Autumn 2002, pp.6-7. J M Consulting. 2000. Interactions between Research, Teaching, and other Academic Activities:

Report for HEFCE. Bristol: Higher Education Consulting Group. Jenkins, A. 2000. The relationship between teaching and research: where does geography stand

and deliver? Journal of Geography in Higher Education, Vol. 24, No. 3, pp.325-351. ISSN 0309-8265 print/ISSN 1466-1845 online/00/030325 Taylor & Francis Ltd.

Jenkins, A. and Healey, M. 2005. Institutional Strategies to Link Teaching and Research. The Higher Education Academy.

Lancaster University: (www.lancs.ac.uk/depts/indstud/undergraduate.htm Massachusetts Institute of Technology: http://web.mit.edu/president/communications/learning-4-94.html McMaster University (Canada): www.mcmaster.ca/cll/inquiry/index.htm Monash University (Australia): www.adm.monash.edu.au/cheq/academic/ Neave, G. 2002. Research and Research Training Systems: Towards a Typology, UNESCO

Forum Occasional Paper Series No.1, UNESCO, Paris. Nelson, B. 2005. Science Meets Parliament: National Press Club Speech by Dr. Brendan

Nelson, http://www.dest.gov.au/Ministers/Media/Nelson/2005/03/ntran080305.asp Northwestern University (USA): www.cas.northwestern.edu/advising/seminars.html

13

Oxford Brookes University: www.brookes.ac.uk/publications/bejlt/volume1issue2/perspective/hugginsetal_05.html Piper, M. 2001. Presidential Address at the Board of Governors’ Retreat. University of British

Columbia, Canada, http://www.vision.ubc.ca/supp_docs/piper_bog.html. Royal Holloway, University of London (UK): www.rhul.ac.uk/edc/researchandteaching Sanyal. B.C., and Varghese, N.V. 2006. Research Capacity of Higher Education Sector in

Developing Countries. International Institution for Educational Planning, UNESCO. Trowler, P. and Wareham, T. 2007. Re-conceptualising the ‘Teaching-Research nexus’.

http://www.lancs.ac.uk/fass/projects/nexus/docs/deliverable_1_literature_review. University of Alberta (Canada): www.uofaweb.ualberta.ca/researchandstudents/) University of Alberta (Canada): www.uofaweb.ualberta.ca/researchandstudents/ University of British Columbia (Canada): www.trek2000.ubc.ca/reports/index.html University of Canterbury, Christchurch (New Zealand): www.uctl.canterbury.ac.nz/ University of East Anglia (UK): www.uea.ac.uk/lhi/rltl/ University of Gloucestershire (UK): www.glos.ac.uk/adu/clt/resteach/ University of New South Wales (Australia): www.ltu.unsw.edu.au/ref6_research_teaching.cfm University of Ottawa (Canada): www.uottawa.ca/vision2010/ University of Roskilde (Denmark): www.ruc.dk/ruc_en/about/ University of Southampton (UK): www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~hcd/LandT/mission.htm University of Sydney (Australia): www.itl.usyd.edu.au/RLT/ University of Wollongong, Australia, 3 October. Available at

http://cedir.uow.edu.au/nexus/dwoodhse.html. University of York (UK): www.york.ac.uk/felt/gpresource/research&teaching.htm Vietnam Government: Socio-Economic Development Plan 2006-2010 (Attachment to

Government Resolution No. 25/2006/NQ-CP, dated October 9, 2006) Woodhouse, D. 2001.The teaching-research nexus: lessons from New Zealand audits,

presentation at the VC Symposium: The teaching-Research nexus: Enhancing the Links. Xue, L. 2006. Universities in China’s National Innovation System. UNESCO Forum on Higher

Education, Research and Knowledge, November 27-30, 2006. Paris. Zamorski, B. 2002. Research-led teaching and learning in higher education: a case study.

Teaching in Higher Education, Vol. 7, No 4, pp.411-427. PhuongNga China seminar

makPhoungPhers active in learning and teaching