By Dr Madina Tash, Dr Oussama Baher, and Dr Amira Hawas, lecturers in Finance at the University of Sussex Business School.
The traditional model of higher education institutions in the UK has largely relied on student recruitment as the primary means of funding both staff salaries and research activities. However, a boom in student enrolments has created a critical challenge: how to maintain an equilibrium between student satisfaction and research output. As institutions allocate more importance toward research endeavours, the quality of teaching and overall student satisfaction are sidelined, highlighting the inherent tension between these competing priorities.
Among the leading factors in attracting international students are the university league tables, which heavily rely on students’ satisfaction. Most UK league tables rely on the National Student Survey (NSS) yearly data as a student satisfaction measure. Universities have started recognising the importance of Education and Scholarship (E&S) academic roles to maintain a good balance between education and research. The E&S employment contract is designed for academic faculty whose primary focus is on teaching and learning. These roles are pivotal to enhancing student experience, especially in the face of growing student numbers and demands for high-quality teaching. Despite this correlation, it is puzzling to see the lack of E&S vacancies at UK higher institutions, as well as the lack of career progression opportunities for the existing E&S academics. This blog article aims to explore the reasons behind the lack of vacancies in E&S, and its consequences for the Higher Education sector overall and on individual E&S academics in particular.
The main reason behind the lack of E&S contracts is behavioural in nature. Teaching-focused roles are generally perceived as inferior to research-focused ones, even when they are equally paid. In terms of research, there is far less recognition of excellence in education and scholarship compared to excellence in subject-specific research output. Additionally, there is far less recognition of providing excellence in teaching and student satisfaction, compared to publishing articles in highly ranked journals (rankings are usually based on CABS, Scopus, ABDC, among others). This mindset is automatically translated onto the roles themselves. Budgets and vacancies are decided by research-oriented line managers, who still believe that an excellent researcher can in theory deliver excellence in teaching when reality proves otherwise.
The other aspect is practical. The rise of E&S contracts is relatively recent; only 10 years ago there were barely any roles available that would allow academics to focus on developing pedagogy-focused research and activities. Because the E&S contracts are still relatively new, there is a lack of knowledge about the unique skills a teaching-focused academic might offer, and how to employ these skills in the best interest of an institution. This gap in awareness extends to management, where universities often struggle to integrate teaching-focused academics into their long-term strategic goals. Without clear promotion criteria or structured career pathways, E&S staff face barriers to advancement, which not only limits their professional growth but could also lead to legal issues under labour rights if these roles remain undefined.
In terms of the consequences, the imbalance between education and research importance has contributed to serious problems in higher education. First, there has been a clear decline in both teaching and student satisfaction. As previously noted, low levels of student satisfaction can lead to a drop in student recruitment. This is not to imply that research-active academics are to blame; rather, they often lack the time to improve the student experience due to the greater emphasis being placed on research over teaching.
Second, a major problem worth highlighting is the limited career progress related to the E&S tracks. As teaching achievements remain undervalued in comparison to research publications, this leads to limited promotion prospects for the E&S staff. Teaching-focused staff often experience frustration as they watch research-active colleagues climb the academic ladder, despite great efforts being put into pedagogical research and teaching innovation. With fewer opportunities for progression and recognition available for the E&S staff, burnout and job dissatisfaction can be common issues. This can lead to a sense of professional stagnation, and limited access to leadership roles or involvement in strategic decision-making.
Third, the disparity between research and teaching tracks means that E&S academics struggle to demonstrate transferable achievements when applying for roles at other institutions. While research-focused positions are more prevalent and often exist at different institutions across the UK, there are far fewer E&S roles available. This imbalance creates a bottleneck for teaching-focused staff looking to move between universities or explore opportunities abroad. The fewer numbers of these contracts translate into limited work mobility for E&S colleagues. The scarcity of these roles also means that when vacancies do arise, competition is fierce, and opportunities for career progression can be elusive. This competitive environment restricts the pool of institutions that teaching staff can apply to, further reducing mobility. The issue is even more pronounced if they intend to diversify their CV and look for opportunities abroad. Such contracts appear practically non-existent in Europe. The restricted mobility of teaching-focused staff has significant implications on their professional development.
Finally, the combined issues discussed previously can create a chain effect impacting the sector overall: the lack of mobility limits the exchange of innovative teaching practices between institutions, restricting opportunities for professional growth, institutional diversity and economic prosperity.
In conclusion, the lack of E&S roles and clear promotion criteria for teaching-focused staff poses a challenge in higher education but also offers an opportunity for innovation. By developing robust career pathways and valuing teaching and research tracks equally, universities can boost student satisfaction, enhance recruitment, and foster a more inclusive academic culture.
What actually happens. This I know empirically.
Large numbers if T&S staff are appointed.
Their promotion criteria include management experience.
T&S staff therefore occupy management of teaching roles- course director, UG director, PG director, Deputy Dean (Teaching)
In those roles they begin to dictate curriculum content notwithstanding their lack of research activity means they are not at the forefront.
Those roles also buy them out of chalkface teaching. So paradoxically, Research contract staff do more of it that their T&S peers.
But now, their content and method are dictated by T&S managers seeking to justify their position.
The dichotomy between research and teaching is a false dichotomy. The teaching that students love most is that from researchers speaking of first hand work in their specific fields (the research shows).
We should ask cui bono from the Research and T&S contractual divide.
The answer to the problem of too much teaching to do is hire more academics able to research and teach.
Has itbeen considered that student low satisfaction may well come from their lack of independent and self directed learning skills.not being necessary in present teacher and restricted content led exams SECONDARY
Education?
Universities often commented on the independent learning ability of students who had entered via the vocational route of GNVQ and AVCEs , much like the present
Btecs…
Relevance to employability and time to develop ITC skills also helped.
Research skills as opposed to teacher input alone, gave opportunities for wider understanding.
Without tackling problems at both ends will lead to further stagnation.
Research done by Tony Gibson as early as 1972 into Changing Teachers attitudes through making it more interactive and relevant to the world proved then just how much more motivated the learner becomes when interested- Sugata Mitra of Hole in the Wall Learning” more recently showed how self directed learning took place today by interaction with computers and phones, still not every day experiences for so many, apart from social media…
Indeed. The RAE/REF distorted HEI strategic priorities for several decades – R trumped T in resource allocation because R was what counted in ‘buying’ brand value via the global rankings industry and as it happens was/is also what propels academic careers at the elite end of HE. The more recent TEF has hopefully led to some rebalancing but in the final analysis the academic tribe prefers to talk about its R prowess rather than about its commitment to T…
Great piece – E&S colleagues are crucial to a thriving University. One cause of a rise in T&R (or drop in E&S) is the REF’s shift in emphasis to a collective submission. Gone are the days where your “research stars” are submitted. That is good for a more inclusive and diverse research culture, but there is a question as to where this is good for the student experience. There is also a question of whether colleagues who are highly research active are being expected to do more education activities – and whether this might lead to a decline in research outputs or burnout of colleagues “doing it all”
There’s been lots of work done around education-focused academic careers over recent years, and universities have increasingly implemented promotions frameworks to reward and recognise them. I agree there’s still issues around parity of esteem, but there’s not a scarcity of education-focused roles. According to HESA, approximately 1/3 of academics in the UK are education-focused (they call them teaching only, which is a whole other issue!), and the numbers and proportions have grown substantively year on year over the last decade. It’s worth undertaking a literature review to update the perspective presented here. There’s also a lot more support these days than there used to be.