11 ms·
> Something I've noticed and take this with a grain of salt as this is a sample=1 observation is that the better researchers (more publications, better funded l
by xiaolingxiao 6y ago
> Something I've noticed and take this with a grain of salt as this is a sample=1 observation is that the better researchers (more publications, better funded labs) were generally also better teachers.
In engineering/math, I've seen it swing both ways. Some professors couldn't be bothered to teach, because are so busy w/ their research and/or jaded w/ the University: implicit assumption is to baby the undergrads and shepherd them along the system. In regards to funding in relation to teaching ability, one way to look at it is that a PI is in essence a salesman, you have to sell your vision to get funding/appointments, sell your lab to get good phd candidates, and sell the subject to undergrad as something that is interesting and worthy of learning.
- medium_burrito 6y agoYou are right on the mark on the PI being a sales-man/woman/*. People forget how basically the purpose of a leader is to sell the product, and sell it hard. Think of a research group like any other business. You have to create a product and sell it, except the product is publications and publicity. Related, university presidents are fundraisers first, ie selling their nonprofit to donors, in exchange for buildings, chairs, spots on committees (for poors), fuzzie-wuzzies, etc.