In order to improve the quality of instruction at the college and university level, all faculty should be required to spend time working outside the academic world in professions relevant to the courses they teach.

[cy yung]

In the hustle and bustle society, most people can hardly make ends
meet, not to say paying more time for doing other things, even for
things that are pertaining to our own jobs. However, sometimes
spending more time engaging in further knowledge beyond one’s work
might be crucial, especially for faculty in the academic field. In
order to imbue the students with adequate information, the faculty not
only has to inculcate explicitly with the whole content in the
textbooks, but also has to introduce some information of specific
industries or enterprises related to the textbooks or the courses. Why
should the faculty dedicate themselves to do such works? We can
discuss the advantages for doing so and the disadvantages for not
doing so.
If faculty in academic fields merely instills what in the
textbooks, students might lose their interest in the subject. For
students, studying is not such a interesting thing. Studying hard is
constructed on the basis of knowing the ultimate purpose of studying:
future work. Of course, for students who also want to take the jobs in
academic fields may not feel bored toward this method of teaching.
Nonetheless, most students would not go into the academic fields but
the practical industries for pragmatic works. Therefore, once they
couldn’t get some information from the class about the pragmatic
application, they would be entangled in the boring world of the
ossified knowledge. After going through this miserable experience,
some might redirect for other fields of jobs, such as entertaining,
sports, writer, and so on, desperately escaping from the world of
industry and of course, academy. Thus, it will be a vicious
circulation. Less people work in industry or work in but dislike it,
and less admirable paragons in industry world could be praised, result
in new students’ less interest in it.
Nevertheless, things could be totally changed if faculty pays more
attention on catching some interest paradigms from industry for
teaching. Students may listen attentively in class, gradually evoking
their aptitude toward these jobs. Furthermore, they will spontaneously
search or realize the details of those jobs during vocations. The
amount of skipping class or sleeping during class will also plummet.
For students who want to devote themselves in academic fields, this is
also important, because appropriate discourse let students know that
they should also do the same thing to evoke their future students.
Consequently, benign circulation occurs, making not only students more
willingly to implement on their future work, but teachers conducting
their responsibilities effectively. Elites from industries and
enterprises will soar probably.
As far as I am concerned, more and more teachers in our university
have noticed this phenomenon, offering more inspiring orations or
courses. However, in my department, it is a pity that few practical
paradigms or conditions will be proposed during the class. Teachers
merely share their recent achievement in research but not the social
states of this new era. I’m looking forward some changes in this stiff
way of course.
To sum up, in order to improve the learning conditions and quality
of industry, I think that academic teachers make contact with some
industries and express them in class is a critical element.