Colleges and universities should require all faculty to spend time working outside the academic world in professions relevant to the courses they teach.
Write a response in which you discuss your views on the policy and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider the possible consequences of implementing the policy and explain how these consequences shape your position.
There is a disputation whether universities should require all professions to work outside their academic world, for teaching or relevant jobs. I think requiring all faculty to do this is inefficient decision: as it reduces profession's time for research. However, as distributing correct knowledge is also important, I suggest hiring persons specialized for teaching would be better.
Firstly, forcing professions to work outside their academic world for teaching the relevant courses could harm the profession's research. The aim of university is not only teaching and distributing knowledge, but also developing and elaborating it. Preparing teaching is an exacting job, takes time and effort. Especially, teaching laypersons requires more effort, as experts should explain the basic backgrounds they usually assumes but laypersons do not know. As time is a limited resource, preparing lectures for non-experts means the experts should reduce time for their study.
Some proponents of pop sciences might argue that, those who understands their research topic properly can easily teach other people, with invoking Hilbert's adage "If you cannot teach your knowledge 10-years-old child, then you cannot say you understand it properly", so the policy would not harm professions' research seriously. However, their opinion is simply wrong: it is well-known that many pop science book writers stops real research: for example, Richard Dawkins' recent research article is written 20 years ago. Keith Devlin, a famous writer about mathematics, also stopped research on set theory before 20 years ago. In contrast, I have not heard any Nobel Prize winner who is famous due to his or her pop science books. We could not say pop science writers an expert on a given field, though they could be called a brilliant writers.
However, it does not deny the importance of distribution of knowledge; the development of the Internet allows easy distribution of information, but it also helps to spread various false and wrong ones. Experts are best persons who correct this situation, as they know the correct knowledge. If universities stop requiring their faculties to work outside their academic world for teaching, experts would choose easier way: not to work outside their world, as it is demanding job but hardly beneficial, especially as their value are apprised by their research results. Although forcing all faculties to teach laymen is inefficient, the universities could requiring some of them to do it. Moreover, training "mass-media communicator" in university level is also efficient in the view that they can concentrate on how to teach non-experts rather than researches, like pop science writers.
To summarize, urging all faculties to work outside of profession's academic world for teaching is inefficient, as it hampers their research. However, as distributing correct knowledge is also important, universities should keep their policies in some way, so I suggest training some experts on teaching knowledge, rather forcing all faculties.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 426, Rule ID: NON3PRS_VERB[2]
Message: The pronoun 'they' must be used with a non-third-person form of a verb: 'assume'
Suggestion: assume
...lain the basic backgrounds they usually assumes but laypersons do not know. As time is ...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 845, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[2]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'writer'?
Suggestion: writer
...though they could be called a brilliant writers. However, it does not deny the import...
^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 211, Rule ID: THE_SUPERLATIVE[4]
Message: A determiner is probably missing here: 'are the best'.
Suggestion: are the best
...d various false and wrong ones. Experts are best persons who correct this situation, as ...
^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 654, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'could' requires the base form of the verb: 'require'
Suggestion: require
... is inefficient, the universities could requiring some of them to do it. Moreover, traini...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, however, if, moreover, so, then, well, for example, i think, in contrast
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 19.5258426966 97% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 16.0 12.4196629213 129% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 14.8657303371 67% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 11.3162921348 53% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 43.0 33.0505617978 130% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 38.0 58.6224719101 65% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 12.9106741573 85% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2596.0 2235.4752809 116% => OK
No of words: 468.0 442.535393258 106% => OK
Chars per words: 5.54700854701 5.05705443957 110% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.65116196802 4.55969084622 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.01441734976 2.79657885939 108% => OK
Unique words: 239.0 215.323595506 111% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.510683760684 0.4932671777 104% => OK
syllable_count: 769.5 704.065955056 109% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 6.24550561798 112% => OK
Article: 4.0 4.99550561798 80% => OK
Subordination: 11.0 3.10617977528 354% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.77640449438 113% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.38483146067 114% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 20.2370786517 99% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 23.0359550562 100% => OK
Sentence length SD: 64.8849751483 60.3974514979 107% => OK
Chars per sentence: 129.8 118.986275619 109% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.4 23.4991977007 100% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.95 5.21951772744 95% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 7.80617977528 51% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 10.2758426966 88% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 5.13820224719 78% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.83258426966 145% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.308602773175 0.243740707755 127% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.106479072932 0.0831039109588 128% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0997661519212 0.0758088955206 132% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.212193385817 0.150359130593 141% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0821760906387 0.0667264976115 123% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.4 14.1392134831 116% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 48.8420337079 99% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.1743820225 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.21 12.1639044944 125% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.96 8.38706741573 107% => OK
difficult_words: 124.0 100.480337079 123% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 11.8971910112 76% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.2143820225 100% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 79.17 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.75 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.