Imperial is woefully unambitious when it comes to teaching
It's time for Imperial to move into the 21st century
Imperial is proud of referring to itself as the university of the future. After all, few universities can boast graduates who predicted the 20th Century as keenly as H.G. Wells or who contributed to our advancement throughout it as significantly as Alexander Fleming, Dennis Gabor or James Ellis. It is therefore deeply disappointing that a university so keen to promote technical innovation in all fields should be neglecting an area much closer to home.
One of the most tired and overused cliches that new Imperial students are exposed to is that their departments do not care about them. Their priority, we have all been told, is to perform cutting-edge research. Students can come to the lectures, pick up the handouts, attend one or two tutorials and then find themselves shoved into the examination room. If they somehow manage to come out of the process with a high-quality degree, the system will suck them into a research position and force the next year's intake to run the same gauntlet.
While the truth may be nowhere near this bleak, students are given little reason to doubt the received wisdom. Teaching methods in most departments have changed little since they first opened, whereas the capacity for innovation has increased beyond measure.
We need look no further than our own Mathematics Department for proof of this. Professor Richard Thomas is embracing modern technology, not simply for the sake of it, but as an effective tool to improve learning and understanding. His students are full of praise for his techniques; again and again they say that the mobile app approach is helping them engage with the content instead of simply skimming through lectures, mindlessly scribbling down notes.
One would be tempted to ask "What's taken so long?" if the answer weren't so obvious. There is a lack of ambition and creativity when it comes to teaching at Imperial. And innovation is often not taken seriously, as Professor Thomas knows all too well.
The College believes that it can retain its reputation through high quality research and ruthlessly high entry standards. It doesn't hold itself to the same standard of excellence and innovation in teaching as it does in research, and it thinks that this has little effect on its image. The pitifully poor level of donations from alumni is sure proof of their folly. Had H.G. Wells been told, over a century ago, that blackboards and chalk would still be used in today's lecture theatres – would he not be disappointed?
