> If you have a physicist who's at the leading edge of research in their field, you want them doing that research, not teaching 18 year old's Newton's laws of motion.
That depends. Fundamental research is a tiny field and prodigies should perhaps stay there. But otherwise you want the best of the best to educate the next generation as a general rule. Their task is vastly more complex as to convey the plain material. That teachers have such a low regard is indicative of a highly anti-intellectual position, which of course makes the job fairly unattractive for anyone talented.
To supply researchers with resources that their work is not inhibited is often a logistically trivial problem, especially in modern times. So research and education can and should remain intertwined for the most part. Progress is about the pipeline too.
That depends. Fundamental research is a tiny field and prodigies should perhaps stay there. But otherwise you want the best of the best to educate the next generation as a general rule. Their task is vastly more complex as to convey the plain material. That teachers have such a low regard is indicative of a highly anti-intellectual position, which of course makes the job fairly unattractive for anyone talented.
To supply researchers with resources that their work is not inhibited is often a logistically trivial problem, especially in modern times. So research and education can and should remain intertwined for the most part. Progress is about the pipeline too.