No, I think that’s a false distinction. Scholars in older times were not focused on ‘discovery’, on the Eureka moment, but on understanding and explanation. The latinate title ‘doctor’ is given to a teacher. In the Catholic Church, there are certain saints who are recognized as ‘doctors of the church’, to be reepsected for thgeir teachers, and their teaching respected. In the modern era, we have cheapened the title of ‘doctor’, to where it is simply an uber-meister, a great master of perhaps a narrow subject, and the typical PhD dissertation (mine included) is merely a proof of the ability to find particular question, do some research, and wrestle it to the ground. The doctorate certifies the ability to do research within boundaries. It says little of the ability to discover, elucidate and teach from a higher perspective. The fact that we have lots of newly minted PhDs who can’t find decent teaching jobs might suggest thatnot all of them are qualified for real ‘teaching’.
Some journalists are excellent observers of the human condition, and excellent story-tellers. Some might even be good teachers. But the test here is that a good teacher has a point of view, and can explain that point of view, and can argue it with some other points of view. An undergraduate university should have good story-tellers, teaching the human condition.
For UATX, the jury is still out.