4 ms·

Colleges have never advertised themselves as employee factories. The value-add for college should be in giving people the ability to think for themselves; to fi

Colleges have never advertised themselves as employee factories. The value-add for college should be in giving people the ability to think for themselves; to figure things out.

DanBC 15y ago
Why does that have to cost $150,000? Why can't "thinking for yourself" and "figuring things out" be combined with examples from relevant legal systems rather than examples from post-feudal England?
- _delirium 15y ago
  I haven't attended law school, but I've self-studied a few of the casebooks and readers they use, and most examples are contemporary. In fact many profs and book-writers go out of their way to use examples their students will find relevant/entertaining. Sometimes that even gets them into trouble; in a recent case, a law prof was suspended for posing a "colorful" hypothetical about shooting his dean in various combinations of circumstances: http://volokh.com/2011/02/16/criminal-law-professor-suspended-for-classroom-hypotheticals/ http://volokh.com/2011/02/16/criminal-law-professor-suspende...
  - a3camero 15y ago
    I have never had a law exam question that tested something on outdated law. I'm a third year Cdn. law student but it's probably quite similar. The old cases are taught because they're still relevant to some principle. A 1600s case about a music hall burning down sounds ridiculous until you realize that "buildings burning down" is still a problem that exists today and that's the origin of the doctrine of frustration.
powertower 15y ago
> Colleges have never advertised themselves as employee factories. That's exactly how colleges sell themselves. > The value-add for college should be in giving people the ability to think for themselves; to figure things out. And yet they fail.
- marquis 15y ago
  I had an extraordinary experience at university, though I did not follow the same path professionally. It gave me a grounding in self-responsibility and access to a million kinds of wonders, and while I wish I had taken some CS and mathematics classes as my degree is heavily arts-based, I could pick these things up later auto-didactically (though it's a life long dream to return to get a CS degree). I don't think my education experience failed me at all and many of those around me: it ultimately came down to personal passion to make the most of where you are.
  - powertower 15y ago
    Then you and your circle of friends are the exception, not the rule. > it ultimately came down to personal passion to make the most of where you are. Then you agree with me!
    - marquis 15y ago
      I don't downvote comments that spur conversion, please don't assume this. I also don't think I'm the exception: I would say most of my friends thoroughly enjoyed their higher education experience and got a lot out of it more than just learning practical knowledge that furthered their career. What's important about studying after high-school is that you find out that you love learning for the sake of it, with a group of people who are there by choice (unlike high school) and your horizons can be broadened immensely. Am I biased because I took a creative arts degree? Possibly, but I also took science classes and found the energy to learn there to be of the same calibre. On that note also: I didn't study in the U.S. and certainly not at a for-profit school. I concede that the experience may be completely different in other countries (though I've found Europe to be fairly homogenous in regards to their approach to learning: academic over career-oriented).
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]

Colleges have never advertised themselves as employee factories. The value-add for college should be in giving people the ability to think for themselves; to figure things out.

DanBC 15y ago

Why does that have to cost $150,000? Why can't "thinking for yourself" and "figuring things out" be combined with examples from relevant legal systems rather than examples from post-feudal England?

_delirium 15y ago
I haven't attended law school, but I've self-studied a few of the casebooks and readers they use, and most examples are contemporary. In fact many profs and book-writers go out of their way to use examples their students will find relevant/entertaining. Sometimes that even gets them into trouble; in a recent case, a law prof was suspended for posing a "colorful" hypothetical about shooting his dean in various combinations of circumstances: http://volokh.com/2011/02/16/criminal-law-professor-suspended-for-classroom-hypotheticals/ http://volokh.com/2011/02/16/criminal-law-professor-suspende...
- a3camero 15y ago
  I have never had a law exam question that tested something on outdated law. I'm a third year Cdn. law student but it's probably quite similar. The old cases are taught because they're still relevant to some principle. A 1600s case about a music hall burning down sounds ridiculous until you realize that "buildings burning down" is still a problem that exists today and that's the origin of the doctrine of frustration.

powertower 15y ago

> Colleges have never advertised themselves as employee factories. That's exactly how colleges sell themselves. > The value-add for college should be in giving people the ability to think for themselves; to figure things out. And yet they fail.

marquis 15y ago
I had an extraordinary experience at university, though I did not follow the same path professionally. It gave me a grounding in self-responsibility and access to a million kinds of wonders, and while I wish I had taken some CS and mathematics classes as my degree is heavily arts-based, I could pick these things up later auto-didactically (though it's a life long dream to return to get a CS degree). I don't think my education experience failed me at all and many of those around me: it ultimately came down to personal passion to make the most of where you are.
- powertower 15y ago
  Then you and your circle of friends are the exception, not the rule. > it ultimately came down to personal passion to make the most of where you are. Then you agree with me!
  - marquis 15y ago
    I don't downvote comments that spur conversion, please don't assume this. I also don't think I'm the exception: I would say most of my friends thoroughly enjoyed their higher education experience and got a lot out of it more than just learning practical knowledge that furthered their career. What's important about studying after high-school is that you find out that you love learning for the sake of it, with a group of people who are there by choice (unlike high school) and your horizons can be broadened immensely. Am I biased because I took a creative arts degree? Possibly, but I also took science classes and found the energy to learn there to be of the same calibre. On that note also: I didn't study in the U.S. and certainly not at a for-profit school. I concede that the experience may be completely different in other countries (though I've found Europe to be fairly homogenous in regards to their approach to learning: academic over career-oriented).

deleted 15y ago

[deleted]