next »

[smencil]

I just finished the first chapter of Higher Education? and I'm wonder whether I should continue.  So far I have read that:
1. Professors only work 320 hours a year (only office hours and class time count).
2.  Professors make more than lawyers (if you compare the average Full Professor's salary to the average salary of lawyers of all ranks).
3. People "usually" become full professors in their early 40's.
4. Professors love committee work and they won't let administrators take over any of it because professors want the power.
5.  If sabbaticals were eliminated, the quality of academic writing would improve because only things that you feel really passionate about would get written.
6. "In other occupations" writing must be done outside of work. (I'm really not sure how that idea got written by a journalist.)

If the first chapter is this bad, should I continue reading?

[mended_drum]

It depends.  Can you write a scorching review of the book for some publication?  That would be the only reason I'd keep reading.

[tuxedo_cat]

I just finished the first chapter of Higher Education? and I'm wonder whether I should continue.  So far I have read that:
1. Professors only work 320 hours a year (only office hours and class time count).
2.  Professors make more than lawyers (if you compare the average Full Professor's salary to the average salary of lawyers of all ranks).
3. People "usually" become full professors in their early 40's.
4. Professors love committee work and they won't let administrators take over any of it because professors want the power.
5.  If sabbaticals were eliminated, the quality of academic writing would improve because only things that you feel really passionate about would get written.
6. "In other occupations" writing must be done outside of work. (I'm really not sure how that idea got written by a journalist.)

If the first chapter is this bad, should I continue reading?

No, no, you've misunderstood the author's purpose.  This is clearly a work of satire.

[changinggears]

I just finished the first chapter of Higher Education? and I'm wonder whether I should continue.  So far I have read that:
1. Professors only work 320 hours a year (only office hours and class time count).
2.  Professors make more than lawyers (if you compare the average Full Professor's salary to the average salary of lawyers of all ranks).
3. People "usually" become full professors in their early 40's.
4. Professors love committee work and they won't let administrators take over any of it because professors want the power.
5.  If sabbaticals were eliminated, the quality of academic writing would improve because only things that you feel really passionate about would get written.
6. "In other occupations" writing must be done outside of work. (I'm really not sure how that idea got written by a journalist.)

If the first chapter is this bad, should I continue reading?

No, no, you've misunderstood the author's purpose.  This is clearly a work of satire.

I haven't laughed this hard since I watched Tropic Thunder. The combo of the points from the book and tuxedo_cat's reply was a 1-2 knock out.

[smencil]

As I read over the points, I keep checking myself to see if I took the most egregious ideas or I distorted them to make them sound worse that they were intended.  But I did not! 

I was hoping that they were setting up a strawman but in Ch. 2 they move on to administration, so I don't think they plan to knock down their strange, inaccurate points.

[tuxedo_cat]

Ooooh, please tell us what this book has to say about administration!  That should be even more entertaining.

[scottja]

I just finished the first chapter of Higher Education? and I'm wonder whether I should continue.  So far I have read that:
1. Professors only work 320 hours a year (only office hours and class time count).
2.  Professors make more than lawyers (if you compare the average Full Professor's salary to the average salary of lawyers of all ranks).
3. People "usually" become full professors in their early 40's.
4. Professors love committee work and they won't let administrators take over any of it because professors want the power.
5.  If sabbaticals were eliminated, the quality of academic writing would improve because only things that you feel really passionate about would get written.
6. "In other occupations" writing must be done outside of work. (I'm really not sure how that idea got written by a journalist.)

If the first chapter is this bad, should I continue reading?

No, no, you've misunderstood the author's purpose.  This is clearly a work of satire.

I concur, this book review or overview is definitely a work of satire and it's funny. This list should be included in a syllabus to see what kind of response the professors get! Or, at the very least, discussed in a classroom setting to see if there is any stigma that students have toward the profession.