04-11-2013, 12:40 PM
Apparently it's not an University either. It's a "tech incubator with a football team."
http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/el...nford.html
http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/el...nford.html
The CardBoard
/
C-House!
/
The CardBoard
/
Yvonne's right Stanford is not the University of Phoenix with a golf course
Yvonne's right Stanford is not the University of Phoenix with a golf course
Apparently it's not an University either. It's a "tech incubator with a football team."
http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/el...nford.html
http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/el...nford.html
04-11-2013, 12:40 PM
Apparently it's not an University either. It's a "tech incubator with a football team."
http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/el...nford.html
http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/el...nford.html
Apparently it's not an University either. It's a "tech incubator with a football team."
http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/el...nford.html
http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/el...nford.html
04-11-2013, 01:22 PM
"We have an unwritten rule around here not to do anything stupid."
-Casey Jacobsen, Feb 3, 2000
"We have an unwritten rule around here not to do anything stupid."
-Casey Jacobsen, Feb 3, 2000
04-11-2013, 01:22 PM
"We have an unwritten rule around here not to do anything stupid."
-Casey Jacobsen, Feb 3, 2000
"We have an unwritten rule around here not to do anything stupid."
-Casey Jacobsen, Feb 3, 2000
04-11-2013, 02:19 PM
Man, those first five paragraphs of the response are trying a bit too hard. It kind of pushes too far down the killer point which is that this is an example, like the football team, of setting exceptional goals and doing exceptional things.Â
I agree that the piece just seems like a trifling, wispy follow up to the longer piece of a few months back. I am hoping and trusting that however non-topical or non-hot some of our liberal arts departments may feel, it is making them think outside the box rather than simply feeling sorry for themselves.Â
The idea of what an undergraduate degree means is a hot topic these days. Sounds like we are dealing with the issue head on.
I agree that the piece just seems like a trifling, wispy follow up to the longer piece of a few months back. I am hoping and trusting that however non-topical or non-hot some of our liberal arts departments may feel, it is making them think outside the box rather than simply feeling sorry for themselves.Â
The idea of what an undergraduate degree means is a hot topic these days. Sounds like we are dealing with the issue head on.
Man, those first five paragraphs of the response are trying a bit too hard. It kind of pushes too far down the killer point which is that this is an example, like the football team, of setting exceptional goals and doing exceptional things.Â
I agree that the piece just seems like a trifling, wispy follow up to the longer piece of a few months back. I am hoping and trusting that however non-topical or non-hot some of our liberal arts departments may feel, it is making them think outside the box rather than simply feeling sorry for themselves.Â
The idea of what an undergraduate degree means is a hot topic these days. Sounds like we are dealing with the issue head on.
I agree that the piece just seems like a trifling, wispy follow up to the longer piece of a few months back. I am hoping and trusting that however non-topical or non-hot some of our liberal arts departments may feel, it is making them think outside the box rather than simply feeling sorry for themselves.Â
The idea of what an undergraduate degree means is a hot topic these days. Sounds like we are dealing with the issue head on.
04-11-2013, 02:19 PM
Man, those first five paragraphs of the response are trying a bit too hard. It kind of pushes too far down the killer point which is that this is an example, like the football team, of setting exceptional goals and doing exceptional things.Â
I agree that the piece just seems like a trifling, wispy follow up to the longer piece of a few months back. I am hoping and trusting that however non-topical or non-hot some of our liberal arts departments may feel, it is making them think outside the box rather than simply feeling sorry for themselves.Â
The idea of what an undergraduate degree means is a hot topic these days. Sounds like we are dealing with the issue head on.
I agree that the piece just seems like a trifling, wispy follow up to the longer piece of a few months back. I am hoping and trusting that however non-topical or non-hot some of our liberal arts departments may feel, it is making them think outside the box rather than simply feeling sorry for themselves.Â
The idea of what an undergraduate degree means is a hot topic these days. Sounds like we are dealing with the issue head on.
Man, those first five paragraphs of the response are trying a bit too hard. It kind of pushes too far down the killer point which is that this is an example, like the football team, of setting exceptional goals and doing exceptional things.Â
I agree that the piece just seems like a trifling, wispy follow up to the longer piece of a few months back. I am hoping and trusting that however non-topical or non-hot some of our liberal arts departments may feel, it is making them think outside the box rather than simply feeling sorry for themselves.Â
The idea of what an undergraduate degree means is a hot topic these days. Sounds like we are dealing with the issue head on.
I agree that the piece just seems like a trifling, wispy follow up to the longer piece of a few months back. I am hoping and trusting that however non-topical or non-hot some of our liberal arts departments may feel, it is making them think outside the box rather than simply feeling sorry for themselves.Â
The idea of what an undergraduate degree means is a hot topic these days. Sounds like we are dealing with the issue head on.
pincemob
Unregistered
Unregistered
04-11-2013, 02:36 PM
We've always had kids drop out, whether for sports, acting, business. So has Harvard, so has every school. That is not new or newsworthy. The part I would like to understand better is how the faculty are investing money in these kids in their department. Is that not a little bit like if David Shaw was the agent for a few of his players, in addition to his responsibilities running the team? Then some of those kids start going pro early. Does that not strike you as... complicated?
We've always had kids drop out, whether for sports, acting, business. So has Harvard, so has every school. That is not new or newsworthy. The part I would like to understand better is how the faculty are investing money in these kids in their department. Is that not a little bit like if David Shaw was the agent for a few of his players, in addition to his responsibilities running the team? Then some of those kids start going pro early. Does that not strike you as... complicated?
pincemob
Unregistered
Unregistered
04-11-2013, 02:36 PM
We've always had kids drop out, whether for sports, acting, business. So has Harvard, so has every school. That is not new or newsworthy. The part I would like to understand better is how the faculty are investing money in these kids in their department. Is that not a little bit like if David Shaw was the agent for a few of his players, in addition to his responsibilities running the team? Then some of those kids start going pro early. Does that not strike you as... complicated?
We've always had kids drop out, whether for sports, acting, business. So has Harvard, so has every school. That is not new or newsworthy. The part I would like to understand better is how the faculty are investing money in these kids in their department. Is that not a little bit like if David Shaw was the agent for a few of his players, in addition to his responsibilities running the team? Then some of those kids start going pro early. Does that not strike you as... complicated?
04-11-2013, 03:09 PM
(04-11-2013, 02:36 PM)norcalcard link Wrote:Is that not a little bit like if David Shaw was the agent for a few of his players, in addition to his responsibilities running the team? Then some of those kids start going pro early. Does that not strike you as... complicated?
I don't think so. Someone who has the skills to run a successful business almost certainly isn't going to make the decision to leave school to start it just because of prodding from their adviser, and similarly someone who will start a business because of prodding from their adviser probably won't be successful. I think the more likely thing in this scenario was that the kid's mind was made up and came to Hennessy for help, but who really knows?
From a different angle it's not clear how Hennessy's motives would shake out here. Having kids drop out isn't really great for the school since it makes our graduation rate worse. But having kids make great things is good for the school, whether they drop out or no. Having kids make brobdingnagian sums of money doing great things is always a plus. But having kids drop out to start a business on your advice, fail, and then write scathing op-eds about you is a pretty big negative. How do you weight all that in terms of conflicts of interest?
Really seems like the kid made up their mind about starting the business, talked to Hennessy about it, and he offered help. Which seems very obviously fine to me. In fact, from yet another angle, having a financial stake in the business probably means he gave honest advice about the prospects of success, why invest if you don't think it'll work?
(04-11-2013, 02:36 PM)norcalcard link Wrote:Is that not a little bit like if David Shaw was the agent for a few of his players, in addition to his responsibilities running the team? Then some of those kids start going pro early. Does that not strike you as... complicated?
I don't think so. Someone who has the skills to run a successful business almost certainly isn't going to make the decision to leave school to start it just because of prodding from their adviser, and similarly someone who will start a business because of prodding from their adviser probably won't be successful. I think the more likely thing in this scenario was that the kid's mind was made up and came to Hennessy for help, but who really knows?
From a different angle it's not clear how Hennessy's motives would shake out here. Having kids drop out isn't really great for the school since it makes our graduation rate worse. But having kids make great things is good for the school, whether they drop out or no. Having kids make brobdingnagian sums of money doing great things is always a plus. But having kids drop out to start a business on your advice, fail, and then write scathing op-eds about you is a pretty big negative. How do you weight all that in terms of conflicts of interest?
Really seems like the kid made up their mind about starting the business, talked to Hennessy about it, and he offered help. Which seems very obviously fine to me. In fact, from yet another angle, having a financial stake in the business probably means he gave honest advice about the prospects of success, why invest if you don't think it'll work?
04-11-2013, 03:09 PM
(04-11-2013, 02:36 PM)norcalcard link Wrote:Is that not a little bit like if David Shaw was the agent for a few of his players, in addition to his responsibilities running the team? Then some of those kids start going pro early. Does that not strike you as... complicated?
I don't think so. Someone who has the skills to run a successful business almost certainly isn't going to make the decision to leave school to start it just because of prodding from their adviser, and similarly someone who will start a business because of prodding from their adviser probably won't be successful. I think the more likely thing in this scenario was that the kid's mind was made up and came to Hennessy for help, but who really knows?
From a different angle it's not clear how Hennessy's motives would shake out here. Having kids drop out isn't really great for the school since it makes our graduation rate worse. But having kids make great things is good for the school, whether they drop out or no. Having kids make brobdingnagian sums of money doing great things is always a plus. But having kids drop out to start a business on your advice, fail, and then write scathing op-eds about you is a pretty big negative. How do you weight all that in terms of conflicts of interest?
Really seems like the kid made up their mind about starting the business, talked to Hennessy about it, and he offered help. Which seems very obviously fine to me. In fact, from yet another angle, having a financial stake in the business probably means he gave honest advice about the prospects of success, why invest if you don't think it'll work?
(04-11-2013, 02:36 PM)norcalcard link Wrote:Is that not a little bit like if David Shaw was the agent for a few of his players, in addition to his responsibilities running the team? Then some of those kids start going pro early. Does that not strike you as... complicated?
I don't think so. Someone who has the skills to run a successful business almost certainly isn't going to make the decision to leave school to start it just because of prodding from their adviser, and similarly someone who will start a business because of prodding from their adviser probably won't be successful. I think the more likely thing in this scenario was that the kid's mind was made up and came to Hennessy for help, but who really knows?
From a different angle it's not clear how Hennessy's motives would shake out here. Having kids drop out isn't really great for the school since it makes our graduation rate worse. But having kids make great things is good for the school, whether they drop out or no. Having kids make brobdingnagian sums of money doing great things is always a plus. But having kids drop out to start a business on your advice, fail, and then write scathing op-eds about you is a pretty big negative. How do you weight all that in terms of conflicts of interest?
Really seems like the kid made up their mind about starting the business, talked to Hennessy about it, and he offered help. Which seems very obviously fine to me. In fact, from yet another angle, having a financial stake in the business probably means he gave honest advice about the prospects of success, why invest if you don't think it'll work?
04-11-2013, 05:09 PM
Rather an easy call really. The University has a mission to educate. Not every student that stays 4 years will graduate anyway, so graduation should not be the primary metric or goal. Once the true goal of education is reaffirmed, then the decision of individual students to depart "early" carries few conflicts. Also if the goal is to educate, then helping a bright student discover the VC or angel partners in the area of study would be part of that greater mission.
Imagine a student that discovers a love for crop management, I would hope someone at Stanford might tell the student that there are some schools that teach that material better than Stanford. Â
Now I will concede that the professors might have some conflicts of interest related to their relationship with VC firms or as future investors, but the business world is all about connections.
Imagine a student that discovers a love for crop management, I would hope someone at Stanford might tell the student that there are some schools that teach that material better than Stanford. Â
Now I will concede that the professors might have some conflicts of interest related to their relationship with VC firms or as future investors, but the business world is all about connections.
Rather an easy call really. The University has a mission to educate. Not every student that stays 4 years will graduate anyway, so graduation should not be the primary metric or goal. Once the true goal of education is reaffirmed, then the decision of individual students to depart "early" carries few conflicts. Also if the goal is to educate, then helping a bright student discover the VC or angel partners in the area of study would be part of that greater mission.
Imagine a student that discovers a love for crop management, I would hope someone at Stanford might tell the student that there are some schools that teach that material better than Stanford. Â
Now I will concede that the professors might have some conflicts of interest related to their relationship with VC firms or as future investors, but the business world is all about connections.
Imagine a student that discovers a love for crop management, I would hope someone at Stanford might tell the student that there are some schools that teach that material better than Stanford. Â
Now I will concede that the professors might have some conflicts of interest related to their relationship with VC firms or as future investors, but the business world is all about connections.
04-11-2013, 05:09 PM
Rather an easy call really. The University has a mission to educate. Not every student that stays 4 years will graduate anyway, so graduation should not be the primary metric or goal. Once the true goal of education is reaffirmed, then the decision of individual students to depart "early" carries few conflicts. Also if the goal is to educate, then helping a bright student discover the VC or angel partners in the area of study would be part of that greater mission.
Imagine a student that discovers a love for crop management, I would hope someone at Stanford might tell the student that there are some schools that teach that material better than Stanford. Â
Now I will concede that the professors might have some conflicts of interest related to their relationship with VC firms or as future investors, but the business world is all about connections.
Imagine a student that discovers a love for crop management, I would hope someone at Stanford might tell the student that there are some schools that teach that material better than Stanford. Â
Now I will concede that the professors might have some conflicts of interest related to their relationship with VC firms or as future investors, but the business world is all about connections.
Rather an easy call really. The University has a mission to educate. Not every student that stays 4 years will graduate anyway, so graduation should not be the primary metric or goal. Once the true goal of education is reaffirmed, then the decision of individual students to depart "early" carries few conflicts. Also if the goal is to educate, then helping a bright student discover the VC or angel partners in the area of study would be part of that greater mission.
Imagine a student that discovers a love for crop management, I would hope someone at Stanford might tell the student that there are some schools that teach that material better than Stanford. Â
Now I will concede that the professors might have some conflicts of interest related to their relationship with VC firms or as future investors, but the business world is all about connections.
Imagine a student that discovers a love for crop management, I would hope someone at Stanford might tell the student that there are some schools that teach that material better than Stanford. Â
Now I will concede that the professors might have some conflicts of interest related to their relationship with VC firms or as future investors, but the business world is all about connections.
04-11-2013, 05:21 PM
From the article:
What if starting your own company -- getting your idea out to the world -- is what inspires you? Should that not be nurtured?
Quote:But whats the point of having a great university among the palm trees if students feel like they have to treat their professors as potential investors, found companies before they can legally drink, and drop out in an effort to get rich fast? Shouldn't it be a place to drift, to think, to read, to meet new people, and to work at whatever inspires you?
What if starting your own company -- getting your idea out to the world -- is what inspires you? Should that not be nurtured?
From the article:
What if starting your own company -- getting your idea out to the world -- is what inspires you? Should that not be nurtured?
Quote:But whats the point of having a great university among the palm trees if students feel like they have to treat their professors as potential investors, found companies before they can legally drink, and drop out in an effort to get rich fast? Shouldn't it be a place to drift, to think, to read, to meet new people, and to work at whatever inspires you?
What if starting your own company -- getting your idea out to the world -- is what inspires you? Should that not be nurtured?
04-11-2013, 05:21 PM
From the article:
What if starting your own company -- getting your idea out to the world -- is what inspires you? Should that not be nurtured?
Quote:But whats the point of having a great university among the palm trees if students feel like they have to treat their professors as potential investors, found companies before they can legally drink, and drop out in an effort to get rich fast? Shouldn't it be a place to drift, to think, to read, to meet new people, and to work at whatever inspires you?
What if starting your own company -- getting your idea out to the world -- is what inspires you? Should that not be nurtured?
From the article:
What if starting your own company -- getting your idea out to the world -- is what inspires you? Should that not be nurtured?
Quote:But whats the point of having a great university among the palm trees if students feel like they have to treat their professors as potential investors, found companies before they can legally drink, and drop out in an effort to get rich fast? Shouldn't it be a place to drift, to think, to read, to meet new people, and to work at whatever inspires you?
What if starting your own company -- getting your idea out to the world -- is what inspires you? Should that not be nurtured?
04-11-2013, 05:25 PM
(04-11-2013, 05:09 PM)Farm93 link Wrote:Rather an easy call really. The University has a mission to educate. Not every student that stays 4 years will graduate anyway, so graduation should not be the primary metric or goal. Once the true goal of education is reaffirmed, then the decision of individual students to depart "early" carries few conflicts. Also if the goal is to educate, then helping a bright student discover the VC or angel partners in the area of study would be part of that greater mission.
It's actually a dual goal, and every mission statement I ever heard or read out of Stanford included both: teaching AND research. Not just passing along what we know to the future, but expanding the boundaries of what we know. Which is why some really good teachers don't get tenure if their research isn't up to snuff.
(04-11-2013, 05:09 PM)Farm93 link Wrote:Rather an easy call really. The University has a mission to educate. Not every student that stays 4 years will graduate anyway, so graduation should not be the primary metric or goal. Once the true goal of education is reaffirmed, then the decision of individual students to depart "early" carries few conflicts. Also if the goal is to educate, then helping a bright student discover the VC or angel partners in the area of study would be part of that greater mission.
It's actually a dual goal, and every mission statement I ever heard or read out of Stanford included both: teaching AND research. Not just passing along what we know to the future, but expanding the boundaries of what we know. Which is why some really good teachers don't get tenure if their research isn't up to snuff.
04-11-2013, 05:25 PM
(04-11-2013, 05:09 PM)Farm93 link Wrote:Rather an easy call really. The University has a mission to educate. Not every student that stays 4 years will graduate anyway, so graduation should not be the primary metric or goal. Once the true goal of education is reaffirmed, then the decision of individual students to depart "early" carries few conflicts. Also if the goal is to educate, then helping a bright student discover the VC or angel partners in the area of study would be part of that greater mission.
It's actually a dual goal, and every mission statement I ever heard or read out of Stanford included both: teaching AND research. Not just passing along what we know to the future, but expanding the boundaries of what we know. Which is why some really good teachers don't get tenure if their research isn't up to snuff.
(04-11-2013, 05:09 PM)Farm93 link Wrote:Rather an easy call really. The University has a mission to educate. Not every student that stays 4 years will graduate anyway, so graduation should not be the primary metric or goal. Once the true goal of education is reaffirmed, then the decision of individual students to depart "early" carries few conflicts. Also if the goal is to educate, then helping a bright student discover the VC or angel partners in the area of study would be part of that greater mission.
It's actually a dual goal, and every mission statement I ever heard or read out of Stanford included both: teaching AND research. Not just passing along what we know to the future, but expanding the boundaries of what we know. Which is why some really good teachers don't get tenure if their research isn't up to snuff.
04-11-2013, 05:45 PM
Wait- what school was it that Bill Gates and Mark Zuckerberg dropped out of to found Microsoft and Facebook....?
04-11-2013, 05:45 PM
Wait- what school was it that Bill Gates and Mark Zuckerberg dropped out of to found Microsoft and Facebook....?
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »