Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Law Students Blogs -> Nuts & Boalts

Law Students

: Nuts & Boalts

Shameless plugs?

By Bekki

The worst course I ever took in undergrad was an American Lit course. From the description in the course reader, I'd expected to read the American greats - Melville, Hawthorne, Faulkner. Instead, the reading list reflected the professors attempt to perform self therapy. Every book we read had as the protagonist a man undergoing a mid-life crisis. They all bore an eerie resemblance to the professor. Ever since, I've been wary of taking courses where the reading list focused more on the professor than the students.

This semester, I've got two courses in which the textbook was authored, either in full or in part, by the professor. This concerns me. There's always the possibility of the professor being so certain of her theories that she refuses to allow students to bring up alternate explanations. Then there's the question of kickbacks - did the professor really choose the best book for the course, or did she choose the one that would make her more money? It also makes me wonder if this is a professor who's so caught up in academia and research that she doesn't have a clue how her theories stand up outside the textbook.

On the other hand, the fact that the professor wrote the book means (theoretically) that she actually knows what she's talking about. It won't be one of those first year classes where the professor knows as much as (or less than) the students. It also means that the professor is (or should be) intimately familiar with the text and can answer student questions thoroughly and effectively. Plus, the professor has the option to give the text to the students for free - eliminating the question of whether the prof chose a book that would put more money in her pockets.

Thoughts on this from people who've taken courses from profs who've assigned their own texts?

Full post as published by Nuts & Boalts on January 13, 2008 (boomark / email).