| > In schools for professional (rather than academic) disciplines — e.g. medical schools, law schools, trade schools, etc. — the lessons from academia with relevant practical application to your field are taught together with the more practical material. Teachers mostly don’t think their education degree made them better teachers and there’s no evidence they do[1]. It’s widely agreed that at least the third year of USAn law school is useless[2] and there are testing providers whose entire thing is teaching graduates what their law school didn’t but should have if it was professional training [3]. Professional schools are run for the benefit of the staff, so they teach what the admins and teachers want to teach. It has to have some relationship to the field but it can be completely attenuated. People learn to do their job at work, not on a university campus. [1] It's easier to pick a good teacher than to train one: Familiar and new results on the correlates of teacher effectiveness https://www.science-direct.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0272... [2] https://www.businessinsider.com/third-year-of-law-school-is-... https://forgottenattorney.wordpress.com/2013/02/01/the-usele... [3] https://abovethelaw.com/2017/05/teaching-you-what-law-school... |
It's likely pretty easy to measure that lawyers from professional law schools win more cases than self-taught lawyers. Or that doctors from medical schools have higher patient satisfaction / produce higher average QALYs in their patient cohort than self-taught doctors.
I think a more closely analogous question to the one of CS vs SWEng might be: if a group of psychiatrists (professionals) and psychologists (academics) switch places, who performs better in the other context?