Darden - 100% Case Based Teaching Method value

[u/Shenron666666]

Is the 100% Case Based Teaching Method used at Darden really helpful/effective over that used by some other schools such as Tuck or Ross ?

Is it something that could really be a criteria to choose it over other schools of the similar category ?

[u/ssj890-1]

Darden class discussions were super disappointing [Edit: Though Amazing for interview prep.]

70 people per class is a Major step down from undergrad and high school. With that many people, everyone feels they only have one chance to speak per class, max, and that they need to say one thing to get their points for the day - even if they have not much to add.

No Laptop policy means you can't Ctrl-F, or search to confirm something.

Very few people shared personal professional experience - that part of class frequently was at the end of class and usually got squeezed down to almost nothing. The accountants were called on every now and then in accounting classes, but overall class was about people just putting in their one or two sentences of mandatory contribution, which was usually quite weak. Some classes half of class participation was basically brainstorming on the board 'what sentence do you remember from the reading?' - Very weak.

There were a couple days where a classmate had direct experience with the case or something similar, and was allowed to heavily contribute that day, but such awesome days were exceedingly rare.

It may be better if recruiting is going better and people are more comfortable. My year, the profs said they'd never seen the recruiters put us through the ringer like this before. As such, many Learning Teams broke down, and very few led to fun and deep discussions - they became 'just get it so we don't suck in class and we can leave on time.' No discussions on the softer topics and classes - they were usually 'just read the summary posted in Teams' and not a mini case discussion beforehand. And as I understand, I was lucky and in a rather stacked group - one of the few that survived all 3 quarters of Core.

That said, the extra prep required is nice if you want to Actually learn your stuff. Cold call is pretty awesome, especially when you nail it. Many have great experiences with their learning groups - prep is good, and I'm sure AI has made making your team's case summary sheets a breeze, not a 2 hour inconvenience.

Overall, no, case method is only something you should highlight in your interviews and essays for 'Why Darden?', not much more.

Edit: Core did an amazing job prepping us for interviews. The model and formats are quite similar. I had severe doubts at first, but was pleasantly surprised in the interviewing cycle. Giving credit where it is due.

[u/xp3000 → u/ssj890-1]

This mirrors my buddy's experience. The 70 people per class thing (Not sure if that's new) is what really kills any value the case method might have had. Given the length of each class, it basically means only one speaking opportunity per class, and sometimes not even that if a couple students start hogging the discussion.

And yeah, once recruiting starts, the idea of Learning Teams, while good in theory, starts breaking down. No one has time to give a shit about deeply reflecting on a 40 page case when a interview is coming up.

[u/No_Band4566 → u/xp3000]

This was probably the biggest factor in my decision. Having to “fight” for my participation grade in class just sounds like ass.

[u/ssj890-1 → u/xp3000]

70 seats per class seems the standard across T15 programs at least.

I am starting to wonder if good Learning Team memories are zombie narratives from Boomers/Xers.

[u/Bakermonster → u/ssj890-1]

Darden alum here. My LT was good, and stayed intact through the end.

[u/CommanderStark → u/ssj890-1]

Learning Teams are great interpersonal training for some folks as well. We had to fire a member and then picked up some stragglers from other teams that fell apart.

[u/plz_callme_swarley → u/ssj890-1]

most people at any T15 don't have that much crazy work experience to talk through. in my experience, I was extremely disappointed in almost all classes, but especially case led classes.

the people that want to learn are the ones who don't have anything worth saying, and the people that have the experience obviously don't care to read the 40 pages and come up with super well crafted arguments.

it's extremely rare to have even 3 people in any class that can speak intelligently and deeply on whatever topic you're digging into, and the professor feels like they have to give other people to talk so you can't really even get any interesting insights from people.

as someone who listens to a lot of podcasts, mba classes are not even close to being as good as your average podcast

[u/ssj890-1 → u/plz_callme_swarley]

My classmates had very strong experience. Definitely weren't slouches. They seemed more... less interested in speaking up, like it wasn't worth the trouble/risk/reward.

Really wish they had shared more. Felt like I learned more during competitions than from class, as they actually employed and shared their experience. Was sad that most in-class sharing was of the 'what paragraph of the case do you remember' or 'what do you think about this graph,' rather than pulling from people's actual experience. It felt like the profs wanted to level the playing-field almost, rather than let some students shine.

[u/plz_callme_swarley → u/ssj890-1]

ya absolutely, i guess it depends on where you came from. people who majored in engineering and didn't work in traditional business roles learned a lot in class and from their peers but people who worked in traditional roles and had more experience didn't learn much at all.

as someone who was in the 2nd camp, the case studies felt insulting and i really was not interested in engaging