Do you think an intelligent person can hold stupid views?

Well, I can see why they would want to study that. Whether or not it is useless depends on how the course is delivered, how they read and how they are taught to think, and whether or not they are able to play devil's advocate to their own biases. As for employability, I am sure that there are many employers willing to take on someone who has a 2:1 in toeing the line of political correctness... or in defining what's politically correct and what isn't for the next generations. Problem is, in 5 or 10 years' time ideas will probably have moved on and in this case, their learning may have become outdated before they've even paid off their student loan... Please forgive me my cynicism. Maybe I am taking it a bit far. It's just a caricatural form of what it looks like, when lecturers say that you are to write about this or that but only guide you to certain authors which they approve of, while there are other authors that have a stake in the subject but don't hold to the same line of thought as the lecturer, whose latest works the lecturer maybe hides near the bottom of a list or doesn't mention at all. There are some institutions that stipulate that you have to argue with reference to this idea or that idea or using a certain framework that sets up its own worldview, or else you won't get a good mark. Back when I studied Translation the latest thing was Narrative Theory and now it's the conceptual tool that more and more educated liberal activists use to present social issues, on the radio and in books. It's useful to be familiar with the apparatus they use when looking at the world, but it does just feel like one orthodoxy after another.

Parents will never have full control of how their kids turn out, they have some impact but their kid is still their own person with their own thoughts and they also will encounter other things in their life than what their parents intentionally put there.

It is sad that people go to university so young, isn't it? They could be much better academics if they went into it with better critical thinking skills and more life experience. They wouldn't be so impressionable because they would know more of what else is out there, understand their rights better and be more familiar with what being taken advantage of looks like, before they began, and they would be less easy to intimidate by a man or woman with 'Dr' in front of their name, backed up by a big university institution, saying 'you must', because they would be used to it by their adult prime, and sick of it. Young people are prone to thinking they know everything and that older generations are primitive - I remember how I used to be not long ago - and the institution backs them up because it's their school of knowledge that the young person is propagating out into the world... The nature of youth and inexperience makes it easier for university lecturers to be taken at their their word and have an impact outside of academia.