On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 19:31, David B. Shemano <[email protected]> wrote:
> Sean Andrews writes: > > "Lawyers may not have unions (though they do have a bit of a guild, IIRC), > but they have the ability to make "partner" which gives them a say in how > the firm works. Would you allow someone to make decisions about your firm > who had no experience as a lawyer? Would you approve of a professional > practice where partners could be fired in order to hire cheap new lawyers > coming right out of law school?" > > In large law firms, the normal practice is to hire a bunch of baby lawyers > out of law school every year, who will then attrition away until maybe 10% > remain after 8-10 years, at which point a handful are made partner. Those > not made partners are usually encouraged to leave, even though they are much > more skilled and experienced than the incoming new batch of baby lawyers. > So, for what it's worth, an entirely different model than that espoused by > the teacher unions. > You've never worked at a school, have you? How many elementary teachers do you know? How do you understand the internal workings of the average elementary school? Is it something you've mostly learned by reading about it on right wing blogs, or have you descended to speak to a couple of people who've actually experienced it first hand? Because there is plenty of this kind of informal "encouragement" to leave made to teachers who aren't cutting it--by colleagues, etc. But there is also a lot of tolerance and patience because it is a tough fucking job--teachers do more professional development throughout their careers, on average, than lawyers and doctors--and, more importantly, precisely the kind of attrition rate you speak of by the new folks. If we're talking only about what unions want, it would be useful to at least have an actual statement by one of these vicious organizations to compare to your straw man; if we are, instead, talking about how schools operate and teachers are hired, quit, and or stick around, (b/c as I read you, the guys who don't make partner aren't fired, just encouraged to leave) then I'd say you don't know the first thing about how any of it works. And Unions rarely figure into the equation except in trying to help teachers have better working conditions. > As E.G. West describes in his classic *Education and the > State*<http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/086597134X/thevolocons0d-20/>, > education levels in Britain and the United States were rapidly rising before > the introduction of public schooling, which was largely motivated by a > desire to indoctrinate students in government-approved religious and > political views. In the words of John Stuart > Mill<http://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/m/mill/john_stuart/m645o/chapter5.html>, > an important intellectual forebear for both libertarians and progressives, > “A general State education” promotes whatever view “pleases the predominant > power in the government.... in proportion as it is efficient and successful, > it establishes a despotism over the mind, leading by natural tendency to one > over the body.” > Ah yes. The School as the Ideological State Apparatus. I'm familiar with the argument--made mostly by far left radicals in the 60s like Althusser, who coined the term here. I am clear on that--though he said Law was equally functional in this way--moreso, since law was also a repressive apparatus. But the book you cite is mostly about England--which is good since it would likely be wrong in relation to the US, where most schools were public from the beginning. Jefferson was a pretty strong advocate for expanding that system as a prerequisite for an informed democracy. And I'd be very surprised if the non-public education levels were rising among any but the most wealthy, white, and male members of 19th century society. In any case, this is pretty rich coming from a lawyer--possibly one of the most anally credentialed professions in modern society. I'm sure you recommend home schooling your kids until they take the LSAT and having them write a letter explaining why they have no GPA with their GED. "No, really Mr. Admissions officer, I've been educated, even if I haven't been schooled." What does this distinction even mean in the current conversation? s
_______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
