Job Discussion Forums

[JZer]

[some waygug-in]

[JZer]

[Molson]

I like the point about a degree shows someone put the time into learn, and IMO teaching and learning are linked. How much you learn on your own cannot be measured, thus employers use a degree (and your transcripts) as a measure of what you have learned.

For those ESL backpackers out there without a degree, get used to the fact that in the future you could be out of a job, or all the good jobs will go to those who have a degree.

It is sort of like NA back in the day you could work without a degree and it was the best man for the job. The job market got competitive and thus the introduction of qualifications such as holding at least a BA came into play.

To those without degrees, what job do you think you could get at home.

[some waygug-in]

A degree doesn't mean you can teach any better than someone with none, but employers want degree holders more and more because they have to sell you and your teaching skills to prospective students.

Prospective students tend to be attracted to teachers with more credentials and certificates.

Not saying this is right, it's just the way things are heading.

[gaijinalways]

[Justin Trullinger]

[JZer]

[Molson]

[jdl]

Should one who has invested time and effort into a quality formal and experiential education apologize for the dividends forthcoming?

The market place will make the final determination in any case. The market place seems to be saying, "Get the education and we will give you the experience if you are serious. In addition we expect you to 'upgrade' yourself as experience and need dictate. In fact we may even pay you to develop your professional skills."

Those who have the most marketable education and verifiable superior experience will usually be availed of the better jobs and able to navigate the plateaus within an organization. Education and experience are most valued in the form of action; so it may be an individual responsibility to make the most of each.

Underpaid? unemployed? unsatisfied? What part of one's education or experience may be lacking?

[rusmeister]

[jdl]

Rusmeister,

Here is something on 'small business' in America you may find interesting.

http://bestbizpractices.org/2009/07/14/america-runs-on-small-business/

Seems that people in the US still do turn their education to creating their own work and workplace. I guess we just don't hear as much about the individual as we do about 'the companies too big to fail'

Can't believe all we hear on FOX/CNN/BBC/etc. I guess?

Gatto does have some legitimate concerns about the role of public education as a feed mill for whichever corporate identity; however, a little international perspective may highlight the rather egalitarian nature of North American Education. Perhaps too much of the soul and character of humanity has been taken out of the classroom, since what is knowledge without a soul? But as you say that is another discussion.

At any rate perhaps the 'best person for the job' is one who has navigated the halls of education, learned what can be learned and used this as a tool to create meaningful experience not just for himself but for his community/society/tribe/fellow man. The value of education and the experience of life is what one does with it.

Also found the following on Gatto....an interesting interview

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ogCc8ObiwQ

[rusmeister]

[jdl]

Rusmeister,

It is an interesting paradox that the goal of free enterprize endeavors is the creation of monopolies; but perhaps that is just the nature of 'isms'.

You and I share differing views on publicly funded education. I see it is an attempt at equalizing access and little more. The content of education and the quality of that content is a matter for the consumer/client/user/stakeholder to determine. Therein lies the complication since given so many users and often competing stakes, a discussion of the content, and in content I include process, becomes very complex and political in nature. As in most political discourses 'smaller is better' in that smaller groups can usually design something which suits the needs of the group whereas larger groups tend to have discussions which are vote based or lobby influenced and result in descisions which are not consensus in nature, leaving a large minority of the stakeholders dissatisfied and under served.

It has been my experience that public education in the spirit of the 'little red school house' provides great opportunity for inclusion. This is more a function of the process of governance of the school by stakeholders than anything else.

It is often quoted that the colt was the great equalizer in the American west, where even the weakest could compete; I tend to view public education as such, perhaps a poor comparison but the one that comes to mind.

As a result of my views on the value of public education I have opted in, as did my parents and their parents before them. Public education has served my community well for the most part; but again the community was always vigilant that it did.

Now having said all that, there are problems. These, I have found, can be solved most effectively at a local level with discussion, tolerance and when ideas and solutions as well as concerns are brought to the discussion. Problems do arise when one tries to impose 'what is right' upon other members in the community.

If I had to sum it all up; size is important with smaller schools closely knit to the community, providing service to that community, being most effective.

Just some ramblings .......... hopefully not a diatribe.

But I fear I have strayed a long way off the path of the original topic. Apologies.

[JZer]