|
Author
|
Topic: How do we reinvent Craftsmanship?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
radiorahim
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2777
|
posted 13 November 2004 12:54 AM
quote:
Is it possible to start in grade school with aptitude tests to channel the most apt student into a productive life doing what they are best at.
I understand what you are saying here but I have some problems with "channelling" kids into one occupation or another at a very early age. Kids abilities/interests change over time as well. There are also socio-economic factors at play here too. There have been problems over the years with "streaming" whereby kids from working class/immigrant backgrounds tended to be "streamed" into vocational high schools, while middle class kids were streamed into academic high schools to prepare them for university. Also, I don't have a whole lot of faith in so-called "aptitude" tests. This kind of testing is far far away from being any kind of science. I think it is important for kids to have "role models" though...so they know that its "okay" to pursue certain types of occupations. That its "okay" for example for women to go into trades. That its "okay" for men to be nurses and elementary school teachers.
From: a Micro$oft-free computer | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mazie
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4957
|
posted 13 November 2004 03:41 AM
quote:
There have been problems over the years with "streaming" whereby kids from working class/immigrant backgrounds tended to be "streamed" into vocational high schools, while middle class kids were streamed into academic high schools to prepare them for university.
This is the problem I have as well, It bothers me that we "stream" kids anywhere. I think we should be enabling kids to be good at what they have an aptitude for.
I do not care who/what the parents are/were/should be. If a kid would be a good cabinet maker,rather than cabinet member this is in everyones best interest to encourage. I also do not believe we need to force kids into any set occupation, only that they are given the skills to make intellegent choices.
If a kid has the "care giver" apptitude there are hundreds of fields for occupation, and there is no point in trying to turn him into a steel worker.
From: Williams Lake, BC | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
radiorahim
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2777
|
posted 13 November 2004 04:16 AM
quote:
Name your trade; these guys can make a lot of money
I'm sure you didn't do this intentionally but "guys?" That's the stereotypical "image"...that trades are for "guys". We need to change this stereotype. One strategy to combat the low incomes of women compared to men of course is pay equity. But I think another parallel strategy needs to be to encourage young women to go into jobs that are male dominated and tend to pay more. Young women also need support too. Many women who have tried to move into male dominated occupations have endured some absolutely incredible sexism on the job.
From: a Micro$oft-free computer | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Cougyr
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3336
|
posted 13 November 2004 08:55 PM
quote:
Originally posted by radiorahim:
I'm sure you didn't do this intentionally but "guys?" That's the stereotypical "image"...that trades are for "guys".
You're out of date, radiorahim. My daughter refers to both her male and female friends as guys. I've learned to use the term for its group application. quote:
Is it possible to start in grade school with aptitude tests to channel the most apt student into a productive life doing what they are best at.
I was tested in grade school. They used to do that 50 years ago. As with everything else in the schools, a lot of good intentions get messed up. Aptitude tests were supposed to be a rough indicator for those who had no goals, however some educators used them as iron rules. The same with streaming; those educators with a fascist bent used streaming as an iron fist instead of the oportunity it should have been.
From: over the mountain | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Klingon
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4625
|
posted 14 November 2004 12:07 AM
K'pla! Good on Mazie for bringing up this key issue here. The BC Liar regime has just about pretzelled our apprenticeship program, trying to de-skill and even de-license key trades, especially in construction.This is a blatant pay-off to the non-union/sweatshop/leaky condo building elite and the BC Business Council (who else), which fund the Liar party to the hilt. Now, for example, you won't become a journeyman carpenter any longer; rather, you'll become a journeyman door hanger. Apprenticeships have been under attack by the major corporate building lobby--in particular the non-union contractors--for many years. How do we bring back craftsmanship? I think there are several things that need to be done. First, bring back unionization in construction. The main thing that keeps construction unions working, despite the heavy anti-union laws aimed at them over the years, is the fact they are very well trained. In the 1970s, when over 80 per cent of construction in BC was done by union labour; there were no leaky condos, no run-away contractors and relatively few fatalities on construction sites. Putting in place rules that encourage workers to organize and encourage contractors to agree to this will help. Second, require certified licensing of all trades and empower unions to provide and maintain the licensing. Just like many professional bodies regulate various trades (accounting, architecture, etc.), this should also be done construction, with the unions maintaining the licensing standards and holding indenture, since they already provide high quality apprenticeship training. Third, reintroduce the Master craftsman. During the era of the guilds, small contractors were necessarily union member who started the own firms with other members. These were called "companies" (that's from where the term originates). They functioned a bit like law firms with senior and junior partners training to be journeymen (who then often would leave the firm to journey across the land working in different locations). Since still today many small contractors are in fact union members who set up their own firms and use union labour, this set-up should be re-introduced, with the Master craftsman supervising the direct training and jobs on site. Fourth, government funding a supervision of all standards and training programs. The government should negotiate training standards with the unions and create standard licensing exams and require trade upgrades. These should be available at public technical and trade schools as well. Fifth, a public advisory board, made up of industry, labour, government, consumer and client and general public interests should be set to oversee the industry and the quality of workmanship overall. Sixth, public insurance and safety should be priority one for the above agencies, that will ensure and enforce standard warranties, building insurance, proper inspections of all aspects of building and hold contractors and unions accountable for the results of their work and training, including for repair of deficiencies.
From: Kronos, but in BC Observing Political Tretchery | Registered: Nov 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Klingon
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4625
|
posted 14 November 2004 07:13 PM
K'pla! Thanks Skdadl for your interest in the guilds.Of course, there are/were many different guilds with diverse views and philosophies of live. despite the fact that most of them were either illegal, or at least restricted or clandestine, they managed to organize, improve the living standards, protects the rights and educate many people, against feudal tyrannies they were going up against, by setting up a defacto democratic self-regulatory system of trade and production in local and regional areas. After the collapse of feudalism and the rise of capitalism, the reminants of the guilds basically evolved into labour unins and other cooperative associations. In the late 19th century, there was the rise of the Guild Socialism movements--basically a modernized liberalized version of the old guild network. There some great books out there on this stuff, but, of course, the net provides some good references as well: www.public.iastate.edu/~gbetcher/373/guilds http://www.bartleby.com/65/gu/guildsoc.html http://william-king.www.drexel.edu/top/personal/wkpaps/gildf/gildpref books: Arthur J. Penty Restoration of the Gild System N. Carpenter, Guild Socialism That should be enough for a start.
From: Kronos, but in BC Observing Political Tretchery | Registered: Nov 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478
|
posted 15 November 2004 07:28 AM
Thank you very much, Klingon. Beyond their usefulness as models when we're thinking of democratic organization, the guilds -- and of course the skilled work in the first place -- interest me for the promise of psycho-social health that they held, could still hold. Tommy P wrote: quote:
there's no connection between high school programs and apprenticeship programs in factories. Employers would much rather hire skilled trades from other countries, to elude the expense of an apprenticeship program.
It's my understanding that this has been a long-running historical problem in Canada. It's a measure of one of the many ways that Canadian capitalists have been incompetent/irresponsible, frankly.
From: gone | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
brebis noire
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7136
|
posted 15 November 2004 10:47 AM
I feel like I'm coming at this from left field, but this thread addresses a malaise I feel as I observe the practice of agriculture fall apart around me. I practiced for one year as a large animal veterinarian, and luckily for me that year the price of beef was high, so none of us lacked for work, and we were called upon to use the best of our skills and knowledge in treating both adult cows and youngstock. However, in the middle of that year, the foot-and-mouth epidemic hit Britain, and I listened to the radio every day with a sinking heart as another mass slaughter of cows, sheep and pigs occurred, as if each one of them was a faulty cog in a machine. And today, of course, if I were still practicing, I doubt I would get called out very often, since cows are worth just about nothing - less, anyways, than what it costs to treat...for example, a cow with a twisted stomach gets a bullet in the head because the very simple surgery and the drugs required are more than her market value (but the situation is very complex, since the twisted stomach occurs in the first place because of the type of feeding we require to maximize milk production...)
Obviously, basing treatment upon market values is farcical, because it doesn't take into account any biological laws, just for starters (i.e. a cow has to be two years old before she starts producing either a calf or milk. You have to feed and care for her up till then, with no output.) I contrast this situation with my sister-in-law who raises purebreed cats. She makes more with a kitten than farmers do with a cow. (Insert angry face here.)
Secondly, there's the contrast between the knowledge, skills and sheer time required for good forestry practices versus the relatively quick returns for producing Christmas trees (that are being cut down all around me out here even as I write this.) This whole market driven atmosphere is driving me absolutely nuts because of its complexity and insolubility with the current system. It's not market-driven, it's ignorance-driven.And I have nothing against streaming in schools, as long as it is done in a way that respects individual choice and is not class-based. I think that kids' interests and aptitudes can be better nurtured if one type of activity isn't considered to be more valuable than another. We seem to have achieved this type of inequality without streaming in our school systems.
From: Quebec | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Email this thread to someone!
