[Uncle Erik]

I will read your paper over the weekend, but wanted to offer a philosophical point about education.

What you learn is not constrained to the classroom. Education is not a restaurant where your choices are limited to the menu. I was frustrated by the system, too, but eventually, I accepted it for what it is and decided to use it as it is. There is value, despite the flaws.

If something interests you, do what you can to learn. Buy books, talk to people and use the miracle that is the Internet. You don't need someone with a credential to teach you and a diploma is not necessary.

This is the thinking behind a classical education. It does not omit contemporary culture because it is not worth learning. The point is that you should explore that on your own while being exposed to the best of what has come before as a foundation and framework.

So get the most you can out of the system, then take off on your own. You don't need an official stamp of approval to learn.

 

[jeremynwolf]

Quote:

Originally Posted by micaela /img/forum/go_quote.gif All of my experience has been in Texas & that does not occur here. It sounds illegal

Texas is what one side of the debate has succesfully labeled a "right to work" state ( Right-to-work law - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ). In this case, that means the employees of businesses that have contracts with labor unions are entitled to the benefits of those contracts whether or not they choose to contribute financially to the cost of securing the contracts.

Connecticut is not a so-called "right to work" state. This doesn't mean that unions have the right to force individuals to join the union, or to pay dues. It does mean that those who enjoy the benefits of a collectively bargained contract can be required to bear some of the cost of securing such a contract as a condition of employment. This payment is known as an agency fee, and is based upon an annual evaluation of the proportion of a union's income that are spent on directly "representational" activities. So, political expenditures are non-representational, but attorneys' fees and other contract-related expenses are representational. If a union spends 60% of its income on representational activities, then an agency fee payer will be required to pay 60% as much as a dues paying member would be. (If a the dues rate is, for example, 2%, the agency fee would be 1.2%). Agency fee payers are entitled to vote on decisions regarding the contract, but not on those regarding other union business.

It may also be worth noting that, at least as of 2004, while some teachers in Connecticut may be required to pay agency fees against their will, they are also the best paid teachers in the country. Teacher Salaries by State

 

[redshifter]

tl;dr


I get an F

 

[user18]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Computerpro3 /img/forum/go_quote.gif I was talking in terms of overall society. So you're saying having entertainment and culture aren't important?

I didn't say they weren't important, I said they are not EQUALLY important to the subject matters you compared them to.
Quote:

I find that amusing seeing how it's a multi-billion dollar business.

That's a strawman argument. That has more to do with the ability of the mega-conglomerates that run the industry to maximize the revenue of the artwork than the artwork itself. Taking American Idol as an example, the success of the show has more to do with the personalities of the show than the music behind it. Take a look at some of the past Billboard Hits and ask yourself, "Was the song successful because it was a great song, or because of the marketing?"

Quote:

It is certainly important to have musicians - it is a huge part of our culture. And you're kidding yourself if you think piano is offered at public high schools.

You're kidding yourself if you think every public high school is the same as yours. And there are public vocational schools that specialize in the arts, such as SF School of the Arts.

 

[redshifter]

Quote:

Originally Posted by nick_charles /img/forum/go_quote.gif *words*

GREAT avatar.

 

[nick_charles]

Quote:

Originally Posted by redshifter /img/forum/go_quote.gif GREAT avatar.

Thanks old chap, Martini ?

 

[micaela]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jeremynwolf /img/forum/go_quote.gif Texas is what one side of the debate has succesfully labeled a "right to work" state ( Right-to-work law - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ). In this case, that means the employees of businesses that have contracts with labor unions are entitled to the benefits of those contracts whether or not they choose to contribute financially to the cost of securing the contracts. Connecticut is not a so-called "right to work" state. This doesn't mean that unions have the right to force individuals to join the union, or to pay dues. It does mean that those who enjoy the benefits of a collectively bargained contract can be required to bear some of the cost of securing such a contract as a condition of employment. This payment is known as an agency fee, and is based upon an annual evaluation of the proportion of a union's income that are spent on directly "representational" activities. So, political expenditures are non-representational, but attorneys' fees and other contract-related expenses are representational. If a union spends 60% of its income on representational activities, then an agency fee payer will be required to pay 60% as much as a dues paying member would be. (If a the dues rate is, for example, 2%, the agency fee would be 1.2%). Agency fee payers are entitled to vote on decisions regarding the contract, but not on those regarding other union business. It may also be worth noting that, at least as of 2004, while some teachers in Connecticut may be required to pay agency fees against their will, they are also the best paid teachers in the country. Teacher Salaries by State

Thanks for the interesting info! That makes sense. And sorry I did not reply to your post earlier - had forgotten to go back & check this thread since I posted.