Teaching labor, 100 years after the Reform
The relation between differents forms of teaching labor and the reformist heritage has been the site of a tension, in some historical periods. In the Manifiesto, but also in other writings, the reformists attacked servile knowledge, the University heteronomy against the academies and other corporati...
Guardado en:
| Autores principales: | , |
|---|---|
| Formato: | Artículo revista |
| Lenguaje: | Español |
| Publicado: |
Instituto de Política, Sociedad e Intervención Social (IPSIS) de la Facultad de Ciencias Sociales (FCS) de la Universidad Nacional de Córdoba (UNC)
2018
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | https://revistas.unc.edu.ar/index.php/ConCienciaSocial/article/view/20205 |
| Aporte de: |
| Sumario: | The relation between differents forms of teaching labor and the reformist heritage has been the site of a tension, in some historical periods. In the Manifiesto, but also in other writings, the reformists attacked servile knowledge, the University heteronomy against the academies and other corporations. A hasty interpretation of this dispute claims that the Reform proposed periodic oppositions as the main form of teachers recruitment, besides considering the proclaimed autonomy as the mere individual right for investigating or teaching whatever one wants, without control from or discussion with the university institution. We show that both ideas are wrong, that they are not based on historical facts nor are they supported by a scientific or political rationality. On the contrary, we claim that the progress on labor legislation for university lecturers, in particular the Convenio Colectivo de Trabajo and, within this framework, the teaching career, opened opportunities of real research freedom and commitment with education, in a context where the threats to autonomy are not mainly posed by the government organs, but rather by the international division of academic work. |
|---|