How humorous - I didn't realize that you had posted yet, Claire - but our topics kind of relate in interesting ways!
So I think this makes it clear that this is a big topic - especially for our generation. Profit vs. Non-profit. Volunteer vs. paid.
I think a lot of us are wondering, why are there only the two options?
This paradigm isn't working for our generation. We are faced with the desire to be of use to those around us, to contribute to our community and to our world. But we are also often weighed down with enormous education debt, or perhaps just unable to find positions open in the field that we chose due to the older generations staying in the workforce longer, and the sheer masses of our generation that are educated.
What are the other options? And that, my friend, is the topic for this blog.
Sunday, April 26, 2009
entirely voluntary
I've been working on a project to provide after school homework help for students between around 8/10 and 18 in a diverse and interesting neighborhood in Seattle. I've also been serving lattes to the students from the prestigious, private high school across the street while I'm at work. And these encounters make me wonder about education and money - Claire, you and I have spoken about socially responsible business, businesses that can include people and the planet into their considerations of the bottom line(s), and I begin to wonder how that works with schools.
On one end of the spectrum, you have folks like me and my colleagues in this endeavor, which is entirely voluntary, seeking to provide a community service. And even if we were to get a grant to help fund our efforts, I would be wary of paying any of our "tutors" or facilitators. One of the first rules of our center is that everyone - students and adults - has to want to be there. Does money change endeavors like this? In some ways this seems like an overly simple question, but I ask it to bring out discussion of the complexities I know are involved.
We didn't have private high schools that weren't affiliated with religious organizations in my hometown, so I don't know much about how they work. From what I understand, the tuition is extremely high for many of these exclusive schools. Where does that money go? Does it all go back into the school - does it go to making sure all the teachers are well compensated for their tireless efforts - does it go to making opportunities available for the students? Or, is someone making money from these undertakings? And throughout, how does money change the culture of a school like this?
On one end of the spectrum, you have folks like me and my colleagues in this endeavor, which is entirely voluntary, seeking to provide a community service. And even if we were to get a grant to help fund our efforts, I would be wary of paying any of our "tutors" or facilitators. One of the first rules of our center is that everyone - students and adults - has to want to be there. Does money change endeavors like this? In some ways this seems like an overly simple question, but I ask it to bring out discussion of the complexities I know are involved.
We didn't have private high schools that weren't affiliated with religious organizations in my hometown, so I don't know much about how they work. From what I understand, the tuition is extremely high for many of these exclusive schools. Where does that money go? Does it all go back into the school - does it go to making sure all the teachers are well compensated for their tireless efforts - does it go to making opportunities available for the students? Or, is someone making money from these undertakings? And throughout, how does money change the culture of a school like this?
Making volunteerism a paid position
I came across this column in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel that I think was written with honorable intentions, but missed the mark in its proposed solution and needs to go further if we're going to fix this problem.
"Turn volunteer jobs into paid positions"
http://www.jsonline.com/news/opinion/43310492.html?referrer=facebook
"As more and more folks get laid off, the least experienced are often the first to go. In the Milwaukee area, there's a large pool of talented young adults who would be happy to do socially useful work, if we only paid them."
Essentially there are inefficiencies in our system where there are services that most of us agree are needed and beneficial (soup kitchens, litter clean-up, etc) but which no one of us wants to go out and pay for. It's the public good issue, and we usually rely on generous philanthropy or government programs funded by those lovely tax dollars to make them happen, or they don't happen at all.
Problem is that when these programs are staffed primarily by volunteers, you run into a whole number of other inefficiencies that can cripple the program. Most volunteers only come 1 or 2 days out of a year and don't vest anything long-term so there's little knowledge transfer or strategy, and even these "un-skilled" positions could be HUGELY improved with just a little skilled labor.
So what do we do? How do we find a way to 'fix' the system? Are we really content to operate in an economic and moral framework here in the States where these valuable services clearly aren't valued highly enough that they're pushed outside the supply and demand market? If business folks don't want exceptions to their rules of 'ventures won't succeed without a market' then why are these components forced to beg for their funding to stay operational? Business law would say that these elements shouldn't exist if that's the case since they're not profitable. Why aren't we willing to pay for them?
It looks to me more like a problem of proper valuation - there's got to be a way to present the value of these goods in a way that we want to pay for them and not just on an inconsistent donation basis. I refuse to believe that there isn't some creative solution to this issue.
Your thoughts?
"Turn volunteer jobs into paid positions"
http://www.jsonline.com/news/opinion/43310492.html?referrer=facebook
"As more and more folks get laid off, the least experienced are often the first to go. In the Milwaukee area, there's a large pool of talented young adults who would be happy to do socially useful work, if we only paid them."
Essentially there are inefficiencies in our system where there are services that most of us agree are needed and beneficial (soup kitchens, litter clean-up, etc) but which no one of us wants to go out and pay for. It's the public good issue, and we usually rely on generous philanthropy or government programs funded by those lovely tax dollars to make them happen, or they don't happen at all.
Problem is that when these programs are staffed primarily by volunteers, you run into a whole number of other inefficiencies that can cripple the program. Most volunteers only come 1 or 2 days out of a year and don't vest anything long-term so there's little knowledge transfer or strategy, and even these "un-skilled" positions could be HUGELY improved with just a little skilled labor.
So what do we do? How do we find a way to 'fix' the system? Are we really content to operate in an economic and moral framework here in the States where these valuable services clearly aren't valued highly enough that they're pushed outside the supply and demand market? If business folks don't want exceptions to their rules of 'ventures won't succeed without a market' then why are these components forced to beg for their funding to stay operational? Business law would say that these elements shouldn't exist if that's the case since they're not profitable. Why aren't we willing to pay for them?
It looks to me more like a problem of proper valuation - there's got to be a way to present the value of these goods in a way that we want to pay for them and not just on an inconsistent donation basis. I refuse to believe that there isn't some creative solution to this issue.
Your thoughts?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)