교원정년단축정책의 논리에 대한 비판적 검토
(A) Critical Review of the Logical Presuppositions of the Teacher's Retirement Age Reducing policy
교원정년 정년단축 교사상 교원정책;
- 원문 URL
The purpose of this study is to review the logical presuppositions of the teachers' retirement age reducing policy(TRARP) critically. As you know, TRARP have been put in force by the Korean government in 1999 after about 1 year of preparation and adjustment. There have been some studies on TRARP which focused on the decision-making process or the issues of TRARP. What is the logic of TRARP, and is it valid? What are the logical presuppositions of TRARP, and are they plausible? There has been no study on this issue. This study tackles on this issue. The logic of TRARP may be summarized as follows. The former is the manifest idea, whereas the latter is the latent in each sentence. (ⅰ) The parents and pupils, so called "the education needers" do want not old teachers, whereas education rests not on its own intrinsic values whatsoever but on the capitalistic market principle, that is the law of demand and supply. (ⅱ) Teachers should take shares in the suffer of other people who have been dismissed or retired early in various occupations, whereas efficiency is the best value of education as well as other human realms. (ⅲ) Schooling will be revitalized and improved, whereas the quality of education depends not on the wisdoms but on the capabilities of teachers. Inferring from the logic of TRARP, there seems to be two logical presuppositions of TRARP. While the one which has to do with the aim of schooling is the fostering of competent persons, the other, the ideal of teacher, is the capable. The former, that is the fostering of competent persons can be compared with the orientation to the whole person, whereas the latter, that is the capable can be compared with the moral. It is well-known that both the orientation to the whole person as an educational aim and the morally equipped person as an ideal teacher have been rated high until now. I am sure that education has its own right and its own intrinsic values. So education cannot be judged by the capitalistic market principles but by its own logic or values. And I think that the educational aim and ideal teacher which have been inherited throughout the human history deserve to be respected. Because almost everything can be worth being valued if it has survived through the severe test of history. Almost everything should have been disappeared in the wind of history if it had no merit.