I mean here that money appear only as a mediator of human relationships. While OP focuses on just salaries, the teacher-student and nurse-patient relationships could be established without it.
How was your teacher not being paid to teach?
Not one teacher, but nearly half of them! It was a small university near research institutes. If a scientist won a grant for their research, they were teaching students for free; if they were struggling financially, the university would register them as teachers for courses that have an unpaid teacher. I understand that it’s hard for American folks to imagine, but in Eastern Europe such places still exist.
Finally, what makes a teacher more professional than another?
That should be clear for now. Imagine a person who researches group theory and comes to share their knowledge; and a person who just teaches it. Who do you think is more professional?
And yet my most professional teachers were not paid for teaching.
I’m not advocating lowering the paycheck to increase the professionalism; just highlighting how phantom money are in this equation
Can you elaborate? What phantom money? How was your teacher not being paid to teach? Finally, what makes a teacher more professional than another?
Would be glad to!
I mean here that money appear only as a mediator of human relationships. While OP focuses on just salaries, the teacher-student and nurse-patient relationships could be established without it.
Not one teacher, but nearly half of them! It was a small university near research institutes. If a scientist won a grant for their research, they were teaching students for free; if they were struggling financially, the university would register them as teachers for courses that have an unpaid teacher. I understand that it’s hard for American folks to imagine, but in Eastern Europe such places still exist.
That should be clear for now. Imagine a person who researches group theory and comes to share their knowledge; and a person who just teaches it. Who do you think is more professional?