First, we must understand that the capitalist is purchasing labour-power- our capacity to work productively- rather than labour itself. This means that the employer always has an interest in seeking to intensify productivity(Colley, 2018 p.3)
There is an adage thrown around, “when we know better, we do better.” With Colley’s argument in mind, I wonder who is defining, being served and benefitting from ‘better’?
What does it mean to work productively as an educator? What makes a better teacher? Is it the number of students one can process? The quality of instruction, and if so, how is quality judged: test scores, teacher evaluations, employment rates amongst finishers or civic/social engagement? Perhaps productively is assessed on the number of administrative tasks performed accurately in a week, a month, a term. Productivity could be judged on ability to flex some unique skill set or on the ability to embrace and radiate the corporate branding of the institution? Is one more productive responding to the concern of one learner, or when completing an administrative task for a class of 50? Is it more productive to lead students through a standardized resume template or supporting them in developing the language to tell their own story.
As educators we want to do better, for the learner. To ‘do better’ is part of being ‘professional’. As professionals we have a ‘duty’, an obligation to be informed, to innovate, to implement best practices, and to constantly add ‘value’ to all that we do.
And so we add a small,
30 second step to a process and our course might,
according to evidence based research,
be better for a particular (group of) learner(s).
And we repeat that step 500 times over the course of the term
Adding 4 hours of intensified production- 29 minutes a week or 5.87 minutes a day.
Negligible
Right?
We can squeeze out or compress six minutes of value into a day.
Automate a process
skim a text
use a ready made resource, no need to customize
our learners can be standardized
Right?
We can drop that conversation with a colleague
Forgo that coffee
Do ‘just one more thing’ before we step away for rest
Right?
Repeat this addition five times, ten times a term.
When the evidence deems
anecdotal comments better than letter grades,
learners benefit from differentiated A and B,
achievement is best documented as C,
curriculum needs more of D
we add and
intensify
because
we can do better.
“The distinctive capacity of human labor power is not therefore its ability to produce surplus, but rather its intelligent and purposive character, which gives it infinite adaptability and which produces the social and cultural conditions for enlarging its own productivity, so that surplus product may be continuously enlarged.” (Braverman, 1998)
We struggle though the ‘intuitive’ steps of self-service portals because we are
efficient
adaptable
flexible
We wade through forms and processes to secure X or Y because we are
team players
collaborative
Fill out those surveys, join that committee
an agent of change
engaged
Unionized educators rally around hours of instruction and prep time, wages and benefit packages but don’t often push, publicly or overtly, against the intensification of productivity. We will passionately debate the effectiveness of strategy A over that of B, but will rarely consider the commodity we are producing or who profits from our practices beyond the ubiquitous ‘learner’. Do we accept data, research, the evidence presented in PDs sessions, industry conferences and in association meetings without asking: whose questions, whose evidence, and whose benefit is served? Sometimes. Maybe.
Colley, reminds us there are two ways to increase labour-power. The first through the extension the work day and secondly through productivity via intensified demands. Perhaps in our pink collar labour, we clothe labour-power in the nice, middle class cloak of ‘professionalism’ so we can frame it as a choice rather than a condition. As a calling rather than a system of exchange.
I welcome your reactions. What made you say “but…” or “I think she’s lost the plot? Anything you can relate to? A new thought or questioned formed?
Reference
Braverman, H. (1974). Labor and monopoly capital: The degradation of work in the twentieth century.
Colley, H. (2015). ‘Labour-power,’ in Marxism and Feminism, S. Mojab (Ed.). London: Zed Books, pgs. 221-238.