Raw thoughts on teaching and research

1. At this point, undergraduate education students are not required to defend a research output (i.e., thesis) in order to get a bachelor’s degree in education. One may say thus that education undergraduate students are not as familiar with methodical research as other undergraduate students from other colleges after graduating from college. I think I would be stating the obvious if I will explain at length why education undergraduate students ought to be familiar with research in education when they enter the graduate school. The purpose of which is very simple: to become fully prepared when they enter the graduate school, which is basically a research school.

2. In terms of value, research in education has yet to be placed at the same level as teaching, I believe, in all teacher education institutions in the Philippines. The U.P. College of Education could make a difference on this. (Research writing need not be an individual task; it could be a group work).

3. It's hard to promote a culture of research in education if it is not an equal of teaching, when it is of lesser value than teaching during promotion period. While teaching performance is important, teachers should also treat research as its equal in terms of value. For it is always necessary, if we do not wish to remain a simple practitioner of some theorists' thoughts in education, to continue to challenge and verify the purported truth of educational theories by way of carrying out confirmatory research. It is only through research that we could test in a disciplined and scholarly fashion the soundness of theories that we often import into our system. It is through research that we could widen and deepen our knowledge of our profession. In addition, it is also equally important for us to come up with our own theories that could be more responsive to the requirements of the unique realities of the Philippine educational culture and situation. Hence, research should be equally valued in the College of Education.

4. It is simply not enough to say that teaching is more important than research in education because the majority says so. It’s no less invalid than saying that the neck of a cow could be found in its stomach simply because the majority believes so. So far, no sufficient reason was presented to fully justify the position that teaching is more important than research that is why the latter should be of prime consideration when we evaluate the merit of one’s application for promotion.

5. I do not mean to suggest that there are no good teachers. There are and they could very well get high scores in the Student Evaluation of Teachers (SET). But does it follow that if your SET score is high, you must be good at teaching? And if your score in the SET is low, does it follow that the teacher is bad at teaching. Note that the teachers’ SET is based on the students’ interpretation—not far removed from their opinion or personal standards—of the evaluation elements. Teachers too may have their own standards of good teaching which may not be identical to the students’ or SET's criteria.
6. This opinion is not being stated to suggest that research is more important than teaching. I am just trying to articulate what I believe to be a more tenable view: that research is as important as teaching. There was a time though when universities were more interested in research than in teaching those who were interested to learn from those who had advanced knowledge were invited to come and be the first students in the history of schooling.

7. We have graduate programs where students are taught not only to teach but also to conduct disciplined research. The purpose of which is to cultivate a culture of independence for it is difficult for the Filipino teachers and educators to apply theories that were built abroad, for these could turn out to be constructs that are not sensitive to the realities of our own changing environment here in the Philippines.

8. In teaching, we cannot expect to effect so many changes. What we could expect is a simple maintenance of the status quo in the sphere of pedagogical theories. For instance, teachers would have largely based their approach in teaching on Skinnerian psychology if no theorist had ever offered a “better” alternative view of the human mind and learning. To be not contended with the existing versions of truths in teaching, learning, pedagogy, curriculum, and other areas of education, we should encourage research. But this, again can't be done effectively if research is not viewed as an equal of teaching.

9. The matter on the value of teaching and research should not be reduced into a simple case of shared issue of teachers wanting to be promoted. A simple casting of vote would allow the teacher, who thinks that research is not as important (or as easy as teaching), to go for a set of criteria where the highest promotion points go to teaching. Apparently, this is not without a problem as, again, the valuation of the teacher’s teaching performance comes from the students alone. Research, as well as publication, should likewise be given equal weight in promotion as it is a proof of the teachers’ individual capacity and independent ability to generate knowledge and to contribute to the current fund of knowledge in education, especially in his/her own country.

10. I don’t see any problem if we are going to place equal premium on research and teaching. It’s a win-win situation as it encourages the teacher to be good both at teaching and research. Whereas, if we are going to put research somewhere below teaching—and note that, so far, no good reason has ever been produced to support this hierarchical setting of value—this can’t be a real case of encouraging research in education. “Encouraging” here is nothing but a mere word from someone who thinks, regardless of the amount of arguments for the research-an-equal-of-teaching thesis, that if you are a teacher in the College of Education, then your research is not as and no more important than your teaching. This is not a win-win situation. Research, here, is apparently at the losing end. A teacher who is dominated by thoughts about promotion points will most likely angle for a high SET score rather than work on research projects THAT ARE CONVERTIBLE INTO PUBLISHABLE JOURNAL ARTICLES, OF COURSE.ⁱ

11. Simply because we are teachers of the College of Education, it does not follow that teaching should be greater in value than research in education. To the question, “Where is the required justification to fully support the view that 'if you are an education teacher, you ought to place the highest premium on teaching and not on research because the latter is lesser in value?'” It's nowehere near in sight. Maybe,that cannot be justified. Teaching should be equally valued even in other colleges and research should be of the same worth as teaching regardless of the college where the faculty is teaching. All teachers, regardless of the college in which they teach, aim to train and educate their students, and such tasks could not be accomplished satisfactorily if teaching and research will not “work” as equals. Every faculty, regardless of his/her college, should place equal premium on research (or its equivalent).ⁱⁱ Every faculty should be both good teachers and researchers (whose works should get published).

ENDNOTES

i I’d like to add that a UP Diliman teacher has three functions: teaching, research, and extension. But I do not know if I could produce a sufficient reason to defend the view that extension is no less important than teaching and research.

ii The College of Music and the College of Fine Arts, and probably several other colleges, have something in place of research. In any case, these counterparts of research, I believe, are not viewed as something of lesser value than teaching. For all we know, some specialists are wont to believe that they could even be more important in value than teaching (e.g., concert performance of music teacher, art products of fine arts teachers). But then again, I shall be quite contented with the view that in education, teaching, and research should be equal in value.