Educational Thought and Practice

Let's say that by "practice" here we mean the application or translation of a certain thought into action. But what is thought? It is said that thought is different from thinking, as the latter denotes a specific activity (e.g., calculating, planning, dreaming, reasoning, philosophizing).

HIGH-QUALITY LOCAL TEXTBOOKS FOR FILIPINO SCHOOLCHILDREN: WHERE ARE THEY P-NOY?

Hey, I must say the National Conference on Research in Teacher Education (19-21 Oct.) was a successful gathering of educationists from different regions of the country and other parts of the world. I was part of the panel discussion this morning and Philippine basic education was the center of everyone's academic curiosity. Well, it's obvious that the country's basic education suffer from many "diseases." It's kind of awkward to be saying this in the presence of our foreign guests, but it's just difficult to talk about solutions when we don't honestly articulate our problems. We have many problems in education, all right, but I'll identify only three in this post and these are the following: (1) outdated or questionable curriculum; (2) poor teacher preparation; and (3) lack of high-quality (or model) textbooks from K to 10/12. Of these three problems, the easiest to fix is the curriculum, but then, a beautiful curriculum would amount to nothing if teacher preparation program in the country remains wanting in form and substance. This means, of course, that professors of teacher education and training should actively help in addressing the teacher prep problem. Now, of the three problems that I have identified, common sense tells us, and we know this already since the day Moses was born, that the most difficult problem to solve is teacher prep. It will take years before we could solve this problem as it takes time before a nation could produce highly competent teachers. Read how highly competent teachers are made in Finland, and we shall be on the same page on this matter. Because a beautiful curriculum is just a bunch of words in the wind without a huge army of good schoolteachers, I'm currently more interested in the production of high-quality local textbooks from K to 12. I'll take the risk of saying that we have none of these yet. Having good textbooks could help us lessen the impact of teacher prep problem on the learning and education of young Filipinos. Sad to say, we can't seem to pull out, at this point, any one basic education textbook that could withstand rigorous criticism. Ok, but if you know one exists, show it first to me.

I'd turn green with envy each time I open a ministry-accredited Singapore math textbook because, indeed, any student who could read, write, and think could effectively learn from it even when the teacher is not around. We don't have anything like those Singapore textbooks, both in math and in other areas of study. It's really disappointing to see that in our country one government administration after another did not seem to use the taxpayer's money to finance the writing and printing of high-quality (i.e., model) textbooks in various areas of education (i.e., science, math, values education, art education, physical education, etc.). Of course, highly-educated parents, private tutors, and other stakeholders should likewise be consulted before proposed textbooks are printed or distributed. For these stakeholders, especially parents, have many legitimate issues over the way textbooks are written. For example, a six-page reading text on people of Luzon, Visayas, and Mindanao is too long for a grade 2 to process everything that he/she is expected to learn in one sitting. Also, some books in values education would instruct students to indicate whether "Honesty is the best policy" is true or false when this statement is neither true nor false, i.e., it's a non-cognitive statement. I need not go to any school of book writing in order to know that this is not the way to write books for little children whom we expect to develop a passion for reading and learning. If books are written this way from grades 1 to 6, most of our elementary school graduates will, probably, never find it fun to read. Badly written textbooks, that is to say, would just burn our young ones out long before they enter college. I haven't done any study on this, but I'm tempted to think that badly written books could be one of the reasons why many Filipino teenagers do not seem to have a passion for reading, much less writing.

My recent advocacy is the production of high-quality textbooks for the young Filipinos because if we have good textbooks to offer in public and private schools, a huge part of our problem could be solved even if our teacher prep and basic education curriculum, at this point, are far from ideal.

Let's not forget that financing, using the taxpayer's money, the writing and printing of badly written textbooks is reprehensible as these textbooks will be distributed to millions of public schoolchildren whom, we know, are not yet fully equipped to sanitize or question what the badly written textbooks will preach and many ill-equipped teachers will unwittingly teach. I therefore suggest that all textbooks for public schoolchildren should be subjected to rigorous public scrutiny before WE, THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, THE GOVERNMENT, i.e., not just the select few, decide whether such books are worth using in elementary and high school. By public scrutiny, I mean, parents, even students, columnists, university professors, tutors, school administrators, and other stakeholders in education should be GENUINELY consulted by the administration running the government before textbooks are purchased using the taxpayers' money.

"Control"

Should we control our students when we teach? Do we need it when we teach?

To answer these questions, we should tell first what control is.

Philosophies and movements in education

There are a number of well-known educational movements out there. All of them sound confident with their respective claims, which are often inconsistent, if not conflicting, answers to the basic problems of education. What ought to be the purpose of education? What ought we to teach in education? How ought we to teach?

Often, the proponents of the movements would justify their answers to these questions by citing the "truth" or "universality" of their assumptions about reality, the human being, knowledge, good, and, at times, beauty. Such assumptions, it may be noticed, are traceable to one or more philosophies. One, of course, has his/her own philosophy, possibly quite different from the known ones. Often, however, the student's or teacher's philosophy is more or less consistent with or similar to one or more philosophies. Platonic Idealism, Aristotelian/Lockean Realism, Augustinian Idealism, Thomasian Realism, Sartrean Existentialism, and Rousseau's Naturalism are some of such philosophies. (Already, my use of the expression "philosophy" here suggests that it is basically a body of fundamental beliefs or assumptions that one uses to justify answers to questions that are more or less similar to the educational problems that I've just stated.)

Students of education should be cautioned that it's not uncommon for a certain philosophy to be tied to the ideals and visions of a certain educational movement. Experts, however, may not agree as to the connections other authors make between an educational movement and a certain philosophy. This implies that impeaching a certain aspect of a philosophy does not necessarily mean that one has effectively undermined the validity of a certain educational movement.

One way to effectively invalidate an educational movement, and its recommended educational practices, is to show first that there is indeed a lack of robust connection between such movement and its supposed theoretical foundation (a philosophy or a cross between two or more philosophies). The next job is to attack the areas of philosophy/philosophies that serve as the major pillars of an educational movement in question. Another way to invalidate an educational movement is to prove that it has, if any, very little practical value, and it does more harm than good to the stakeholders, especially the students, in education. Of course, a more potent approach is to question both the theoretical and practical value of the movement in question.

The simple lesson that I wish to state here is that it's just unwise to embrace something if there is no good reason to do so.

For: My future students

When should it bother you if you fail to teach?

Many teachers deal with their students as though learning would certainly follow if the teacher has the required knowledge and ability to teach. This, I believe, often gives rise to good teaching attitude and practices. But we should also understand and keep in mind that, in the context of formal schooling, teaching and learning are neither causally nor logically connected. That is to say, learning does not entail the occurrence of teaching. Much less, teaching does entail learning. Now, this is just an introduction, not the issue itself.

Should you allow your conscience then to nag you if you're a failed teacher to your students? Take note that, with this question, I'm not suggesting that you have nothing to worry about if your students didn't learn from you. Just think about the issue without bothering whether we've similar answers to the problem that I've just stated. (TO BE CONTINUED)

OVCRD includes EQ among UPD online journals

This is the latest development in the Publications Committee of the College. Like I said, we are aiming for the inclusion of the EQ in the list of publications maintained by the Institute for Scientific Information (ISI). Another good news is that full texts of the submissions are available online. If you're looking for some materials to review for your thesis, dissertation, or professional research, you might find some helpful articles in the site. Click here.

Thoughts after reading "Building a Better Teacher"

Aside from having the right amount of knowledge and skills, what else do good teachers need to increase their chances of succeess in teaching? Read on. I promise you that the answer could not be found in the school situation.

Elizabeth Green's article titled "Building a Better Teacher" was published in The NY Times on 2 March 2010. Part of the story is about Doug Lemov, an American educational trouble shooter who works as consultant for schools that wish to improve the quality of education they offer. Green reported that Lemov found that abilities to command attention and to give clear and precise direction reside in the core of effective teaching. Another part of the story is about a group of educational researchers that piled up more evidence for the commonsense belief that effective teaching requires competence (i.e., sufficient knowledge, training, quick mind and sound judgment) to teach the subject . It seems futile thus to impeach any of the abovementioned elements of good teaching, for after all, these are some of the things that educators and great thinkers value as far back as the time before the pre-socratics were born.

But will the said elements of good teaching suffice to ensure a significantly improved performance in school? The answer is no, for we all know that even the best teacher, regardless of the amount of scholarly and professional qualities he/she possesses, could still fail to teach his/her students. It seems to me thus that Lemov and that team of researchers, Green including, are too absorbed with facts about formal teaching that they have unintentionally neglected the major role that other factors outside the school situation play in the advancement, stagnation, or retardation of learning. I think I'll have more to say about this if my time will permit me. For now I just want to say a few words about success and failure in teaching, a topic that is often ignored in debates on the principles of accountability and difference in schooling.

Social Reconstructionism: Where should we begin?

It seems easy to say why we sorely need an education that will enable us, in the long run, here in the Philippines, to reform our society into something it ought to be. But it's unwise to begin by looking for someone or some thinkers whose philosophy or philosophies shall be used as a guide in formulating a social reconstructionistic education in our country.

I believe that what we need to do is to examine or diagnose first our social and cultural situation before we reformulate the goals of education, think of what we ought to teach in order to accomplish such goals, and decide the manner by which we're going to deliver the agreed contents of reconstructionistic education. The social reconstructionist advises us to inspect the various areas of our social and cultural realities: politics, morality, arts, language, psychology, collective intelligence, worldview, and so on. What we ought to teach should be responsive to our own needs. But how could we tell whether there's anything wrong with our politics or the morals of our people, for instance? One way to diagnose our situation is to read our daily papers, both the broadsheets and the tabloids. They will not suffice as a strong basis for our diagnosis, but it's not bad to begin with them as they could show whether something is wrong with our politics or the morals of the people. How many people die everyday for no good reason? How much do corrupt government officials steal from the people? Does the public fall for commercial advertisements fallacious claims? How many people are ill and helpless? How many senior citizens and special children suffer from nightmarish neglect? How does the administration running our government survive condemnation? How many Filipinos want to leave this country? Suppose there are good reasons to believe that such and such are the problems of our people. Is there anything that education could do to effectively address our difficult situation?

Problem of Social Reconstructionism

Social Reconstructionism suggests that education should be an institution of change. Fine. But who will ever disagree with this very broad claim?

But this type of reconstructionistic change is said to go beyond the limits of space occupied by the school campuses. Isn't that good enough a reason to say that reconstructionism is good for us? Great! Great! But this is not clear enough about how things should be done. What exactly are or should be the objectives of formal education? What ought we to teach in school? How ought we to teach the supposed matter of education?

Social Reconstructionism implies that formal education is inadequate if it has no conscious effort to address the enduring problems of one's cultural and social context. This part needs clarification, too, as we do not know yet how far this context goes. Should it be responsive to the requirements of our immediate context alone?

A difficult problem remains unsolved even if we grant that there is no quarrel as regards the social reconstructionistic function of education, for this is still too abstract.

We must not lose sight of the fact that social reconstructionists do not share one and the same philosophy, ideology, and even psychology. In a way, Plato was also a social reconstructionist as evidenced by his desire to realize his vision of an ideal society. Karl Marx was also a social reconstructionist who thought that his communism was the solution to the problematic tension between the capitalist and the working class. Jose Rizal and Andres Bonifacio were neither platonists nor marxists, yet they also count as fine examples of social "educators" who desired systemic change in their society. How about Jesus Christ, St. Augustine, Gandhi, and many more? Even Hitler would count as a social reconstructionist.

So, while it's not difficult to agree with what Social Reconstructionism says in general, we can't help but quarrel when it comes to deciding whose framework ought we to use to guide the educator's attempt to partake in re-engineering or re-building our rickety (i.e., morally and legally corrupt) society.

For: Those who will take the LET

Values, Moral, and Character Education

You'll probably find some helpful information here:

1. A brief history: Character Education and approaches to Moral Education
2. Teaching moral values
3. Values Education: Theory/Practice/Problems/Prospects
4. Character Development
5. Moral Development
6. Values are Caught and Taught
7. Character Education and Cognitive Training

For: Those who are reviewing for the LET

The links below will take you to some sites whose content might be helpful in the Philosophy of Education part of the licensure examination for teachers in the Philippines:

1. Idealism, Realism, Existentialism, and Pragmatism
2. Perennialism, Essentialism, Progressivism, and Social Reconstructionism
3. Learning Theories
4. ARISTOTLE; AUGUSTINE, ST.; BAGLEY, WILLIAM C.; BODE, BOYD H.; BRAMELD, THEODORE; CHILDS, JOHN L.; COMENIUS, JOHANN; COUNTS, GEORGE S.; DEWEY, JOHN; FREIRE, PAULO; HERBERT, JOHANN; JAMES, WILLIAM; KILPATRICK, WILLIAM H.; MONTESSORI, MARIA; NEILL, A. S.; PESTALOZZI, JOHANN; PLATO; ROUSSEAU, JEAN-JACQUES; WHITEHEAD, ALFRED NORTH.

Home Education (Part 2)

What is a good learning home environment?

A well-modified (i.e., well-planned and organized) learning home environment is highly helpful in giving children, ages 0 to 3 years, a strong foundation for future schooling and life experiences. The content of the home environment as a learning place should be more than what a child could take as a learner. This is to maximize what his/her learning faculties would permit him/her to absorb. It's like an eat-all-you-can buffet set up in a restaurant where the foods are always more than what the diners could stuff into their stomach. Only in a similar arrangement could a child have the opportunity to learn so many things that are, nonetheless, just a fraction of what has been made available for him/her to learn. This, I believe, is the best kind of learning environment for infants, toddlers, and other pre-school children.

Home Education (Part 1)

The learning experience of the child in the home environment should be foundational to his/her future formal, informal, and non-formal education. Here, the purpose of teaching, prior to attending school, is to develop cognitive, creative, psychosocial, and other life skills. Learning in the home environment should, of course, include development of important habits and acquisition of certain values and attitudes. While play activities are a natural part of the infants’ and toddlers’ life, advanced learning of the said skills should be centrally¹ imbedded in the infants’ and toddlers’ home environment and daily routine. If this could be done from birth up to age 3, it is possible to turn out “home school graduates” who have the potential to learn things at a rate significantly and inconceivably faster than the speed of learning of average and above-average schoolchildren today.

Thesis / Dissertation Topic or Outline Proposal (Part 3)

What to write for an introduction?

Researchers usually begin with a brief history of the topic. Whether the issue is something new or not, the circumstances and facts surrounding the issue/s that the researcher wishes to address are usually presented. The introduction commonly informs the readers of what the planned or finished work is all about. It also states the most compelling reasons (e.g., important facts, relevance) for your wanting to do research on the topic.

Thesis / Dissertation Topic or Outline Proposal (Part 2)

"To explain all nature is too difficult a task for any one man or even for any one age. 'Tis much better to do a little with certainty, and leave the rest for others that come after you, than to explain all things by conjecture without making sure of any thing." Isaac Newton

Would it still be possible to come up with an outstanding research that stems from a pioneering work or other similar projects?

On how to write your thesis / dissertation

You'll find a good piece of advice on thesis/dissertation writing here. You'll find some more here on what is good research, here on taking notes, and here on rewriting.

Thesis / Dissertation Topic or Outline (Part 1)

Graduate students are forbidden to rehash any study and pass it as their thesis or dissertation. A mere change of research venue, subjects/participants, and retention of a more or less similar conceptual framework, related literature, problems, hypotheses, and instruments of a previous study will not amount to a pioneering research. For that means that one is not about to embark on an investigation that would bear a fresh contribution to the present pool of knowledge. Being the first of its kind should be a quality that all graduate theses and dissertations must hold in common. The UP College of Education should thus exhort its graduating masters and doctoral candidates to submit a proposed topic that could lead to a pioneering research in education.

Schoolteachers

Where do you think will you be today without them?

So, don't you dare make fun of them even if you think that you are now smarter and more moneyed than they are.

The raison d'etre of the UP College of Education

Every teacher education institution exists to train students who wish to become school teachers. It is thus quite obvious that this task is not the one that distinguishes the UP College of Education from other similar institutions. But even if the UPCOE produces highly competent school teachers, such societal contribution won't simply do to say that it is an august institution. It's nobility rather lies in it's unique and heroic function of turning out highly trained and well-educated teachers of future school teachers.