Category Archives: Education
Valuing Grades
Students are labeled pesky when they pester their students with questions about their scores in quizzes and exercises. They are viewed as annoying when near the end of a semester or shortly after final exams they send emails to their teachers or call them to inquire about their grades.
Teachers say that students are desperate when after seeing their report cards they move heaven and earth to make the former reconsider the grades they have given and possibly give higher marks citing 101 reasons why it must be done. Reasons they give range from queer to valid.
How many times have some teachers violated established rules on test and measurement… rolled the correction tape on the grades they have given because they got moved either by appeals from the students or by pressure from the academic gods and goddesses.
Students are often criticized for being so grade-conscious.
But is it their fault?
NO!
Students are grade-conscious not because they want to but standards of society force them to be. The policies and procedures in the academe frame that kind of mind-set in the consciousness of students. They are seemingly programmed to become grade-conscious.
It all begins at home. Parents keep reminding their children to study hard and get good grades. When the children get to school, the indoctrination goes full steam. Teachers give a battery of tests and exercises telling the students to perform well if they want to pass the subject. And that if they want to be part of the honor roll then they need to have high scores.
Parents tell students to study hard, the teachers tell them to study harder. Day and night students are told that they must get good grades. After school, parents would even acquire the services of a tutor to further improve the academic performance of their children.
That’s how the “getting-good-grades-is-a-must” mentality gets ingrained in the consciousness of the poor little kids.
Companies and corporations deliver the coup de grace by frequently advertising that they hire only the best and brightest. And what’s the tangible measurement of these superlatives (best and brightest)? GRADES… A+, or 1 or 5 or what-have-you.
Society have assigned GRADES as proof of excellence. Academic performance of students is measured through their grades. The higher the grades the more excellent is the student. That’s how it goes. RESULT? The students become grade-conscious. The grades they receive is a microscope and they are the specimen on the slide. Their academic marks are like lenses used to magnify the contents of the shell between their ears.
The parents want them to work hard for their grades. Yes, perhaps for the children’s sake but the grades they receive is an instrument used by the parents in monitoring their investment. They want to make sure that their children are not wasting the money they are spending for their education.
Parents become so mad when their children present to them unsatisfactory academic marks. And of course, when their children perform well academically, they are elated no end. It is a boost to their pride, a feather in their caps.
The schools in any country stretch their students to the limits of academic achievement because when students pass standardized examinations given by their governments it redounds to their benefit. It’s good for ranking and accreditation purposes. It’s a boost to their reputation resulting to more funding from their government and more enrollees flocking to their gates with their parents just more than willing to pay so their children could take a bite at their academic excellence pie.
The parents and the teachers keep telling the kids that good grades is a prerequisite to success, the only way to get a good job. Thus the students think that the purpose of education is purely economic, to prepare them for a job. And if they fail to get good marks their future is doomed. They will not succeed.
This is the way the students are brainwashed into getting the highest marks possible. This is what developed among students a tunnel vision about education, that it’s all about getting good grades in order to be among the best and the brightest to who the big companies and corporations would give a chance to get a high-paying job.
The grades have seemingly become a curse. The grades take joy off learning. They make students prisoners in the classrooms and the teachers the unforgiving and unrelenting prison guards.
The grades put blinders on the students preventing them from seeing the bigger picture, that education is more than getting good grades and that its purpose goes beyond getting a job… that education is a preparation for life.
It’s sad that both the parents and the educators themselves are the ones putting the blinders on the students. They are the ones who put enormous pressure on the students to get good grades.
There’s nothing wrong with inculcating excellence among students. That’s what schools ought to be doing. There’s nothing wrong as well if students are encouraged to get the highest marks possible. But both their teachers and parents must not forget to tell them also that grades are not the be-all and end-all of schooling. The students need to be told that the world doesn’t end if they don’t receive A+ (or 1 or 5).
Schools must not forget that they exist to prepare the students, not only to find a job after graduation, but to live life and be a productive member of society and humanity.
On Philosophy and Teachers
No two teachers are alike. Even if they are from the same race and culture and graduated from the same university, don’t expect them to embrace the same educational philosophies and to develop the same set of beliefs and values. You won’t see them apply the same methods and strategies in the classroom, approach teaching and learning with the same degree of passion, and treat the learners in the same manner.
Teachers are different in many ways.
Teachers decide which perspectives they would use in looking at their role as mentors and in treating their students. Such perspective depends on either the philosophical foundations upon which they are grounded or their personal set of beliefs… or may be both.
Teachers may have read too much of Hegel, Kant and Plato that they may have developed idealistic tendencies indoctrinating their students into believing that they do not exist for themselves but for others and for a higher purpose. Or like Aristotle, Locke or Rousseau, who all tried to debunk the ideas established by Plato and company, the teachers maybe slowly training their students to subscribe to rational thinking, that the latter need to think critically and scientifically. They could be pragmatists like Dewey and Kilpatrick, guiding students to keep themselves in touch with reality for they believe that there is no other world aside from what can be perceived by the senses.
Their educational philosophies determine the way they talk, think, and behave as professionals.
Whatever values and beliefs teachers bring to the class don’t really matter for as long as nothing they say and do in the while teaching is inimical to the interests of the lerners. What is important is that everything that transpires in the classroom is intended to make the students the best persons they could be and make them prepared to live life.
So be it if the teachers are like Satre, leaning towards Existentialism in guiding the students to take responsibility… in deciding who they are in order to make themselves authentic individuals.
Nobody can claim that this or that philosophical perspective in education is superior over the other. It’s fine if the teachers wish to embrace all the philosophies and combine their best features to serve and guide them in shaping their set of values and in choosing their methods and strategies.
Combining the philosophies, by the way, is not a novel idea. In Scholasticism, St. Thomas Aquinas, harmonized Idealism and Realism.
What about coming out with a philosophical perspective combining the four major philosophies in Education?
The philosophies aforementioned have shaped the teachers into the kind of educators that they are today. Whatever they knowingly and unknowingly say and do in the classrooms are offshoots of their set of values and beliefs. And this set of values and beliefs constitute their philosophy of education.
Teachers may have also accumulated through the years a personal system of values that govern every decision they make in the classrooms. Thus we see them approach their teaching (and deal with their students) in different ways. We see them display different degrees of enthusiasm in teaching. Some display no enthusiasm at all.
There are teachers who are “sages on the stage” who believe, the way the realists and idealists do, that knowledge emanates from them being the authorities. So, the students should be spoonfed. Conversely, there are teachers, who, like the existentialists and pragmatists, act like “guides on the side” painstakingly guiding the students to self-discovery.
There are teachers who would choose specific methods and strategies without considering the specific needs of their students. But there are also those who would be conscientious enough to take into consideration the heterogeneity in the class before deciding what learning system they would put into effect.
There are teachers whose mere mention of their names would send shivers down the spine of students. Conversely, there are teachers who try to make learning fun making the students enjoy, and not fear, the classroom.
There are teachers who consider the classroom a workplace, while others consider it a playground. They work playfully or playfully work happy doing what they are doing in the classroom thereby rubbing off to the students their joyful spirit.
There are teachers who have seemingly forgotten that the students are not just empty sheets waiting to be filled-out as in Locke’s Tabula Rasa. The kids in the classrooms are not wax figures with empty minds which the teachers need to stuff with all the knowledge that the curriculum requires. These students are not just intellectual beings, they have emotions. They need more that education. They also need love and understanding. They should be treated the way parents treat their children.
Whatever the teachers decide to be… whatever system they implement… whatever method and strategies they apply… however they view learning… however they treat their students… would depend on their perspectives as dictated by their educational philosophy and their set of values and beliefs.
At the end, the way teachers conduct themselves as professionals and the way they treat their students depend on whether they consider teaching a means of livelihood or a way of life.
Measuring School Effectiveness
The main subject of the dissertation I wrote for my doctorate was “school effectiveness.” Choosing this subject was driven by a personal belief that the school contributes the most in the development of an individual. It is in school where an individual acquires and develops formally most of the knowledge, skills, attitudes, and values they need and they ought to have.
I put emphasis on the word formally in the preceding paragraph for anyone could argue that the home (family) and the church contribute also to the formation of an individual. Of course they do… but not all parents (unless they are teachers by profession) are trained educators. Teachers (presumably) are. And not all families are functional. The dysfunctional ones would certainly not help in the proper development of an individual. A school (presumably also) is always functional. This is not saying that the home does not contribute to the development of an individual. It does, but not as comprehensively as the school could.
What about the Church?
An individual can not be forced to embrace religion. A lot of people do not have religion. And even those who profess to have religion can not be obliged to go to church and attend masses (or church services) during days of spiritual obligations. Thus, religious institutions may not help (or may contribute just a little) in the development of an individual. On the other hand, a young person can not avoid going to school. No parents in their right mind would not want their children to get an education. For as long as the budget would allow, children will be forced to attend school from basic to tertiary education. And even if a family may not have enough financial resources to access expensive private education, schools run (or subsidized) by the government may serve as alternative.
The school carries on its broad shoulders that task of ensuring that the students entrusted to them should acquire and develop the necessary knowledge, skills, attitudes and values that they ought to posses. The school, which is already acknowledged as the extension of the home, should even be ready to become a vehicle of the church in spreading the gospel… except of course in societies where religion is not part of their culture.
Thus, the school cannot afford to be mediocre. The schools, as expected, should always be a paragon of excellence.
But how do we measure excellence in schools?
Excellence is an abstract concept but can be empirically tested. Excellence of schools can be quantified through existing measures of school effectiveness.
Existing literatures suggest that to measure school effectiveness the performance or achievement of students should be taken into consideration. Scheerens1 refers to school effectiveness as “the performance of the organizational unit called school. The performance of the school can be expressed as the output of the school, which in turn is measured in terms of the average achievement of the pupil at the end of the period of formal schooling.”
Student achievement in the basic skills is undoubtedly the most popular criterion for defining an effective school. Sergiovani2 explains that an effective school is one whose students achieve well in the basic skills as measured by standard tests. Thus, schools take pride whenever their students top government exams – proficiency in certain subject areas for basic education students and board exams for college graduates.
But are the students’ grades or scores in standard tests and government examination a valid measurement of school effectiveness?
Sergiovanni’s model (and similar approaches in quantifying school effectiveness) is being criticized as unidimensional and insufficient. Critics are saying that focusing exclusively on academic achievement ignores the relationship between achieving effectiveness in academic outcomes and achieving effectiveness among other dimensions like citizenship training and development of self-esteem, independence training, and the development of self discipline.
Focusing too much on academic outcomes have made society too obsessed about grades.
Schools are believed to have purposes and goals other than teaching basic skills. Schools effectiveness, therefore, should not be measured only in terms of whether the graduates could read, write and compute and could get good grades and perform well in government examinations.
The effectiveness of schools should be measured in other dimensions as well. Measuring school effectiveness through Sergiovani’s model is taking a myopic view of the purposes of education. It takes into consideration only the intellectual purpose of schooling, which, according to McNergney and Herbert3, include the teaching of basic cognitive skills, such as reading, writing, and mathematics and the transmission of specific knowledge. There are other purposes of education which they (McNergney and Herbert) identified – political, social and economic.
A comprehensive measurement of school effectiveness should attempt to quantify the performance of schools in all the areas aforementioned.
It is hard to refute that schools play a very important role in the development of the individual and in nation-building. Thus they cannot afford to disregard their political and social purposes.
Measuring effectiveness of school should not stop after their students graduate. How their students perform in the workplace and in society as they grow older should also be considered.
The school is the vehicle in the delivery of education and the quality of education the citizenry and their leaders receive through the educational system determines whether a nation is destined for greatness or remain in socio-economic stagnation.
It is believed that a nation is as good as its citizens. One measure then that could be used to establish the effectiveness of schools is to determine what kind of citizens (and members of society) do they produce.
Whatever the status of a country is at the moment, whether it is progressive and peaceful or not is what its citizens made it to be and how the citizens made a nation to be reflects the kind of education they received from the schools.
Measuring school effectiveness in this way, admittedly, is difficult. But even the simplest of minds can easily answer the following questions:
Which school is more effective? Is it the school that produced graduates who topped board examinations or the school that produced responsible, productive and conscientious citizens and leaders?
Which schools are effective? Those that produced topnotchers in standardized and board examinations or those that produced citizens and leaders who are contributing positively to the betterment of society, nation, and the world?
References:
- Scheerens, Jaap, Effective Schooling: Research, Theory and Practice.
- Sergiovanni, Thomas, The Principalship: A Reflective Practice Perspective.
- McNergney, Robert & Herbert, Joanne Foundations of Education: The Challenge of Professional Practice.
Technology and the 21st Century Teacher
The central argument upon which I anchored my previous research work entitled “Factors Affecting The Use of Computers for Classroom Instruction in South Korean Universities”1 is “information technology has significantly altered the landscape of teaching and learning.” Indeed, it drastically changed the ways teachers taught and students learn thus school administrators and teachers need to respond accordingly and effectively.
At the turn of the 21st century education leaders have been reconfiguring educational paradigms that became almost obsolete because of the rapid changes in technology. Nowadays, emerging models of educational frameworks have included technology in both the expected outcomes and support mechanisms of the new paradigms.
The P21, a national non-profit organization that advocates for 21st century readiness for every student, developed the “Framework for 21st Century Learning” (F21CL) to define and illustrate the skills, knowledge students need to succeed in work, life and citizenship.2 The two parts of the framework (see figure below) are student outcomes (as represented by the arches of rainbow) and the support system (as represented by the pools at the bottom. One of the 4 clusters of student outcomes, is “Information, Media, and Technology Skills.” The article explains that to be effective in the 21st century, citizens and worker must be able to create, evaluate and effectively utilize information, media and technology.
And to be effective 21st century teachers, it has become A MUST that the teachers themselves should have those skills just mentioned. We cannot have “the blind leading the blind” scenario.
The 21st Century Student Outcomes and Support Systems
Schools need to respond by making the needed investment. They have to upgrade their existing facilities and purchase the necessary equipment in order to cope up with the demands of the new educational paradigms they have drawn up in order to keep abreast with the demands of the 21st century.
Not only in terms of equipment and facilities that the schools should focus on. They need to pay attention also to their manpower – particularly the teachers who plays the key role to ensure that success of the endeavor.
I made an assertion (in the previous work aforementioned) that integration of technology in instruction and assessment is inevitable and the teachers, being at the center of the delivery of learning need to accept it. The F21CL clearly defines the responsibilities of teachers (Standards and Assessment, Curriculum and Instruction, Professional Development and Leaning Environment.) Much of the responsibilities will be shouldered by the teachers. The said framework even specified clearly what is the role of teachers in the attainment of cluster 4 of students outcome – that is to “Enable innovative learning methods that integrate the use of supportive technologies, inquiry-and-problem-based approaches and higher order thinking skills.
But the application of technology in instruction is a contentious area that caused (or is causing) a lot of arguments and controversies in the academe. Despite the immense benefits that technology brings to education, some teachers are still either unwilling or hesitant to embrace the application of technology to the teaching-learning process.
I specifically identified also (in that same work) the pedagogical benefits that computers and internet provide. For example, the internet has become the teachers and students’ virtual library. Projectors and media players make the interaction between the students and their mentors more efficient. For the teachers in particular, the educational and organizational softwares and web browsers give them more resources and enable them to create better presentations.
But apparently, not all teachers are convinced. They do not believe that computers benefit teaching and learning. They are the ones who do not use presentation softwares preferring to either just dictate or write on the board everything they wish to convey to their students. They are ones who refuse to use available course softwares opting to just open the prescribed textbook and read from it while teaching.
But why?
There are two possible reasons.
First – these teachers were exposed to educational philosophies different from those of the ones to whom embracing technology is a welcome development . This could be the reason they have different attitudes and views about the value of computers in teaching and learning. Their educational beliefs just don’t jibe with using computers in the classrooms.
Second and last – they simply (heaven forbid) do not know how to use any office software suites (word processing, spreadsheet, database and presentations applications) and specific educational software provided for them. They have difficulty navigating around any computer-generated environment. They are so helplessly not computer-literate that no amount of tutoring would help them learn.
Presumably, the reason they could not use the prescribed course software packages (that make things easier for them and their students) is that they don’t have the ability to do so. Even if assuming a course software, at a particular time, suddenly doesn’t work, its contents can be copied and pasted to any presentation software. But that again could be another problem… they probably don’t know how to create presentations.
Worst, they could simply be just aversive to technology.
Or maybe, they are simply lazy. They are computer literate but are not willing to try new systems being introduced.
The question that begs for answer is, “How can a teacher without the required 21st century skills teach such things to students?”
Professional competence for teachers is continuously evolving as technology keeps creeping into the foundations of education. Alongside pedagogical skills, another skill through which competence of 21st century teachers should be gauged is how extensive and effective do they apply technology (computer) to teaching and learning.
Perhaps it’s about time that computer literacy be strictly considered when hiring teachers.
On the part of school administrators and owners, they have a responsibility of ensuring that when they introduce a new computer application of learning the teachers are given enough time and sufficient training to become familiar with it.
The following is one of the recommendations I made in a previous study I have been referring to.
“It should be noted also that among noted also that among the variables that are significant statistically teachers’ perception on the value of computers has the positive influence on their extent of use of computers for instruction in Korean classrooms. Thus, it is important for school administrators to keep that perception positive. The study also found out that a key factor in this positive perception is the teachers’ level of preparedness in using computers to facilitate learning. Being proficient in using computers is different from being familiar in using a new computer application for learning. Even the most proficient among computer users need time to learn an application introduced to them for the first time. Teachers tend to perceive the value of computers for classroom instruction negatively if they were not given enough time to acclimatize themselves with a new system being introduced.”
According to Edwin Creely3, “I was challenged by the ideas from Don Idle that we are textured for technology and that technology has always been and will ever be part of the deepest learning that we do. Learning to move technology and the digital technology of the 21st century into the heart of the learning process is an ongoing challenge for educators. So, the practice of being a literacy educator in the 21st Century must be, has to be, inclusive of digital literacies, including, most importantly, the use of social media.”
As Janelle Cox puts it, “A modern teacher is willing to try new things, from new educational apps to teaching skills and electronic devices. Being innovative means not only trying new things, but questioning your students, making real-world connections and cultivating a creative mindset. It’s getting your students to take risks and having students learn to collaborate.”4
References:
Factors Affecting the Use of Computer Technology for Instruction in South Korean Universities
http://www.p21.org/our-work/p21-framework
(E.Creely)(https://www.researchgate.net/post/What_are_the_qualities_required_of_ teachers_to_teach_21 st_century_learners.
(J.Cox)http://www.teachhub.com/15-professional-development-skills-modern-teachers
On Teaching English In South Korea
Filipino professors attending a meeting of the AFEK
Most universities here in South Korea (and other Asian countries) prefer to hire English teachers from countries where English is the native language. That is a matter of policy but it does not follow that the best English teachers are the ones coming from those countries… they could be somewhere else just waiting to be given an opportunity to prove their mettle in ESL teaching.
There are only a few tertiary institutions in this country who employ Filipino teachers to teach English. These are the universities who believe that teaching English is not a monopoly of the teachers labeled as “native speakers” coming from the following countries: USA, UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, Ireland.
If the statistics gathered in 2013 by the AFEK, Association of Filipino Professors in Korea, is accurate then there are more or less 100 teachers from the Philippines in this part of the Korean peninsula. Reportedly, there are more in elementary and secondary schools and academies (hagwon). This, the organization (AFEK) came to know when they launched in May, 2017 the program “Skills Enhancement for Filipino Teachers Teaching English in Korea.” Several of the attendees were Filipino women married to South Koreans and are employed as English teachers. The Philippine Embassy in Seoul, however, doesn’t have an official record as to how many Filipinos are teaching in the basic education schools and academies here.
Filipino professors are not limited to teaching English subjects only. They are E-1 visa holders and are allowed to teach content subjects depending on their fields of specialization.
E-2 visa holders are allowed by the Ministry of Education here to teach strictly English subjects only. One advantage of hiring Filipino professors, because theirs is E-1 visa, is they can be asked to teach content subjects related to their fields especially if the curriculum requires that the content subjects are should be taught in English. Currently, in the university where this writer is teaching, three teachers from the Philippines, are also teaching, aside from English subjects, content subjects in the university’s Graduate School.
I wouldn’t say that Filipino professors in universities in South Korea are lucky to have been hired. Why? They have to go through the proverbial eye of the needle to have a chance of getting hired. They applied alongside teachers who are native speakers of English who have the upper hand because of their geographical roots.
Most of the Filipino professors here are PhD degree holders. The minimum requirement FOR THEM is Master’s.
To the universities who opened the opportunity for Filipino professors, the applicants needed to prove that they are as equally capable as their counterparts from the native English-speaking regions of the world. When they got hired, it was because they are qualified and had proven that they have what it takes to be English teachers. It wasn’t luck.
Filipino teachers are trained in the Philippines to both know what to teach and know how to teach what they know.
Modesty aside, the Philippines have a very good education curriculum implemented through the Commission on Higher Education which closely monitors TEIs (Teacher Education Institutions) to ensure strict compliance. Thus, Education graduates from the Philippines can be relied upon not only in terms of the knowledge, skills, attitude and values in their field of specialization but also in pedagogy and in research. Filipino teachers are good in both instruction and research.
One of the best features of Teacher training in the Philippines is teachers are made to understand that the most important stakeholder in a school is the STUDENT, not the TEACHER. Filipino teachers adhere to the philosophy that the teaching-learning process should be student-centered.
One reason, if not the main and only reason, most universities in Asian countries (like South Korea, Japan and China) prefer to hire teachers from those seven countries is ACCENT.
Filipinos are good at English. It (English) is the medium of instruction in the Philippines from kindergarten to college – even in the graduate school. Filipinos, at an early age, write and speak English. They hear and read it everywhere. It is also the the official language of communication in the Philippines. All business and government transactions are done in English. The country also has the 3rd largest group of English speakers in the world. Their accent is not bad. Philippines wouldn’t be the BPO/Call Center capital of the world if so. But notwithstanding all the aforementioned, still the said universities prefer native English speakers and not include Filipino teachers in their lists of preference.
But there are two things that would make hiring a Filipino teacher a wise investment – two things far more important than ACCENT… their PASSION for teaching and COMPASSION for the learners.
It is not difficult for a teacher to improve his accent. It is easy to train the tongue to mimic somebody’s way of producing vowel and consonant sounds and diphthongs. What is hard is to convince a teacher to be passionate about the job and to be compassionate to the students…. especially if he/she is not really trained to be one and was only forced to accept the teaching job for lack of better options.
Remembering My Teachers
“What is done in the classroom today becomes the indelible memories of tomorrow.” – Robert Brooks
What do we remember most about our teachers? Is it their intelligence or their wit and humor?
Why do we say that we’ll never forget some of our teachers? What made it hard to erase them from our memory – the positive influences they exerted on us or the emotional wounds they may have directly or indirectly inflicted? Do they remain in our memory because of the words of encouragement they said that motivated us to excel or the mouthful they delivered with the meanest of intentions that destroyed (or almost destroyed) our self-esteem?
Do we recall the lessons our teachers taught in the class or is it the jokes they shared that we cannot forget to the point that to date those same jokes we also share with others?
Think about this – Is it our teachers’ impeccable display of mastery of the subject matter we remember about them or is it their compassion and gentleness that made us feel so comfortable in the classroom?
Being a teacher myself I often wonder what my students remember about me, or do they remember me at all. Imagine how many students I already had having been a teacher since 1988. Has anyone of them proudly announced my name when asked “Who’s your most favorite teacher?” or “Who among your teachers influenced you most positively?”
Constantly asking myself such questions makes me conscious about my performance in the class. Not that I wish to be popular among my students. Teaching is not a popularity contest. But if I get to be remembered by my former students, I wish that it is for the right reasons and not the wrong ones.
As part of my planning, each time a school term begins I make a conscious effort of remembering my former teachers. Why? My teachers in the past, aside from the subjects they taught, they directly and indirectly showed me “what to do” and “what not to do” as an educator. They contributed the pieces in the teaching-learning model that guides me as I practice pedagogy.
There are several teachers whose names were etched in my memory (although I wish to keep their identities under wraps except for some clues). There are a variety of reasons why after all these years I have not forgotten them.
During my PhD days at Bulacan State University I always looked forward to attending the classes of two professors. One of them taught me that “Whatever we don’t use will die of disuse.” and “In onion there is strength.” Yes, that’s onion… not “union.” The other one bragged that “His PEN IS six inches long.”
I didn’t consider their brand of humor offensive although I know some of the ladies in those classes felt uncomfortable whenever those professors deliver those double-meaning sentences. I am not sure what made the students pay attention to those professors – the ideas they were expounding or the jokes they interspersed in their discussions.
Even without those double-meaning sentences those two professors were really committed to bringing humor into the classroom. A lot of times that they shared hilarious personal stories. Three classes in one day, with each class 3-hour long, in the graduate school are stressful and the best known antidote to stress is laughter.
That’s what they did…gave entertainment on the side while we go through the rigors of graduate school.
But when it comes to sense of humor, no one beats my Psychology and Political Science teacher during my first year in college. Aside from his contagious smile, he had the knack for injecting humor during discussions. I remember him making exaggerated facial expressions and movements.
As Maurice Elias suggests, “Let’s add some more enjoyment to school. We don’t need guffaws — a smile and a little levity can go a long way.”
Let me just clarify that the said professors are not just humorous – they are very intelligent educators.
I was also blessed to have three teachers (one each in High School, College and Master’s) who modeled academic excellence. Each meeting with them was always an opportunity to learn something new. Of course I learned from all of my teachers and they all contributed to my development but these three are simply a cut above the rest.
Their common denominator is they never came to class unprepared and demanded nothing less from the students. They were demanding but were very supportive. I don’t know but there was something different in the way that they taught and the way they carried out their duties as mentors.
Because of this dedication to excellence, one of them (the professor in the Master’s program who influenced me the most), became “the avoided one.” Students, as much as possible, would avoid enrolling in her classes. They were students who wanted their grades to be given to them in a silver platter. They were the ones who consider a weekly reaction paper and several book reviews too much for a graduate student. For me, that was the challenge that I wanted to undergo to test my mettle, to hone my skills. I wanted to be deserving of any degree I would be conferred with.
That was the kind of attitude inculcated upon me by my High School Biology and English 2 (and 4) teacher. She gave us assignments and projects that I considered at that time as requirements done by college students. It was difficult but it prepared me to the rigors of college life.
Then in College I had this teacher who taught Shakespeare (and his plays) rarely bringing instructional materials to the class from beginning up to the end of the semester. She did not use audio-visual materials when teaching. She would just stay seated the whole period. But when she talked it was like listening to an audio book. There was never a question from us (the students) she did not satisfactorily answer.
However, I don’t remember the said teachers only because of their brilliance. I had a lot of equally intelligent teachers but whose names I could no longer recall. But these mesdames are different. They displayed enthusiasm while teaching. I witnessed how much they loved what they were doing.
I would also not forget my Grade VI adviser. I felt so sleepy in her class one day but I was trying very hard not to fall asleep. The reason was during my Elementary days, almost every morning I needed to wake up around 4:00 AM in order to sell “pandesal” (bread) before going to school so I would have extra allowance.
One day, while she was discussing I closed my eyes but I was awake. Then one of my classmates said, “Look ma’am! Ching (that’s my nick name when I was a kid) is sleeping.” My eyelids were a bit heavy so I couldn’t open my eyes immediately when I heard a classmate say that. Then my adviser responded, “It’s okay. Let him sleep for a few minutes. I saw him selling “pandesal” this morning.”
That for me was a display of compassion. My teacher did not get angry. She was aware of my situation and she tried to understand. Her simple act of kindness made me feel I am important. It started to develop my self-esteem.
Then I had these experiences with two of my High School teachers that reinforced my self-esteem. My English 1 teacher told me one day, “You’re performing well in the subject. Keep it up!” That was the first time I received a positive comment about my academic performance. Then my Biology and English 2 (and 4) teacher, the same one I previously mentioned, told me also that I can be a good student if I study harder. In addition, she told me that I can be a writer.
The words they said nurtured my self-esteem. The things they told me awakened a self-confidence that until now is alive and strong in me. The words they said encouraged me to excel.
Those teachers believed in me and I promised myself not to disappoint them.
In his book entitled “Self-Esteem Teacher,” Robert Brooks explained that “Teachers have a very significant, lifelong impact on all of their students. This impact involves not only the teaching of particular academic skills, but as importantly, the fostering of student self-esteem.”
What do I remember most about my teachers? What qualities did they have that made their memories persisted in my mind and continued to influence my practices as an educator?
It is their sense of humor, enthusiasm, dedication to the craft, compassion for the students, and the practice of praising students – of telling them what they are capable of.
The foregoing are the building blocks of the educational philosophy that I have embraced.
“Most children will not remember what a teacher taught as much as how he or she made them feel. Children who perceive themselves as accepted and valued will work harder and have positive feelings about their school experience.”
~ Leah Davies
Source: Remembering My Teachers
Realities in the Workplace
The experience of Isaiah Thomas in the NBA, getting traded by his former team, the Boston Celtics, despite giving his all when he plays, despite playing for them in the playoffs a day after his beloved sister died tragically in a car accident, mirrors some of the painful realities in the workplace.
Isaiah Thomas learned the hard way that no one’s indispensable in an organization.
How valuable is Isaiah Thomas as a Celtic player? He led the team to the best record in the East during the 2016-2017 NBA season and brought the franchise all the way to the Eastern Conference finals. He was the team’s scoring and spiritual leader. But that did not prevent the Boston Celtics from letting go of him through the Kyrie Irving trade.
Should the Boston Celtics be faulted for doing what they did? Thomas should know that it’s nothing personal. It’s all business. The executives of the Celtic organization merely exercised their prerogatives. They did nothing illegal. They simply acted in what they think is in the best interest of the team.
That is one thing employees should bear in mind. There are times that employers have to do what they need to do in order for their business to prosper or simply survive. They need to implement changes and tweak policies at a certain point, sometimes at times when the employees least expected them. Notwithstanding disagreements coming from “downstairs,” changes “people upstairs” want to make, will be implemented.
When changes are implemented and policies tweaked, the employees should not take it personally. Changes in the workplace happen when they are due. It is something inevitable. They need to get used to it. Employees need to be ready to make decisions when they happen. There are available options that they are free to exercise.
Employees may simply embrace the changes and move on. They may decide to just accept organizational shake-ups, policy modifications, and what-have-you then continue working. It’s either they view the changes as necessary or accept the fact that they could simply do nothing to prevent them from happening.
Those who would consider that such changes are unacceptable… those who think that they are being taken out of their comfort zones… those who feel being taken advantage of… do have two possible courses of action. They can either resign and continue their quest to find a perfect workplace or they will stay put and contest the legality of the changes that the employers made.
But locking horns with the bosses is a difficult struggle. Employers are always careful with decisions they make. Only the ignorant ones would risk getting hauled to court by effecting changes or making moves contrary to established laws and ordinances. Just like the Boston Celtics who certainly made sure that they have all legal loopholes covered before they finalized their agreement with the Cavs.
Most employers are wise. One of the things an employer or businessman worth his salt does is study the laws and regulations that govern his business endeavors. It’s hard to catch them off-guard in legal matters. They simply know what buttons to push whenever “push comes to shove.” In addition, they also consult lawyers to make sure that they face no legal impediments with anything that they do.
Employees who disagree with changes that those who employ them implement often fight a lonely battle which they are more likely to lose than win. They risk getting ostracized. If they decide to settle the matter of disagreement in the court of law, the employers are ready. With all their financial resources they are ready to fight a long-drawn legal battle until the employee’s pocket and resolve run dry. There’s also a question of whether or not the majority (or even a few) of their co-workers share their sentiments. They cannot force anybody to join their cause, especially those who consider the changes made necessary and inevitable. They should not force anybody not willing to listen to their complaints about policies and personalities in their organization to give them time for their whinges and whines.
You simply cannot expect your colleagues to look at things and issues in the organization in the same way you do. You don’t share the same perspectives. Even your circumstances are different. People are also driven by sets of motivations that might be entirely different from yours. Learn to respect that.
Another thing that employees should always remember is that while they need to ensure that their rights as workers are protected, conversely, the employers will do everything to protect their own investments…to improve their business…or to keep their business afloat… even if it means firing their best employees. It’s nothing personal. It’s simply business.
And the lesson everybody should learn from the Isaiah Thomas’s experience in the NBA is that in an “employer-employee relationship,” business interests outweigh loyalty. Expect nothing from your employers beyond what is stipulated in your contract. They do the same. The employees just need to work as best as they can. There are employers who know how to reward those who work hard. Employers also know how to deal with the perennial whingers and whiners.
Just love the work and enjoy the pay. Find a motivation that will keep you going in the workplace. If there’s none, not even the pay, then it’s time to pack up and find another workplace.
Here is the thing, if you think you can find a perfect workplace, you’ve got to be kidding.
The workplace is a jungle….and only the fittest survive. The workplace is not for the faint-hearted. Remember that!
M.A.D. LIGAYA
M.A.D. L I G A Y A 