Ang Tatay Ni Juan
Excited si Juan nang ama’y kinausap –
“Itay, sa wakas ay aking nang nahanap
Iibigin, ko’t pakakasalang dilag
Bukod sa maganda’y ubod pa ng sipag.”
Nangiti si mang Pedro anak niyakap
“Yes! Magkakaapo na ako sa wakas.”
At tinanong ng ama ang kanyang anak –
“Eh Juan, sino ba itong bago mong sweetheart?”
“Siya po’y si Helen anak ni aling Bebang
Sila’y nakatira sa kabilang kanto lang.”
“Anak, si aling Bebang bang nagpapakwan?”
“Opo itay… ‘yong madalas ninyong bilhan.”
“Naku anak, ako sana’y iyong sundin
Iyang si Helen ‘di mo pwedeng ibigin”
“Bakit po itay? Inyo ngang liwanagin.
“Anak si Helen… sa akin din nanggaling.”
“Itay… si Helen pala’y aking kapatid!
Talagang sa babae kayo’y malupit.
Si aling Bebang kayo ang nakabuntis,
Di ka nasindak sa mister niyang pulis.”
“Si Helen ay pilit kong kakalimutan
Si Joy na lang po ang aking liligawan
Mukha’y maamo’t maganda ang katawan
Siya’y anak ng kumpare ninyong si Teban.”
“Hep! Hep! Hep! Ikaw nga anak eh tumigil
Anak… kay Joy eh huwag ka sanang mang-gigil
Bunga din s’ya nang aking pagtataksil
Nang si kumare ay hindi ko napigil.”
“Ang liligawan ko na lang eh si Gracia,
Nag-iisang anak ni aling Maria.”
“Naku hijo, sorry, pero pasensya na,
Si Gracia’y galing rin sa aking semilya.”
Naglasing ng todo ang dismayadong Juan
Mga kapatid kasi ‘di pwedeng ligawan
Kaya’t ang nanay niya’y kanyang nilapitan.
“Inay…ako po ba’y pwedeng pagpayuhan?”
“Tatlong dilag… aking pinagpipilian
Isa sa kanila nais kong ligawan
Ngunit si itay ako ay pinigilan
Siya daw ang tatay ng mga naturan.”
“Inay si itay ika’y pinagtaksilan
Kataksilang aking pinagdudusahan.”
“Tama na anak pag-iyak ay tigilan
Itong sasabihin ko’y iyong pakinggan.”
“Si Helen at Gracia pwede mong ligawan
Tanging si Joy lang ang dapat mong iwasan.”
Eh bakit po inay? Pwede bang malaman?
“Anak… tunay mong ama’y si pareng Teban.”
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.
Sa TIRAHAN Ni Father
Tinungo ni father likod ng simbahan
Doon si sister kanyang natyempuhan
Dahan-dahang ito’y kanyang nilapitan
Nalingong madre ay kanyang tinunguan.
Sila’y tumingin sa kaliwa’t sa kanan
Ang nandoon ay silang dalawa lamang
Pagkatapos niyon sila’y nagngitian
Halos pabulong silang naghuntahan.
“Wala ka bang gagawin mamayang gabi?”
Madre’y di makasagot, mata’y nanlaki.
“Okay lang naman sister kung kayo’y busy.”
Di naman sapilitan… pwedeng tumanggi.”
“Teka po father…pwede naman po ako
Tatapusin ko lang ang pagrorosaryo
Ayaw ko kasi na ika’y magtatampo
Sige mamayang gabi…magkita tayo.”
“Salamat sister…ako’y pinaunlakan
Sa kwarto ko mamaya, ako’y puntahan”
“Sa kwarto po n’yo?” Madre ay nagulantang.
Si father ngumiti’t tumango na lamang
Sumapit ang gabi, bandang alas-otso
Itong si sister ay kabadong-kabado
Sa TIRAHAN ni father siya’y tumungo
Nakita n’yang bukas pintuan ng kwarto.
At ang sabi ng madre, “I’m here now father.”
Kumatok pa’t nagtanong…”Father, are you there?”
Tugon ang pari…”Come in I’m waiting sister.”
Dugtong pa nito’y…”Please push the door then enter.”
“Ay Diyos ko po father… bakit po madilim?
Naku po… ano ba ang ating gagawin?
Naku po father… maawa ka sa akin,
Pwede po bang ilaw ay ating buhayin?”
Bumukas ang ilaw madre’y nagulantang –
Kasama ni father… dalawang sakristan.
Cake at ng regalo siya’y inabutan
At ng “Happy Birthday” siya’y kinantahan.
Ang Bird ni Father
Umiiyak si Father isang umaga,
Bird kasi niya’y naglaho sa hawla.
May nagnakaw – ang kanyang suspetsa
Kaya’t nagpasya itong magimbestiga.
Bird na naturan mahal na mahal niya,
Hinihimas palagi gabi’t umaga,
Kasa-kasama kahit saan magpunta,
Maging sa pagtulog… hawak-hawak niya.
Kaya’t sumumpa s’yang ito’y hahanapin.
Sukdulang bawat bahay hahalughugin.
Pagiging pari sumumpang gagamitin,
Upang ang bird niya muling makapiling.
Nanawagan pagkasampa sa pulpito,
Pasimpleng tinanong ang mga Katoliko.
Ang tanong, “Sino ba ang may bird sa inyo?”
Syempre nagsitayo lahat ng ginoo.
Paring nagtanong tila nagulantang
Kaya’t ang tanong ay kagyat pinalitan.
“Anyone seen a bird?”… bagong katanungan,
Nagsitayo mga dalaga at ginang.
Ang Mayuming Dalaga
Sa parke nakita’y magandang dalaga
Sa karikta’y mapagkakamalang dyosa
Kabado man ako’y nakipagkilala
Ang swerte ko nama’t hindi s’ya suplada.
Mayuming dalaga’y kay sarap kausap
Walang mapagsidlan nadama kong galak
At nang magutom siya’y aking niyakag
Na aming subukin bibingka’t salabat.
Tumango’t ngumiti magandang prinsesa
Di nag-atubiling sa aki’y sumama
Bumili nga kami…salabat’ bibingka
Nagdagdag pa siya ng puto’t kutsinta.
Aba’t tila gutom ang aking kasama
Biniling pagkain biglang niratsada
At dahil pati niyog kanyang tinira
Ang dalaga’y dumighay na’y nautot pa.
“Sorry!” Wika ng gusto kong maging irog
Ngiti na lamang ang aking isinagot.
Ang dalaga pala kahit maalindog
Masangsang din pala’t mabantot ang utot.
At dalaga’y bigla na lamang bumahin
Lumabas sa bibig tinga ng kinain
At matapos na bibig kanyang pahirin
Kulangot sa labi niya’y lumambitin.
Inisip kung paano ko sasabihin
Nahihiya akong siya’y diretsahin.
Kadiri naman kung aking aalisin
At sariling kamay ko ang gagamitin.
At ang sinabi ko na lamang sa kanya
“Miss sa labi mo may niyog na natira.”
Sa halip na gamitin ang panyong dala
Pinangsungkit sa kulangot ay dila n’ya.
Nang kulangot ay naipasok sa bibig
Susme… nginuya’t ninamnam na pilit
Aniya’y, “Bakit itong niyog mapait.”
Sagot ko’y, “Naku miss… baka iya’y panis.”
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.
Larawan
Lumang larawan sa sahig ay nahulog
Nang ang mga gamit ay aking inayos
Dali-dali ito na aking pinulot
Pinagpag ang kumapit na alikabok.
Larawan mo ito… muling pinagmasdan
Kinuhanan ka sa isang kabukiran
May mga puno sa banda mong kanan
Ginintuang palay ang nasa likuran
May mga bulaklak sa iyong paanan,
Isang rosas nga’y muntik mong matapakan.
Sa kaliwa mo aking nabanaagan,
Tutubi’t paro-paro’y nagliliparan.
Dapit-hapon noon nang ika’y kinunan
Sa langit ay may kaunting kaaulapan
Palubog na araw sana ay napagmasdan
Kung ang mukha mo ay hindi nakaharang.
Larawan mo ay hindi na iniligpit
Sa taguan kasi baka makagipit
Marahan ko itong pinagpunit-punit
Isinama sa mga itinapong gamit.
M.A.D. LIGAYA
M.A.D. L I G A Y A 