Tag Archives: Education

Promoting Honesty in the Classroom

At this time in the history of education in the Philippines, great stress is being put on the importance of promoting true Christian (humanistic) values in our schools. In the light of this fact, I would like to share with you my own experience in connection with efforts I have been making during the past three years to promote honesty in my Religious Studies classes. As far as I can tell, the results have been encouraging enough to warrant this brief report.

Perhaps it might help if I begin by explaining briefly the basic framework within which I work in my Religious Studies classes. I present this framework under the rubric of “General Objective” in the three courses I teach, i.e., RS 21-Jesus and the Kingdom, RS 103-The Church in Philippine Society and RS104-Life Expressions in the Christian Community (Sacraments). In it I explicitate as my main goal to “promote a deeper understanding (in the light of Faith), appreciation and commitment” in the particular area of Christian Life specified by each course as part of “the on-going Dialogue of Salvation between God and Man.” I make it clear, however, that my primary objective, as far as course requirements are concerned, is to promote a clear understanding of the course content. In addition to the importance of solid understanding as an indespensible foundation for a valid appreciation and meaningful commitment to the Christian reality being studied, I explain that the main reason for focusing on the cognitive aspect of religious growth and development is that I believe this is the only aspect that the school can justifiably require the students to address themselves to without violating their freedom in religious matters. It is also the only aspect of religious growth that can be measured and graded. Everything else is deeply personal and deeply personal clearly demonstrates. I just don’t want them to feel that we are forcing them to act against their conscience or interfering in their personal lives. Even my stress on anonymity in the various exercises or activities I utilize in this project are meant to protect the sacredness of their basic relationship with God and personal freedom and integrity. But be that as it may, I do not hesitate to make it clear to them that I consider understanding which does not lead to appreciation and commitment as being of limited — if any — real value. Actually, this is already very clear to many of them as is evidenced by their own support of this little project which they appreciate as an opportunity to “put into practice what we have learned.”

Once the first part of the General Objectives has been sufficiently explained, I give the students the first quiz of the semester. The questions I ask are chosen to give me a basis for pointing out the relevance of the issue of honesty to the general objective and to the process of religious growth. Thus I ask them the following questions:

1. What are the 3 main elements in the process of religious growth and development we hope to foster this semester?
2. Which of the 3 elements do you think is the most important? Why?
3. Which of the 3 will we be concentrating most on this semester? Why?

I point out the relevance of the questions to the exercise later if it is not already clear from what has been said above.

After placing the three questions on the board, I ask them if the questions are clear, and once I feel that they understand the questions I tell them that I have to go out for some important business and that I will return in about 10 minutes. Then I leave the classroom and they are on their own.

Upon returning to the classroom, I give them additional time to finish the quiz if needed. If not, I collect the papers. Then I tell them to take a one-fourth sheet of paper and without placing their names on it to answer three more questions honestly, namely,

1. What did you do while I was out?
2. Why?
3. How do you feel now about what you did? Why?

Invariably, I get a lot of knowing smiles from the majority who realize now that there was really “method in my madness” in leaving the room during a quiz — an experience none of them had ever had before, so they say.

While they are answering the second set of questions, I sit down and place a “10” on every paper without even looking at them and immediately return their graded papers to them. This gets them even more confused as their puzzled looks at one another clearly show. I then tell them that when they are finished with their answers they can pass them to me. As I collect them I make it obvious that I try not to notice who give me what paper so they won’t think I am trying to find out what they write. Once the papers are in, we begin to process what has happened.

The processing begins with my reading out loud the answers written on the papers they give me. Their reactions to what they hear are very revealing. After reading each paper I comment on the various answers to get them to reflect on what they hear and what they themselves did while I was out of the room. For example, I point out how expressions of guilt feelings on the part of those who cheated in my absence and feelings of joy on the part of those who resisted the temptation to cheat reveal the significance of the decisions that they made in the face of that temptation. I make sure that they understand that they have either compromised or enhanced a very important part of their personal being in the free choices that they made. They are thus enabled to see the importance of their conscience and the limited nature of their freedom. In some instances however, a student would admit copying and say he felt nothing. I try to help them to see the danger of getting into such a state of insensitivity. Another issue that surfaces during the reading of the third answer is the level of awareness or feeling manifested in what evokes the feeling reported. Some are more inclined to feel good or bad about how they fared in answering the questions than in how they got their answers, i.e., whether they were the result of their own personal study and honest effort to answer or the result of copying from a neighbor or their notebook. It manifests to some extent which level of personal growth is a priority with them, the cognitive or behavioral.

The answers to the second question provide an occasion to reflect on and discuss reasons for being honest and reasons for cheating. Those who try to be honest express their own esteem for honesty and integrity and their serious desire to show their faith and reverence for God by trying to be honest It is clear that for many, honesty Is a-value no matter how often they may fail. This is also true in the case of many or even most of those who cheat. The most common reason, of course, for cheating is the failure to study seriously for the quiz. But “peer pressure” often enough, is what “forces” some to go against their conscience. Their express intent of “helping a friend”, or their fear of “hurting a friend” gives us a chance to discuss the real meaning of friendship as the effort one makes to do what is best for the other. In the course of the discussion it becomes clear to them that asking a friend to help one cheat is really a violation of the nature of true friendship and that the refusal to help another cheat might be the “friendliest” thing to do. Another fairly common answer given for cheating is simply the desire to get high grades “by hook or by crook” and this answer leads into the next phase of this exercise of “fostering honesty in the classroom.” But before actually moving on to the next phase I point out to them that every quiz situation involves two tests, one regarding their level of understanding and the other the degree of personal integrity they have attained. I help them see that all three levels of religious growth and development were involved during the quiz and that their behavior revealed not only what they know (cognitive level) but also what kind of persons they are or are becoming (behavioral). When I ask them which of the two tests is more important, they spontaneously acknowledge their own recognition of the priority of the latter (behavioral). With that clarified we move on to phase three of our exercise.

This third phase starts with my going around and asking several of the students what grade they got for the quiz. All of them answer “10”, of course. When I ask them how they feel about the grade they got, most say they are happy. When I ask them why, they say because they got a perfect score. When I ask them what that means they say the got all the answers correct. When I point out to them that I obviously gave the grade without even reading their answers they show signs of being more confused. When I ask them what they think my motive was in giving everyone “10” without checking the answers some say they think it was because I believe they all studied hard and are very bright (honestly!). Others say it was because I want to give them a good start for the semester. But the majority do not really know what is going on. At this point we undertake a discussion of the purpose and meaning of grades.

In our discussion of the matter of grades, I explain to them that grades are a form of feed-back to both student and teacher as to how each is performing in the matter of promoting or growing in understanding of the course matter. I try to get them to see that a grade which doesn’t measure their level of understanding is meaningless, at least it is meaningless to those who come to school to learn. For those who come just for grades, high grades no matter how attained, are meaningful in a functional, if not, a moral or academic sense. In the light of this discussion, I ask them once again how they feel about the grade that they got. They realize that actually their “10” has no real value or meaning. I then invited those who really want to know how they did on the quiz to return the paper to me so that I can grade it properly. Needless to say, all do return their papers to me.

Once I have clarified the reasons behind my rather mysterious behavior as an attempt to help them see what their performance on the quiz revealed to them about their level of understanding of the matter, the level of their moral development and their basic motive for coming to class, I introduce them to the Honor System and explain my intention of implementing that system for the rest of the semester. I tell them that I will follow the same procedure in future quizzes that I followed in the first quiz, i.e., after placing the Questions on the board and clarifying anything that needs to be clarified, I will leave the room and let them answer the questions on their own without the presence of any proctor. I try to deepen their understanding of the reason and value of having such a system by pointing out the need to cultivate the value of honesty and integrity now as a means of preparing for the challenges and temptations that they will be faced with later on in life in matters of greater moment than grades on a quiz. By pointing out the moral dimensions of many of the problems facing the country today and appealing to their own desire to contribute to the creation of a better world, I invite them to take advantage of this opportunity to begin to change the world by changing themselves here and now.

After these exercises and discussions, I give them an assignment to be done at home after they have reflected on their own experience during the previous session. I ask them to answer on a one-half sheet of paper two more questions: 1) Are you in favor of the Honor System? 2) What are the reasons for your answer? I collect their answers the next class and after reading through their papers at home I process these answers with them. I list down on the board the main reasons against the system (very, very few are opposed to the idea) and the main reasons for the system and then discuss each. Among the more common reasons against are fears that some will take advantage of the system to become lazy and dependent on others for their answers since some are clearly only after grades. Some of the objectors claim that the system is unfair because those who study hard and try to be honest may get lower grades than those who don’t work but get by through cheating. To these objections I simply respond that these possibilities and students’ reactions to them are a test of one’s personal values and that these issues will surface over and over again in their lives in the future. I try to help them to see that those who are responsible and honest are the real gainers and that those who are irresponsible and dishonest are the real losers, if we really believe in the values we claim to believe in. One other object ion that comes up frequently is the difficulty of resisting temptation. This gives me a chance to explain that while it is true that the “devil is prowling around, seeking whom he may devour” as St. Paul warns us, the Holy Spirit is also around trying to help us to become better men and better women. Here I have the opportunity to say something about the importance of a serious spiritual life in order to become the kind of persons we all aspire to be. I try to help them see that this is true of every aspect of their moral lives, not just quizzes here in school.

Upon completing our discussion of the objections presented, we take a quick look at the reasons why they favor the system. Among the more significant reasons given are their felt need and desire to test and prove their love of and faith in God. Many see the value of being challenged and of being given a chance to prove that they can be trusted. Some see it as an opportunity to grow In maturity and in their sense of responsibility for their own actions. Still others see it as a chance to develop self-discipline and self-control. So, by and large, their over-all response to the challenge presented by this Honor System reveals in them a real desire to do the right thing on their own and to begin the moral resolution we are all talking about by starting with a conversion in their own hearts. Several even express the wish that this system could eventually be adopted throughout the whole academic system here at the Ateneo. As Unrealistic and impractical as that may seem to be, I can really say that their responses have proven very enlightening and inspiring to me.

This report would not have not be complete if I did not say something about the realization that has developed in me regarding my own contribution to the success of this effort to promote honesty among the students. For it has become very clear to me that if I myself am not honest and open in my dealings with them, I have no right to impose on them the burden of struggling to be honest in their dealings with me. This system has made me more serious and careful in preparing, presenting, and facilitating understanding of the matter that I present to them. It has also made me realize the need to be more reasonable and understanding in my expectations and demands on them, seeing that they are under so many pressures from other teachers and their social and domestic worlds. So I make it a point to assure them that if they prove honest and open with me, I will do everything in my power to be fair in dealing with them. I encourage them to feel free to give me feed-backs —either personally or through the beadle if there is anything I am doing or not doing to their detriment. In this way I try to make it clear to them that I am willing to make my own contribution towards promoting greater honesty in the classroom. I assure them that I am therefore willing to carry my share of the burden involved in our corporate effort to make the world “a better place to live in”, even in the admittedly small way of trying to promote the value of honesty in R.S.

Financing Schemes for Philippine Higher Education: Meeting the Challenges of Quality and Equity (From the Point of View of Mindanao Private Schools)

Following the concept paper for this Second Annual NIUFE Conference, the four NIUFE regional convenors for Mindanao sent out the questionnaires to tertiary-level institutions in Mindanao. The responses from the schools were not too enthusiastic: about a third as an average; a little over forty percent for Region X; a little over twenty percent for Region XI.

Except for Region XII, regional consultations were convened to comment on draft papers on the two suggested subtopics: “Financing Higher Education vis-a-vis Socioeconomic Growth Trends and Needs and the Vision of an Improved Quality of Life for the Filipino” and “Financing Higher Education relative to Resource Capabilities  or Tertiary -Level Institutions.” These regional consultations were multisectoral, with representatives from academe, public and private, government, business and industry and NGOs.

Towards mid-September a Mindanao area consultation was held in Davao City. In attendance were the regional convenor of Region IX assisted by a colleague, the regional convenor for Region X, a representative sent by the regional convenor of Region XII and four representatives from the host region, Region XI.

The Mindanao area consultation discussed the process and the results from the questionnaires and the regional consultations. The meeting decided that instead of presenting two papers from Mindanao at this Conference, one for each of the suggested topics, two summary papers would be presented — one from the point of view of SUC’s and the other from the point of view of private schools. This highlights the radical difference in funding and fund-sourcing for SUC’s and private schools.

This paper from the point of view of private schools will treat mainly of the second topic: “Financing Higher Education relative to Resource Capabilities of Tertiary-Level Instructions.”

From the beginning the following caveats should be kept in mind:
1. Average response from the school in the different regions averaged only about thirty percent. Hopefully the responses received were representative of most schools .

2. Probably due both to a faulty questionnaire and careless reading of the questionnaire and careless answers, the data which could be derived from the questionnaires were at best spotty and incomplete.

However, despite these shortcomings,  the data received were reasonably similar uniform and consistent, and verifiable from other sources, especially from the EDCOM Report of 1992.

Mindanao and the Schools

The schools feel that at present Mindanao needs graduates in agriculture, technology and engineering, education and business. The schools also feel that they are producing the graduates needed for the development of Mindanao. The schools also feel they are contributing towards the development of Mindanao.

This may not be the proper forum for a discussion of the developmental concerns and priorities for Mindanao. Clearly this would greatly affect the schools and their offerings.

The Resources of the Schools

1. The resources schools have are their faculty, physical facilities, library and other learning resources, and research/laboratory facilities.

Data from Region XI give us a sampling of the responses.

Making use of standard FAAP accreditation levels 1-3, with three as highest, Faculty was deemed at level 1 by one school, at level 2 by five schools and at level 3 by three schools. Two schools said their Physical Plant was at level 1, two schools placed their Physical Plant at level 2 while five schools placed their Physical Plant at level 3.

One school placed Library and other learning facilities at level 1, four schools at level 2 and four schools at level 3. Research and Laboratory facilities were rated at level by three schools, at level 2 by four schools at level 3 by two schools.

Six schools did not give ratings to these school resources because they are not yet accredited or have not done any work towards accreditation.

2. Of the fifteen respondent schools, two had full-time faculties of over a hundred teachers; four have between fifty and a hundred, while the remaining nine schools  had less than fifty FT faculty members.

Regarding the percentage of FT faculty with master’s and higher degrees, percentages went from a low of zero percent to a high of 67%. The median percentage was about 14%.

Percentage of doctorate degree holders had a high a 7 percent. Half of the schools did not have a single faculty members with a doctorate.

Most of these graduate degrees were in the field of education.

3. Faculty salaries varied but were uniformly low and over rather narrow ranges. One school had monthly salaries ranging from P2,417 to P3,000. The “best” range was from P3,942 to P7,674. Most faculty salaries ranged from three to four thousand pesos monthly.

For schools which reported hourly pay, the ranges were from P28-40; P35-55; P50-57; and P50-100.

Faculty benefits varied but generally included study and leave privileges and education benefits for dependents. Some schools also had education benefits for dependents. Some schools also had housing and various levels of health and hospitalization.

How are Schools Financed?

Again data from Region XI will give us a sampling of the responses.

1. Tough there was a question requesting that approved schedule of fees for SY 1990-91 be attached, only half of the respondent schools did so. We do not know why the questionnaire asked for fees for SY 1990-91.

Per unit charges per semester in SY 1990-91 varied from a low of P15 at public community college to a high of P99.95. The other schools had similar semester per unit tuition charges: P65 for first year and P54.32 for upper years; P70 for freshmen; and 63.65 for upper years; P72; P77.80; P80.

2. To the question inquiring about sources of income other that tution and other schools fees, the two public schools checked government subsidy or assistance. Of the private schools five said they had no other sources; two checked  government subsidy or assistance but without specifying how (could this be the grants given to students by the government?); one school indicated rentals and interest income; and three other schools said they received government assistance or grants from other sources. The level of these other sources as a percentage of total income was not indicated.

3. To the question asking about major problems related to financing current degree programs, one public school said they offered no degree programs. Three schools said “no problems” or did not answer the question.

The other schools mentioned that faculty salaries were low and could not be made higher because of limited tuition income. Some mentioned DECS constrains on tuition increases; at the same time these schools were concerned about the paying capacity of their clientèle. A few schools mentioned more specific constraints such as a recent fire  or the recent drought.

The responses agree that to provide quality education tuition alone is not able to adequately  support a school. However, as one school put it, “fund raising is slow due to response of people. Lack of social concern. “One public school mentioned “lack of instructors, lack of government support and lack of market to buy their produce.”

4. To cope with these financial difficulties, schools have tightened up their financial control systems and have sacrificed other needs of quality education (especially to be able to take care of salaries). They have also continued to look for other sources of funds, especially for scholarship, special projects and capital expenditures.

5. As more long-term solutions to these problems, schools recommend government subsidies and grants to private schools, even for part of the salaries of faculty. They also propose less control and restrictions from DECS on school tuition and fees. They also propose that government should provide more funds for scholarships for students in private schools. Some also recommend that small programs either be phased out or merged with others and that duplication of courses offered in the same localities be better rationalized.

Summary, Recommendations and Conclusions

1. The data provide by the questionnaires, though skimpy, say that tertiary-level educational institutions are having a difficult time providing equaly education. SUCs say that except for a few they are inadequately funded by the government. Private schools which provide for the greater majority of college-level students in the country  are almost completely tuition-dependent.

Tuition charged at Mindanao private schools are about a fourth of fifth of what the top Manila schools are able to charge.

While schools deplore too much control from DECS, especially with regards to the tuition they may charge, these same schools are also worried about the ability of their clientèle to continue to pay the ever-rising costs of higher education.

And yet tuition charges must continue to rise if these are the only source of ever-increasing (and still very inadequate) teacher/staff salaries and of the other costs of schools operations.

We cannot over-stress that fact that quality education will have its costs: better teachers with better academic qualifications deserve better salaries; libraries and laboratories have costs which are often foreign-currency and foreign-economy related since more sophisticated equipment and better library books come from abroad; it remains doubtful how much of capital expenditures and expansion of school facilities could be financed by tuition and the usual operational income of schools.

And while we may complain about the ever-rising cost of education, tuition charges of Philippine private schools remain very low compared to schools abroad. In general per capita expenditures at Philippine schools are also  much lower than comparable education in other countries. As EDCOM documents, Philippine expenditure for education as a percentage of GNP stands at 1.3%; expenditure for education as a percentage  of GNP is  3.7% for Indonesia, 3.6% for Thailand, 6% for Malaysia. The average for all Asian countries is 3.3%.

2. DECS regulations prescribe that faculty at tertiary-level institutions should possess appropriate graduate degrees. The data given confirm that the great majority of faculty in most schools do not possess appropriate graduate degrees.

And faculty development for appropriate graduate degrees is very expensive. It includes present  salaries and an appropriate living allowance (since many must go to Manila schools) and the tuition and other school fees. In addition, the salaries of replacement faculty must be paid.

3. The main cost in schools is faculty and staff salaries. Salaries of Teachers have remained ridiculously low in comparison to business and industry, and yet teachers are expected to pursue more education.

While it may not be possible to equal salaries in business and industry, salaries of teachers should be dramatically improved, if quality education is to be had.

4. Even the 1992 EDCOM Report does not say mush about the financing of higher education, most of which is provided by private tuition-dependent schools.

EDCOM concentrates on the necessity of giving first and foremost attention to basic education, most fof which is provided in public schools.

For higher education, EDCOM recommends that the financing of SUCs be reviewed, especially with regard to the present system of subsidizing all and with regard to the efficiency of their use of funds. While EDCOM notes that private schools seem to generally have lower per student cost, it adds that “there is need to evaluate whether . . . [this] . . . is the result of lower quality or higher efficiency.”

The EDCOM also shows concern about the “mismatch” between what graduates had taken and job opportunities.

EDCOM recommends that all income generated by SUCs be retained for their use; it further recommends that scholarships and tuition subsidies be increased for priority courses. It recommends the possibility of socialized tuition schemes in some private schools. It recommends that the private sector be brought in for grants for graduates they need, for incentives for research outputs they are interested in, etc.

While EDCOM recommends the expansion of the voucher system, it is not clear whether this is only for basic education or for all levels. It should be noted that the voucher system will not effectively help private education if tuition charges remain low and inadequate for better faculty/staff salaries.

It would seem that due to the scarcity of public monies and the serious needs of basic education EDCOM has presupposed that government will have most of tertiary-level education to private schools. The highest realistic level of assistance government may be able to give private schools seem to be to leave them alone and to allow market forces to dictate their charges (and even their existence), while hopefully also maintaining a realistic level of educational quality.

We should note that through the Department of Science and Technology government is assisting a few selected engineering schools and graduate schools for equipment and faculty development.

5. The financing of tertiary-level education remains most problematic and there seem to be no ready and easy solutions in sight.

SUCs should be required to offer quality education and to make use of scarce government funding and other resources made available to them. There should be a moratorium on the establishment of new SUCs. SUCs should seriously review present practice of subsidizing all students and at the same level.

Private schools will continue to be mostly dependent on tuition and other fees. Government should be encouraged not only to accept them as partners and to allow them greater administrative and fiscal autonomy but also to give them support through student vouchers and scholarship,support for equipment and faculty development and even for salary supplements for faculty.

ZABAPS, the association of private schools in Region XI, summarized their main reflections and recommendations:

a. The association is encouraged by the DECS Secretary A. Fabella’s statements that his “priorities will stress greater curricular flexibility and equality in regulatory treatment between public treatment between public and private schools.”

b. The association is not concerned about the problems of equity of access and quality of education.

c. The association supports greater fiscal autonomy for private schools.

d. The association does not feel that schools should operate parallel “business ventures” just to enable them to continue in their main task of education.

e. The association supports a voucher system to be adopted by the government. It makes recommendations on how to arrive at a fair and equitable value of the voucher.

f. The government should more actively assist faculty development programs for advanced degrees.

6. For the development of the whole country and to minimize too much movement to Manila and the resulting talent drain to Manila from the provinces, it is imperative that there be genuine centers of academic excellence in the provinces, comparable to Manila schools.

7. As a nation we should seek a better understanding and rationalization of our educational system, especially on the college/university level. While out Constitution mandates that the “State . . . protect and promote the right of all citizens to quality education at all levels and . . . to make such education accessible to all,” are we able to afford the very extensive system of college and university education that we have, especially seems to have been greater access to all, but at the sacrifice of educational quality.

Language, Power, and Defining the Filipino Soul

I had written a paper on the process that led Jesuits finally to adopt English as the medium of instruction in their schools, primarily the Ateneo de Manila and later the seminaries entrusted by the bishops to their care. For fear however that I might bore you with details on the intramural struggles regarding language among the Jesuits, I decided that probably the best way of drawing some fruit from my labors as a student of history is to do the following: First, to summarize in a concise way what I think are some data brought to light by historical research into this Jesuit process; second, to raise some questions about the relationship between language and identity given a particular reading of our context today; and third, to present a tentative framework regarding this relationship given today’s globalizing world.

Background on Jesuit educational work in the Philippines

The shift from Spanish to American sovereignty in the Philippines produced radical changes on various levels of life.’ These changes were all in the service of a policy of Americanization of Philippine society. The strict political demarcation of Church and State dictated by American constitutional principles spelled the demise of the patronato real as the legal-canonical arrangement governing Church-State relations during the Spanish regime.’ This meant that public funds could no longer be used for Church-based and Church-sponsored activities. Thus in the realm of education for example, the Church had to fend for itself. Where the Jesuits were concerned, the Eskwela Normal Superior had to cease operations as a state-financed teacher-training institute and the Ateneo municipal de Manila had to drop its appellation of “municipal” and transform itself into a private school.

The American regime drew up a plan for a public school system to replace the one systematically instituted under the Spaniards in the 1860s. The plan covered the whole range of education, from the primary to the university level. Implementation of this plan involved the use of English as medium of instruction. Though Spanish continued to be used in government, particularly in court proceedings, the trend clearly was toward supplanting the language of Calderon with the language of Shakespeare. Much better able to adapt to and live under this radically changed situation were the new religious congregations invited to work in the country. In the first decade of the twentieth century alone, Irish Redemptorists, Dutch Mill Hill Missionaries, Belgian Congregation of the Immaculate Heart of Mary (CICM) Fathers, Dutch Sacred Heart Fathers, and the German Divine Word Missionaries (SVD) entered the country and in time would spread out to the rest of the archipelago. Women religious congregations predated and accompanied these men religious congregations. Aside from the contemplative nuns of Santa Clara, the Beaterio de Santa Catalina, the Beaterio de la Compania de Jesus (which would become the Religious of the Virgin Mary or RVM Sisters), and, somewhat later, the Recoleto-directed Beaterio would become active in the educational apostolate. Joining them were the new European women congregations: The Daughters of Charity in 1862, the Augustinian Sisters in 1883, and the French Assumption Sisters in 1892. During the American regime, the following arrived in the Philippines: The St. Paul de Chartres Sisters in 1904, the Benedictine Sisters in 1906, the Immaculate Heart of Mary (ICM) Sisters in 1910, the Holy Spirit Sisters, the Franciscan Missionaries of Mary, and the Good Shepherd Sisters in 1912.

Church-related educational institutions connected to the older religious orders for men would take quite some time to adopt English as medium of instruction. The Ateneo de Manila would do so definitively only in 1921 and the University of Santo Tomas in 1923. Various reasons could be given for this delay: Some reasons were due to the internal conditions in which the religious orders found themselves; other reasons were due to a lingering doubt with regard to American political intentions in the Philippines, at least until the middle of the second decade of the twentieth century when the passing of the Jones Bill clarified American intentions.

Briefly, the questions then in people’s minds had to do with the duration of American colonial rule. Was independence imminent? Was it to be long in coming? If so, how long? If the Americans were to give up the Philippines in a few years, say in five to ten years, would it make sense for Church-based educational institutions to shift to English? I make the claim that these questions had pragmatic import. Spanish had been the lingra franca of the islands for three centuries; English for merely a decade. If the Americans were to leave, would English then survive? The Americans of course would stay on for more than three decades, but this was hardly obvious in the first half of the second decade of American colonial rule in the Philippines. Besides, Filipino elite rhetoric then was full of agitation for independence at the earliest possible time. The decision to shift from Spanish to English as medium of instruction in the schools was first and foremost a political issue tied to colonial rule.

In general, it must be noted that the Catholic Church that survived the Philippine Revolution, the Spanish-American War, and the Filipino-American War was a beleaguered Church, assailed on all sides by various threats, both real and imaginary. Real however were the following: First, there was the challenge posed by an aggressively proselytizing and logistically superior Protestantism making its new presence absolutely felt in the country. Second, there was the schism initiated by Gregorio Aglipay and companions; the Iglesia Filipina Independiente claimed at least a fourth of the Catholic population as its membership in the first few decades of the twentieth century. Third, there was the enmity of anti-clerical and anti-Catholic elements, mostly members of the Filipino elite, who were out politically and socially to discredit the Church and to exploit its weakened public position.

Specific observations regarding Jesuit educational work

The Jesuits were royally expelled from Spain and all Spanish dominions in 1767. The Jesuits of the Philippines received their marching orders in 1768 and, in the next two years, they were shipped in several groups to exile in the Papal States in Italy. In a papal bull, Pope Clement XIV would then suppress the Society of Jesus in 1773. Restored worldwide by a papal fiat of Pope Pius VII in 1814, the Spanish Jesuits returned to the Philippines in 1859 after almost a century of absence. Their primary mission was the evangelization of Mindanao, then targeted by the Spanish colonial regime for economic development and political consolidation. By the end of the nineteenth century, the Spanish Jesuits who composed the Philippine Mission of the Province of Aragon had charge of the whole island of Mindanao, except for a few places still under the Augustinian Recollects and those given to the Benedictine order. They also had two schools in Manila, the Ateneo municipal de Manila and the Escuela Normal Superior. A source of pride was the Observatorio de Manila.

At least initially, the Spanish Jesuits were in principle not opposed to the adoption of English as medium of instruction in their schools. There is a charming picture of Spanish Jesuits gathered in the courtyard of the Ateneo municipal de Manila in 1899; they are portrayed as going . through a crash course on the English language. It is difficult not to see in this exercise a refreshing optimism about the future. In fact, Father-Francisco Javier Simo, one of the Jesuit professors at the Ateneo, was commissioned by his superiors to write a textbook on English grammar in 1900. The book was never published, much to the consternation of its author, who began to suspect that superiors had changed their attitudes toward the English language. However, due to problems of teaching staff and lack of expertise, the Spanish Jesuits never did feel equipped to make the shift from Spanish to English. True nonetheless was a lingering nostalgia for the Spanish past, an ironclad but ultimately reductionist identification between the Catholic faith and the Spanish language, and an emotional attachment to their own national identity.

After the shift of sovereignty from Spanish to American hands, a sprinkling of American Jesuits would find their way to the Philippines. Their primary task was to help the Philippine Mission in its dealings with organs of the American colonial regime. Initially, they were also supposed to minister to the pastoral needs of American Catholics in Manila. Some of them would help out in the Manila Observatory, one of only two Jesuit works that the American colonial regime financed.’ The presence of these American Jesuits was ad hoc in nature; however, it was becoming clearer by the year that the Spanish Jesuits, after it became apparent that American colonial presence was going to continue indefinitely, could no longer respond to the situation.

To make a rather long and complex story short, the Jesuit Superior General in Rome, Father Wlodzimierz Ledochowski, decreed a change: Spanish Jesuits of the Philippine Mission were to move to the Bombay Mission to take over the work of the German Jesuits who had been expelled from India by the British during World War I. American Jesuits of the Maryland-New York Province were to take over the Philippine Mission from the Spanish Jesuits of the Aragon Province. The first big group of American Jesuits arrived in 1921. They were given the Ateneo de Manila and the Colegio-Seminario de Vigan to run. This Year marked the official change of Spanish to English as medium of instruction. In 1926, the American Jesuits took official and definitive control of the Philippine Mission when the first American Jesuit in the person of James Carlin, then Rector of the Ateneo de Manila, was named Mission Superior. In general, it must be said that the American Jesuits were as committed as any other American in the Philippines to the process of Americanization that the American colonial regime had set for the Archipelago.

When Horacio de la Costa was still a Jesuit scholastic in his early twenties, he wrote a book on the history of the Jesuits in the Philippines from 1859 to the decade just before World War I. The book Light Cavalry, a delightful read even if already somewhat dated, takes pains to show that the Spanish Jesuits did all that was possible to them to teach English to their students. He quotes at length the Spanish Jesuit Father Juan Villalonga’s instructions on the teaching of English from the elementary grades to high school. Nevertheless, he also says that the use of English as medium of instruction would find its effective place only when the American Jesuits finally arrived to take over the Ateneo dc Manila.

In time, the American Jesuits would also set up schools in various places in the Philippines, schools that, in the course of time, would evolve into the four Jesuit universities in Mindanao and the Bicol region today. Two other Jesuit schools, the Ateneo de Tuguegarao and the Ateneo de San Pablo, would not prosper because of difficulties experienced with the ecclesiastical authorities in those places during their incumbency.

When Filipino Jesuits took over the Philippine Province of the Society of Jesus in the post-World War II period, the various Jesuit Ateneos remained committed to English as medium of instruction. Nevertheless, in the 1960s and 1970s, a reawakened nationalist consciousness among students and faculty called for the Filipinization of education. We cannot go into the details of this quite recent phenomenon. Suffice it to say that, at least in the Ateneo de Manila, the move to Filipinization took place in the area of the Humanities. Two exemplars of this move come to mind: Now deceased national artist Rolando Tinio in the Pilipino Department and the Jesuit Roque Ferriols in Philosophy.

Today, English continues to be the primary medium of instruction in all Jesuit educational institutions. In a globalizing world, the call has been for the strengthening of this commitment to English. In the institution where I teach, the Loyola School of Theology, plans are being drawn for making the school the center of theological education for Jesuit scholastics coming from the diverse regions of East Asia and Oceania. Already we have scholastics from as .far as Sri Lanka studying with us. In the near future, Jesuit scholastics from as diverse countries in Asia as East Timor, Myanmar, Vietnam, and South Korea will be coming to our part of the world to study theology. Only one language is deemed necessary and useful for this enterprise: The English language.

Language and identity: Some questions

In my reading of historical texts about the shift from Spanish to English as medium of instruction in Jesuit schools, one inescapable question continues to play in my mind: What view of language was consciously or unconsciously operative in all the discussions and debates about shifting from one to the other language? A preliminary answer given by an analysis of the sources is that language was fundamentally construed as an instrument of what Glenn May (1980) terms as social engineering. Perhaps a better term would be cultural engineering given that the Americanization process was concerned to change not only the political, economic, and social structures, but also the cultural values deemed necessary to underpin those structures. In any case, the question remains relevant today: What view of language is operative in our promotion of English today?

How effective has been this instrumental view of language in the social and cultural engineering of our history? In his book Amon and rerobaion. Rey Ileto (1979) describes the differences in the perception of the revolution by two groups of Filipinos: The Spanish-educated and Spanish-speaking ilustrados like Rizal and the Tagalog masses whose worldview was shaped by the Tagalog pillion texts of that time. The dissonance in the reading and interpretation of the signs of the times between the elite and the masses has its contemporary analogues. The most obvious example I can give now for this contemporary dissonance is our estimation of the Erap presidency.

If this view of language as an instrument of social and cultural engineering is what is operative then and now, what are its implications for the development of a Filipino identity? In a post-Wittgensteinian and post-Heideggerian age, when language is viewed not so much as instrument but as the “house of being,” as defining who we are and as constitutive of living in a world, could English (or Spanish or any other foreign language for that matter) carry the burden of defining the Filipino soul, of explicating Filipino identity? Can the English language understood as instrument be transformed into a language as an authentic matrix of Filipino meanings and values? Or arc we cast into a dramatic performance in which, depending on the role to be played, we are called at one point to use one language for some pragmatic purpose and then called at another point just to be, to live, to exist in the other language? Is it possible to live in a world that is constantly in need of being translated from one language to the other? Vicente Rafael (1993), in his book Contracting colonialism, deconstructs conventional readings of Philippine history and weaves a tale of constant negotiations of our identity through linguistic strategies of evasion and domestication of what is foreign. Or do we now have Filipinos for whom English has in fact ceased to be an instrument but has become a matrix of meanings and values for their own lives?

The American Jesuits shifted to English as medium of instruction in all their Ateneo schools in the Philippines. English was of course their own world-constituting language. They lived in the world made possible by that language and by the traditions it carried. Filipinos learned the English language however as an instrument, and as such it required a constant negotiation of their identity through translation. Could it be that the never-ending translations Filipinos had to engage in have produced some changes in that same identity? What does it mean therefore for a Filipino to live in a constantly translated world? Could the pathologies of the national character be attributed precisely to the ever-shifting linguistic grounds on which we are required to stand?

A reflection on how language locates Filipino identity today

It seems to me that it is becoming more and more typical of Filipinos to be multilingual. I speak Taosug whenever I find myself among family members in Zamboanga. In my religious community at Loyola I louse of Studies, I converse in Tagalog. And every Sunday when I have to preside at mass in NIontalban or Pansol or Our Lady of Fatima Parish in Mandaluyong, I deliver my homily also in Tagalog. But when 1 email foreign-born friends abroad, I use English or Italian. I have cousins whose mother tongue is the Samal language. I have other cousins whose primary language is Cebuano or Ilocano.

Whatever the conditions of relative isolation in which our ancestors found themselves in pre-Hispanic Philippine society, the situation of the Filipino today is markedly different. Born into one language, she is called to learn Filpino or Tagalog at a young age. By the time she is done \yid’ elementary schooling, our young Filipino speaks two or three languages at the very least: Her mother tongue, Tagalog, and English, in various degrees of skill and proficiency. If, at some point in her young life she finds herself working abroad in a non-English speaking country, a fourth language very often now forms part of her linguistic repertoire. I spent eight years of studies in Rome. There, some of our Filipino migrant workers have come to speak fluent Italian. It is easy enough to imagine many of our fellow Filipinos working in other countries speaking Arab, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, Spanish, German, French, among others.

Who then is the Filipino today? Perhaps it might be helpful to pore that Filipino identity is implicated in three worlds. First, there is the world of her birth and childhood, the world of family and relatives, the world of her local community. Second, there is the world of %viral Benedict Anderson (1991) calls her imagined national community, she is heir to a common history that tells her she is Filipino. Third, there is the international community; it could be that, at some point in her life, she finds herself working in some country having to speak a foreign language. The fact that she speaks English is very often touted to be a plus, and therefore an advantage for her. If it happens that she gets employed in a call center in Eastwood in Quezon City or some such place, she will most probably be speaking in English.

At least three worlds therefore: The local, the national, and the international. In every world, she speaks a language. The three worlds are not of course clearly demarcated among themselves. It could be that the sense of belonging to a national community remains the least developed in her. The Filipino does not seem to possess the same attachment to the Filipino language as the Japanese is to hers, or the Korean, or the Vietnamese.

What implications are there therefore for Filipino national identity when she has to live in three worlds and express herself in, through, and across three different languages? Could it be that social injustice in our time must also mean being reduced to speaking one and only one language? Could it be that poverty in our time means the absence of any opportunity to speak one or two other languages than one’s own mother tongue?

Education for Humanness

We educate people for many purposes. We educate them to be nurses, accountants, lawyers, doctors and priests. We educate them to be good citizens, to possess certain moral values, to be committed to a certain religion.

Have we overlooked something? Is there a type of education that is missing from this list? I suggest that there is another possible purpose of education. This would be an education that would result in a fully human person, an education of a human being precisely as human.

A few years ago I spoke to a group of new teachers at the Ateneo de Zamboanga and I proposed this idea of an education for full humanness. These teachers reacted initially with puzzled frown and strong resistance. For them such a type of education, first of all, was simply not found at the Ateneo de Zamboanga. They felt that the education which they had received at the Ateneo was focused on two things: the learning of practical skills (such as nursing, accounting, etc. and good Catholics and Moslem’s, socially involved, men and women for others). They were not aware that any education for humanness was found at the school.

Their second reaction to this idea of an education for humanness was a question: how could you possibly do this sort of thing? How could you organize a school and set up a curriculum which could train people to be human? These young teachers could not imagine what such a school would be like.

As I begin this talk I presume that this idea seems just as strange and wild for you as it seemed for those young teachers in Zamboanga. Without a doubt it is a strange idea: an education in humanness, strange because it is an approach that is so radically different from what we usually experience in modern education.

I feel challenged to clarify this idea. There seem to be three major areas which need to be confronted and discussed:

1) What is this humanness that such an education would seek to develop? What does it mean to be human?

2) There is need to speak about the approaches to education which are opposed to such an education for humanness. Any attempt to establish such a form of education would face stiff opposition. What militates against an education for humanness?

3) We need to explain the structure of this school for humanness. How do you train someone to be a human being?

What Does It Mean To Be Human?

It is one of the strange paradoxes of human life that we can be human beings without being human. The character of human existence is quite different from the existence of any other living species. Every other living organism grows quickly and surely to a state of full development. An acacia tree necessarily is an acacia tree. A dog necessarily is canine.

Very rarely do we encounter a plant or an animal that is such a “monster” that it does not truly represent its species. But this does not hold true of human beings. We differ from plants and animals in that we can fail to be what nature destines us to be: human. We describe such failure as a person who is inhuman. or as a person who is an animal or a robot or a barbarian.

Humanness is a quality which is not given to us automatically at the beginning of life. It is an achievement that is only attained after a long period of development and struggle. Even when it has been achieved it is not possessed as a permanent endowment. We human beings can choose to live in such a way that we lose certain dimensions of our humanness.

With that as a preface I return to our question: What does it mean to be human? I find that such a question is almost impossible to answer. I am aware that there are so many dimensions to human existence that any list of basic human qualities would go on almost endlessly. I am also aware that in the history of human cultures there have been many different ways of viewing humanness, many different humanisms. Each one of these humanisms would tend to emphasize different human traits. Because of this, any presentation of basic human qualities will necessarily be controversial as well as incomplete. Nevertheless, let me proceed with my description of what it means to be human.

1) Fully human persons have a sense of personal identity, they know who they are. This sense of identity includes, first of all, a realization of their own special uniqueness. They have a sense of their own special gifts and the unique contribution that they can make to the world. Out of this awareness of themselves and their gifts arises a sense of pride in themselves. They move forward in life with a certain confidence in what they can do.

They also know what they want to do with their lives, they have a sense of their own personal vocations. They have stepped outside the robot-like crowd where everyone is the same and they live authentic lives. They have developed their own special interests and have their own ideas about things.

2) Fully human persons have communication skills which are highly developed. They are able to present their feelings, ideas and dreams with clarity, force and humor. Such people are able to tell you in a clear way what they are thinking. They can persuade you by the power of what they say. They are interesting people who don’t bore you when they talk to you. With these communication skills they are able to function in an active and influential way in their families and communities.

3) Fully human persons understand the human heart. They appreciate the great dreams that inspire human life: the great ambitions, the longings for love, the vision of creating something new, the hopes for success and achievement. They are aware of the deep vices that twist human life: frightening insecurity, quiet joy, gentle humor. They are sensitive to the many forms of suffering that arise in human life: loneliness, frustration, the sense of being a failure.

When a truly human person meets someone, he is sensitive to the hidden feelings that are swirling around in that other person’s life: the anger, the guilt, the heartache, the disappointments, the silent hope, the unhappiness. A fully human person has an understanding, compassionate heart.

4) Fully human persons have active and inquiring minds. They are fascinated by the mysteries of life: the wonderful organization found in nature, the varying moods of their own heart, the hidden stories that other people have to tell, the strange happenings of human history, the profound affirmations made by religions, the hidden presence of God, the changes that take places in each of us as we move forward in life.

Fully human persons are full of many questions, especially the question “Why?”. They are aware of their own ignorance. They realize that they have much to learn about life itself, about other people, about themselves, about God. They are disciplined enough to confront these mysteries of life, and actively to seek a fuller understanding of them.

In such active minds there is an attitude of critical thinking. Fully human people analyze and evaluate what they hear and read. They think for themselves. They do not accept blindly what is presented in the media, what is communicated to them from others, what has been passed down by cultural traditions. Out of this continuing process of personal analysis and evaluation rise personal judgments about truth and value.

5) Fully human persons appreciate beauty in its many forms. They take delight in well written language, in fine poetry, in well expressed speeches. They appreciate fine music and dance. Their lives have been enriched by the great human achievements in art and architecture. They draw life and strength from the wonderful beauty of nature.

Truly human persons not only appreciate beauty but they also strive to create it in various ways. They strive to speak and to write well. They take effort to make their homes and communities beautiful. They use their artistic gifts to create beauty in music and the arts.

6) A fully human person has a’ vibrant understanding of the history and major achievements both of his own culture and of the whole human race. He has actively absorbed this history and these achievements into his own life. He lives as one imbued with the wisdom and the values of this culture. He glories in the great achievements of the human race: the great works of literature and art, the heroism of great warriors and patriots, the profound insights found in the great religions, the social accomplishments of great civilizations.

All this means that a fully human person lives as someone rich in tradition, a past. He possesses the wisdom, energy and creativity of humanity’s past. He is not an alienated, isolated individual whose life is limited to the small details of his own private experience.

A fully human person is creative in some form. This creativity may be found in his social existence, in the way that he relates to people, creating friendship and community. It may be found in his exercise of a technical skill. As a carpenter, a cook or a dressmaker he fashions something new. It may be found in his fresh and original use of language. It may be found in his ability to create new forms of music or art. Or his creativity may be found in his discovery of himself, in the way that he fashions his own individual identity. He lives as the image of God, the creator who constantly fashions something new.

A fully human person will never be a mere follower, someone who marches to the step of the crowd, who merely fits into a pattern of life designed by others. Some amount of conformity may be necessary in his life but a human person is careful to preserve a significant part of his life for spontaneous and original expression.

8) A fully human person has a character, possessing maturity and a sense of responsibility. He has taken control of the direction of his life and of the involvements that are found in that life and he, stands behind them. This character shows itself in a personal moral code, a set of values and principles which he has chosen for himself and which he adheres to in his life. There is a consistency in such a human person’s life; you know where he stands. His character also shows itself in certain distinctive virtues such as bravery, industriousness, reliability, loyalty, self-discipline.

Such a person has risen above a life of mere crowd morality, a life governed blindly by social pressure. He has set aside fear and shame and responds to the authentic obligations of his life.

9) A fully human person has a developed religious life. He lives in terms of a religious vision of his life, of that life’s beginning in the creative love of God, of graced events in his life where he has been blessed by God, of that life’s future return to the embrace of God. He has found things in his life which possess absolute value and with religious seriousness he holds them to be sacred and cares deeply about them. He has developed as active personal relationship with God, a dialogue which fills the center of his existence.

In all this we see that a fully human person rises above what is superficial in life. His life responds to the deeper meanings of life and he cares profoundly about what is truly important.

10) A fully human person is someone who is caught beyond both childish fear of people as well as adolescent individualism. He has dared to commit himself to others and has become a part of society. His life is filled with involvements where he works together with other people and creates common achievements with them.

Opposing Philosophies of Education

But, of course, you recognize as well a I do that this concept of an education for humanness is very much of a Utopian dream. In the educational world of today students do not want this type of education, while administrators and teachers do not believe in it as a value. The reason for this opposition to an education for humanness is that there are other prevailing philosophies of education which militate against an education for humanness. Ideas have consequences and the dominant ideas in the world of education today block the possibility of this dream ever becoming a reality. Let us consider three of these opposing philosophies.

The first philosophy is one that we might characterize as a “trade school” mentality. This mentality views college as a place where people are trained for a very particular type of work. The focus of attention in such education is the future job and the precise skills that are needed for that job. Following this approach students are trained for their future work of being nurses, lawyers, doctors, accountants and farmers.

Such a trade school approach to college education has the advantage of practicality. Students learn practical skills which might be useful in a future job. In a world where human beings are forced to struggle in order to satisfy their many needs it is very helpful to have a skill which is marketable.

This usefulness of job-oriented skills provides clear motivation for students. They have a reason for working hard to master their courses for they realize that there are jobs and pay checks at the end of their efforts.

Despite these advantages, this trade school mentality produces a terribly inhuman atmosphere for education. This inhumanness is found first of all in the narrow way that students are looked at. A trade school mentality understands students merely in terms of their potentiality as workers, ignoring all the other dimensions of their lives. It overlooks their dignity and preciousness, the special roles that they will play in their families and communities, their capacity for understanding life, for appreciating beauty, for discovering a unique identity, for relating eternally with God.

It is interesting that the narrowness of this trade school approach appears in the way that it limits the social life of students. From the very beginning of their college experience students are grouped in classes according to their future trade. The result is that the only people they have a chance to socialize with are those that share the same trade orientation. If, for instance, they are nursing students they are put into classes where they only meet other nursing students. They make friends only with nursing students, they form clubs only with nursing students, they play games only with nursing students. They will have’ to wait until after college before they can meet people who are different from them.

A second philosophy of education that militates against education for humanness is that educational approach which we might call ideological. This would be a type of education which seeks to form students in such a way that a further goal will be achieved. This further goal might be social such as the preservation of certain traditional patterns of living. We seek, for example, to inculcate into our students certain Filipino values. This further goal can be religious such as the forming of students to be adherents of a particular religious institution or way of life. It can be nationalistic, leading students to be dedicated to a particular nation with its goals. It can be revolutionary such as the training of students to change some aspect of a society or culture.

Such an ideological approach to education emphasizes control. The administration and the teachers seek to control both the thinking and the lives of the students. They justify such a treatment of students by affirming that it is the will of the parents that their children be “formed” in a particular way.

What judgment can we make of such a style of education? Positively, we can see a real value in this approach to education in the goals that it seeks to achieve. The preservation of a culture or a religion, the development of a sense of nationalism, the reform of society are all admirable goals. It is only reasonable that we seek to pass on to our children those values which have enriched our own lives.

But there is a danger in such an approach for it leads to a dehumanizing of the atmosphere of the school and a dehumanizing of the students. The atmosphere of an ideological school is dehumanizing, first of all, because its emphasis on goals results in a devaluing of the various courses and activities of the school. All of these courses and activities are seen merely as means to those goals and not as things which have value in themselves. History, literature, philosophy and science are seen merely as tools which will build those future achievements and not as courses which possess intrinsic value in themselves. Similarly, all the activities of the school (such as dramas, religious worship,

student clubs and even sports) are promoted because they will serve to bring about these ideological goals and not because they are worthwhile in themselves. The result of all of this is that the humanizing power of these courses and activities is largely lost.

A further problem with an ideological education is that it tends to produce students who have a limited sense of personal identity. These students have been trained to think and live as their mentors have guided them. They have not been allowed to go through that whole painful process of personal reflection and personal decision making which results in their having a sense that they have principles of their own. Without such a process students end up not knowing who they, are. They can only repeat the slogans that have been drilled into them.

A further result of such ideological education would be a basic lack of self-confidence. Students would not believe in themselves, in their own intelligence, in their own goodness, in their own capacity to deal with the mysteries and difficulties of life. They would lack this confidence in themselves because they have gone to a school which did not have confidence in them. Instead of trusting them this saw the need to guide and control them.

A final negative aspect of such ideological education is the blocking of reflection and critical thinking. Such education promotes one “party line” and discourages any attempt to question that party line or propose another way of thinking. The dialogue has the answer and does not feel the need for any questioning or thinking. His life is centered on getting others to agree with him. The atmosphere of such a school would lack the intellectual atmosphere which is necessary for the development of fully human persons.

A third enemy of an education for humanness is an educational approach which might be described as an education for “qualification.” From the standpoint of a student, education is a matter of passing tests, fulfilling requirements and receiving diplomas. From the standpoint of the teacher, education is a matter of giving tests, computing grades and submitting those grades on time. From the standpoint of the administrator, education is a matter of fulfilling governmental requirements, attaining PAASCU accreditation and having students do well on bar exams and CPA exams.

Such an approach to education (emphasizing qualification) has the positive value of possessing a great deal of motivation. There is always a clear task to be performed and a clear reason to complete the task. The result is that students work hard to pass tests, teachers do a tremendous amount of work correcting papers and computing grades, administration spends much time and effort gaining accreditation.

Although such a “qualification” approach has much to commend it and is firmly entrenched in our schools it is, nevertheless, a rather inhuman system of education. First of all, it manages to miss the whole point of a college education. College is supposed to be a time when students learn and when students grow. What happens is that they become so focused on requirements and tests that they don’t have any time for real learning. School becomes a constant process of cramming one’s mind full of necessary information, putting that information down on one’s exam paper and then promptly forgetting. It seems that the only thing that students learn in this approach is how to pass tests. An extreme example of this is that period of a semester which is called exam week. It is a time when students become super-busy in preparing for examinations. In doing so they stop thinking, they stop being aware of one another, they stop being sensitive to life and to beauty. It is the climax of the semester, an inhuman climax, when students become like robots.

The basic error of this approach is its viewing education basically as a task, a job, It views learning as something that you work at, something you force. It forgets the basic truth that for education to be human it must be leisure. The Greeks had a clear understanding of this truth. The English word school comes from the Greek word skole which means leisure. In his Republic, Plato will say “Forced learning will not stay in the mind.” If you don’t have an atmosphere of leisure, if you make education forced labor then you will not have true learning.

It must be noted here that when we use the term leisure we do not mean mere play. There are in human life many forms of activity in which we escape from the world of work by distracting ourselves in some form of play. (We watch TV, we play cards.) While admitting that such enjoyable play may be very necessary in human life we must realize-that it does not constitute true leisure. Leisure is a high point of human life, a deep experience which is only present when human beings live in the fullest possible way. It is found in activities such as the creation of beauty, the worship of God and profound conversation. Such activities go beyond mere enjoyable play and embody a fullness of living. It is such fullness of living that is desirable in a school.

What is the reason for this? Why must school be leisure rather than work? One reason is that it is only in leisure that you have an openness of mind to see the mysteries of life, to appreciate the preciousness of human life, to understand the wisdom that is there in poetry, to become excited about the questions of science, to wonder about the questions of psychology and theology, to appreciate the beauty of mathematics, to be sensitive to life. It is only in leisure that you are open to these mysteries, that you let yourselves be moved by all that is there. When you are caught up in a “task,” in worrying about passing a test or getting a diploma, your life is narrowed to that limited task. There is. a wall between you and those life-giving mysteries.

A second reason why school must be leisure is that it is only in leisure that we have time to listen to ourselves and to respond to what we find there within us. We need time to dream, to sort out all the confusing elements of our experience, to experiment with our lives. Life constantly challenges us in new ways and we need the presence of leisure to understand those challenges and to respond to them. If as students we are super-busy with 25 units of course work we do not have a situation where we have time for ourselves to grow as human beings. If, as teachers, we are overburdened with a heavy teaching load, many papers to correct and a multitude of meetings to attend we will inevitably miss the opportunities for growth that life is giving us.

Leisure is necessary for human existence because it is at times of leisure that human life is creative. Freed from the tasks and routines of life, we are able to re-discover and re-make our lives. It is time of “re-creation” in the truest sense. In leisure we remake our relationships to other people, in leisure we set up in a new way the values and goals of our lives, in leisure we become partners once again with this wonderful earth that is our home, in leisure we re-discover God and our relationship to him. In leisure life becomes fresh

I have presented here three approaches to education which militate against an education for humanness ( a trade school mentality, an ideological concern, a concentration on qualification). It is obvious that these approaches are very much present in our schools and that they tend to dominate our lives. Does this mean that education for humanness is a Utopian dream that can never possibly be realized? The young teachers that I spoke to in Zamboanga could not imagine a school where there was education for humanness. Can we?

How Do You Teach People to be Human?

I thoroughly believe that an education for humanness is possible. It is possible to step back from those three philosophies of education which militate against humanness. It is possible to set up a school situation where students, teachers and administrators are led into a fuller living of their humanness. If we really want that type of education we can achieve it.

Let us dare for a few moments to be Utopian, to leave the practical, organized educational world to which we are accustomed and to dream of a type of school where humanness would be developed. What would such a school be like? Let me present six elements of a school for humanness. I will leave it to you to suggest other elements.

First of all, this school for humanness must be place where the faculty and administrators are rather human themselves. You teach students to be human by bringing them into contact with people who are themselves human. For instance, students will learn to be well-rounded persons by interacting with teachers who are themselves well-rounded.

You don’t staff a school for humanness with one-idea specialists, even though they may be brilliant and professionally competent. In a school for humanness teachers are really alive, they are moving into new fields, they have wide academic interests. I once visited a school in the States where each faculty member was expected to teach every course in the college curriculum. Imagine that. As a teacher in that school you would have to be able to teach science, literature, mathematics, language courses, social science, philosophy. You could not just teach the same basic courses semester after semester. Here was a school which required its faculty to be well-rounded, to be open to the full spectrum of human knowledge, to be constantly learning. Such a school would demand constant reading and growth on the part of its faculty.

In this school we would strive to bring our students into contact not only with the humanness of their teachers and fellow students but also with the’ humanness found in fine poetry, great literature, drama and fine arts. In the history of the human race there have been certain individuals and groups who have succeeded in attaining a high level of human living. It is possible in school to enter into the spirit and achievements of these people and to learn to live as they lived. If this is achieved, education is an experience of a renaissance where humanness of the past takes root and is born again in the lives of students and teachers.

Secondly, this school for humanness would require a great deal of personal interaction among students; faculty and administration. Ideally they would live together in the same buildings, eat at the same tables, play together and pray together. (I believe that something like this was attempted at the traditional English universities.) It is thru such close interaction that we enter into the lives of other people and grow in humanness. You can never hope for a humanizing situation if the only contact students have with teachers is from the back of a lecture hall. Similarly you don’t have a humanizing situation when students come to school, attend classes and then rush home again without ever having time for interaction with others.

In this school for humanness there is a need for students to interact with many different types of people, with students from many countries, with people who have a wide variety of occupations, with old people and with children. The wider the interaction, the richer will be the educational experience. The inhumanness of many of our present school situations is largely due to the limited socialization that is found there.

A third element to be emphasized in this school for humanism is self-expression. Students would be placed in situations where they would be constantly expected to express themselves. This expression would go beyond a parroting back of what has been given them by teachers or textbooks. It would be a matter of expressing in their own way their understanding of what they have read, their personal evaluation of the situations that they encounter in their lives. They would be expected to talk and to write, to put forth their ideas clearly, forcefully and cleverly.

A fourth way to guiding students to be human is to immerse them in a milieu of questioning. To achieve this, their teachers must be questioners, people who are actively wondering about the exciting mysteries of life and who are searching for an understanding of them. The students would be expected to enter into this questioning, to go beyond textbook formulas and to enter into the controversies found in the history of human thought.

They would be exposed to the major questions which are alive in science, politics, economics, education and religion. They would be confronted with the live issues that agitate these fields and they would be challenged to understand them and to take a personal stand.

A fifth way of leading students to become more human is to surround them with an atmosphere of beauty. The experience of education should be an experience of drinking in beauty. The physical environment of the school should be a beautiful one: beautiful buildings, beautiful classrooms, beautiful campus. Students should be led to appreciate fine music and fine art. The school should promote the presentation of beauty in various forms: music, drama, art, poetry. Each individual student should be led to create beauty in some form.

Sixthly, this school for humanness would help students to discover themselves, to develop a sense of their own identity. How could this be done? Somehow, somewhere students would be treated as individuals. They would be listened to. Each of them has special gifts, particular interests, a unique destiny. They would be given programs of activities and studies which would fit those special gifts, those particular interests, those unique destinies. In this school for humanness students would be growing as individuals simply because they would be living as individuals. They would not be following a plan of education suited for everyone in general and no one in particular.

Conclusion

These ten basic qualities represent a provisional sketch of a picture of a fully human being. Of course, many more qualities could be added to this list.

Wouldn’t it be wonderful if we could educate student: to possess these qualities? Wouldn’t it be wonderful if our graduates were people who were fully human and fully alive’ Their entire lives would be blessed as every waking hour o theirs would be richer and fuller. How grateful these student, would be toward the school which opened up their lives an( led them to live lives that were deeply human.

Wouldn’t it be wonderful for our families and our communities and our churches if some of their members wen people who were truly human? The presence of such People with highly developed human qualities would invaluable contribution to the lives of everyone in those communities. make at  invaluable contribution to the lives of everyone in those communities.

A final question.. Do you want to be in a school where there is education for humanness? If you do, what would that school be like?