Showing posts with label May Anne Joy Romanes. Show all posts
Showing posts with label May Anne Joy Romanes. Show all posts
Thursday, December 1, 2016
Thursday, September 1, 2016
Who are the local heroes of Indang, Cavite? (part 1)
by: May Anne Joy D. Romanes
Because of the demands of the K to 12 program, teachers need to incorporate localized and contextualized topics to their lessons; however, this becomes a problem when the valuing of people for the history and its own products is not that strong. This can be attributed to the lack of knowledge, which also can be attributed to the lack of interest, not only of the students, but also the lack of interest of teachers to teach these topics to their students. Ideally, this should never be the case. As educators, we uphold the responsibility to pass the richness of our local history to our students, because this is the only way that we can truly form their identity as responsible citizens of this country.
P.S. These photos are my property.
List of Local Heroes of Indang, Cavite
[Well-known]
- Severino delas Alas
- Raymundo Jeciel
[USAFFE Veterans]
- Alfredo Atis
- Geronimo Atis
- Julio Atis
- Juan Aves
- Lorenzo Barrientos
- Isidro Bergado
- Flaviniano Caagusan
- Benvenuto Costa
- Doroteo Costa
- Pedro Creencia
- Pedro H. Creus
- Constancio Crucena
- Casimiro Cuevas
- Victorio Feranil
- Cornelio Ferolino
- Fidel Dilig
- Filomeno Diokno
- Pablo Erni
- Sofronio Erni
- Pedro Escalante
- Marianito Espinosa
- Valentin Feraer
- Victoriano Feranil
- Dominador Grueso
- Bonifacio Guevarra
- Teofilo Hernando
- Juan Josue
- Anastacio Legaspi
- Diosdado Morales
- Roman Marges
- Aldovino Marquez
- Juan Marquez
- Aurelio Matel
- Agapito Matilla
- Benjamin Mojica
- Florentino Mojica
- Ignacio Mojica
- Perfecto Mojica
- Sebastian Morales
- Ignacio Novero
- Alfredo Nuestro
- Geronimo Ocampo
- Conrado Oloteo
- Filomeno Panganiban
- Lamberto Penales
- Alberto Penalba
- Felimon Penalba
- Ricardo Perello
- Atanasio Perido
- Pedro Perlado
- Teodoro Perlado
- Francisco Ramos
- Marcelino Ramos
- Albino Rodil
- Arsenio Rodil
- Valentin Rodil
- Crispulo dela Rosa
- Salvador del Rosario
- Honesto Salazar
- Melanio Salgado
- Aurelio Salvacion
- Felipe Salvacion
- Rafael Sarmiento
- Numeriano Sernal
- Gaudiosio Sierra
- Hugo Suarez
- Felimon Tibayan
- Vicente Torres
- Pedro Viaje
- Nemesio Villa
- Doroteo Vida
- Pacifico Vida
- Marcelino Villanueva
Saturday, May 28, 2016
References
Ananda, M. (2006). Albert Bandura’s social cognitive theory.
Retrieved from
http://ananda.mahto.info/albert-banduras-social-cognitive-theory/
Awkins, J. (2011). Are we products of our environment?.
Retrieved from http://jaeawkins.com/are-we-products-of-our-environment/
Bandura, A. (1971). Social learning theory. Retrieved from
http://www.jku.at/org/content/e54521/e54528/e54529/e178059/Bandura_SocialLearningTheory_ger.pdf
Criticisms. (n.d.). Retrieved from
http://bdrum.com/Bandura/Criticisms.htm
McLeod, S. (2014). Bobo doll experiment. Retrieved from
http://www.simplypsychology.org/bobo-doll.html
Shuttleworth, M. (2008). Bobo doll experiment. Retrieved
from https://explorable.com/bobo-doll-experiment.
Bandura’s Social Cognitive Theory: An Analysis part 11 (Conclusion)
The social cognitive theory believes in the combination of the environmental,
social, and cognitive factors in the development of the behavior; however, it
is still unclear as to what extent these three influences the behavior of
men. Nevertheless, this theory received both good and bad reactions over
the years, which means that, although imperfect, this theory has its importance.
The social cognitive
theory has its truth; however, accepting it as a whole truth is not possible
because of some reasons. First, Bandura believes that people does not
just respond to the stimulus presented in the environment, but uses their
cognitive skills in reacting to their environment. I agree that people
does not impulsively react to their environment. People think whether
they like it or not. But then again the extent on which people use their
cognitive skills in reacting to their environment has yet to be
clarified. Second, people are different, and as they grow old, their
differences become greater; thus, it becomes harder to generalize the manner of
learning of all people. For instance, Kaye is a child, who came from a
family of painters, raised in a way that she was exposed to the nature of work
of her family members, provided that her family persuaded her to be a painter
all her life. Even though it seems that the circumstances have conspired
to make Kaye the same as her family, it does not follow that Kaye would really
be a painter when she grows up. The reason is just obvious—people
change. Our way of thinking becomes different as we grow old.
Moreover, as we grow old, we tend to think beyond our environmental and social
circumstances. Even if Kaye has been home-schooled and has been taught
only to paint, it is not an assurance that she would copy the behavior of her
family members (e.g. passion for painting), because chances are, she might form
an opinion, a judgment, or a belief of her own, guided by her own reasons,
which are independent of the outside factors, such as her family. Third,
people have their free will. We can choose for ourselves.
Otherwise, if we held our environment and our models solely responsible for our
deeds, then the law would be meaningless. For instance, a man, who beats
his child just because his father also beats him when he was a child, does not
make this man innocent as far as the law is concerned. This is because we
have the power to think and to choose which is good, at least according to
one’s conscience and what is required of us in the law of the country we lived
in.
To summarize, the social
cognitive theory should not be generalized; it is only true in some cases.
Nonetheless, it is still useful to teachers and students. It is just
important to note that more than giving importance on the technical aspect of
the teaching process, the teachers need to make sure that they also teach the
students how to be conscious about their surroundings including the people they
interact with in order to weigh the good and bad sides of the situations around
them and how it affects others. It is also important to emphasize that
regardless of the situation, we can form our own decisions. Bandura was
right in this part. The cognitive factor has a very important role to
play in learning a behavior; therefore, people need to take advantage of
it. At the end of the day, neither Bandura nor his theory would tell us
how we ought to live our lives, it is still up to us through our choices and
decisions on how we will make this world a better place for us and for the
others.
Bandura’s Social Cognitive Theory: An Analysis part 10
http://social.rollins.edu/wpsites/mclaren/files/2013/04/oppression.png
In the mentioned quote by Bandura, it is affirmed that he believed that people
reflect and gain control of their behaviors; however, it also recognized that
our standards of behavior were all copied—something that sounded contradictory
to the first statement. If we use our own brains to think, then how did
it become that how we think is just a product of how our model
thinks? Assuming this is true, these questions become necessary to
ask: How sure are we
that how we reflect is not influenced by anyone? Whose standards of behavior
are we subscribing to? Have we been in chains with someone else’s
identity all our life? Do the models, or rather people with prestige and power,
have the right to influence the behavior of their followers? Is
our freedom of thought being compromised? The
social cognitive theory tells us something—that oppression can easily find its
way to the road of learning. If oppression is present at the starting
point of learning, how can we stop it when it is already there in the first
place? The best thing that we can do, if this happens, is to unlearn what
we have learned, and reflect in order to find the things that we could stand up
for—something that truly defines us, at least as we perceive it, in order to
have our own truth. Doing this, however, is just difficult and somewhat
unrealistic.
Doing a thing frequently
makes up our truth. If we mostly learn by following a model, we tend to
make some, if not all, beliefs and actions of our model, our own beliefs and actions, which when we
repeatedly do, whether or not we get rewards, for as long as we are able to
convince ourselves that we are good with those beliefs and actions, these
things become our realities and truths. Other person’s truth becomes our
truth, and once we made up our truths, it becomes hard to dismantle. For
instance, Rodrigo Duterte, a presidential candidate, is undeniably charismatic
to the masses (at least to my belief). He has prestige and power—someone who
could be looked up to by the youngsters because of his audacity, humor, and
undaunted actions against the law offenders. If a Jose, a teenager,
admires Duterte so much and makes him his model, he consciously and
unconsciously, over the days, will probably adopt Duterte’s behavior, such as
his ill justification of extrajudicial killings and the latter’s profane
words. Over time, Jose will make Duterte’s justifications his own until
these become his truth. It is hard to say whether this is a good thing or
a bad thing, because we all have our own perceptions of what is good and what
is bad. Nevertheless, it is still important to note that modeling can be
a medium for something that might be bad for other people.
Bandura’s Social Cognitive Theory: An Analysis part 9
https://cuevaseds103.files.wordpress.com/2015/10/bobo-experiment.jpg
To prove that that all human behavior was learned through social imitation and
copying, rather than inherited through genetic factors, Bandura performed the Bobo Doll Experiment in 1961(Shuttleworth, 2008).
This gave Bandura several ways to prove his hypothesis that watching violence
causes aggressive behavior. This conclusion, however, has been argued
because the children, who are used as the subjects of the experiment, were said
to be manipulated into responding aggressively according to what they have
observed (“Criticisms”, n.d.). If observing an aggressive behavior and
being rewarded for it produces similar aggression, then would observing and
watching a well-recognized diligent student produce the same attitude for
everyone in the class? Perhaps, some students would not imbibe the same
attitude. In the real-world, adopting a behavior, whether good or bad, is
subject to numerous factors. Moreover, we cannot generalize how the
majority, or even everyone, in the class would react, because each student has
his/her own values, experiences, beliefs, and traditions. People are
different from each other. Hence, if we say that people tend to have
different reactions when it comes to what they observe, can we affirm that the
Bobo doll experiment has been suggestive? Yes, it is. The children
used in the experiment are aged between 3 to 6 years old (Bandura, Ross
& Ross as cited by McLeod, 2014). Since these children are very
young and so they might not have any idea on how to play with the Bobo doll,
they have to observe what others are doing with it. It is not that the
children were not using their thinking skills, but when the children are given
with an unfamiliar thing without any instructions on how to use it, they would
ask verbally or nonverbally: “What am I supposed to do with this thing?”.
The children, who were expose to a model with an aggressive behavior, in the Bobo doll experiment might have thought that the observed
aggressive acts are the things that they were supposed to do in the experiment,
and so they did. Although they did show an aggressive behavior, this does not
mean that they would do the aggressive acts to other children. Similarly,
in teaching Edukasyon sa
Pagpapakatao in the early
grades, we tend to ask the pupils questions that are somewhat suggestive. For
instance, when we ask the students similar questions like: “Nag-iingay ang
iyong mga mga kamag-aral habang nagkaklaklase kayo, ano ang iyong gagawin?”.
The children would most probably think of an answer that would not make the
teacher angry, so most likely, they would answer: “Sasawayin ko po ang aking
mga kamag-aral”, even though in real life situation, they would not really
do so. Therefore, we cannot generalize that modeling and reinforcement
does assure the replication of behavior at least with the children because, as
mentioned earlier, there are a lot of things to consider before imbibing the behavior
of the model, and people are just different from each other. In addition,
the manner of how we learn and behave changes as we grow up, because we tend to
form deeper thoughts as our brains develop (generally speaking). Bandura
surprisingly agree with this statement. In fact, he wrote in 1991:
People possess self-reflective and self-reactive capabilities that enable them
[to] exercise some control over their thoughts, feelings, motivations and
actions. In the exercise of self-directedness, people adopt certain
standards of behavior that serve as guides and motivators and regulate their
actions anticipatorily through self-reactive influence. Human functioning
is, therefore, regulated by an interplay of self-generated and external sources
of influence (Ananda, 2006, para. 2).
Bandura’s Social Cognitive Theory: An Analysis part 8
So, are we really just as helpless as the plants which have nothing to do but
to keep adapting and reacting to the environment? If the weather gets too hot,
the plants will wilt; it does not really matter whether a plant is able to see
what the other plants are doing because it is natural for the plant to wilt in
the mentioned situation. If the soil is well-fertilized, the plant will
be healthier; there is no need for the plant to have a brain to know that it
has to grow better because of the fertilizer, because growing better is the
natural reaction of plants to the fertilizer. Nonetheless, people and plants
are still way different, because people have the power and choice of reasoning
out.
Human beings react to the environment, and are products of
it, but only for some extent. It cannot be generalized that environment solely
dictates who we are and how we behave. Ideally, the causes of our behavior
must be rooted from deeper and better reasons. Even though a well-admired
relative of ours gets mad at any visitor coming inside the house, we may not
feel the same though the relative, as the model, got our attention, retention,
motoric reproduction, and reinforcement processes working. Thus, even if
our relative forces us to act similarly towards any visitor and rewards us for
doing so, we still may not adopt that kind of behavior. This is because
we have the power to reason consciously and unconsciously. If a person is
well-guided by good reasoning (at least in his/her own perception of good
reasoning), then learning through reflection becomes more powerful than
learning through the environment. Our intelligence gives us the ability to
adapt to whatever we are exposed to; and unlike the animals of the earth, we
have the power of reason to make moral choices based on our thought given to
the possible outcome (Awkins, 2011). Although there is some truth that
reasons might also be acquired from a model, it can also be said that there is
also truth in saying that individuals can also innovate their own reasons
without using any vicarious experience or observing some models.
Bandura’s Social Cognitive Theory: An Analysis part 7
Analysis of the Social
Cognitive Theory
Though there are some good
points mentioned about the social cognitive theory, it is still not far from
the traditional behaviorist theories, which, somehow, Bandura is against
to. Even though Bandura included modeling, as one of the determinants of
behavior, it can still be included in the environmental causes of behavior,
simply because it is still an influence outside of a person. The only
difference is that the social cognitive theory recognizes the role of the
cognitive factor in the production of a behavior. Despite this, the
results of the social cognitive theory still depend largely on the
environment. To illustrate, the traditional behaviorist and social
cognitive theories can be compared to a mimosa plant (also called makahiya in Filipino). Assuming the
mentioned theories are absolute truths, whether or not we know that a mimosa
plant has the pulvinus, its part that reacts to touch
(assuming that part is their brain),
or, whether or not we think that mimosa just merely reacts to touch regardless
of its inner system, the causes of the resulting behavior will still be based
on the things happening in their environment. If this situation will just
be the same with human beings, then what is the point of knowing that we use
our brains when, we just solely behave based on our own human nature and the
stimulus from our environment? If we believe both theories completely,
then we are accepting the fact that we mostly learn through our environment;
therefore, it meant that even if we think, learn from other people’s
experiences, find a model, or just plainly react to a stimulus, the behaviors
and actions manifested are just the consequences of our exposure to the given
environment. For example, if a house is on fire, it does not matter if a
person needs to think, find a model, remember an article about fire, or just go
out of the house, because in the end, he will not be able to bear the heat of
fire and will eventually move far from it. If all of the mentioned
illustrations in this paragraph are true, then it makes the social cognitive
theory as hard to swallow as the traditional behaviorist theories, for they
largely, if not wholly, rely on the environment, neglecting a lot of other
factors that cause our behavior, such as our own beliefs and the results of our
reflective thinking.
Bandura’s Social Cognitive Theory: An Analysis part 6
http://career.iresearchnet.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Self-Efficacy.jpg
Central to the social cognitive theory is the concept of self-efficacy.
Self-efficacy refers to the level of a person's confidence in his/ her ability
to successfully perform a behavior. It is the idea that people decide how
to behave based more on their belief in their own capabilities of
accomplishment rather than in their knowledge and skills (Pajares as cited by
Ananda, 2006). Having mentioned that a person’s capacity is
different from their actual knowledge and skills, we can infer that a person
who is much knowledgeable and skillful might have low self-efficacy, and a
person who lacks knowledge and is less skillful might have high self-efficacy.
Therefore, self-efficacy cannot be used as the lone determinant whether or not
a person can achieve future successes, because there are other determinants of
success to consider. Nevertheless, having varied levels of self-efficacy
among individuals can help explain why two individuals with very similar skills
and knowledge can end up exhibiting extremely different behaviors (Ananda,
2006).
Bandura’s Social Cognitive Theory: An Analysis part 5
https://bibliobulimica.files.wordpress.com/2010/05/classroom.jpg?w=723
Modeling becomes a crucial cause of learning and behaving for a multitude of
reasons. By relying on the action of knowledgeable models, a novice can
behave appropriately in a given situation without having to discover the
acceptable conduct through shocked or pleased reactions to his unguided
performance (Bandura, 1971). Assuming this is absolutely true, a child
would not become rowdy if he/she sees that every child in his/her class is very
quiet and is sitting in their chairs properly. Similarly, a shy child can
become outspoken if he/she becomes used to a class with outspoken
students. Because people tend to follow an example (model), they are able
to produce more acceptable modes of behavior (as far as their immediate
environment is concerned), which is much more reinforcing than tedious trial
and error (Bandura, 1971).
Bandura’s Social Cognitive Theory: An Analysis part 4
http://www.nakedheart.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/IMG_6983-e1418744146764.jpg
Modeling is governed by four interrelated subprocesses, namely: attention,
retention, motoric reproduction, and reinforcement (Bandura, 1971).
First, the model must grab the attention of the subject. The
subject should recognize the essential features of the model's behavior
(Bandura, 1971). For instance, if a celebrity is to model a caring
behavior, the child as the subject, must identify what makes up his caring
behavior, such as the smile, sweet voice, friendly gestures, etc. Second,
the child should retain the essential features of the model’s behavior.
Third, the remembered features must produce actions. Lastly, the actions must
be rewarded in order to be strengthened and repeated.
Bandura’s Social Cognitive Theory: An Analysis part 3
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/09/01/article-2408397-1B90A440000005DC-767_634x383.jpg
Another important
element of the social cognitive theory is modeling. Modeling is an
essential form of learning (Bandura, 1971). Under most circumstances, a
good example is therefore a much better teacher than the results of unguided
actions, especially when mistakes can be costly or dangerous (Bandura,
1971). An example is when pupils are being taught on how to use the
microscope in observing the microorganisms in dingy water. If the pupils
will just rely on the consequences of their actions in order to learn how to
use the said equipment, they might damage the costly equipment. Thus, it
becomes more advantageous for everyone in the class if the teacher will just
demonstrate the appropriate procedure on how to properly do the activity.
Another example is when the teacher tries to teach a sport, for instance,
swimming. If the students will just rely on the consequences of their
swimming gestures, then the students might end up drowning themselves.
This is something that could be prevented if the teacher would model the
proper way to do the different swimming techniques. Teaching the child
how to speak is also a situation wherein parents as teachers cannot rely on the
consequences alone for the child to learn. Therefore, if learning proceeded
solely by rewarding and punishing consequences, it would be more laborious,
more costly, and more dangerous both for the teachers and the students
(Bandura, 1971). Therefore, the socialization processes, in which the
language, morals, vocational activities, familial customs, and the educational,
religious, and political practices of a culture, are difficult to be taught
without the benefit of models who exemplify the cultural patterns of their own
behavior (Bandura, 1971).
Bandura’s Social Cognitive Theory: An Analysis part 2
http://images.says.com/uploads/story_source/source_image/422500/410c.jpg
One of the important elements of the social cognitive theory is the role of the
vicarious experiences in the production of behavior. Direct experiences
are governed by the rewarding and punishing consequences, which are assumed to
strengthen one’s behavior (Bandura, 1971). However, if learning will
solely be acquired through our own experiences and their consequences, then it
would take a long time and would make it a lot difficult for us to learn the
things, which are expected of us. For example, if a Christian attended a
Muslim wedding of a friend, and he/she is the only Christian in that event,
given that he/she has no idea of a Muslim wedding, then it would be so
impractical for him/her to act, solely relying on the consequences and reactions
of the other guests to his/her actions. In this situation, the Christian
attendee needs to use his/her cognitive skills and to observe and be sensitive
about the actions of Muslim guests in that wedding event to make it more
beneficial for him/her. In this way, undesirable experiences can be
avoided rather than the person act as if he/she is an unthinking organism
(because he/she will just react to the stimulus presented in that
environment). Therefore, learning becomes more efficient because of the use
of vicarious experiences on top of our own experiences.
Wednesday, May 25, 2016
Performance of Broilers Supplemented with Effective Microorganisms Activated Solution (EMAS) at Different Stages of Growing Period.
ROMANES, MAY ANNE JOY. Performance of
Broilers Supplemented
with Effective Microorganisms Activated Solution (EMAS) at Different Stages of
Growing Period. Thesis. Bachelor of Science in Agriculture major in
Animal Science. Cavite State University, Indang, Cavite. March 2010. Adviser:
Teresita M. Labrador.
The
study was conducted at the Broiler Production Project of the Department of
Animal Science at Cavite State University, Indang, Cavite from July 9 to August
31, 2009 to determine the performance of broilers supplemented with EMAS via
the feeds and drinking water at different stages of growing period (Day 0 to
Day 32) in terms of body weight, feed consumption, feed conversion efficiency,
mortality rate and the supplementation period to which EMAS is most beneficial
to broilers.
Average
body weights of broilers were significantly different (P > 0.05) at Days 7,
14, 21, 28 and 35. The findings revealed that supplementation of EMAS at Day 15
to 28 (Treatment 3) resulted in higher body weights of broilers. Furthermore,
supplementation of EMAS at Day 0 to 14 (Treatment 2) and Day 0 to 32 (Treatment
5) resulted in similar body weights. EMAS supplemented at Day 29 to 32 (Treatment
4) had no significant effect in broilers. The feed consumption of broilers was
not significantly affected by EMAS in any stage of their growing period,
likewise, their feed conversion efficiency. There were only two mortalities both
from the untreated group.
The highest total cost (PhP 2, 222.85) was incurred in the birds supplemented with EMAS from Day 0 to Day 32 (Treatment 5) while the lowest production cost (PhP 2, 015.89) was incurred in the untreated birds (Treatment 1). The total return was highest (PhP 2, 757.10) in the birds supplemented with EMAS in both feeds and drinking water from Day 15 to Day 28 (Treatment 3) while the untreated birds (Treatment 1) got the lowest return (PhP 2, 338.50). The highest net return (PhP 554.13) was also obtained in broilers treated with EMAS at Day 15 to 28 (Treatment 3) while broilers supplemented with EMAS from Day 29 to Day 32 (Treatment 4) got the lowest net return (PhP 229.94).
Tuesday, May 24, 2016
Bandura’s Social Cognitive Theory: An Analysis part 1
by
May Anne Joy Romanes
University of the Philippines Diliman
May 24, 2016
https://www.utwente.nl/cw/theorieenoverzicht/Theory%20Clusters/Health%20Communication/Social_cognitive_theory/Social_cognitive_theory-1.png
For many years, a lot
of scientists have tried to find an explanation as to why people behave as they
do. Earlier behaviorists have reduced human
beings into helpless reactors to their environment, dismissing the role of cognition
in forming their behaviors (Bandura, 1971). The
traditional behaviorist theories did not satisfy Albert Bandura. He challenged these earlier theories through the
development of the social learning theory, which later evolved as the social
cognitive theory. This theory asserts
that the cognitive capacity of men determines their behavior and posits that learning results
from vicarious experiences that occur through the observation of other people’s
behavior and its consequences for them (Bandura, 1971). The social cognitive theory is much more
palatable than the traditional behaviorist theories; however, it does not
address the variations of people due to their genetic, brain, and learning
differences (“Criticisms”, n.d.).
Furthermore, it does not mention the role of free will in the behavior
outcomes of men. Nonetheless, it is
undeniable that there is some truth to the social cognitive theory; however, as
teachers, we need to look closer and critically examine this theory to make it
more relevant to the teaching-learning process for us and more importantly, for
our students.
Thursday, May 5, 2016
Tuesday, May 3, 2016
Reaksyon sa Kasaysayan ng Naic, Cavite ni Amanah Julla D. Romanes (Cavite State University-College of Education)
Naging
isang malaking kasangkapan ang kolonyalismo ng mga Kastila sa paghubog ng
kultura ng mga tao sa Naic. Bagamat nagpakita ng pagkondena ang mga mamamayan
dito laban sa imperyalismo, hindi naging sapat ito upang tuluyang mapalaya sila
sa sistemang nagkukulong sa kanila. Tulad ng isang kumunoy, sa kanilang patuloy
na pagpupumiglas, lalo lang nalulubog ang mga tao sa sistemang kanilang pilit
nilalabanan.
https://xiaochua.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/img_7449.jpg
Dahil sa impluwensiya ng mga Kastila,
naging madali upang hawakan sa leeg ang mga taga-Naic. Ang katotohanan ay ni
hindi na nga kailangan ng mga dayuhang ito na maglagak pa ng mga kawal upang
masiguradong gagawin ng mga taga-Naic ang nais nilang mangyari. Hindi na nga
kailangan pang sabihin ng mga dayuhan ang nais nilang mangyari dahil kuhang
kuha ng mga mamamayan ang mithiin ng mga dayuhan. Halimbawa nito ay ang
matinding debosyon ng Naic sa kanilang patron, kawalan ng gaanong partisipasyon
ang mga kababaihan dito at ang pagmomonopolyo sa kapangyarihan ng iilang
mamamayan ng Naic. Ang mga sistemang nabanggit ang malakas na katunayan na
tuluyan na napagtagumpayan na nga ng mga Kastila ang mga taga-Naic noon pa
lamang.
http://blogbenetton.dunebuggysrl.netdna-cdn.com/philippines/files/2012/04/Visita-Iglesia_03_Liliw-Church-in-Laguna.jpg
Ipagpalumagay na ang Katolisismo ay
tulad lamang ng ibang relihiyon sa mundo tulad ng Budhismo, Shintohismo, o
Hinduismo, na walang gaanong importansya sa nakararaming Pilipino. (Nililinaw
ng may-akda na hindi niya intensyong maliitin sa anumang paraan ang mga
paniniwala ng mga tao, ang mga opinyong ito ay para lamang sa mithiing pang
kritiko sa mga bunga ng mga paniniwalang ito.) Halimbawa, sabihin nating ang
mga Kastila ay nagdala ng Budhismo bilang isang lihim na paraan upang
ipasailalim tayo sa isang kulturang magkukulong sa atin, tatanggapin ba natin
ito? Malamang na hindi, kaya tulad ng “regalo” ng isang kaaway, babalutan muna
nila ito upang magmukhang kanaisnais para sa tatanggap. Mahirap mang sabihin
sapagkat marami pa rin ang mga Katoliko sa ating bansa, naging isang malakas na
sandata pa rin ng mga Kastila ang pananampalataya ng mga Pilipino. Tinuruan
tayong tumahimik at sumunod na lamang. Huwag magtanong at tanggapin ang
kaunting huwad na awa na ibinibigay sa atin ng nakakataas na mga tao. Ito ang
mga sistemang kaakibat ng relihiyon na hanggang ngayon ay umaalipin sa atin.
Wala man ang mga Kastila, dinala pa rin natin ang bulok na sistemang ito, hindi
lamang ng mga taga-Naic kundi ng marami pang Pilipino.
https://naiccavite.files.wordpress.com/2014/12/427038_263303543780903_2081581580_n.jpg
May maayos na sistema ng edukasyon sa
Naic. Maayos ang sistema ng pamamalakad ng kanilang mga paaralan at mga
kaguruan dahil sa regular na pagpapadala ng mga guro sa bayan at pagtataya sa
kanilang paraan ng pagtuturo sa kanilang mga estudyante. Ngunit sapat ba ito
para sabihing utang ng mga Pilipino, kabilang ng mga taga-Naic, sa mga dayuhan
ang pagiging edukado natin? Hindi ako sang-ayon. Hindi dungo ang mga Pilipino
upang hindi magkaroon ng sariling sistema ng edukasyon. Nagkataon lamang na
nauna ang mga dayuhan, ngunit hindi ito nangangahulugan na kung wala sila ay
wala rin tayong maayos na sistema ng edukasyon. Maari pa ngang maging
instrumento ang edukasyon upang indoktrinahan ang mga mag-aaral sa sistemang
mapang-alipin ng mga dayuhan.
http://www.bayaniart.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/Katipunan_Jose_Rizal_1.jpg
Sa kabila ng masasamang epekto ng
sinasabi ni Gat Jose Rizal na “kanser ng lipunan” kung saan nahawahan din ang
bayan ng Naic, nagkaroon pa rin ng paraan ang langit upang magising sa
katotohanan ng ilang taga-Naic. Isa na sa mga unang nagising ang mga guro kung
kaya’t malaki ang pagpupugay ko sa mga ito. Kahit iilan lamang sila, napakahalaga
ng kanilang ginapanan sa Himagsikan. Ang mga gurong taga-Naic na buong lakas na
nagtuturo sa mga kabataan at pilit na nagtataguyod sa kanilang pamilya na
umanib sa Himagsikan para ipaglaban ang mas nakatataas na layunin ay tunay na
kahanga-hanga. Ilan pa nga bang guro ngayon ang katulad nila? Ilan pa nga bang
guro ang kayang manindigan para sa mga kadahilanang pinangangatuwiranan niya
kahit pilit siyang ibinababa ng sistema?
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg9gCdRpfUyOVxH11vVmN9FsjzRMA67JUeHOhYQH_PQ6Kvzh1gEePAZXBlYmHkW4iGonvyhuFLFlAeFGFUUclhcieIc2l36w7Qlloxu3p-HaSGB0x9feCyztcEXDszTmc3m2o22TLrsig/s1600/doug_fire_water_main.jpg
Kahit ang mga dayuhan ay maihahalintulad
sa isang malaking alon sa dagat na gustong lunurin ang pag-asa ng mga taga-Naic
tungo sa kasarinlan, hindi pa nito napigilan ang nagngangalit nang apoy na nananalaytay
sa mga Pilipinong nais ng kalayaan, katarungan, at pagbabago. Maaaring ang “apoy” na ito ang nakita ni
Andres Bonifacio kaya nailagay sa Naic ang tanggapan ng pamahalaang
rebolusyonaryo. Sa kasamaang palad, hindi naiwasan ang kabi-kabilang pagsalakay
ng mga puwersang Kastila sa Naic. Nagtagumpay man sila dahil sa pagsama sa
himagsikan, nasakop naman silang muli ng mga Kastila ngunit hindi na kasing
tagal ng dati. Patunay na hindi na basta malalansi ang mga taga-Naic ng mga
hambog na dayuhan. Kaya na nilang manindigan at lumaban para sila ay lumaya.
http://www.retrato.com.ph/retratoimages/Midsize/SS/SS00397b.jpg
Nang dumating ang mga Amerikano, idiniin
nila na mas mahalin ng mga Pilipino ang kultura ng Amerika sa tulong ng mga
gurong ipinadala ng Amerika. Naging progresibo ang pamahalaang lokal sa panahong
ito at naging aktibo naman ang mga naging partisipasyon ng mga taga-Naic sa
pamamahala ng mga Amerikano. Marahil para sa iba, maganda ang dulot ng mga
Amerikano sa Pilipinas at sa Naic, ngunit para sa akin, walang kaibahan ito sa
regalo ng mga Kastila, mas maganda lang ang pagkakabalot nito. Nilunod tayo ng
Amerikano sa mga huwad na biyaya at masayang lumubog ang marami dito. Kaya nga
naman may mga taga-Naic, at sa pangkalahatan, mga Pilipino, na rin ang lumaban
sa panig ng mga Amerikano laban sa mga Hapones (bagamat hindi pa rin lubusang
masisisi ang mga gerilyang ito sapagkat maaaring biktima lang din sila ng
pagkakataon).
https://thefilipinoservant.files.wordpress.com/2012/08/tatag-ng-wikang-filipino-lakas-ng-pagka-pilipino.jpg
Hindi malayo ang kasaysayan ng Naic sa
kasaysayan ng Pilipinas. Hindi lamang
aral ng nakalipas ang makukuha natin sa mayamang kasaysayan ng Naic, kundi
inpirasyon—inspirasyon na kahit sa anong kalagayan natin sa buhay, may magagawa
tayo tungo sa pagbabago. Mula dito, mararamdaman natin na napakalapit ng mga
pangyayari sa ating kapaligiran (hal. paaralan, bahay, pinagtatrabahuhan) sa
mga pangyayari sa ating bansa kung kaya’t mahalaga ang aktibong pakikiisa ng mga
tao sa pagtatama ng mga mali sa ating lipunan. Wala itong pinipiling panahon,
ang kawastuhan ang laging dapat mangibabaw. Makikita rin natin sa kasaysayan na
kahit minorya lamang ang mga nagtanggal ng piring ng kolonyalismo upang lumaban
sa mga dayuhan, may naidulot pa ring itong pagbabago—pagbabago na lalong
nagpatapang sa mga taong lumalaban sa “kanser ng lipunan”, paggising sa mga
taong gumon pa sa ideyalismo ng dayuhan at ng kapitalismo, at pagbibigay ng takot
para sa mga dayuhang nagnanais na abusuhin ang ating Inang Bayan. Natutuhan na
nating walang ibang nasyon ang makakapagpalaya sa atin sa mga problemang ating
kinakaharap. Hindi ang Espanya, hindi ang mga Amerikano, hindi ang mga Briton,
at lalong hindi ang mga Hapones ang makakapagpalaya sa atin. Ito ay nasa mga
kamay ng mga tinawag ni Gat Jose Rizal na “pag-asa ng bayan”—tayong mga
kabataang nagnanais na mapaunlad ang ating mga sarili at ang ating bayan. Hindi
pa man natin magawa sa ngayon ang pagbabago, naniniwala akong ang pagiging
mulat natin sa mga pangyayari sa ating paligid at ang pagiging gising natin sa
bawat maling at mapang-aping sistema ay isa nang malaki nang hakbang tungo sa
dito. Darating din ang panahon na tayo naman ang huhubog sa hinaharap kung
kaya’t mainam na atin itong paghandaang mabuti sa pamamagitan ng pagiging
mayaman sa kaaalaman, pagiging mayabong ng magandang kaugalian, at paggamit
nito sa pang-araw-araw na pamumuhay.
http://geronimobdelosreyesjr.com/news/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/1.15.14.jpg
Sa bawat gurong lumaban sa Himagsikan, sa bawat Katipunerong
nanindigan sa kalayaan ng mga Pilipino, sa bawat miyembro ng gerilya na walang
takot na ipinaglaban ang kanilang mga karapatan, at sa bawat Pilipino na
nagnais at nagnanais ng pagbabago at nagsisikap na matamo ito, taga-Naic man o
hindi, nagpupugay ako sa inyo.
Monday, March 21, 2016
Millennium Development Goals, Education for All 2015, and Education 2030
by May Anne Joy D. Romanes
University of the Philippines - Diliman
March 21, 2016
March 21, 2016
Millennium Development Goals (MDG ) and Education for All (EFA) 2015 had set such
sky-high and idealistic goals, despite the known problems of weak political
will among world leaders, inadequate resources of different countries, the likelihood
of inefficient strategies in implementing such goals (United Nations, 2015),
and the passiveness of some citizens who were supposed to benefit from the said
programs. As a result, not all goals have been achieved. MDG had remarkable gains yet inequalities persist
and progress has been uneven. (Ki-Moon as cited by United Nations, 2015). As
for EFA 2015, it has not been achieved despite the efforts of the governments,
civil society and the international community (Bokova as cited by Chua, 2015).
The implementation of the MDG and EFA goals can be illustrated by a delivery
man (world leaders) carrying a relatively heavy sack of goods (quality and
equitable education for all, good health, satisfaction of basic needs,
environmental sustainability, and global partnership for development), and
trying to deliver it to the recipient (people) through any vehicle (means of
achieving the goals), which is either the delivery man’s choice or whatever is
available at the moment.
There are factors to consider in the
delivery of the goods to the recipient (the realization of the MDG and EFA goals).
First, it is up to the delivery man whether
he wants to deliver the goods or not (a question of the willingness of political
leaders to implement the goals). If he decided not to deliver the goods, then
the recipient will not get them.
Second, the goods can be too heavy for the
delivery man to carry (the capacity of the country leaders to carry out the
goals and the resources of the country). If the delivery man cannot carry the
goods because of his own limitations, then no matter how much he wishes to
deliver the goods, he will not be able to do it.
Third, what will the recipient do if he/she
did not receive the goods (the participation of people in the realization of
the goals)? How active or passive can he/she be in getting what he/she is
supposed to get?
Fourth, the vehicle, or the means of
transportation, dictates how slow or how fast the goods can be delivered (means
and strategies employed to realize the goals). If the delivery man rides a
sled, then it will take a long time to deliver the goods; if he rides a
helicopter, then the goods will be delivered in a short span of time. Furthermore,
the availability of the means of transportation should also be considered,
because it is possible that the mode of transportation could be unavailable, such
as in areas occupied by the enemies of the government.
Lastly, the circumstances that happen
during the delivery of goods, such as accidents, bad weather condition, etc.,
can influence the delivery of the goods (events that can hasten or hamper the
realization of the goals).
Recently, the
Philippines adopted a new set of goals and targets to establish the global
education trajectory through 2030 Education Framework for Action (Education
2030) to operationalize the 4th goal of the recently adopted
Sustainable Development Goals (United Nations Educational, Scientific and
Cultural Organization Philippines, 2015). All factors mentioned were important
to realize the MDG and EFA 2015 goals. The same is true in achieving the goals
of the Education 2030. This year, 2016, is an opportunity to reflect on and to
learn from the past mistakes, to build on our successes and to put all
countries, together, firmly on track towards a more prosperous, sustainable and
equitable world (Ki-Moon as cited by United Nations, 2015).
References:
Chua, Y. (2015, April 10). ‘Education for All’
ending; PH fails to meet targets. Vera Files. Retrieved from
http://verafiles.org/education-for-all-ending-ph-fails-to-meet-targets/
United Nations. (2015). The Millennium Development
Goals report 2015. Retrieved from http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/2015_MDG_Report/pdf/MDG%202015%20rev%20(July%201).pdf
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural
Organization Philippines. (2015, April 11). PH Affirms Commitment to the
Education 2030 Framework for Action. Retrieved from
http://www.unesco.gov.ph/content/article/PH%20Affirms%20Commitment%20to%20the%20Education%202030%20Framework%20for%20Action
Suggested citation (APA 6th ed):
Romanes, M. A. J. (2016, March 21). Millennium Development Goals, Education for All 2015, and Education 2030 [Web log post]. Retrieved from http://jesusnevereverrfails.blogspot.com/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)