I. Intensity in Education: A Dialectical Consideration
Education nowadays as well as the process within it is measured more in terms of extensity than of intensity. Hence, the more relevant burden of academic scholarship in the present era is to locate the concrete vantage point where extensity and intensity may fully be coordinated to effect the realization of the truly educated individual. The lopsided thrust of education and its required features focuses more on the superficial in the matter, manner and method that it possesses. This is in the area of extensity and the problem with the unilateral emphasis on it is the inadvertent isolation of intensity which capitalizes on depth and quality. At the end of the road, we find extensively "educated" individuals who are more particularly interested in the degrees attached to their names than in the essential depth of what they possess in the intellect.
Thinking aloud, it could be surmised reasonably that despite the presence of an array of multi-degreed academics, the general landscape of national life is still seen to be retrogressive and less promising. More realistically, the academe and real life do not match up and fit well together for what is taught in the academe are matters so artificial, real life does not need them and real life is so concrete the academe, replete with abstract notions peddled by "schizophrenic" professors, is just a superfluous nuisance.
The intensity of education lies in the fact that it should be a realistic reflection—a committed theorizing—on what is actually experienced in life. It should be a deeper exploration into the dynamics and mechanics of actual life-events interconnected among themselves and constitutive of a system that prevails at a certain moment of ongoing history. Such education can only lead to a better understanding not of the theory that expresses the understanding but of the practical life given interpretation by the theory. In this condition and situation, real authorities are a common sight and their contribution is not to the growing statistics of half-cooked doctoral degree holders but to the economic vibrancy, political stability, social empowerment and cultural intensification.
To be more specific at this point of the discussion, the dialectical notion of progress that characterizes authentic education as an intense reflection of actual practices in social life should permeate every process operationalized in it in the forms or instruction, reseach, and extension. In other words, dialectics operates not only in terms of extensity but in terms of intensity as components of the entire system complement each other to achieve a higher level of development.
II. Academic Credibility Getting Lost in the Jungle of Absurdity
This is the most infamous idiocy we now encounter in less-credible Philippine universities and colleges: academics possessed with the guts to brag their graduate and/or post-graduate degrees as if these are the end-all of their existence—unmindful of THE WEIGHTIER SUBSTANCE OF SCHOLARSHIP expected of the schooling that they spent to get their degrees. This circumstance is further complicated by bestowing these people with the title “Professor.” On a closer look, the worst is, almost none of them have actually produced serious writings and research studies of scholarly worth much less, being quoted and/or cited in prestigious refereed journals and volumes of deep sophistication.
The eyes of pride and arrogance light up as these pretenders are addressed “Doctor” or “Professor.” But in reality, their conceit and haughtiness emanate from the higher salaries they get by virtue of the academic degrees they boast. They are the paper tigers of the academe. The Commission on Higher Education (CHED) is the only institution that recognizes their importance (if they are truly important); not the more trustworthy scholars and scholarly societies based in more credible academic locales. No reason is therefore engendered to persuade “the authentics” to offer lectureship stint to “the pseudos.” The real won’t dare.
This condition in the Philippines has been so rampant and hence alarming. In the face of this reality, “academic excellence” claimed by most universities and colleges has gone equivocal and hence meaningless.
III. Basking Under the High-Noon Sun of Hardcore Delusion
Some second-rate private universities and colleges in the Philippines are now levitating under the magical spell of the Commission on Higher Education’s make-believe power after these institutions have been granted an autonomous status by the latter. Hubris is the most appropriate term for the spirit that has possessed them. A certain type of delusion has overpowered their leaderships in the belief that they are now in league with the illustrious Ateneo and De La Salle. What a horrendous hallucination!
The irony of the present circumstances is they are in a state of unequalled “high” despite the hard reality that they cannot actually lay a solid claim to an array of distinguished honest-to-goodness scholars from among their stockpiles of “doctored” degree holders. Ateneo’s and De La Salle’s doctorate degree holders are authentic scholars who have produced academic outputs of high scholarly worth published in notable scholarly journals, local and international. Ateneo’s and De La Salle’s academic scholars have read papers and lectured in prominent conferences and forums, local and international.
But the present situation of these mediocre institutions is still salvageable given the condition that they will soon wake up to reality. Face-to-face with reality, they can soberly locate themselves right at the place where they can start off: the call to challenge genuine scholars and the guts to weed out incompetence in their faculty ranks.
IV. A Postscript for Serious Rumination
The following quote from a letter by a certain Michael Riggs (http://freeenergynews.com/Directory/Beware/Bearden_Bogus_PhD/#Comment_mcriggs) is worth reflecting as it challenges us to reconsider a lot of misguided thoughts on higher education:
“While one may not agree with me, the definition of a diploma mill is an educational facility where one meets minimal, structured, educational requirements in order to acquire a degree. While I do not wish to belittle the efforts of those who have gone through the prescribed educational processes required, by say, the top 100 universities, I would say that based on the end result, our top-rated universities definitely meet the definition of diploma mills, including any "top" university you wish to select. Let me explain why I would say this.
Modern-day academia, (and thus the university system) is an unbroken loop of self-regulating, self-perpetuating, self-promoting, ego-centric elitists where the prime qualifications for maintaining "impeccable credentials" is to hold the faith, retain those concepts learned by rote, and be able to repeat them as taught. And I'm supposed to be impressed? Keep in mind, once you attain that Ph.D, you don't have to accomplish one single thing, and you don't have to make any contribution in understanding our world in order to be considered one of the establishment elite. Within academia, it is sufficient to theorize some minor facet of a known and familiar science, do some tests, document the same, and then,( and this is the key element,) do whatever it takes to get your results published. After all, publication to physicists and scientists is the ultimate goal. Never mind that your obscure work will never be read, never mind that your determinations are meaningless. Just get published. Ride the current and don't make waves. And this approach is meaningful and superior?
The only thing that should matter to anyone is the end result. The result of our newly graduating Ph.D's is that they have the basics, but until one may contribute to our collective knowledge, or successfully accomplish a breakthrough, then all they have done is spend time in a specified regimen.
Our current educational system is stagnant, and is turning out stagnancy. That is why we are doing the same old things with brighter, newer equipment.”
© Ruel F. Pepa, May 2010
Friday, May 28, 2010
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
"Our current educational system is stagnant, and is turning out stagnancy. That is why we are doing the same old things with brighter, newer equipment." (Riggs) -- A lot of people use new technology as if it were a substitute for what is really essential: idea/concept itself, how it developed, and what it means. As long as it's flashy, other people think it's awesome. The new technology consist mostly of tools and methodologies -- knowledge itself is more complex, more demanding. It's sad when people rely more on technology rather than the knowledge that can truly uplift others.
Bill Gates recognized that information technology, though powerful, cannot and should never be taken as the substance, because all it does is to "upgrade" whatever it is applied to -- so if what you have or is doing is inefficient or ineffective, technology only makes it even more so. On the other hand, if what you're doing is truly substantive, relevant, meaningful and original, then technology can bring it to a higher level as well.
Post a Comment