There goes this saying that if an elected government official is doing his/her job well and not corrupt, you do not call him/her a politician. Instead, we call him/her a public servant.
Yet still, the BA Pol Sci course is still Bachelor of Arts in Political Science, not “Public Service Science”. And as observance to usage of respectful language, we practice political correctness.
Despite the indispensability of the term “politics”, the said word never fails to enrage us. That’s because traditional politicians, or “trapos” as they are colloquially called, give politics a really bad name.
The very same thing happened to the term “academics”. In my previous post regarding Nick Perlas’ education platform, Edward commented, “Nice to see someone's perspective on Nick's platform analyzed in an academic context. I do think that the people's impression of him being an environmentalist overshadows perception of his abilities to change the different sectors of society especially education.”
And the beautiful thing about it is Edward appreciated my post despite my well-known counter-academic stance on many issues.
It appears that the term “academics” isn’t really that bad at all. It’s just that the differently educated members of our society cannot help but to get stirred up everytime they hear the words “academics”, “school” and even “education”. I have even seen a man wearing a shirt with print design that says, “I was born intelligent, but education ruined me.” The said message reflects the very sad state of the formal education system he currently have, and that’s because traditional academicians gave "academics" a very bad name, just like what traditional politicians did to the word "politics".
Traditional academics: a system of blatant prejudice and corruption
Almost a decade ago, I came across a questionnaire called The 16 Personality Factor Test. It is a questionnaire developed in the 1940’s by psychologist Raymond Cattell that aims to somehow quantify someone’s personality in terms of 16 factors. In the said questionnaire, a person can either hit the low range or high range in each factor. Among the factors in the said questionnaire is reasoning. In the said factor, concrete thinkers hit the low range while abstract thinkers hit the high range. The concrete thinking trait is labeled as “low scholastic ability” while the abstract thinking trait is labeled as “high scholastic ability”.
From there, we can immediately see the bias of traditional academics towards the abstract thinkers while deliberately marginalizing the concrete thinkers, directly or indirectly labeling them as incompetent, dumb and/or stupid. I even read a blog that describes concrete thinking as the inability to think abstractly!
But are concrete thinkers really intellectually inferior? Do concrete thinkers really literally empty their cups when they are told to do so, just like what the character of Jason did in the movie Forbidden Kingdom? I don’t think so. They just think differently. It is just the abstract thinking academic elitists’ preposterous pride in their cerebral self-coitus, endlessly gratifying themselves with all the gobbledygook their ivory tower can offer and branding those who do not have either the capability or interest to join their game as dull. It is nothing but the pure conceit of the abstract thinking traditional academicians who think their way of thinking is the thinking man’s way.
These traditional academicians take pride in their so-called achievements in advancing scientific and linguistic studies. They, after all, are of logical-mathematical and/or linguistic intelligence(s). People of naturalistic and spatial intelligences are fortunate enough to have a special place in the IQ-biased system of formal education, for their talents are essential for the advancement of engineering and biological sciences. But for those who possess the musical, interpersonal, intrapersonal, bodily-kinesthetic, and existential intelligences are being placed in the “low sections” of the hierarchy of scholastic ability.
Hence the unforgiving pressure on the part of students to attain high grades the abstract thinker way. This kind of pressure destroys the students. That’s because a shovel is a shovel. Unfortunately, it cannot be a pail unless it gets molded into one by fire, which will of course inevitably destroy the shovel. And because concrete thinkers are most likely to stay as concrete thinkers, the academic pressure they experience will then force them to cheat their way to the passing grade, all in the name of academic excellence. The situations present two options for the marginalized concrete thinkers: fail by staying true to their intellectual character, or cheat to survive in the academic world. For most students, the choice is easy. Most would rather choose to cheat than to fail for they simply cannot afford to face the persecution of the system of traditional academics. This scheme of “survival of the cheaters” would then be the seeds of the culture of corruption.
Imagine this crooked system shaping our children for at least 18 years
Three years in pre-school, at least six years in elementary, four years in secondary, and at least four years in tertiary. Imagine a discriminatory system of formal education molding our children for at least 18 years. And if your child
And for us to have a better picture of formal education’s impact to the character development of our children, let’s talk about the number of school hours. When I was in elementary, I had spend six hours per day in school. When I was in high school, it’s up to nine hours. When I was in college, I had to live in a dorm inside the UP Los Banos campus, so I literally lived in a school.
Now imagine that amount of time that our children spend in the discriminatory system of formal education. With so much time our children spend in the system of traditional academics, what do you think will they be upon finally graduating? What kind of culture has our system of formal education embedded into the minds and hearts of our youth?
Needless to say, a culture of multi-sectoral cooperation is essential for the growth of any country. But instead, our formal education system is promoting a culture of division. We now have lots of college graduates who treat differently educated individuals as uneducated people. We have a lot of graduates from the “big five” universities (UP, Ateneo, La Salle, UST, UA&P) who believe that graduates from other schools are not competent enough. We now have lots of college graduates who look down on blue-collar jobs. I even know a UP student who once said, “Huwag niyo pakinggan ‘yan. Janitor lang ‘yan. Taga-UP ako.”
And instead of raising children who will have the courage to challenge the corrupt system, traditional academics has brought up students who are more inclined to just join the system.
Instead of fighting for their legitimate rights, the followers of traditional academics just chose to bow down to the will of whoever is in power, just like how concrete thinkers bow down to the rules set by the abstract thinkers way back their school days.
And instead of promoting the virtues of honesty and respect by giving concrete thinkers enough room to breathe and teaching abstract thinkers to give way to others, traditional academics has produced cheaters and tyrants.
Instead of fostering a culture of integrity, traditional academics instead cultivated a culture of corruption.
Now bring that culture into the context of political practice. What we get is a system we now call traditional politics, run by traditional politicians who are experts in the games of cheating and tyranny.
What do we replace traditional academics with?
Given the monstrous characteristics of traditional academics, we must replace it with a new system that is based on the virtue of respect. We need a system that accepts the student for who he/she is, for what his/her intelligence type is. We need a system that will nurture the child according to his/her intelligence type and learning patterns.
We’ve had enough of the formal education system that forces a shovel to be a pail. We’ve had enough of traditional academics that destroys our children’s character and identity.
We need to stop the culture of cheating and tyranny from the root. We need to stop it in its early stage. If the formal education system would give students the opportunity to pursue and showcase their own learning regardless of their intelligence type, then we are reducing the chances of cheating in the academic world. Learning things your own way makes studies a lot easier, so why cheat if you already have a good grasp of the school lessons?
We need an education system based on the theory of multiple intelligences as proposed by psychologist Howard Gardner. We need to replace traditional academics with multiple-intelligent education.
Nick Perlas and his unique platform for education
Yet still, the BA Pol Sci course is still Bachelor of Arts in Political Science, not “Public Service Science”. And as observance to usage of respectful language, we practice political correctness.
Despite the indispensability of the term “politics”, the said word never fails to enrage us. That’s because traditional politicians, or “trapos” as they are colloquially called, give politics a really bad name.
The very same thing happened to the term “academics”. In my previous post regarding Nick Perlas’ education platform, Edward commented, “Nice to see someone's perspective on Nick's platform analyzed in an academic context. I do think that the people's impression of him being an environmentalist overshadows perception of his abilities to change the different sectors of society especially education.”
And the beautiful thing about it is Edward appreciated my post despite my well-known counter-academic stance on many issues.
It appears that the term “academics” isn’t really that bad at all. It’s just that the differently educated members of our society cannot help but to get stirred up everytime they hear the words “academics”, “school” and even “education”. I have even seen a man wearing a shirt with print design that says, “I was born intelligent, but education ruined me.” The said message reflects the very sad state of the formal education system he currently have, and that’s because traditional academicians gave "academics" a very bad name, just like what traditional politicians did to the word "politics".
Traditional academics: a system of blatant prejudice and corruption
Almost a decade ago, I came across a questionnaire called The 16 Personality Factor Test. It is a questionnaire developed in the 1940’s by psychologist Raymond Cattell that aims to somehow quantify someone’s personality in terms of 16 factors. In the said questionnaire, a person can either hit the low range or high range in each factor. Among the factors in the said questionnaire is reasoning. In the said factor, concrete thinkers hit the low range while abstract thinkers hit the high range. The concrete thinking trait is labeled as “low scholastic ability” while the abstract thinking trait is labeled as “high scholastic ability”.
From there, we can immediately see the bias of traditional academics towards the abstract thinkers while deliberately marginalizing the concrete thinkers, directly or indirectly labeling them as incompetent, dumb and/or stupid. I even read a blog that describes concrete thinking as the inability to think abstractly!
But are concrete thinkers really intellectually inferior? Do concrete thinkers really literally empty their cups when they are told to do so, just like what the character of Jason did in the movie Forbidden Kingdom? I don’t think so. They just think differently. It is just the abstract thinking academic elitists’ preposterous pride in their cerebral self-coitus, endlessly gratifying themselves with all the gobbledygook their ivory tower can offer and branding those who do not have either the capability or interest to join their game as dull. It is nothing but the pure conceit of the abstract thinking traditional academicians who think their way of thinking is the thinking man’s way.
These traditional academicians take pride in their so-called achievements in advancing scientific and linguistic studies. They, after all, are of logical-mathematical and/or linguistic intelligence(s). People of naturalistic and spatial intelligences are fortunate enough to have a special place in the IQ-biased system of formal education, for their talents are essential for the advancement of engineering and biological sciences. But for those who possess the musical, interpersonal, intrapersonal, bodily-kinesthetic, and existential intelligences are being placed in the “low sections” of the hierarchy of scholastic ability.
Hence the unforgiving pressure on the part of students to attain high grades the abstract thinker way. This kind of pressure destroys the students. That’s because a shovel is a shovel. Unfortunately, it cannot be a pail unless it gets molded into one by fire, which will of course inevitably destroy the shovel. And because concrete thinkers are most likely to stay as concrete thinkers, the academic pressure they experience will then force them to cheat their way to the passing grade, all in the name of academic excellence. The situations present two options for the marginalized concrete thinkers: fail by staying true to their intellectual character, or cheat to survive in the academic world. For most students, the choice is easy. Most would rather choose to cheat than to fail for they simply cannot afford to face the persecution of the system of traditional academics. This scheme of “survival of the cheaters” would then be the seeds of the culture of corruption.
Imagine this crooked system shaping our children for at least 18 years
Three years in pre-school, at least six years in elementary, four years in secondary, and at least four years in tertiary. Imagine a discriminatory system of formal education molding our children for at least 18 years. And if your child
And for us to have a better picture of formal education’s impact to the character development of our children, let’s talk about the number of school hours. When I was in elementary, I had spend six hours per day in school. When I was in high school, it’s up to nine hours. When I was in college, I had to live in a dorm inside the UP Los Banos campus, so I literally lived in a school.
Now imagine that amount of time that our children spend in the discriminatory system of formal education. With so much time our children spend in the system of traditional academics, what do you think will they be upon finally graduating? What kind of culture has our system of formal education embedded into the minds and hearts of our youth?
Needless to say, a culture of multi-sectoral cooperation is essential for the growth of any country. But instead, our formal education system is promoting a culture of division. We now have lots of college graduates who treat differently educated individuals as uneducated people. We have a lot of graduates from the “big five” universities (UP, Ateneo, La Salle, UST, UA&P) who believe that graduates from other schools are not competent enough. We now have lots of college graduates who look down on blue-collar jobs. I even know a UP student who once said, “Huwag niyo pakinggan ‘yan. Janitor lang ‘yan. Taga-UP ako.”
And instead of raising children who will have the courage to challenge the corrupt system, traditional academics has brought up students who are more inclined to just join the system.
Instead of fighting for their legitimate rights, the followers of traditional academics just chose to bow down to the will of whoever is in power, just like how concrete thinkers bow down to the rules set by the abstract thinkers way back their school days.
And instead of promoting the virtues of honesty and respect by giving concrete thinkers enough room to breathe and teaching abstract thinkers to give way to others, traditional academics has produced cheaters and tyrants.
Instead of fostering a culture of integrity, traditional academics instead cultivated a culture of corruption.
Now bring that culture into the context of political practice. What we get is a system we now call traditional politics, run by traditional politicians who are experts in the games of cheating and tyranny.
What do we replace traditional academics with?
Given the monstrous characteristics of traditional academics, we must replace it with a new system that is based on the virtue of respect. We need a system that accepts the student for who he/she is, for what his/her intelligence type is. We need a system that will nurture the child according to his/her intelligence type and learning patterns.
We’ve had enough of the formal education system that forces a shovel to be a pail. We’ve had enough of traditional academics that destroys our children’s character and identity.
We need to stop the culture of cheating and tyranny from the root. We need to stop it in its early stage. If the formal education system would give students the opportunity to pursue and showcase their own learning regardless of their intelligence type, then we are reducing the chances of cheating in the academic world. Learning things your own way makes studies a lot easier, so why cheat if you already have a good grasp of the school lessons?
We need an education system based on the theory of multiple intelligences as proposed by psychologist Howard Gardner. We need to replace traditional academics with multiple-intelligent education.
Nick Perlas and his unique platform for education
The issue of education has always been a favorite propaganda ground for any presidential candidate in the Philippine setting. That’s because our current education system is plagued by so many problems. We always here all sorts of flowery promises every campaign period, some of them are actually way too formulaic and predictable. Too much has been said, but too little has been done.
All candidates promised to make formal education accessible and uplift its quality. We have heard this countless times. Same old song huh!
Well, I’ll sing you something new.
Upon making my research about the education platform of the presidential candidates for the 2010 election, there’s this one and only candidate who included the advancement of multiple-intelligent education in his platform. The candidate I am talking about is Nicanor “Nick” Perlas. You can view my previous post about his platform for multiple-intelligent education.
Also, Pam Fernandez commented in my previous post that here in the Philippines, Ka Nick is among the pioneers of Steiner-Waldorf education, an interdisciplinary educational approach that has found its niche among the artistically inclined. That’s good to hear! That means when Ka Nick talks about holistic education, he knows how to implement it.
Addressing one of the roots of corruption
We Filipinos have been suffering the cancer of corruption for ages. Persecuting those corrupt trapos is something that we can easily see as the solution. Sounds pretty good at first, but it doesn’t go to the root of the problem.
We have to bear in mind that corruption is a cultural problem. And as far as molding a child’s culture is concerned, the education system is among the big players, along with family, media, and society.
Overhauling the education system is not just an educational agenda. It is also an essential component in the battle against corruption. We need to realize that to crush the corrupt system of traditional politics, we must also defeat the crooked system of traditional academics that raised the current traditional politicians during their tender years.
Good thing Ka Nick knows how to address one of the roots of corruption, and he is offering us a remedy in the form of multiple-intelligent education.
All candidates promised to make formal education accessible and uplift its quality. We have heard this countless times. Same old song huh!
Well, I’ll sing you something new.
Upon making my research about the education platform of the presidential candidates for the 2010 election, there’s this one and only candidate who included the advancement of multiple-intelligent education in his platform. The candidate I am talking about is Nicanor “Nick” Perlas. You can view my previous post about his platform for multiple-intelligent education.
Also, Pam Fernandez commented in my previous post that here in the Philippines, Ka Nick is among the pioneers of Steiner-Waldorf education, an interdisciplinary educational approach that has found its niche among the artistically inclined. That’s good to hear! That means when Ka Nick talks about holistic education, he knows how to implement it.
Addressing one of the roots of corruption
We Filipinos have been suffering the cancer of corruption for ages. Persecuting those corrupt trapos is something that we can easily see as the solution. Sounds pretty good at first, but it doesn’t go to the root of the problem.
We have to bear in mind that corruption is a cultural problem. And as far as molding a child’s culture is concerned, the education system is among the big players, along with family, media, and society.
Overhauling the education system is not just an educational agenda. It is also an essential component in the battle against corruption. We need to realize that to crush the corrupt system of traditional politics, we must also defeat the crooked system of traditional academics that raised the current traditional politicians during their tender years.
Good thing Ka Nick knows how to address one of the roots of corruption, and he is offering us a remedy in the form of multiple-intelligent education.
Reposted with the permission of the author.
