It is not in the nature of man–nor of any living entity–to start out by giving up, by spitting in one’s own face and damning existence; that requires a process of corruption whose rapidity differs from man to man. Some give up at the first touch of pressure; some sell out; some run down by imperceptible degrees and lose their fire, never knowing when or how they lost it. Then all of these vanish in the vast swamp of their elders who tell them persistently that maturity consists of abandoning one’s mind; security, of abandoning one’s values; practicality, of losing self-esteem.

Ayn Rand

Ten days unemployed. Now reading The Fountainhead.

The world is amazing.

In other news, the people of Marikina woke up to find their little valley topped off with a generous layer of whipped cream. All hail the great cow in the sky.

In essence, since we do not have the necessary expertise required to do an original exegesis of the text, we read the exegesis done by theologians and then duplicate their work, avoiding being labeled as plagiarists by feebly paraphrasing and summarizing their ideas. This is not necessarily wrong, for is this not what we do when we report on a certain topic? We read about the subject and then communicate the information we have obtained in a personal way. This is an important exercise, because it develops our ability to process and present information.

However, a distinction must be made between actually doing an exegesis of a text, in which one obtains an original (not necessarily unique) output, and making a factual report, in which information is merely synthesized. It is important to note the difference because the student may come to believe that he is making an exegesis when actually he is not. Moreover, by trying to pass off fact-finding as exegesis, the importance of creating new knowledge as an aspect of research is ignored, creating students who are pathetically unoriginal.

In effect, contrary to the desired outcome of the student becoming more critical, we only end up with students who are disheartened by having to trawl through highly specialized literature to extract insights the wordings of which they can manipulate and then half-heartedly pass off as their own. This is why I deem being asked to do an exegesis futile. The time could have been more fruitfully spent carefully studying an established exegetical work and then relating it to our experience.

Read the rest of their amazing story here (an article from Sports Illustrated). There is a video at the bottom of the page. Or, you can visit the Team Hoyt official website.

Now, what was it again that was so impossible to do?

technorati tags:Rick-Hoyt, Dick-Hoyt, Team-Hoyt

If what happened to Nicole happened to one of my daughters (there are several of them), I would tell her to shut up because she had it coming to her.When you sleep with a crocodile, be prepared to get eaten. Why should my daughter, if she got into that situation, cry rape when she went willingly with the guy who supposedly raped her?

Justice Secretary Gonzalez’s guts – Ramon Tulfo

That is a quote from Ramon Tulfo’s article in today’s (Jan 7) Inquirer. What a shameful thing for a respectable Filipino to say, much more a father. The “when you sleep with a crocodile” line of reasoning that many are so proud of repeating is an inappropriate analogy, not least because we are men, and not mere animals. Or is Tulfo implying here that US servicemen, nay, all men, are only as good as wild beasts?

Two wrongs do not make a right and though a woman may make mistakes and choose the wrong company, or get drunk, it does not mean that it is ‘just right’ that she gets taken advantage of. In the first place, as I recall, the law protects the rights of all citizens, be they right or in the wrong. It exists to protect the rights of people even if they screw up. How chilling to imagine that many Filipinos agree with him.

Email your reactions to isumbongmokaytulfo@yahoo.com

technorati tags:Nicole-rape-case, Mon-Tulfo

“Global competitiveness depends on students’ abilities to innovate and invent, not on their test scores,” agrees Yong Zhao, professor and director of the U.S.-China Center for Research on Educational Excellence at Michigan State University. America has long embraced its students’ passion, ingenuity, dreams, and ideas—none of which can be measured by test scores, says Zhao. Asia, on the other hand, has traditionally valued test scores above all else. Even where scores are high and innovative educational approaches are valued, as in Singapore, it’s still felt that testing plays too much of a role.

“Yours is a talent meritocracy, ours is an exam meritocracy,” Tharman Shanmugaratnam, Minister of Education of Singapore, said in a Newsweek interview. “There are some parts of the intellect that we are not able to test well—like creativity, curiosity, a sense of adventure, ambition….America has a culture of learning that challenges conventional wisdom, even if it means challenging authority. These are the areas where Singapore must learn from America.”

Another blow for too much objectivity in the classroom. Maybe our beloved scihi teachers can advocate this to the proper authorities? We are a leading school after all, so it is just right that we lead the pack in terms of progress. Speaking of which, here is Toyota’s recipe for success. It is a manifesto on innovation – not for the faint of heart, but definitely a good read.

Yes, the dictionary says that authority is the power or right to give orders and enforce obedience. But in the complete sense of the word, obedience is a personal decision on the part of the follower. Therefore, as long as the student never completely obeys the teacher, the teacher does not have authority.

Authority is not had, it is given. When someone informs you, and you believe him, you are allowing him to form you (because the information you acquired is bound to influence your decisions) and thus, you are giving him authority. (PS: This is not my original idea, I just read this from somewhere but unfortunately forgot who wrote it. Any of you readers know?)

Authority is not what defines the student and teacher relationship. It is the result of that relationship, wherein the student trusts the teacher enough to inform and form him. Authority is not the thing which allows the teacher to teach the student. Rather, it is the reward of successful mentoring.

And like authority, trust is earned, not taken as a given. How to get students to trust their teachers? Get the teachers to listen.

What’s your take on this? I’m listening.

All education bloggers are hereby invited and encouraged to…

1. complete the short and completely unscientific, but hopefully
interesting, education blogosphere survey;

2. forward the URL of said
survey to all other known education bloggers to ensure decent
representation of the education blogosphere; and

3. publicize said
survey URL on their own blogs to foster greater participation in this
most noble endeavor.

The survey is here.

A valuable benefit of collaboration, online or not, is that it alleviates the lack of teachers in our country. Our mentors feel overwhelmed because they mostly view education as writing on a tabula rasa. With so many students to fill, it is no wonder that they inevitably tire, and instead of thinking of new things to write and new ways to do it, settle for what they are most comfortable with. In adopting a master-apprentice approach and employing the Internet as an ally, teachers can focus less on the menial aspects of education and give more time to the students and the pursuit of knowledge.

More than just providing additional sources of information, the Internet can also be utilized to assist with assessment, given the right infrastructure. My teachers have pointed out to me that they would willingly use subjective testing methods except that they do not have time to process all of these. Why not, then, invite “guest teachers” to help in checking the works of their students. The guest teacher, in turn, stands to benefit from gaining new insights at best, or if not, good karma at least.

Of course, changing our mindsets and then our procedures won’t be a piece of cake. Putting in place the right mechanisms will be difficult, but then, did we ever get to put flags on Mt. Everest without trying hard?

On the other hand, the prospects of our technology seem to be leading us to this future. In the future of complete connectivity that is in store for us, our methods of sharing knowledge will become more encompassing and efficient, and some day, we would be able to know everything that everyone else knows. We’re being abstract here, of course, which means that you might not be able to know classified government information, et cetera.

But that’s thinking too far ahead. Even now, education stands to benefit greatly from the application of new technologies. Think hive mind less the single-mindedness. (Pardon the oxymoron but hive minds, for all their worth have only one point of view.) The advantages of leveraging online social networks (through all forms of publishing and collaboration) have been trumpeted by many so I don’t think I need to point those out anymore. Instead, in the next post, I’d like to mention a few aspects that I think is especially relevant to the Philippines.

[Update: I just realized that I'd bookmarked a similarly titled entry by Clarence Fisher.]