Saturday, July 30, 2011

Moving on: the cult of forgetfulness

Moving on: the cult of forgetfulness

By: 

Memory is so burdensome to many of us that moving on and not looking back has become a kind of value in itself. The argument is that responding to present challenges is demanding enough, we should not compound it by dredging the past. This attitude, so prevalent in our culture, typically rides on the religious notion of forgiveness as forgetting and freeing oneself of a grudge. I argue that while a sense of forgiveness may lead us to disregard a wrong, forgiving does not mean forgetting.
There are two reasons why we should remember, and they are particularly relevant to our context. The first is quite obvious: many of our present problems are practically the same ones we encountered in the past. They recur because we have not taken them seriously enough – meaning, we do not use them as occasions to affirm our basic values, laws, and standards. We are content to catch the small fry hired by the real culprits. Because of the latter’s power, we stop short of calling them to account, or of punishing them. We seldom take the trouble of determining the nature of these problems so as to prevent their recurrence.
The second reason for remembering is that where there is no recognition of wrongdoing, or where there is no remorse and atonement, there is no duty to forgive. The offense is bound to be repeated, if not by the same person, by others who are emboldened by the community’s lack of will to enforce its laws. But, more than this, when a wrongdoing is unacknowledged and altogether blotted out, and the wrongdoer survives in memory without stigma, cynicism displaces idealism. The community loses its capacity to judge and to distribute social esteem. Before long, the unpunished wrongdoer may even come back to claim esteem. In our forgetfulness, we then wonder why, in the first place, it was denied him.
In his book “The ethics of memory,” the philosopher Avishai Margalit wrote of forgiveness in these terms: “The central metaphor is not erasure but, rather, returning.  The sinner who has become distanced from God because of his sin now returns to Him. The first step in correcting the wrongdoing is not God’s forgiveness but the sinner’s act of returning to God.”
This is accomplished, Margalit writes, first and foremost by the offender showing remorse.  Why is remorse so crucial to the return of the offender to the fold, and to the reconciliation between the wrongdoer and the community that forgives?
Margalit’s insight is instructive: “Remorse offers us a non-magical way of undoing the past. Although it is impossible to undo what has been done, since the past cannot be changed, it is possible to change our interpretation of the past. By expressing remorse the offender presents himself in a new light, a light that can be projected into the past.  His ability to feel remorse attests that he is not basically evil, even if the act that he performed was abominable. The sinner does not deny the badness of his deed, as then he would not be expressing remorse, but his very assumption of responsibility for the deed is supposed to create a rift between the act and the doer. Thus, an offender can be forgiven even if the offense cannot be forgotten.”
Let us apply this insight to two of our past presidents, Ferdinand Marcos and Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, who were accused of committing acts considered abominable by society but were never punished. Marcos died in exile before the cases filed against him could be heard and decided. He was defiant till the end and never admitted committing any wrongdoing. A large portion of his wealth was nonetheless pronounced ill-gotten and was confiscated by the government.
A US court declared his regime guilty of human rights violations and awarded compensation to the victims. But the rest of his family had no problem returning to the country from exile after his death. His wife Imelda is now a member of the House of Representatives, his oldest daughter Imee, the governor of Ilocos Norte, and his son Ferdinand Jr., a senator of the republic.  Feeling perhaps vindicated by electoral success, they now want a hero’s burial for the former dictator.   There is not even a hint of remorse here, no confession, and certainly no atonement.  By demanding a hero’s burial for Marcos, they want the nation, in effect, to confess that it had made a mistake in deposing him as president.  That is what moving on means in this context.
Gloria Arroyo’s case is slightly different. After claiming the presidency a second time on the back of a highly-disputed electoral outcome, GMA did everything to cover up the criminal acts that went into ensuring her dubious victory at the polls.
The issue came to a head in mid-2005 when recordings of conversations between election operators and politicians, including Arroyo, surfaced. The “Hello Garci” tapes plunged the government into a crisis and prompted the carefully crafted “I-am-sorry” statement of GMA on television. Was this a gesture of remorse that merits reciprocal forgiveness? I think not. This was an attempt at evasion, not atonement. By re-describing her act as merely “a lapse in judgment,” Arroyo sought to decriminalize it. Her subsequent statements were a virtual denial of her participation in these taped conversations.
Now that witnesses have come forward, and the trail of evidence and testimony seems to be leading to the doorstep of the Arroyos, we again hear that tiresome refrain about moving on. It is not forgiveness they seek, but, rather, forgetfulness.
* * *
public.lives@gmail.com

How does it count to be green? School in Bali Indonesia proves it otherwise


Andrew Stevens, CNN
July 19, 2011 -- Updated 1227 GMT (2027 HKT)

Bali, Indonesia (CNN) -- Learning Shakespeare under a thatched roof in a building made almost entirely from bamboo. The Green School in Bali, Indonesia, is like no other.

The idea came to its founder John Hardy after his wife took him to see the Al Gore's movie "An Inconvenient Truth."

Hardy -- who retired from running a successful jewelry business in 2007 -- was horrified by what he saw on screen and how climate change might affect his four children. So, he resolved to dedicate the rest of his life to do whatever he could to make their lot better, he says.
At the Green School, students from nursery to eighth grade get, what Hardy calls, "a holistic education" -- well rounded, with a special emphasis on the environment.

"The whole idea of sustainability and holism, which this school is based on, is that you don't dig everything up and spend it...and live inside your environmental means..." Hardy says.

His goal is to decrease the school's carbon footprint even further, which means growing organic vegetables in the garden and using waste from livestock and turning it into biogas for cooking.
Power is generated with the use of this hydroelectric vortex, and soon solar panels will be installed, taking the school completely off the grid.

But Hardy isn't without his critics.

The Green School is an international school that charges steep fees (from nearly $6,000 to almost $13,000 per annum). Most of its students are foreigners with Indonesians making up only 20% of the intake, and most of them are on scholarships.

"We haven't been entirely successful at getting local parents, with means, to send their children to come to the Green School".

Still, the school is expanding. When it opened in 2008 it had 98 children. This year they expect 300 students to enroll.

Hardy's vision has grown since he first saw Al Gore's movie. He says the Green School is just the anchor for what he hopes will become a truly green community.

Just over half a mile from the school Hardy is creating the Green Village.

"Having to put kids in cars or public transport every morning is silly," he said, "so the kids from the Green Village -- it is 900 meters from the school - will be able to walk through the Balinese fields to the school."

Helping Hardy develop this unique housing enclave is his 30-year-old daughter Elora. She gave up a high profile graphic designer job in New York and put her skills to work in Bali.

Like the Green School, these houses are made mostly from bamboo.

"From a resource point of view, bamboo is incredibly green," Elora Hardy said, "and I think that the spaces we're making have the effect when people go inside of feeling connected to nature."
Some of these homes cost up to half a million dollars and most are owned by wealthy families whose children go to the school, trading their city lives for greener lifestyles.
Hardy takes much pride from his daughter's choice to join him in what he describes as an amazing journey.

"We really have to develop into a sustainable system and a sustainable place, so that the grandchildren can go: 'ok we were headed to the abyss but Dad, Mom and Grandpa put the brakes on. Now...things are looking good.'"

Syndicated from:  http://edition.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/asiapcf/07/18/green.school.bali/index.html?hpt=hp_c2

CNN's feature report on Indonesia's Green School, a challenge to all, an inspiration to green and reform minded educators

By:  Gilbert M. Forbes
DepEd Quezon

Since the Department of Education emphasized and encouraged localization of curriculum particularly in Edukasyong Pantahanan at Pangkabuhayan, it has been my dream of seeing our pupils and students, particularly in rural areas doing and adopting lessons that will enhance their agricultural know-how that could be transmitted to their parents and later increase productivity and improve living standards in communities where they belong.  I used to call it balance or holistic education with emphasis on the total development of an individual as a person who would be ready for the rudiments and challenges of life.

But, it remains a dream, for we are still grappling how could this be made a possibility due to so many considerations.  There is this Gulayan sa Paaralan but even its effective implementation is a challenge.  Those who have it implemented successfully are presumed to have set aside tremendous time for academic hence our pupils, grade four to six pupils doesn't even know how to use bolo, scythe, pick mattock and other basic farm tools even those in the rural farming communities.  This is due to the negative attitude of the parents themselves towards farming.  They usually don't like their children follow in their footsteps which prove to be detrimental on the future of their siblings once they get into the field of productive work and source of livelihood.  This situation too is a contributing factor in the worsening labor mismatch.

Others have just reactivated their focus on Gulayan due to the prices earmarked the local governments as they tried to encourage schools optimum participation, possibly to help change public attitude towards farming-- in a short while.  Prices made available are no big deal for it could reach millions for those which could be lucky.

However, the big question is without these rewards and interventions from the LGU and leaving only the central office mandate with regards to it, where would have been?

This boils down to what we really want our children become which teachers and school administrators should  fully understand.  Do we intend to develop a productive citizen who is ready for life or an academic fellow who will soon be an add themsleves the looming non-productive members of the society for they are not ready for work particularly decent manual labor-- such as farming or agriculture

The feature recently broadcasted by CNN and reported on its web site is an inspiration and a wake up call that there is nothing wrong with farming particularly traditional, organic sustainable farming methods.  This article too entitled Green School sustains pupil's interest is an inspiration to all green advocates and is just in time that DepEd has called for all schools to strengthen environment education through the recently released order No. 52, s. 2011.


Certainly, former DepEd Secretary Lesli Lapus is but right when he said, there is no need for us to reinvent the wheel, all we need to do is to keep it rolling.

Friday, July 22, 2011

New SBM Grant Guidelines, Targets Poor and Highly Depressed Schools

DepEd Order No. 55, s. 2011- Gudelines on School Based Management (SBM) Grants has leveled and socialized the opportunities and the playing field among schools badly needing financial support.

Before, grants were given on the basis of being a non-performing school regardless of the place and extent of support available from stakeholders particularly among rich and well-funded schools located in rich cities and municipalities.

Under the new guidelines, prioritization, allocation, and selection of recipient schools shall be guided by, first, convergence to address poverty and capacity of local government units to support schools.  The first one refers to divisions with highest number of schools situated in 4th, 5th, and 6th class municipalities and 4P's areas are given priority.  The second one gives priority to schools under 4th, 5th, and 6th class municipalities whose LGU's have lesser financial capability to support education initiatives.

Prioritization, selection and allocation of division depends on two sets of priorities under GAA.  Priority I which involves 32 of 40 identified high priority divisions and Priority II which is constituted by the remaining  157 division.

The two priorities were identified based on division performance computed using the average of participation, achievement (NAT), completion, and drop out rates for SY 2006-2007, SY 2007-2008 and SY 2008-2009.

All schools under priority I divisions. within the 4th, 5th, and 6th class municipalities as well as 4P's schools shall be given SBM Grants while schools with the highest drop out rates within priority II divisions belonging to 4th, 5th, and 6th municipalities shall be the priority.

See more of the guidelines by clicking the link above or on the link at the right of this blog under legislation and control.

Saturday, July 16, 2011

Essence of Genuine Leaders

By Gilbert M. Forbes
DepEd Quezon, IV-A CALABARZON 

Yesterday, I was reminded of a message of our honorable councilor about the importance of true leadership.  The importance of serving and leading not for recognition but for the benefits of the needy.  He expounded on the fact that a true leader should be into denial of self.

He particularly mentioned a part of the Boy Scouts of the Philippines law which states that as a true Scout, “I will do my best to do my duty to GOD and my country . . . ., to help other people at all times; to keep myself physically strong, mentally awake and morally straight.,” the last, he says is still intended for the sustenance of service to others.

While reflecting on this message, I just can’t help but to compare it to some of our education leaders today and those who are aspiring for leadership.  What kind of leader am I and they?  Those who are aspiring to be one, I just cant help but question their motives, why?  Are not they aware of what they are entering into?

To those who are already leaders who are now becoming wishy-washy, self-serving how come they are?  And those who are into rumors of corruption of irresponsibility, why have they become and what are being done by their constituents who are also leaders in their own right to stop them.

St. Paul through his letter to Timothy recognizes the fact that to aspire for leadership is an honorable ambition but God also warns us in Jeremiah 45:5 that, Should you then seek great things for yourself?  Seek them not.  Mark 10:43-44 said it further that Whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant, and whoever wants to be first must be slave of all.  

It is clear that to aspire for Leadership should not be for the purpose of escaping from something, or just for the benefit of trying something new.  Nonetheless, it should not be a clandestine path to earthly recognition, bogus respect, following, and social mobility. Instead, our motives should be noble, holy and sacred.

Having none of the last, current and aspiring leaders should think twice of what the true leadership is.

(Mr. Gilbert M. Forbes had his Bachelors Degree and MA in Educational Management (CAR) from the Philippine Normal University.  A campus paper adviser and trainer for 13 years.  Currently, he is a school principal in one of the central schools in the Division of Quezon.) 

Wednesday, July 13, 2011

Religion of Blame: Doom or Salvation

POSTCRIPT by Federico D. Pascual Jr. (The Philippine Star) Updated July 13, 2011

WE WERE FIRST: There are as many theories about the causes of the malaise that afflicts the Philippines as there are contradictions in our culture. We were the first to declare independence in Asia, but find ourselves among the last to achieve economic freedom for our masses. We are the only Catholic country in our region, but have a higher crime rate and more child prostitutes than Muslim Indonesia — a vastly larger archipelago.

We were the first to write a Constitution for ourselves and embrace democratic traditions and institutions, but decided only last January (2001) to replace a sitting president without benefit of elections or impeachment.

We were the first in Asia to be introduced to the wonders of the Industrial Revolution, among them mechanized farming and corporate commerce, but find ourselves competing with Bangladesh to be the region’s poorest country. We had the highest per capita GNP in Asia in the early ’50s, but have become the world’s largest exporter of domestic labor.

*      *      *
DEMONIZATION: There are a myriad reasons why we are in dire straits, but I will focus on one that no one, to my knowledge, has addressed: our conversion to the Religion of Blame, whose twin canons are demonization and victimization. Simply put, demonization is Judas kissing Jesus on the cheek: identifying the enemy for the purpose of crucifixion. Victimization is the state of mind that invariably follows; it’s Judas saying, “I’m innocent — the Devil made me do it.”

Rizal blamed the Spaniards for exploiting the Indio’s body and corrupting his soul. Quezon preferred a country run like hell by Filipinos to one run like heaven by Americans — and got his wish. Magsaysay blamed the Hukbalahaps. Garcia, blaming the Chinese, retaliated with his “Filipino First” policy. Macapagal blamed “canine devotion” to America and unilaterally changed Independence Day from July 4 to June 12.

Marcos claimed that Macapagal’s nationalism was nowhere near as patriotic as his own, but the first thing he did as president was to send a full battalion of Philippine Marines (euphemistically called an “engineering battalion”) to Vietnam. In 1972, to justify martial law, he blamed a conspiracy between the communists and the oligarchy.

Corazon Aquino blamed her predecessor Marcos for all the woes she faced — whether inherited or self-inflicted. Ramos blamed the “remnants of the dictatorship” (wasn’t he one?), the NPA, and the Muslim secessionists for having stopped him from making us “Asia’s newest tiger.”

Estrada blamed Ramos and the arrogant elite, Arroyo blamed Estrada and the ignorant poor, and Cardinal Sin blamed everyone who disagreed with him.

*      *      *
LAYING BLAME: Filipino historians and writers blame the Spaniards for making us indolent, the Americans for making us materialistic, the Chinese for introducing opium, gambling, and bribery, and the Japanese for making us brutal.

Teodoro Agoncillo and Carmen Guerrero claim in “The History of the Filipino People” that WWII “left ugly scars on the people and made (Filipinos) callous,” and conclude that “the national and individual experiences during the occupation are no doubt largely responsible for this tendency (to commit crimes). The extreme poverty that appeared in the backwash of that war has given rise to criminality.”

Every freshman student of Political Science, Sociology, or Criminology knows that the last apostles of the long-discredited “poverty causes crime” theory died in the 1880s. Nowhere in the history of nations has war or poverty caused a rise in criminality. Most scholars and specialists assert and acknowledge that it is inequality — not poverty — that leads to crime.

But the religion of blame has always been at war with truth. Laying blame is not only necessary, it is healthy — but not when it serves to cleanse the accuser of all culpability. Not when it becomes demonization.

To Corazon Aquino, for instance, absolutely nothing that Marcos did was good. I paid a price for opposing his regime, but have to acknowledge that, among other things, he dismantled private armies and empowered our barangays. As for Cardinal Sin, whoever disagrees with him disagrees with the teachings of Christianity; one cannot disagree with his political views without offending God.

I sincerely admire and respect their contribution to the great collective endeavor of restoring democracy in our country, but they have become the country’s foremost evangelists of the gospel of blame, and to that extent have contributed immensely to the ethical confusion that characterizes our times.

*      *      *
DEMONIZATION: To demonize is to ascribe to the accused — which is not to say that all the accused are the proper parties — much more guilt than they actually deserve; to depict the accused, to the extent possible, as the source of all evil. No wonder that it logically sires victimization, the tenet that teaches, “Something’s very wrong, somebody caused it, and it’s not me.”

The unscrupulous logger then, becomes the Devil — but not the kainginero. The prostitute is arrested, charged, and publicly humiliated, but never the man who engages her services. Huge fleets are blamed for depleting our coastal fishing grounds — but never the “poor fisherman” who uses dynamite or cyanide — he’s merely “eking out a living, for God’s sake.”

Factories are demonized for their pollution, but not the citizen who dumps motor oil into a ditch. Law-abiding rent-payers, in effect, are punished every time squatters are first on the list on every single government-funded low-cost housing project. The honest are penalized; the dishonest rewarded.

Conclusion: (Continued from Tuesday)

PEOPLE POWER: This culture of blame, which has become as prevalent as it is pernicious, explains why Filipinos celebrate every time an NPA Sparrow Unit assassinates notoriously corrupt government officials, abusive “matons,” a tyrannical hacendero, or undisciplined military men.

The immorality of a government that cannot provide justice is replaced by the worse immorality of summary execution.

This also explains resort to “people power,” which is becoming a dangerous social habit. What the government cannot accomplish the majority will accomplish for them, the rationale being that democracy means majority rule.

* * *
MOB RULE: Attila the Hun was very popular among the Huns. Majority rule? Yes. Democratic? No. Philip II’s Spanish Inquisition burned thousands of Moors, Jews, and heretics at the stake and dispersed ten times that number, but he was adored by his people. Majority rule? Certainly. Democratic? Certainly not. Hitler was an idol to the Germans, Lenin to the Russians, and Mao to the Chinese. Majority rule? Absolutely. Democratic? Absolutely not.

The problem with the Sin-Aquino-Arroyo argument — which, as we know, is also the vastly predominant view — is that it upholds majority rule at the expense of the rule of law. But one cannot be divorced from the other without debasing and ultimately destroying the very essence of democracy itself.

If “Edsa II” were both moral (as Sin and Aquino say) and legal as Arroyo claims, then huge crowds surrounding city halls and provincial capitols should be able to replace, whenever they see fit, any sitting mayor or governor whenever they are popularly perceived to be abusive, tyrannical, or corrupt… Where and how does it end?

Simply put, majority rule without the rule of law equates to mob rule. As for its results being near-universally popular, I respond with the adage that a noble end is not justified by ignoble means. Ousting Marcos was one thing: his regime, beyond a doubt, was illegitimate; ousting Estrada — though I despise his conduct — is another.

True, a majority can take the law into its own hands whenever it pleases. But it cannot pretend to be democratic. Thomas More, the “man for all seasons,” soon after becoming Chancellor of England, was prodded by his son-in-law to arrest the town thief. The dialogue, it is said, went this way:

“On whose charge?” More asked. “Everyone knows he’s a thief,” the young man said. “Bring me a victim, or witnesses, and I will prosecute him.” “But you don’t need them — you’re the Chancellor!” “If our laws were trees, my son, and the Devil hid behind them, and you had in your hand the Sword of Righteousness, would you chop them down?” “By God, I would — if it were indeed the Devil I were after.” “Then surely you would slay him. But what of the next time? Should the Devil, when you encounter him next, snatch your sword from you and seek you out, and you had by your own hand laid the law to waste by chopping down every tree that might have given you refuge and protection, what would you do? Tell me, where would you go? Where would you hide?”

* * *
NEIGHBORS REBUILD: Japan, Korea, Taiwan, and Singapore suffered immensely more devastation than we did during World War II. And it isn’t true that Japan received more rehabilitative assistance from the US — on a per capita basis — than we did; this is a myth created by demonization/victimization.

Look at these countries today. I submit that one of the fundamental reasons they’ve prospered — unlike us — is that they refused altogether to wallow in the religion of blame. They had neither the inclination nor the time for demonization and victimization.

Closer to our times, if any nation has suffered even more severe devastation — physically, economically, and in terms of loss of human life — in Asia in the last quarter-century, it’s Vietnam. But go to Vietnam and you will be surprised to find less anti-Americanism in the entire country than you would on the UP campus. That’s not to say that they have forgotten the crimes committed by an arrogant and misguided world power on their poor and puny nation.

It’s to say, rather, that the Vietnamese have no time to waste on recrimination — they are much too busy rebuilding their culture, government, and economy. Which explains why they are exporting rice to us. And why their GNP is expected to overtake ours in less than five years.

* * *
CRIPPLING CANCER: Estrada was ousted for allegedly profiting to the tune of hundreds of millions of pesos from illegal gambling. What this tells me is that millions of Filipinos must have purchased jueteng (masiao or bagdok elsewhere) tickets over an extended period of time for Estrada to earn this much in “commissions.”

Placing jueteng bets — according to Philippine law — is just as illegal as earning “commissions” from the game. Will this legion of gamblers ever be prosecuted? I doubt it. Because they’re the “victims,” and victims in the religion of blame are forever innocent.

Even when the run-of-the-mill criminal is caught red-handed, his spontaneous, instinctive response is not admission of personal responsibility, but total evasion. To the query, “Alam mong krimen ‘to — bakit ginawa mo pa?” he invariably says, “Sapagkat ako’y tao lamang.”

Finger-pointing, which has replaced cockfighting, mahjong, basketball, or gossip (take your pick) as our “national sport” will continue to delude, distract, and defraud the people while the economy staggers, peace and order deteriorate, the population burgeons, and the gap between rich and poor becomes an unbridgeable chasm.

Until we acknowledge this debilitating religion of blame, the width, depth, and breadth of this crippling cancer — honestly and fearlessly — there is no hope for our society. What hope is there for a fatal, undiagnosed disease?

FOLLOWUP: Access past POSTSCRIPTs at www.manila mail.com. Like POSTSCRIPT on www.facebook.com/manilamail. Or follow @FDPascual on Twitter. E-mail feedback to fdp333@yahoo.com

Tuesday, July 12, 2011

Major Challenges to the Attainment of EFA and MDG Goals: Politicians Bias Treatment to Education

By:  Gilbert M. Forbes

Four years to go and its 2015, the deadline set in the attainment of Education For All (EFA) Goals.  Still, DepEd is a long way to go and achieving the said target remains a big challenge without the support of various sectors particularly local government units.

While support in terms of material inputs are on the rise, capital investment to increase participation rates is incomparable compared to that being received by college students.  There are clear existing scholarships programs for college students being sponsored by local government executives and politicians but no concrete scholarships programs are in place for the basic education sector particularly for the highly marginalized and highly at-risked children.

There are so called voucher scholarship programs which subsidized tuitions fees of the college students which range from Php3,000 to Php7,000 and even more a year plus other scholarship programs being sponsored by different tertiary institutions, DOST, corporate organizations, foundations, NGO’s, private and philanthropic individuals but this is hardly felt in the basic education sector where support is much needed.  There is GASTPE or Government Ass…….istance to Private Education but it is part of DepEd or national government’s program.

It is a fact that individuals who have not finished primary schooling or elementary grades are prone to exploitation and could not function well with the demands of the society as compared to those lucky enough to graduate high school.  Thus, a low participation and drop-out rates in the basic education sector are un-healthier than the low participation rate in college and in the long run disadvantageous and liability on the part of the government.

Higher education is receiving an average of Php22,000 subsidy per students while basic education receives only around Php8,000.  These tertiary institutions particularly SCU’s are commonly in competition not only with private schools but with fellow SCU’s and are offering irrelevant courses inconsistent with the needs of the job market and of the place where these are located.  Thus, investments made by LGU’s for college students scholarships are a total gamble.  Very low return or none at all could be expected except a sure patronage votes every three years.

Looking at the concept of basic economics and the logic of which is more important, one will see the unfair treatment and bias from our political leaders when it comes to support being given to Basic Education who needs it the most given the already very meager resources it has through the years. 

If our political leaders really want to eradicate poverty as a main objective of the Millennium Development Goals, a holistic approach to education is needed and not the shallow approach towards it which is obviously populist and self-serving.

NOTE:  See also Meeting the Challenges of EFA 2015 and Usapin ng 'Access,' Dapat Maging Pokus ng mga Pulitiko sa Kani-kanilang Programang Pang-edukasyon

(Mr. Gilbert M. Forbes had his Bachelors Degree and MA in Educational Management (CAR) from the Philippine Normal University.  A campus paper adviser and trainer for 13 years.  Currently, he is a school principal in one of the central schools in the Division of Quezon.) 

Saturday, July 2, 2011

Of Being a Parent to Our Children: Parents, Are You?

By:  Gilbert M. Forbes
DepEd Quezon, CALABARZON

Who are saying that the new generation is difficult to tame and discipline?

Actually, this is the common impression of parents, grand parents, guardians, teachers of the children and youth of today.  We used to hear the saying that “iba talaga ang singaw ng kabataan ngayon,” or they are of different in values and character.

They are hard to command, direct, teach.  They are at times arrogant, lazy and irresponsible.   But have we tried to ask our selves why it is so?

Queena N. Lee-Chua  in her book, Learning: What Parents, Students and Teachers Should Know made mention of Permissive Parenting.

Unlike before, during the time of our parents and grand parents where there are sets of standards to follow and limitations to remember, at present, there’s almost none.  The result, particularly now among Filipino families as I personally observed—dependence—putting the extended families into new heights.

It is sad to know that most intermediate grade school children and high school teenagers don’t even know how to cook for themselves or wash there own clothes, do the marketing at the nearest wet market or groceries just because they were pampered—yet parents want their children to become successful in the future.

Award winning writer Michael LeGault  explains the importance of setting limits.  “Children not only need standards and rules for healthy social, ethical, and intellectual development, they desire them.”  Standards lead to good work and study habits, nurturing an outlook that aspires toward excellence, and acquiring a wide, eclectic base of knowledge.

What happens when parents set limits?  “Kids may sulk and be visibly unhappy,” LeGault says.  “Parents can feel their pain but know its not going to kill them.  Authoritative parents may appear “stodgy and uptight,” but they take comfort in the fact that they are doing the right thing.”

Filipino parents tend to be permissive or lax because of the wrong notion of love.  They don’t want to track the path of the parenting styles of the older generation because they have forgotten to look back, reflect and ask themselves if the experiences they had from their olds made them a good person.  If the answer is yes, then there is nothing wrong to do the same.

As a teacher and school administrator, I had managed to recall how my parents brought me up and analyze which were wrong in their styles of being strict and being demanding when it comes to learning household chores and teaching us how to take care of ourselves and younger siblings.  In setting limits and standards and so far only one thing seem to be improper and that is to never answer back though when we are already at our legal ages, we could already answer back to them but in a very polite and respectful manner.  Of course, in our young minds then, we tend to rebel but at the end of the day, we always realize that it is for our own good and yes it was and still until now.

LeGault explains that the fear of growing up, or fear or loss of child’s love and respect, or maybe just the path of least resistance, has led many parents to choose to be their child’s friend rather than their guide and mentor.  “Such an approach focuses on providing kids with material pleasures and comfort rather than demanding that they meet high expectations and do the work required to do so.  The net result is a generation of adults who have transformed the traditional meaning of the child-parent relationship by adopting the most lax and permissive parenting practices in history.”

In my recent parenting sessions with the PTA in our school, I ask them to look back.  I ask them if the requirements of our parents, grand parents to learn to cook rice, simple viands and delicacies and wash our clothes helped us as a person?  “Does the kissing of the hands, learning to pray, and following curfew, taking care of the younger siblings, doing errands and household chores helped us become a better person?”  The answer is astoundingly loud and clear, YES.  And so I challenged them in return, so why not teach our children then and make them a better person like you?

Genuine or real love is not about pampering our children with the things we don't have before.  It's neither about pity for have we loved our husbands and wives just because we pity or found mercy on them?  Love is all about teaching them all important characters and virtues that they will carry on through life.

LeGault must be right when he gives parents a rallying cry:  “Dare to try to let your kids fail.  Dare to say no.  Dare to use punishment when your child misbehaves.  Dare to turn off the television.  Dare to make them do chores.  Dare to kick them off the computer.  Dare to turn their world upside down.  Dare to set the agenda.”

Reference:  Le-Chua, Queena N., Learning:  What Parents, Students and Teachers Should Know, pp. 5- 8.

You may also want to see and read If We Need Great Teachers, Better Parents Too, Research Says