Crossing the fence from being the radical student to becoming a teacher proves to be a difficult transition. The once angst-ridden side of me had given way to the realities of life. The years had mellowed me, I think.
In the university I was in, it was an ordinary sight to see students joining rallies, demanding change from both the government and the school administration. I used to be a mere observer of these mass actions. My parents had carefully warned me about joining any, long before I passed the entrance exam. Thus, I heeded their advice, at least for a year.
When I started meeting with people whose orientation were on the left, it opened my mind to the social conditions grappling our society. I saw the difference between between those students who have and those who have not. Even during those times, one had to pay so much to acquire a good education even in a university known to be "makamasa"(pro-people). What more can you expect from other schools?
There were a lot of issues---conditions of the dormitory, hazing, Eileen Sarmenta rape case. I got myself involved in all these. In admission though, unlike some of my college buddies, I never fell into the trap of any Marxist organization. I've attended their orientations and listened to talks but my participation was limited to that. I went to the cause and not for the distinction of having been an alumna of so and so group. The academic organization was enough for me. However, I admired and respected those militant student leaders we had. They, at least, have the balls to serve the studentry.
In fairness, most of our professors were liberal, thus joining a rally wouldn't translate into a grade of "singko"as long as the student meets the academic requirements. Yeah, a true expression of academic freedom.
But that was years ago. I am now an official member of the rat race. Yes, the rat race. After graduation, I decided to take a month-long vacation before embarking on my mission: a JOB! Ironic as it may sound, teaching was at the bottom of my preferences. Nobility is not just in my blood.
That's what I thought. I was offered a secondary teaching position in Laguna. I fully enjoyed the job but it was also there that I searched for my integrity. As a teacher, one has to be knowledgeable, reasonable, and socially responsible. Education 9 described it as a multi-sided job. In educating these young minds, you need not only feed them with textbook data and force them to listening to rut. Ask Mr. Oscar Wilde, to quote, "Education is an admirable thing but it is well to remember from time to time that nothing that is worth knowing can be taught."
As a student, I used to be very conscious about my grades (oops, not until my dismal performance in college, which is another story). It was the only tangible proof of my "intellectual" prowess. My competitive nature got the ire of both both fellow students and teachers. My world revolves around books and numerical accomplishments. Call it manic pursuit of excellence. On a hindsight, I realized that real life experiences had taught me more that what I would have learned in the four-walled classroom.
Now, my dilemma as a teacher is making every lesson transcend conventional approaches. I am still lost somehow. (Obviously, that's why I take further studies). Sometimes, the am-I-worthy attitude just got hold of me. So this is how it felt to be on the other side?
The predicament does not end there. When students start to convey their demands, teachers more often than not, get caught in the middle. This is because they expect their teachers to have a stand. Being young, most of them see things only in black and white. No gray areas. Young people have a different perspective of things. I said, different, but not necessarily wrong. Idealism, is the common denominator among the youth and as much as we want to shrug it off as another phase, it has left indelible marks in our history. It is also necessary for some critical changes. Without the idealism of Rizal, Del Pilar, Ninoy, et. al, then our past would have been written differently.
Are we, therefore, allowed to speak our minds to our students without jeopardizing our career? I assume that to instill a sense of moral and social obligation, one has to affirm personal virtues. I do not want to create a fuss, I am simply asking a question. I am aware of my responsibility and I knew that foremost of which is to prepare them for their future by imparting knowledge--technical or not. Wasn't it the aim of those who formulated the curriculum?
Most teachers want to give their best. There's a sense of fulfillment whenever students learn a great deal from them. However, there are factors which limit them from accomplishing their goals. One I could think of is the number of students in a class. By golly, how do you expect one to handle a class of 50 and monitor them at the same time? In the laboratory, you can't help but sigh when they cannot obtain good results due to defective instruments. Worse is when the instruments are not available. In a situation like this, I would simply give then theoretical answers which is not enough to convince nor satisfy them. I never underestimate my students. They, after all, belong to the information age. One false answer and the next thing you know, you are bombarded with questions.
My idealistic years were over and I'm taking steps in adapting to the "normal" people. Normalcy, in my definition, is simply the accepted ways of this society. If you dare to be different, make sure you have the stomach for it or you'll end up a pariah. Compromising a principle is not always a sign of weakness. Adults call it "maturity". There are things that you cannot change right away. Bend a little. It's better than to break. The next best option to nothing.
In the university I was in, it was an ordinary sight to see students joining rallies, demanding change from both the government and the school administration. I used to be a mere observer of these mass actions. My parents had carefully warned me about joining any, long before I passed the entrance exam. Thus, I heeded their advice, at least for a year.
When I started meeting with people whose orientation were on the left, it opened my mind to the social conditions grappling our society. I saw the difference between between those students who have and those who have not. Even during those times, one had to pay so much to acquire a good education even in a university known to be "makamasa"(pro-people). What more can you expect from other schools?
There were a lot of issues---conditions of the dormitory, hazing, Eileen Sarmenta rape case. I got myself involved in all these. In admission though, unlike some of my college buddies, I never fell into the trap of any Marxist organization. I've attended their orientations and listened to talks but my participation was limited to that. I went to the cause and not for the distinction of having been an alumna of so and so group. The academic organization was enough for me. However, I admired and respected those militant student leaders we had. They, at least, have the balls to serve the studentry.
In fairness, most of our professors were liberal, thus joining a rally wouldn't translate into a grade of "singko"as long as the student meets the academic requirements. Yeah, a true expression of academic freedom.
But that was years ago. I am now an official member of the rat race. Yes, the rat race. After graduation, I decided to take a month-long vacation before embarking on my mission: a JOB! Ironic as it may sound, teaching was at the bottom of my preferences. Nobility is not just in my blood.
That's what I thought. I was offered a secondary teaching position in Laguna. I fully enjoyed the job but it was also there that I searched for my integrity. As a teacher, one has to be knowledgeable, reasonable, and socially responsible. Education 9 described it as a multi-sided job. In educating these young minds, you need not only feed them with textbook data and force them to listening to rut. Ask Mr. Oscar Wilde, to quote, "Education is an admirable thing but it is well to remember from time to time that nothing that is worth knowing can be taught."
As a student, I used to be very conscious about my grades (oops, not until my dismal performance in college, which is another story). It was the only tangible proof of my "intellectual" prowess. My competitive nature got the ire of both both fellow students and teachers. My world revolves around books and numerical accomplishments. Call it manic pursuit of excellence. On a hindsight, I realized that real life experiences had taught me more that what I would have learned in the four-walled classroom.
Now, my dilemma as a teacher is making every lesson transcend conventional approaches. I am still lost somehow. (Obviously, that's why I take further studies). Sometimes, the am-I-worthy attitude just got hold of me. So this is how it felt to be on the other side?
The predicament does not end there. When students start to convey their demands, teachers more often than not, get caught in the middle. This is because they expect their teachers to have a stand. Being young, most of them see things only in black and white. No gray areas. Young people have a different perspective of things. I said, different, but not necessarily wrong. Idealism, is the common denominator among the youth and as much as we want to shrug it off as another phase, it has left indelible marks in our history. It is also necessary for some critical changes. Without the idealism of Rizal, Del Pilar, Ninoy, et. al, then our past would have been written differently.
Are we, therefore, allowed to speak our minds to our students without jeopardizing our career? I assume that to instill a sense of moral and social obligation, one has to affirm personal virtues. I do not want to create a fuss, I am simply asking a question. I am aware of my responsibility and I knew that foremost of which is to prepare them for their future by imparting knowledge--technical or not. Wasn't it the aim of those who formulated the curriculum?
Most teachers want to give their best. There's a sense of fulfillment whenever students learn a great deal from them. However, there are factors which limit them from accomplishing their goals. One I could think of is the number of students in a class. By golly, how do you expect one to handle a class of 50 and monitor them at the same time? In the laboratory, you can't help but sigh when they cannot obtain good results due to defective instruments. Worse is when the instruments are not available. In a situation like this, I would simply give then theoretical answers which is not enough to convince nor satisfy them. I never underestimate my students. They, after all, belong to the information age. One false answer and the next thing you know, you are bombarded with questions.
My idealistic years were over and I'm taking steps in adapting to the "normal" people. Normalcy, in my definition, is simply the accepted ways of this society. If you dare to be different, make sure you have the stomach for it or you'll end up a pariah. Compromising a principle is not always a sign of weakness. Adults call it "maturity". There are things that you cannot change right away. Bend a little. It's better than to break. The next best option to nothing.
