Morality in General Education

Section 1 of Article 1 of CHED Memorandum No. 20, series 2013 (“General Education Curriculum: Holistic Understandings, Intellectual and Civic Competencies”) says it as clearly and as simply as possible: the over-all goal of General Education (GE) is “the development of a professionally competent, humane and moral person.”

The word “moral” might strike students and teachers as strange in a government memorandum. It will be wrong to take the word out of the context of the memorandum. The Section clearly defines what is meant by “moral” in GE by explaining that “the holistic development of the person takes place in overlapping realms.”

These realms are:

“Individual, where the student is enabled to develop her/his identity as a person, conscious of her/his talents, rights, and responsibilities toward the self and others;

“Filipino society and nation, where the individual is aware and proud of her/his collective identity, and able to contribute meaningfully to the development of Filipino society at local and national levels;

“Global community, where the Filipino student recognizes and respects the fundamental humanity of all, respects and appreciates diversity, and cares about the problems that affect the world.”

The word “moral,” in other words, does not refer to compliance with a particular religion’s commandments. It instead refers to something internal to a person, who by herself or himself thinks and acts according to the three poles of individual, nation, and globe.

Again, it is important to emphasize that GE is not meant to further national development. Rather, it is meant to develop the individual to become “professionally competent, humane and moral.” It is the individual student, therefore, that must exhibit the kind of behavior consistent with someone that, for example, is “conscious of her/his talents,” “proud of her/his collective identity,” and “cares about the problems of the world.”

These are big words and big goals. Let us take just one of them to show how different the new GE is from the old GEC-A and GEC-B.

The student is now expected to be “proud of her/his collective identity.” In other words, the Filipino college student must be proud of being a Filipino.

That sounds so obvious that you may wonder why I even mention it. The reality today, however, is that many Filipinos are not proud to be Filipino.

We can take several empirical examples, such as the survey done some years ago asking young students what nationality they would like to have (the majority said they wanted to be Americans), or the number of Filipinos who go abroad not to seek employment but because they think life is better elsewhere.

How many Filipinos still think that someone who speaks in a foreign language is better than someone who speaks only a Filipino language? How many Filipinos would rather call the country by its English name (Philippines) than by its local name (Pilipinas or Filipinas, whichever you prefer)? (I wonder how many Americans will call their country EU – for Estados Unidos – rather than USA or how many Indonesians would pronounce “Indonesia” with a long E?)

When we teach subjects in GE, we need to ensure that what the students are learning will make them proud of being Filipino. For example, why do we often say that Michelangelo’s David is superior to Tolentino’s Oblation? Why do we not use the nearby Rizal statue as our key example in Arts Appreciation, rather than the Greek statues that only very few and very rich Filipinos (and very few teachers) have actually seen? Why do we study classic Hollywood films without studying classic Filipino films? If Kidlat Tahimik, Lino Brocka, Ishmael Bernal, and Brillante Mendoza are lionized in Europe by famous foreign directors themselves, why do we adore foreign directors?

It is not the small examples, however, that we should worry about. It is the mind-set. GE teachers often teach subjects without any reference to Philippine conditions.

How, you may ask, do we teach mathematics by constantly referring to Philippine conditions? This is precisely the reason that, in the new GE, mathematics will not be taught the way it is now (as a set of culture-free, abstract computations). Mathematics, like every other learning area in GE, will be taught in an interdisciplinary, multidisciplinary way. (We will get to this when we discuss the required subjects.)

In every subject in GE, being proud of being Filipino will be a major objective.

Of course, being proud of her/his collective identity is not the only goal of GE. The other goals are just as important. The student, for example, has to be conscious of her/his “responsibilities toward the self.” This particular goal brings in, for instance, the idea and practice of health consciousness. The student must be aware that taking care of one’s health (physical, psychological, spiritual) is as important as everything else.

At the same time, the student has to be conscious of her/his “responsibilities toward others.” As individuals, Filipinos are usually concerned about other people, but as members of a social class, we are not. Kidnappers routinely kidnap rich people because “anyway, they are rich and can afford the ransom.” Rich people routinely boast of the (their!) national economic growth without thinking of the vast majority of poor people whose lives have not changed for the better. (To be continued)