Wednesday, July 6, 2022

Juan de la Cruz must go to “school” on “dynamism”

Should the following Editorial give us pause? “Reaching the academic top means fixing school problems from the ground up,” Manila Bulletin, 25th Jun 2022.

“We are critical of education in the country – from textbooks riddled with errors as well as international and regional academic rankings that place the Philippines in positions that leave much for improvement.

“This does not, however, take away from the fact that there are individuals and institutions that perform pretty well academically, recognized for achievements in various fields. These are testament to the inherent intellectual prowess of the Filipino. But, as the saying goes (and loosely translated), talent is bested by effort—and adding to this, “effort” is more effective if the environment and the situation are ideal.

“Hence, the need for improving the academic situation of the country.”

Those familiar with the blog may recall that I practice “andragogy” – going decades in the private sector, given the demands of the 21st century, i.e., innovation and global competitiveness.

“Adults are independent. They strive for autonomy and self-direction in learning. They use their own and others’ experiences. Adults learn when they experience a need to know or perform more effectively. Adult learning is task or problem-centered. Their motivation stems from internal resources – the increased self-esteem, confidence, and recognition from successful performance.” [Pedagogy, Andragogy, & Heutagogy _ University of Illinois Springfield]

My role is one of “an enabler to create a climate of collaboration, respect, and openness.” Yet, the blog’s language does not come across as such to Filipinos.

And the onus is on me to figure out how to get Juan de la Cruz to be receptive. I will keep trying, as the over dozen years of the blog’s existence may attest.

That’s why the postings frequently speak to what I call our instincts: We are parochial and insular. We value hierarchy and paternalism and rely on political patronage and oligarchy; ours is a culture of impunity.

In other words, how can “dynamism” find a “home” in Juan de la Cruz?

Unfortunately, it is not surprising that people take their culture and instincts for granted. As we say aptly, “Pinoy kasi.”

Consider what I said to my Eastern European friends when they asked me to do a “crisis management” session stemming from the world’s challenges from the [covid] pandemic.

“I cannot teach you better than your experience.

“If they took them for granted, I recalled the success stories under their belt. “You have gained an enviable depth of experience over the years.” Over 30 of the senior managers listened to me. Yet, they didn’t expect that I would call on specific individuals to narrate the details of these success stories.

“In turn, I challenged them to be a one-billion-dollar company. “You were less than a ten-million-dollar company and unprofitable for eight years, yet you over-delivered beyond the challenge to be a one-hundred-million-dollar company.”

Recall that these people were born and raised as socialists under Soviet rule. The free market was once foreign to them. They had to unlearn something that was at their core.

Decades after the fall of the Soviet empire, former satellite states still exhibit ambivalence, especially the older folks that accepted what, the younger set saw as “propaganda.” For example, people thought they had the best of what the world had to offer; until they realized they were the poorest country in Europe.

Let’s get back to the above Editorial, “Talent is subordinate to effort—and the latter is more effective if the environment and the situation are ideal.”

It’s heartening that the writer of the Editorial referenced the “growth mindset,” which the blog often discusses.

“The growth mindset is based on the belief that your basic qualities are things you can cultivate through your efforts. Although people may differ — in their initial talents and aptitudes, interests, or temperaments — everyone can change and grow through application and experience.” [“Mindset: The New Psychology of Success,” Carol Dweck]

Sadly, Juan de la Cruz isn’t predisposed to change because of (a) our instincts and (b) culture. They feed on each other.

For example, a caste system imposes barriers and blinders that turn us inward-looking – that’s why we value the hierarchy that comes with paternalism. Unsurprisingly, vote-buying is a perpetual feature of our democratic exercise.

Even worse is our “crab mentality.” It goes beyond “populism.” It explains why we can’t distill the “vital few” from the “trivial many.” And even our economists are not immune.

But that is not surprising given how specialization even in the West succumbs to parochialism. For example, innovation is beyond R&D. Nation-building is beyond economics.

Consider: “Notwithstanding the tight finances, Marcos’ economic team is confident that the economy can grow out of its debts. Per the government’s forecast, the economy will expand by 7-9% this year and by 6-7% in 2023 and 2024.

“These projections, however, are subject to adjustments given external factors such as the Ukraine war, the Chinese lockdown, and tensions in the Taiwan Strait. It is also contingent on successful reforms to improve agriculture and manufacturing outputs.” [“Marcos Jr. faces a balancing act,” Andrew J. Masigan, Numbers Don’t Lie, BusinessWorld, 3rd Jul 2022]

Unfortunately, learning – as in “andragogy” – presupposes autonomy and self-direction yet taps both (a) one’s and (b) other’s experiences. Take the experiences of our neighbors – the Asian Tigers – in moving up from third-world to first-world economies.

What are we missing? For example, why aren’t we “stealing shamelessly” their experiences in relentlessly driving industrialization? Recall that Japan acknowledged that they had to “steal shamelessly” from the West. And Lee and Mahathir told Deng to “beg for Western money and technology.”

In other words, has our caste system – our inward-looking bias and value of hierarchy and paternalism and reliance on political patronage and oligarchy – neutered whatever “dynamism” Juan de la Cruz had?

Consider: Dynamism is an inherent human need – the continuum of physiological to self-actualization. The evidence? From “day one,” humankind demonstrated dynamism, i.e., they left Africa to overcome the climate phenomenon they faced.

And for that matter, our neighbors demonstrated dynamism by rapidly moving up from third-world to first-world nations – and economies.

Let’s try it one more time. The challenge of education – or, more aptly, learning – is beyond the mechanics or the “how-to.”

Learning the mechanics of how to drive or swim does not equate to being skillful in either.

The challenge of democracy is self-government, i.e., it is beyond the mechanics of conducting an election. Ergo: vote-buying, which we accept as a given in the Philippines, undermines self-government.

And why the blog frequently raises its premise: Democracy is a mirror image of Christianity, i.e., the imperative of personal responsibility to pursue the common good.

The bottom line: The real world is beyond the academic world – or ivory tower.

Here’s a hypothesis: “Agri policy needs more bottom-up planning to meet farmers’ needs, the study concludes,” BusinessWorld, 3rd Jul 2022.

“The share of the agri-fisheries sector in the country’s gross domestic product declined to 9% in 2019 from 19% in 1990, then rose slightly to 10% in 2020 when the COVID-19 pandemic happened. The agriculture employment share shed 22 percentage points from 1991 to 2019.

“AGRICULTURE and fisheries planning needs to be more “bottom-up” to meet the needs of farmers and fisherfolk better, steering away from “top-down” programs imposed from above, especially those concerning rice.”

Question: How many studies have we done over the years?

How come Philippine agriculture is a dismal failure? What gives us comfort that this latest study will be any different?

The real world is beyond the academic world – or ivory tower.

“General Electric—a household name since its founding by Thomas Edison in the 19th century—has been headed the wrong way for decades. After legendary CEO Jack Welch grew GE into a banking titan with a peak market value of $594 billion in 2000 (from less than $15 billion when he started in 1981), the following stock slide wiped out more than half a trillion dollars in shareholder value. That was about the same as erasing Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway Inc. The dramatic decline under former CEO Jeffrey Immelt continued under John Flannery and now Culp, cutting the market value to about $75 billion as of mid-January. Over the same period, the company's net leverage—debt as a multiple of a measure of earnings—has nearly doubled.

“After Immelt stepped down as CEO in August 2017, John Flannery took the reins. He was gone a little more than a year later as the board turned to Culp. In the new boss’s debut on a third-quarter earnings call, the company revealed an expanded federal probe into its accounting, a vastly diminished dividend, and battered power business.

Both GE’s financial and core businesses are relatively more indebted than their peers.” [“What happened to General Electric? The rise and fall of GE,” bloomberg.com, 30th Jan 2019]

Then consider: “Agri policy needs more bottom-up planning to meet farmers' needs, the study concludes,” BusinessWorld, 3rd Jul 2022.

Question: How many studies have we done over the years?

How come Philippine agriculture is a dismal failure? What gives us comfort that this latest study will be any different?

For example, “The problems besetting agriculture require programs and projects that will take years to bear fruit and boost production to bring down prices eventually. Imports had to be resorted to in the past few years following shortages in rice and meat supply, causing prices to go up.” [“Broad strokes for the future,” Editorial, Philippine Daily Inquirer, 4th Jul 2022]

Learning – as in,  “andragogy” – presupposes autonomy and self-direction yet taps both (a) one’s and (b) other’s experiences. Take the experiences of our neighbors – the Asian Tigers – in moving up from third-world to first-world economies.

What are we missing? For example, why aren’t we “stealing shamelessly” their experiences in relentlessly driving industrialization? Recall that Japan acknowledged that they had to “steal shamelessly” from the West. And Lee and Mahathir told Deng to “beg for Western money and technology.”

In other words, has our caste system – our inward-looking bias and value of hierarchy and paternalism and reliance on political patronage and oligarchy – neutered whatever “dynamism” Juan de la Cruz had?

How can “dynamism” find a “home” in Juan de la Cruz?

Unfortunately, it is not surprising that people take their culture and instincts for granted. As we say aptly, “Pinoy kasi.”

Gising bayan!

No comments:

Post a Comment