Science and Technology Education: How and For Whom?

WRITTEN BY SALVADOR CAOILI

1989-90 VOL 2 NO 2

EDITOR’S NOTE: National industrialization has graced the oldest pages of Scientia and has been called for by the very first movements of Filipino scientists. In this persuasive piece, Salvador Caoili makes the strong case for a better science education, an essential part of national industrialization but which has taken less of the spotlight. Caoili notes that science and technology education must be prioritized and taken seriously not just in order to have better researchers but also to shift the labor force to a higher degree of technical capability, which is required to transition into industrialization. Although the article was written in 1989, many of the traits of Philippine education it stated are still true today. But what’s new is we now have the K-12 education system that only works against industrialization since its promoted need, to make students “job ready,” really just means to ease the production of batches of semi-skilled workers for the exploitation (via contractualization, low wages) of capitalists.

SCIENTIFIC & TECHNICAL (S&T) education doesn’t seem to have that much appeal these days. Economic development through national industrialization is the primary concern of the sectors awakening to the need for scientific and technological progress. S&T provides the dynamism and vitality necessary for sustained industrial growth through a continuous process of research and development (R&D), but this S&T base can materialize only if a nation can generate and maintain a competent and well-oriented S&T workforce of considerable size; the role of S&T education in this respect has been grossly under-emphasized and neglected.

Can we reasonably expect to realize rapid industrialization with the inadequate methods of S&T education and with the very limited number of individuals actually receiving it?

Philippine S&T education is deficient in both its material and human aspects. The deficiency of the material aspect — the availability of laboratory facilities, equipment and other essential education materials — may be traced to the insufficient

Lumad students tour the UPD Institute of Biology.

Photo from Agham Youth - UPD

budget allocations for education and S&T itself. Due to cost constraints, for example, equipment is frequently absent, limited and/or merely confined to display cabinets for fear of damage — a practice reminiscent of the physics class in Jose Rizal’s novel El Filibusterismo. The inadequacy of the human aspect — the modes and methods of instruction — may also be traced to the lack of financial support for members of an economically unrewarding profession. The deeper reason, however, seems to lie in the prevailing neocolonial type of education.

In a symposium held at the Philippine Science High School last Science Week, Dr. Norman Quimpo (current chairman of the Ateneo de Manila University’s Math Department) raised a number of interesting points concerning the Philippine S&T educational system. Dr. Quimpo stated the need for S&T to be taught in a meaningful context, noting that the administration of oversimplified and fragmented facts is the prevalent mode of S&T teaching. Students are exposed only to foreign S&T problems and in the process are taught ‘book science’ in which there is minimal refinement of the foreign textbook content in terms of relevant and practical elaboration. He also discussed the cultural aspect of S&T education. He firmly maintained that Filipino, which facilitates greater reception and understanding on the part of the student, should be used in place of English, and he suggested that the origins of S&T and S&T achievements in the Filipino historical context should be given emphasis in the S&T curriculum to enable the student to culturally identify himself with S&T.

Dr. Quimpo raised another point concerning the unhealthy, highly compartmentalized nature of the S&T curriculum. Dividing lines between the different areas of S&T have been overstressed; S&T and the social sciences have been mutually excluded from each other. Educators fail to realize that all fields of S&T are interrelated (and in some ways interdependent), and that S&T knowledge and skill development should be balanced by a corresponding development of social awareness and wisdom if the former is to be translated into positive benefits for society rather than into political or economic tools for those striving for power, wealth and influence.

The Filipino student is taught S&T outside his own native cultural context. He learns it in an alien ‘international’ language, and is exposed only to foreign S&T ·situations. Consequently, he cannot effectively integrate S&T into his own cultural identity. He is ignorant of the S&T challenges of his own country, and his S&T outlook is distinctively foreign. Thus, the present S&T system educational system provides poor foundations for the development of the values of nationalism and public service, and because the financial opportunities for S&T jobs are far more attractive abroad, the system practically produces S&T personnel for foreign consumption.

Barring the fact that current S&T education is qualitatively deficient, the number of students actually receiving it is alarmingly small. It is much more reasonable to expect rapid industrialization to occur in synchrony with a rise in a society’s collective S&T consciousness and competence, rather than with S&T knowledge and skill confined to a small group of individuals. S&T education must go beyond the ranks of the S&T workforce (i.e. the researchers). Industrialization requires the shift from unskilled manual labor to highly skilled technical labor; the labor force itself must attain an acceptable state of technical capability. Well-managed and well-administered S&T education for the working class can help solve the man-versus-machine conflicts, characterized by job displacement due to the mechanization of labor in the industrialization process. As new methods and machines are introduced, new needs (e.g. machine maintenance and repair) arise, and the workers may be trained to assume these new functions, or go into new areas of production and processing, thus promoting industrial expansion and diversification.

An extensive and effective S&T educational system for the working sectors of society must be realized as a prerequisite for industrialization. If we are to attain the grand vision of industrialization, we must recognize S&T education as a key factor in the laying of the foundations; we must treat this issue seriously and analytically, realizing its implications with regard to industrialization and making the necessary adjustments. Only through an appropriate S&T education system can S& T awareness and competence radiate throughout society, permeate every concerned sector and provide the basis for an industrialized nation. ●