This is a UP '65 alumnus, 2.36 WA, BS Agriculture major Ag Edu, Civil Service Professional, self-taught digital publisher, Editor In Chief, and blogger extraordinaire, speaking. Let us now read & review QS’ 11 bases in rating the universities:
30% academic reputation
20% employer reputation
10% faculty/student ratio
10% international research network
10% citations per paper
05% papers per faculty
05% staff with PhD
2.5% proportion of international faculty
2.5% proportion of international students
2.5% proportion of inbound exchange students
2.5% proportion of outbound exchange students.
Now, universities are supposed to “teach higher” – so:
Where is the teaching that QS is measuring? Zero!
Reputation, ratio, network, citations, papers, PhD – exchange students, outbound students – what are they good for?! Only remotely related to teaching!
You are proud UP ranks 77th in Asia, not#1?!
If Quacquarelli Symonds honestly values higher education, why is it not conducting its own higher information-intelligence tests on all the universities?
Note also that the QS rating is based on 25% research-related skills & attraction: 10% research network, 10% citation, and 05% published papers by faculty. Why give Research so much credit, and Zero for Instruction?!
Here is this teacher’s Instruction to Quacquarelli Symonds: Instruction is best done-measured via the multiple intelligences (MI) Harvard professor Howard Gardner has theorized; this list is from Web.cortland.edu[2]:
(above inset MI image[3] from Amazon.com)
1. Verbal-Linguistic intelligence (“word smart”)
2. Mathematical-Logical intelligence (“number/reasoning smart”)
3. Musical intelligence (“music smart”)
4. Visual-Spatial intelligence (“picture smart”).
5. Bodily-Kinesthetic intelligence (“body smart”)
6. Interpersonal intelligence (“self smart”)
7. Intrapersonal intelligence (“people smart”)
8. Naturalist intelligence (“nature smart”)
9. Existential intelligence (“intuition smart”) – “intuition smart” is my phrase.
UP should be teaching in all subjects via MI, whichever the particular intelligence/s is/are applicable.
For instance, in Agriculture, why do they teach plowing with a disc plow and not explain what happens to the soil when it breaks into so many clods?
These are what happen when you use the disc plow followed by the harrow:
1) You break the water connections from soil particle to particle, and from the underground to soil surface. Soon, the whole field dries up!
2) The harrow mixes the weeds and crop leftovers wetly – this prevents the vegetative matter from turning itself into natural organic matter (fertilizer) for the crops.
You destroy the soil structure and expect Mother Nature to reward you?! Disc plowing explains the low yields in innocent or unknowing farmers’ fields.
PH universities should instead pick up their intellectual cues from MI and enrich the minds of their own students, but first of all their own faculties. We forget that no, we are not teaching to rank; yes, we should be teaching to think!@517
[1]https://globalnation.inquirer.net/200045/15-ph-universities-listed-among-the-best-in-asia-with-up-ranked-77th?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook&fbclid=IwAR0fkyDOVd9zMBK7AFjWrVig3ivoMpJAEfqWR9qIPwZSFi8aS33nAXbsRHI#Echobox=1635890642
[2]https://web.cortland.edu/andersmd/learning/mi%20table.htm
[3]https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1416625097/ref=as_li_tl?ie=UTF8&tag=institute4l0e-20&camp=1789&creative=9325&linkCode=as2&creativeASIN=1416625097&linkId=c09dab0b78ca82317b28404c3be10454&asin=1416625097&revisionId=&format=4&depth=1
No comments:
Post a Comment