data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/7e309/7e3099b22a2f9b07a05362b53a3d1c92599e8a2b" alt=""
2008 is the middle of the triennial International Year of Planet Earth. Year of the Rat starts in February. And it is a leap year so bachelors beware!
| |||||
^ Back to top | |||||
©Copyright 2001-2007 INQUIRER.net, An Inquirer Company |
WHEN THE PERFORMANCE of more than 2,000 pupils of the South City Central School in Cagayan de Oro City was evaluated last year, at least 10 out of 50 pupils in Grades 1 to 3 did not know how to read or understand what they read.
This dismally low literacy rate merely reflects the state of education in Mindanao.
According to the National Statistics Office (NSO), regions in Mindanao ranked lowest in functional literacy last year, with an average of 70 percent.
Dropout rate shot up to as high as 7.3 percent, another NSO data said.
To help address the problem, Amway Philippines, a global direct-selling company, has adopted the South City Central School for its “One by One Campaign for Children,” a project aimed at improving the reading ability of children in public schools.
Amway helped renovate the school library, where a well-lit and inviting storytelling corner was put up.
After months of waiting, the refurbished library formally opened on Oct. 19, to the delight of eager children, parents and teachers.
“A library is a very important component of the school. This is where children can feed their minds and souls. It is our hope that the newly renovated library and the ‘One by One Campaign for Children’ storytelling corner will encourage more children to go inside the library to develop the love and appreciation for reading and learning,” Ador Bonquin, Amway Philippines country manager, said.
A workshop for teachers and volunteers on innovative ways of telling a story was conducted before the project launch.
Captivating the listener
“We teach our storytellers how to reach and touch the hearts of the children. This way, listeners will be captivated by the story and encourage them to try reading the story by themselves,” Bonquin said.
Storytellers use props and visual aids to enrich the imagination of children, as well as enhance their comprehension.
Rebecca Pacanut, a Grade 1 teacher for the past 31 years, said the attractive appearance of the storytelling corner, as well as the new children’s books, had inspired her pupils to read.
“In my decades of teaching, this is the only time that I saw my pupils hurrying toward the library instead of the playground after classes. They have discovered the joy of reading,” she said.
The library now has 3,000 books, mostly donations from the United States.
“We are still trying to solicit more (reading materials),” librarian Arlene de Guma said.
To inspire the children to read and understand what they read, they allow even nonreaders to take home the materials for three days so that the parents can read along with them, De Guma said.
“We also encourage the parents to volunteer as storytellers,” she said.
Sustaining the project is a challenge both for Amway and for the school beneficiary, according to Bonquin.
“The school’s counterpart is to maintain the library and the storytelling corner. For us, we have promised to adopt the school, hence our local IBOs [independent business owners] will continue supporting its needs,” he said.
Amway will also donate computers and more books to upgrade the library. The company’s employees from around the globe will also donate books to the adopted school.
The literacy campaign is Amway’s global initiative to uplift the lives of children all over the world, Bonquin said.
Similar programs were launched to combat child poverty in Africa, provide crucial care for children fighting cancer in Mexico and Brazil, and help disabled children in Japan.
Last year, Amway Philippines received the Anvil Award of Merit under the institutional and corporate category for its One by One Campaign for Children.
Copyright 2007 Inquirer. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
I liked reading this short article from a friend. I hope you will, too. The first day of school our professor introduced himself and challenged us to get to know someone we didn't already know.
I stood up to look around when a gentle hand touched my shoulder. I turned around to find a wrinkled, little old lady beaming up at me with a smile that lit up her entire being. She said, "Hi handsome. My name is Rose. I'm eighty-seven years old. Can I give you a hug?" I laughed and enthusiastically responded, "Of course you may!" and she gave me a giant squeeze."Why are you in college at such a young, innocent age?" I asked.She jokingly replied, "I'm here to meet a rich husband, get married, and have a couple of kids..."
"No seriously," I asked. I was curious what may have motivated her to be taking on this challenge at her age. "I always dreamed of having a college education! and now I'm getting one!" she told me. After class we walked to the student union building and shared a chocolate milkshake. We became instant friends every day for the next three months we would leave class together and talk nonstop. I was always mesmerized listening to this "time machine" as she shared her wisdom and experience with me. Over the course of the year, Rose became a campus icon and she easily made friends wherever she went. She loved to dress up and she reveled in the attention bestowed upon her from the other students. She was living it up. At the end of the semester we invited Rose to speak at our football banquet. I'll never forget what she taught us. She was introduced and stepped up to the podium. As she began to deliver her prepared speech, she dropped her three by five cards on the floor. Frustrated and a little embarrassed she leaned into the microphone and simply said, "I'm sorry I'm so jittery! I gave up beer for Lent and this whiskey is killing me! ! I'll never get my speech back in order so let me just tell you what I know. "As we laughed she cleared her throat and began,
"We do not stop playing because we are old; we grow old because we stop playing.
There are only four secrets to staying young... being happy, and achieving success. You have to laugh and find humor every day. You've got to have a dream. When you lose your dreams, you die.We have so many people walking around who are dead and don't even know it!
There is a huge difference between growing older and growing up.If you are nineteen years old and lie in bed for one full year and don't do one productive thing, you will turn twenty years old. If I am eighty-seven years old and stay in bed for a year and never do anything I will turn eighty-eight. Anybody can grow older. That doesn't take any talent or ability. The idea is to grow up by always finding opportunity in change.
Have no regrets. The elderly usually don't have regrets for what we did, but rather for things we did not do. The only people who fear death are those with regrets."
She concluded her speech by courageously singing "The Rose." She challenged each of us to study the lyrics and live them out in our daily lives. At the year's end Rose finished the college degree she had begun all those years ago. One week after graduation Rose died peacefully in her sleep. Over two thousand college students attended her funeral in tribute to the wonderful woman who taught by example that it's never too late to be all you can possibly be. When you finish reading this, please send this peaceful word of advice to your friends and family, they'll really enjoy it! These words have been passed along in loving memory of ROSE.
REMEMBER, GROWING OLDER IS MANDATORY.GROWING UP IS OPTIONAL. We make a Living by what we get, We make a Life by what we give. God promises a safe landing, not a calm passage. If God brings you to it. He will bring you through it. Pass this message to people you care about. If you choose not, then you refuse to bless someone else……
† RIP
* South Cotabato/Sarangani/General Santos City based
^ Metro Manila based
† RIP
* General Santos City based
^ South Cotabato based
+ Davao City based
My Lakbayan grade is B-!
How much of the Philippines have you visited? Find out at Lakbayan!
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, May 28, 2007; Page A01
Jorge Moll had written. Moll and Jordan Grafman, neuroscientists at the National Institutes of Health, had been scanning the brains of volunteers as they were asked to think about a scenario involving either donating a sum of money to charity or keeping it for themselves.
The results showed that when the volunteers placed the interests of others before their own, the generosity activated a primitive part of the brain that usually lights up in response to food or sex. Altruism, the experiment suggested, was not a superior moral faculty that suppresses basic selfish urges but rather was basic to the brain, hard-wired and pleasurable.Their 2006 finding that unselfishness can feel good lends scientific support to the admonitions of spiritual leaders such as Saint Francis of Assisi, who said, "For it is in giving that we receive." But it is also a dramatic example of the way neuroscience has begun to elbow its way into discussions about morality and has opened up a new window on what it means to be good.
Grafman and others are using brain imaging and psychological experiments to study whether the brain has a built-in moral compass. The results -- many of them published just in recent months -- are showing, unexpectedly, that many aspects of morality appear to be hard-wired in the brain, most likely the result of evolutionary processes that began in other species.
It is known that animals can sacrifice their own interests: One experiment found that if each time a rat is given food, its neighbor receives an electric shock, the first rat will eventually forgo eating.
New research shows morality has biological roots -- such as the reward center in the brain that lit up in Grafman's experiment -- that have been around for a very long time.
The more researchers learn, the more it appears that the foundation of morality is empathy. Being able to recognize -- even experience vicariously -- what another creature is going through was an important leap in the evolution of social behavior. And it is only a short step from this awareness to many human notions of right and wrong, says Jean Decety, a neuroscientist at the University of Chicago.
The research enterprise has been viewed with interest by philosophers and theologians, but already some worry that it raises troubling questions. Reducing morality and immorality to brain chemistry -- rather than free will -- might diminish the importance of personal responsibility. Even more important, some wonder whether the very idea of morality is somehow degraded if it turns out to be just another evolutionary tool that nature uses to help species survive and propagate.
Moral decisions can often feel like abstract intellectual challenges, but a number of experiments such as the one by Grafman have shown that emotions are central to moral thinking. In another experiment published in March, University of Southern California neuroscientist Antonio R. Damasio and his colleagues showed that patients with damage to an area of the brain known as the ventromedial prefrontal cortex lack the ability to feel their way to moral answers.
When confronted with moral dilemmas, the brain-damaged patients coldly came up with "end-justifies-the-means" answers. Damasio said the point was not that they reached immoral conclusions, but that when confronted by a difficult issue -- such as whether to shoot down a passenger plane hijacked by terrorists before it hits a major city -- these patients appear to reach decisions without the anguish that afflicts those with normally functioning brains.
Such experiments have two important implications:
Psychopaths often feel no empathy or remorse. Without that awareness, people relying exclusively on reasoning seem to find it harder to sort their way through moral thickets. Does that mean they should be held to different standards of accountability?
Joshua D. Greene, a Harvard neuroscientist and philosopher, said multiple experiments suggest that morality arises from basic brain activities. Morality, he said, is not a brain function elevated above our baser impulses. Greene said it is not "handed down" by philosophers and clergy, but "handed up," an outgrowth of the brain's basic propensities.Moral decision-making often involves competing brain networks vying for supremacy, he said. Simple moral decisions -- is killing a child right or wrong? -- are simple because they activate a straightforward brain response. Difficult moral decisions, by contrast, activate multiple brain regions that conflict with one another, he said.
In one 2004 brain-imaging experiment, Greene asked volunteers to imagine that they were hiding in a cellar of a village as enemy soldiers came looking to kill all the inhabitants. If a baby was crying in the cellar, Greene asked, was it right to smother the child to keep the soldiers from discovering the cellar and killing everyone?
The reason people are slow to answer such an awful question, the study indicated, is that emotion-linked circuits automatically signaling that killing a baby is wrong clash with areas of the brain that involve cooler aspects of cognition. One brain region activated when people process such difficult choices is the inferior parietal lobe, which has been shown to be active in more impersonal decision-making. This part of the brain, in essence, was "arguing" with brain networks that reacted with visceral horror.
While one implication of such findings is that people with certain kinds of brain damage may do bad things they cannot be held responsible for, the new research could also expand the boundaries of moral responsibility. Neuroscience research, Greene said, is finally explaining a problem that has long troubled philosophers and moral teachers: Why is it that people who are willing to help someone in front of them will ignore abstract pleas for help from those who are distant, such as a request for a charitable contribution that could save the life of a child overseas?
"We evolved in a world where people in trouble right in front of you existed, so our emotions were tuned to them, whereas we didn't face the other kind of situation," Greene said. "It is comforting to think your moral intuitions are reliable and you can trust them. But if my analysis is right, your intuitions are not trustworthy. Once you realize why you have the intuitions you have, it puts a burden on you" to think about morality differently.
Marc Hauser, another Harvard researcher, has used cleverly designed psychological experiments to study morality. He said his research has found that people all over the world process moral questions in the same way, suggesting that moral thinking is intrinsic to the human brain, rather than a product of culture. It may be useful to think about morality much like language, in that its basic features are hard-wired, Hauser said. Different cultures and religions build on that framework in much the way children in different cultures learn different languages using the same neural machinery.
Hauser said that if his theory is right, there should be aspects of morality that are automatic and unconscious -- just like language. People would reach moral conclusions in the same way they construct a sentence without having been trained in linguistics. Hauser said the idea could shed light on contradictions in common moral stances.
U.S. law, for example, distinguishes between a physician who removes a feeding tube from a terminally ill patient and a physician who administers a drug to kill the patient.
Hauser said the only difference is that the second scenario is more emotionally charged -- and therefore feels like a different moral problem, when it really is not: "In the end, the doctor's intent is to reduce suffering, and that is as true in active as in passive euthanasia, and either way the patient is dead."