PROGRAM - University of Hawaii System History Seminar ... Prof. JAMILA SANGUILA . 2:15-2:30 pm –...

History Seminar-Workshop: Enriching the History 3 Curriculum

Enhancing Pedagogy at Mindanao State University

Appendix 1: Program

PROGRAM History Seminar-Workshop

Theme: Enriching the History 3 Curriculum,


Participants: 41 History Teachers & Department Chairs from three MSU Campuses (Marawi City, Iligan City, Bongao [Tawi-Tawi])& other campuses Date & Venue: June 21-23, 2013, Crystal Inn, Iligan City, Tel. (63) 221-2779/ (63) 223-0687 Day 1 (June 21, 2013, Friday): Opening Program 8:00-8:30 am: Registration 8:30-9:00 – Opening Remarks, MACAPADO A. MUSLIM,Ph.D, President, Mindanao State University System 9:00-9:30 am – Briefing on the Workshop/History Teaching and Peacemaking, Dr. FEDERICO MAGDALENA and Project Team 9:30-9:50 am – BREAK/COFFEE TIME 9:50-10:40 am – Lecture: Social Integration and Nation-Building at MSU & Beyond Dr. DATUMANONG SARANGANI 10:40-11:00 am -Open Forum 11:00-11:45 – Lecture: History 3 Teaching: Problems & Prospects, Prof. JUVANNI CABALLERO

11:45-12:00 am -Open Forum 12:00 – 1:30 pm – LUNCH BREAK 1:30-2:15 pm – Lecture: Gender and Peace Education, Prof. JAMILA SANGUILA 2:15-2:30 pm – Open Forum 2:30-3:15 pm – Lecture: Peace Education, Multiculturalism & Mindanao’s People, Dr. MOCTAR MATUAN 3:15-3:30 pm – Open Forum 3:30-3:45 – COFFEE BREAK 3:45-4:30 pm – Lecture: Mindanao Peace Process, Peace Education and Development, Prof. RUDY RODIL 4:30-4:45 pm – Open Forum 4:45-5:00 pm. –Wrap up for the first day / Announcements 5:00-6:00pm.-Break/Rest 6:00-7:00 pm- Dinner/Solidarity Night

Day 2 (June 22, 2013, Saturday): Workshop Proper 8:30-9:15 am – Lecture: Peace Education, Curriculum Making and Evaluation, Prof. RUBY JANE JACOBE-ASPERIN

Crystal Inn, Iligan City June 21-23, 2013

43



9:15-9:30 am - Open Forum 9:30-9:45 am - Briefing on the mechanics of Workshop, Project Team & Facilitators 9:45-10:00 am – Workshop groups (8-9 members per group, 4 groups): THEMES:

1- Syllabus and Text Preparation 2- Monitoring and Evaluation

10:00-10:15 am – COFFEE BREAK 10:15-11:45 am – WORKSHOP SESSION 1 11:45-1:30 pm – LUNCH BREAK 1:30-3:15 pm – WORKSHOP SESSION 2 3:15-3:30 pm - COFFEE BREAK 3:30-4:45 pm – WORKSHOP SESSION3 4:45-5:00pm- Wrap up/Announcements 5:00-6:00pm - Rest or Early Dinner Day 3 (June 23, 2013, Sunday): Workshop Reporting 8:00-8:15 am – Announcement/Briefing on the Workshop, by Project Team & Facilitators 8:15-8:45 am – FIRST GROUP REPORTING 8:45-9:00 am – Open Forum/Reaction 9:00-9:30 am – SECOND GROUP REPORTING 9:35-9:50 am – Open Forum/Reaction 9:50-10:05 – COFFEE BREAK

10:05-10:45 – THIRD GROUP REPORTING 10:45-11:00 am – Open Forum/Reaction 11:00-11:30 am – FOURTH GROUP REPORTING 11:30-1:00 pm – LUNCH BREAK 1:00-1:30 pm – Open Forum/Reaction 1:30- 2:45 pm – CONSOLIDATION & PRESENTATION OF REPORTS, with Project Team and Facilitators 2:45-3:00 – COFFEE BREAK 3:00-3:20 PM - Closing Remarks, DR. DAVID ALMAREZ, Vice Chancellor for Planning & Development, MSU-Iligan Institute of Technology 3:20-3:30 – Statement from Project Team 3:30-3:45 pm – Closing Ceremony and Awarding of Certificates 3:45pm DEPARTURE OF PARTICIPANTS

FAINA C. ABAYA-ULINDANG, Ph.D

MASTER OF CEREMONIES


44



Appendix 2: List of Participants

MSU Marawi Campus (15)

1. Prof. Melodia Udtohan, Chair 2. Prof. Tirmizy Abdullah 3. Prof. Zizzle Dawn Abecia 4. Prof. Adam Acmad 5. Prof. Kimberly Apatan 6. Prof. Jane Ruby Asperin 7. Prof. Jihan Bacug 8. Prof. Sharon Bulaclac 9. Prof. Eduardo Casas 10. Prof. Ludivena Lagrio 11. Prof. Minsahle O. Mimbalawag 12. Prof. Jamilah Sanguila 13. Prof. Salimah Sumaguina 14. Prof. Lovely Torayno 15. Prof. Teodora Umbac

MSU Tawi-Tawi (8)

1. Atty. Lorenzo R. Reyes, Chancellor 2. Prof. Al-Shadat B. Sabal, Chair 3. Dr. Nazer H. Aliaza 4. Prof. Manuel S. Lam 5. Prof. Alfredo R. Matolo 6. Prof. Al-Haniff L. Matolo 7. Dr. Muktar Mohd Tahir 8. Prof. Magsaysay S. Werble

MSU Iligan Institute of Technology (19)

1. Dr. Ma. Cecilia B. Tangian, Chair 2. Prof. Marjorie Joy S. Almario 3. Prof. Jordan Butz T. Apa-ap 4. Prof. Neil Arkhe P. Azcuna 5. Prof. Jehu P. Bantayan 6. Prof. Rebino B. Batoto 7. Prof. Juvanni Caballero 8. Prof. Artchil C. Daug 9. Prof. Munap H. Hairulla 10. Prof. Christopher O. Kimilat


45



11. Prof. Rey Luis A. Montesclaros 12. Prof. Michael Anthony R. Ngo 13. Prof. Jed B. Otano 14. Prof. Jamilyn B. Palattao 15. Prof. Manolita O. Regalado 16. Prof. Inigo Riola 17. Prof. Xandelyn Racel B. Reyes 18. Prof. Celyn J. Teatro 19. Prof. Vivien D. Vesagas

Other MSU Campuses (3)

1. Prof. Ricardo Delambaca, MSU General Santos 2. Prof. Desh Preciado, MSU Naawan 3. Prof. Emily Togores, MSU Maigo Project/Workshop Task Force Secretariat (5) 1. Ms. Monalinda Doro, Chair 2. Mr. Madid Dicka - Member 3. Ms. Andrea Lisa Tumotod – Member 4. Mr. Jun Laguda, Member 5. Dr. Rizalina Ocaya – Workshop Process Documenter

Project Team (4) 1. Dr. Federico V. Magdalena (Proj Investigator) University of Hawaii at Manoa, [email protected] 1. Dr. Samuel E. Anonas (Coordinator, MSU Marawi) Mindanao State University-Marawi, [email protected] 2. Dr. Jamail Kamlian (Coordinator, MSU Tawi-Tawi) MSU Iligan Institute of Technology, [email protected] 3. Dr. Faina A. Ulindang (Coordinator, MSU Iligan) Mindanao State University-Marawi, [email protected] Note: For inquiries, please contact any of the members of the Project Team.


46

mailto:[email protected]






Appendix 3: Brief on the Workshop Seminar-Workshop

Dr. Federico V. Magdalena University of Hawaii at Manoa

Fellow teachers, distinguished guests, and friends, Mabuhay and Aloha! Thank you for coming today in this important workshop. As you may know, this event is part of a project travelling all the way from the US to Mindanao. Allow me first to introduce to you, alphabetically, the members of the project team. They will work with you starting today: Dr. Faina Abaya-Ulindang (coordinator for MSU Iligan), Dr. Samuel Anonas, Dean of the College of Social Sciences and Humanities (coordinator for MSU Marawi), and Dr. Jamail Kamlian (coordinator for MSU Tawi-Tawi). The Center for Philippine Studies at the University of Hawaii at Manoa is inviting them to Honolulu in October this year for a short visit to share their experience about Mindanao and this project. There, they will also make an observation tour about curriculum development, peace education, and environmental management. I hope they won’t refuse this tempting invitation! The project team is grateful for this opportunity to work with you in the hope that together we can make a difference. We are fortunate to have received support from the US Institute of Peace to implement an initiative, a 2-year project, entitled “Teaching Enriched History, Bridging Cultures: In Search of Peace in Mindanao.” The beneficiaries are three campuses of Marawi, Iligan and Tawi-Tawi. In partnership with Prof. Juvanni Caballero and Prof. Rufa Guiam, we intend to cover other campuses as well. With good luck, our grant proposal includes MSU General Santos, MSU Naawan, and MSU Maigo, among other campuses. If we are luckier, we may have a grand project for MSU IIT and MSU Naawan to strengthen their science and technology faculty through advanced training at the University of Hawaii and partner universities in the US, including enhanced capability of their research institutions. The Center for Philippine Studies and the College of Tropical Agriculture at UH Manoa just submitted a bid to USAID for this initiative to begin next year. Pray that we get the project, and you may see my face again. Ironically, I introduce the current initiative as a representative from UH Manoa. The reason I do so is, that deep in my heart I’m still a part of MSU. Though I have left, my connection with MSU has remained intact. I still cherish the values it gifted me, first as a student then as one of your kind. Our goals in this workshop are two: enrich the History 3 curriculum with peace education and enhance pedagogy at MSU by learning together and influencing students to become bridges of cross-cultural understanding. These twin goals are consistent with the mandate of MSU as a Crystal Inn, Iligan City June 21-23, 2013

47



social laboratory of integration, and with the 10-point reform agenda of President Muslim to implement “peacebuilding” initiatives as a strategy. On a larger plane, it is in synch with the UN advocacy of nonviolence. It also resonates with its International Decade (2001-2010) of a Peace Culture for Children of the World. I realize we lag somewhat behind, but as the saying goes “better late than never.” Someone asked me, what’s wrong with the current History 3 curriculum? None! Our intention is to make it stronger, more relevant, more in keeping with the demands of the time. And why peace studies? Well, as a sociologist stuck into conflict research for over 30 years, I now think that maybe it pays to move toward the other end of the continuum. True enough, it does pay. Otherwise, the US Institute of Peace would have rejected our proposal if, as Project Investigator, I insisted on conflict research rather than peace studies. I’d like to see this workshop not as a novelty or something that is unique. We in the team have agreed that we are here for a purpose - to supply the missing link, to continue what was started earlier despite faltering energy and dwindling resources, to work in synergy with existing programs. We know that there are past efforts on peace education. We learn that many of you have attended peace building seminars. If we look around, we notice agencies make their own contributions. MSU began something in 2007, heeding the government’s earlier call toward Institutionalizing Peace Education in Basic Education Curriculum and Teacher Education (by Executive Order 570). DepEd also responded to it on a much larger scale, and has implemented its peace program since 2008 (through ELSA Project). At MSU IIT, the Institute of Peace and Development has recently conducted a series of roundtables and writeshops in the same line. So we are on track, and hopefully will be able to take off with this project ingesting peace education into the history curriculum. If we could band together and pool our energies and resources as a group, we would be able to achieve more. Therefore, this workshop poses a great challenge for us. It invites us to do something better for our constituency- the students and their world. Thank you.


48



Appendix 4: Social Integration and Nation-Building at MSU and Beyond

Dr. Datumanong Sarangani

Introduction

Together with the defunct Commission on National Integration (CNI), the Mindanao State University was conceived as an instrument of the national government to address the so-called Mindanao Problem or Mindanao Question. Established by law, under Republic Act 1387, as amended, the Mindanao State University (then earlier known as the University of Mindanao) was created with a national mandate which is to serve as a crucial instrument of the national government to promote greater understanding between Muslims and Christians. In the achievement of its mandate, the University, primarily as an educational institution, shall offer professional and technical training, apart from providing advanced instruction in literature, philosophy, the sciences, and the arts. Researches on these fields shall be undertaken by the University. In the pursuit of its traditional functions as an institution of higher education, the University shall assist in the promotion and acceleration of the economic, political and socio-cultural development of Mindanao, particularly the Muslims and other cultural communities therein and shall ‘facilitate their integration into the mainstream of the national body politic”.

The key concept in the foregoing statement is integration. While integration can be defined and understood in many ways, integration here is taken to mean meaningful, positive and greater participation in the political, economic, and social benefits of development.

As the University started its metamorphosis from a single campus university, to a multi-campus, then a university system entity, there are several issues that were raised as to whether or not the very purpose for which the University was established has been attained. Responses and or reactions to these issues vary within a continuum of yes to no, with interspersed maybes. But, whatever could be the final response is not all that too important, or of overriding concern. Probably, what matters most is that the quest for that goal or purpose of the University has been set since day one; when the University observed its golden anniversary last 2011, there were indications of some of those set-goals having been reached. Yet, such levels of attainment could only serve as an added impetus to pursue the attainment of the well-avowed purpose of the University.


49



Integration Revisited

When the University opened classes on June 13, 1962 with a total enrolment of 282 students, about 18% came from the Muslim groups and other cultural communities. The rest came from the Christian majority dominated areas of Mindanao and part of Palawan. Majority of the students who came that time were mostly on financial assistance provided by the University through its competitive annual scholarship program. Those who could not be absorbed in the meagre existing dormitory facilities at that time were forced to find lodging accommodations in the downtown area, some nearly four kilometres walk to the campus.

Probably the most visible sign of “integration planted” in the university was through a scheme devised to put together students in and out of their campus quarters. One part of the scheme was a dormitory room assignment plan whereby at least two distinct conditions were observed: (1) No two students coming from the same province can stay together as roommates, and (2) that no more than 2 students coming from the Muslim areas and other cultural communities can stay together in a room of about six to eight occupants. Another part is through a common eating area, the cafeteria, where students can mingle and interact with notwithstanding ethnic identity and or religious preferences. The classrooms and other venues for academic activities also aided the integrative process, but were not as much pronounced due to a block class scheduling.

The integrative process in the University up to 1970 has taken good grip in its march onwards. Relationship between the University and the immediate surrounding communities were stable and peaceful. The University was giving tremendous influence to the community in terms of what it is doing to educate the people in the Mindanao region, particularly the Muslim communities. It initiated a radio program that became one of the sources of information. Its classroom on the air provided news and extended learning programs through its classroom on the air. Student, faculty, and staff relationships were very cordial and there were positive signs of mutual understanding between and among them, despite their ethnic identities.

Setbacks in the Integrative Process

The city of Marawi up to about the early 1970’s has always been cited as one of the best places in the Mindanao area, where Muslims and Christians, and even including some Chinese and Indian nationals, lived together in peace and harmony. These conditions found extension among the residents in the University campus. However, towards the end of the 1960s, national and international events have strongly affected and threatened the integrative process in the Crystal Inn, Iligan City June 21-23, 2013

50



campus. Where the University was supposed to be a main actor in pacifying existing rivalries and hostile relations between the greater Filipino majority (the Christian group) and the smaller Muslim population, it now has served to revive those past conflict and misunderstanding as evidenced by a growing student activism in the campus. This and later similar events were influenced heavily by a growing nascent political unrest vis-a-vis an emerging dictatorial regime, the much talked-about Jabidah Incident of 1968, and a resurging worId-wide Islamic revivalist movement. The latter seemed to have the most substantial effect in the overall integrative process, as some students who may have still have hurdled the high standards of the University, began to pull out from the western education- oriented programs of the University to a more-inclined form of Islamic learning. This was evidenced by the sprouting of up of Islamic madrasahs in the area and elsewhere, as well as a sizable group of Muslim students travelling to the Arab Middle East to pursue advanced Islamic studies, while enjoying reasonable scholarship opportunities.

The seeming fruit-bearing integrative process in the University took a final blow on October 8, 1972 when the so-called Marawi Uprising took place. This led to temporary disarray in the campus and in the months that ensued, as even the administration of the University had to be closely-monitored by the military. The campus was literally deserted; students and faculty members left, most in fear for their security. Later, some returned, but others decided to seek their future elsewhere. Some of the latent effects of this event led to campaigns of transferring the University to nearby Cagayan de Oro City, in order to resume the learning activities halted in the campus as well as guarantee the safety of “Christian students, faculty, and staff. For those who left, the trauma was just so heavy that thinking of the said event was more than a nightmare. This attitude, it appeared has provided a strong blockade of restoring back the peace and quiet that was known and felt in the area earlier.

Nevertheless, though in an unexpected manner, many have returned back to the University after the Marawi Uprising. Although they did not overtly campaigned for total patronage of the University, the almost free education the University offers, could not prevent even their siblings and close of kins, even kababayans to enter the portals of the University. This is still the trend, despite uncertain events and unexpected realities taking place in the campus from time to time.

The 1970’s: Halcyon Days of Integration

Despite the effects of the Marawi Uprising in1972, student dynamism continued to surge as a result of the martial law situation. Students gather themselves as splinter but unified groups


51



pursuing a common goal: 1) to air their grievances affecting student life in relation to institutional facilities and observed management shortcomings, in particular; and 2) to denounce the martial law conditions, often citing military abuses and other indiscriminate activities directed to civil society. Student groupings, at this time, were formed out of common aspirations and preferences, without any distinction of class, ethnicity, and or religious preferences. The development of extra-curricular activities featuring campus dramas, musical concerts, sports intramurals, and even the recognition of once-banned student fraternities further intensified student closeness and unity. The cafeteria, the dormitories, the social and lecture halls, the oval, and the golf course area provided the appropriate settings for the mutual interchange of ideas among students. This linkage developed among themselves into some sort of a mystique; a feeling they could not easily identify or describe but always refer to it as a shared vision of hope, development, and peace for themselves and their communities.

It is also in this era when student intake took on remarkable proportions. There were already a great number of Muslims and other members of the cultural communities entering the university. Towards the middle of the decade, punctuated by new educational and developmental programs, it can be said without much debate that truly, indeed, the University has strongly influenced the thinking and mood of the surrounding communities. This observation, however, seemed to have taken the reverse direction in later years, according to many.

History 55 – History of the Muslim Filipinos

The felt need to further advance the “integration” scheme of the University got a boost when History 55 (now History 3) was finally offered, initially as a major course in the department and a cognate subject in the allied social science disciplines. Later, the course became mandatory to be taken as a requisite subject for graduation, both at the technology and professional degree programs. Although it was initially offered by the History Department, the King Faisal Centre for Arab-Islamic and Asian Studies was also allowed by the University to offer the same course primarily for its own degree programs.

The offering of History 55, as required course, certainly made some advances in providing further information about the Muslims to the university studentry. Although the course is still being offered to include the Lumads, now better known as the IPs (indigenous peoples), there appears to be a need to evaluate whether the offering of Hist 55 made a positive impact among students, particularly among non-Muslims, for them to understand and appreciate the role and status of the Muslims and other minorities in nation-building. The goals of this seminar and its


52



planned course of action, is more than instructive enough to use it as one basis to examine the various levels reached in the integration process.

More Muslims in the Faculty

A sizable number of Muslims were eventually taken into the faculty. Most of them were graduates of the University, and a few from other educational institutions, even from other countries. Their being added to the faculty pool definitely provided more opportunities for interaction among the diverse constituents of the University, giving additional boost to the integrative process. As the years moved on, there were several instances of cultural intermarriages, but mostly Muslim men marrying Christian women. These unions, at least in the Marawi campus, saw a fortified band of mixed marriages forming a cooperative that resulted into the Buklod Multi-purpose cooperative.

More Muslim graduates began joining the labor force, some finding work in Metro Manila, doing small time business in some Mindanao cities such as Iligan, Cagayan de Oro City, Zamboanga, and Davao. Some have gone as far as Cebu, Tacloban, and Iloilo.

Other Integrative Tools

As a distinct part of its national mandate, the University was tasked to “take measures in the preservation of the rich cultural heritage” in the area. Hence, studies and researches were encouraged to pursue this goal. The setting up of the Institute of Research for Filipino Culture, with its initial activity focused on the collection of artifacts, relics, instruments, and the study of the music and dance endemic to the area. The IRFC later became anonymous with the then University Research Center (URC) and now the Aga Khan Museum (AGKM). The early efforts of the IRFC gave birth to the Darangen Cultural which, by far, has served as the main group that exhibited the cultural richness of the peoples of Mindanao. Several efforts were made by parallel dance and theatre groups, such as the Sining Kambayoka at the main campus and other similar groups in the various campuses in the University. All these groups and their efforts have done relatively well in the promotion of understanding among the divergent peoples of the country, putting national unity and integration as the preferred ultimate goal.

The 1980’s Onward

The emergence of more communities and political units immediately impinging on the physical existence of the University ushered in significant developments in the on-going


53



programs and other institutional activities of the University, These communities have unduly put so much pressure on the institution’s governance affairs; these pressures turned a burden. Now, instead of the University looking for continuing understanding and support from its immediate environs, it is now providing them to a large extent electric power, water supply, and peace and security arrangements.

As the university campus was also expanding its operations, certain built-in institutional processes had to give way to new arrangements. Because of the increase in student population but, with seeming stagnant campus facilities, students (mostly on scholarships) were given the option to seek board and lodging choices outside of the dormitories and the cafeteria. This earlier arrangement is probably the most visible seed of integration planted on the campus when it operated since its pioneering years. This development, in some sense, put on the brakes in pursuing the integrative process in areas where students do normally bond together.

The housing program for the faculty and staff in the University has also drastically changed. In the 1970’s, housing privileges were extended to the faculty and staff, Muslims and Christians alike, in a designed manner recognizing the value of staying together, preferably as neighbours in cottages and other official residences of the University. When some cottage awardees resigned, retired, or vacated their units, most of the cottage and residential units were awarded without abiding well with the housing rules and regulations of the University. This situation was further aggravated by most campus personnel who decided to establish their residences in Iligan City and elsewhere, even if they have to suffer the burdens of daily commuting to work. This “neighbourly-scheme” for the faculty and staff of the University eventually dissipated.

Meanwhile, the University, at least at the Marawi campus, continues to undergo a transformation in several levels. Its student population is now about 50-50 % distribution by religious and ethno linguistic affiliation. Of the other indigenous peoples and majority Christian groups, the regions of Caraga, Region 11, and the Zamboanga Penninsula have the greater representation. In terms of social interaction, the contact between Muslims and Christians are not as pronounced as they were in the early years of the University. The campus has also physically grown up. The surrounding barangays boasts of no less than 50 thousand residents, and as was observed, continue to impinge on the institutional existence of the University for similar reasons given earlier.

Integration at the System Level


54



The transformation of the University into a system, but really more as a multi-campus university, consisting of 11 autonomous units, have not undermined at all the very purpose of the University, if only to base this observation from these units’ vision, mission, and objectives. All these, in collectivity, point to the “social and political integration” mandate of the University. However, there appears no common visible indications of pursuing the task, owing largely to the very particular criteria of the campus’ creation as well as the physical or geographical location. MSU Iligan, Naawan, and Gen Santos have unique physical environment settings, where Muslims and other lumad peoples have not figured prominently in their respective student intakes. The same observation extends to the composition of the faculty and administrative support sectors. MSU Tawi-tawi, Jolo, Maguindanao, and now Bu-ug can be lumped up with the Marawi campus in the foregoing classification. Of the three (3) CSI’s, SND and MSAT, will fit in with the Iligan, et. al grouping, while MSAT is a loner by itself, though close enough to be included in the Main Campus category.

What needs to be done?

Nearly two years ago, as the University observed its golden anniversary on Sept 1, 2011, a perceptive mind might want to know if the University has achieved its mandated national mission, or if not at what level has it gone in addressing the issue. As I indicated in my earlier statements, the response to this query is or can be a mixture of a yes, maybe, no, none, not yet. Some of us may have our own answers; whatever they could be; but one thing is certain: Most of us here, whose racial ancestry may have come from different origins, have come to learn to live with each other peaceably well enough for the last 50 years. I could not imagine of any reason pointing to the contrary why we could not extend this relationship for another 50 years, or even more?

At our particular instance, within the MSU enclave, I can proudly say that we have planted the seeds of integration; it is still growing, despite some snags in the process. We need to sustain the gains we have made on this, and not be distracted by the pains we suffered in the process of letting it grow.

The goals and purposes of this seminar is what I might term as “long-time coming”. I am thankful to as I congratulate the organizers of this activity such as Drs. F. Magdalena, J Kamlian S Anonas, F Ulindang, the faculties of the various history departments of the University system, as well as our supporters. The curriculum, for whatever and however people understand it, to my mind, is the soul of a planned institutional learning scheme. It embodies much in changing the


55



tendency, the habit, the behaviour, and the character of a person through the learning process. Elevated on another level, the curriculum can easily supply the appropriate ingredients in building up a philosophy of life that can transcend ethnic, racial, regional, and even national boundaries.

But all said, ladies and gentlemen, things will never start and proceed well unless we start doing things on our own level with seriousness of intent and purpose, and this involves a strong sense of personal transformation. We are the initial key players in this endeavor and we must start it our own level with the determination to succeed and keep on pursuing what we believe is appropriate for the University to achieve, as pronounced in its avowed goals and objectives. This curriculum seminar-workshop is one activity where we can start.

Finally, I wish you, all of us, or the success of this activity. Again, congratulations.

__________________________________________________________________

*A message/paper delivered during the seminar-workshop on “Teaching Enriched History and Bridging Cultures: In Search of Peace in Mindanao, Philippines” , University Of Hawaii and Mindanao State University, as sponsors, June 7 -9 ,2013, Crystal Inn, Iligan City, Lanao del Norte.

Dr. Sarangani just retired from the Mindanao State University nearly two years ago. He belonged to the first batch of students that entered the University in June 1962, and has since worked with the University, initially as a faculty member in 1966 in the Department of History/Asian Studies. He has rendered 45 years of service to the University in other various teaching and administrative capacities.

Appendix 5: History 3 Teaching: Problems and Prospects

By Prof. Juvanni Caballero

As a student, I was never interested in History 3. I thought it’s just another boring subject made mandatory for the sake of compliance and uniqueness (para sabihing “iba” ang MSU education). I remember how my History 3 teacher subjected us to the typical classroom setting characterized by rote memorization, enumeration of names, dates and terms. I thought that was typical for a history 3 class but I realized later that such is the way of ill-prepared teachers to avoid controversies and sensitive issues in the History 3 classroom. By focusing on the “objective” part of the subject, you don’t confront the more important dimension, and that is the “subjective” part of history 3.


56



I started realizing how intriguing and interesting this subject is when I started teaching in MSU-Marawi. I was once getting the feeling that if you are a junior faculty and you are a non-Moro, you should avoid handling History 3. As part of the unwritten rule, History 3 is only given to the seasoned Professors. If you are young, its either you are daring and adventurous enough or you are a young Moro instructor. The sensitive character of History 3 was further demonstrated to me when Prof. Ganancial shared to us once about his experience in the early 80s when he asked his class: “Ano ba ang problema natin dito sa Mindanao at ano ang solusyon?”... So I dared myself once by asking: “kung may mga tao na mas may karapatan kaysa sa ibang tao dito sa Mindanao, sino-sino yon?”. I was not sure how appropriate my question was but I wanted to test the waters and push the limits of my handling History 3, and I was glad I dared asked that question for it became the turning point of my handling History 3... It was in that experience where I saw the perspectives of the tri-people; the sad stories to tell of the tri people. I always remember the anecdote of Sir Manong about Jackie Chan and Steven Spielberg and I realized, the anecdote is a mirror of our situation. It is very important to point all these things out and the History 3 classroom is actually a very ideal avenue to point these things out. But question: how many of us are maximizing the History 3 classroom as an avenue where we transform people into well-informed, emphatic, appreciative, tolerant, peace resilient individuals who value the culture of dialogue, empathy and social space? We don’t have to answer this question right now but to give you an idea how problematic Teaching History 3 is for some of us who are ill-prepared to handle the subject, let me cite to you as an example: One young lecturer was reported to have said: “Class di nalang nato na i-discuss and Islam ha, anyway, di bitaw nato na siya relihiyon”. In another instance, a lecturer tackled the topic Islam only ending up criticising the religion. Another colleague from Marawi tried to let her students debate on Islam and Christianity. Others, simply assign the topic to Muslim reporters or students which could be positive sometimes but at times, could be dangerous. And so handling History 3 was simply entrusted to the academic freedom, intellectual maturity and sound conviction of the teacher. Sorry for those who are enrolled under teachers who thought they are intellectually mature and emotionally grounded on the realities of the Mindanao question. And so, when I became head of IPDM, I thought maybe we can initiate something that would help provide direction to young and new teachers who will be handling the subject. Although we were already very fortunate and thankful that we were recipients of a series of training


57



organized by Sir Ompong in 2005 and in 2007 here in this very hall, it provided us new insights, widened our horizons, and gave us the sound conviction that our job as History 3 teachers is a missionary one, is a vocation so-to-speak. But I think most of us, especially the young participants were suffering from information overload. There was a huge amount of precious information during the training that we didn’t know how to absorb all of them and how to organize them in a very systematic manner so that when we share them in the class, we don’t only satisfy our craving to share the information we got from the training, but also meet the time frame of a semester, the course syllabus of the department, the coherence of the topics we want to share, the other requirements and activities in the classroom. All of us were so eager to share what we learned from the trainings but we simply didn’t know where to start, how to do it in a very systematic way satisfactory to all: the timeframe of a semester, the expectations of the senior faculty and the chairperson or dean as well as the satisfaction of our students. In other words, History 3 which is supposed to be a very promising avenue where we can influence young minds and hearts so that they don’t become part of the problem, so that they don’t perpetuate the problem; so that they become part of the solutions, had not be optimally utilized to do its function. This is because instruction in History 3 at the moment had never been standardized. It is subjected to academic freedom which according to Tawagon is subject also to kanya-kanyang katok. We may admit this or not but this is the dire situation of our History 3. And so at IPDM, we did something as a start up for novice History3 teachers and those who wanted to teach the subject but were afraid to teach the course. As a start up, we gathered history 3 teachers from MSU-Naawan, IIT and Marawi and held FGDs to surface their most difficult questions, issues and topics na sa tingin nila ay mahihirapan silang sagotin. So we brainstormed every Saturday from September to December of 2012 and came up with a list of questions which they found are difficult, sensitive, delicate, controversial or even volatile. We then clustered these questions into themes and plotted in the semestral timeline. Eventually we came up with a course outline that looks like this... Originally, Sir Ompong suggested that we should not be trapped by chronology but it was agreed by the body that it is impossible to do away with chronology especially if you are a novice. And so, we said that if we are going to come up with a course outline and eventually a manual based on the said outline, it should be designed for the novice, beginners not for experts so that kahit baguhan ka, magagamit mo with ease and manual.


58



So ito na po ang syllabus and the initial drafts of the manual. The problem again is that we did not have enough funds, time and enough commitment.Kaya di natapos itong manual. Isa lang poi to sa mga challenges or problems natin, pero ang mas malaking challenge na nakikita ko ay ang pagiging diverse natin in terms of experience, perspectives, social context and conviction. This is the challenge of standardizing History 3. The prospect though is that we are all teachers and professionals, we are all MSUans and our passion to serve Mindanao and its people is beyond question. As such, I am confident that we can find ways of looking for common grounds, of agreeing and of improving. If we can overcome this, we can finally come up with a standard instruction for history 3, make the course objectives clear to everyone who will handle the subject whether novice or seasoned, and optimize the utilization of the History 3 classroom as an avenue where we transform young minds and hearts as advocates of the culture of dialogue, empathy and ultimately imbibe the culture of peace. Baka sabihin ninyo ah wala bang mas practical na rason jan para ganahan kami magtrabaho para sa standardization of History 3? Meron, at yan ay ang possible publication of our manual and hopefully its adoption as MSUS official textbook for History 3. Thank you and Salam!

Sample Challenges in the content of History 3

• Controversies in the topic Islam in Mindanao - Greater Jihad and Lesser Jihad - How do we talk about mujahideens, juramentados, “rebels” etc., in relation to Jihad? - Muslim Female Teacher teaching Male Muslims - Which version/school of Islam should be presented? - It’s difficult to see the ideal when the practitioners are not showing what is ideal. - Are we supposed to discuss Islam per se or Islam in Moro History lang?

• Bangsamoro Definition?

- Others are still not comfortable with it. - Lumads and Christians don’t consider themselves Moros

• The place of the Christian migrants and Lumads in History 3

- The question of being Bida or Contrabida: How should the Christians be depicted? - Lumads are always being marginalized in History 3


59



• Kaninong kasalanan ang kaguluhan sa Mindanao? - Anong solusyon ang meron tayo para ma solve ang problema - What about the cultural things that are contributory to the problem?

• Why do we teach History 3

- Do we have a standard answer or discussion for this? - The BOR resolution is the ultimate point of reference but where is it now?

• How are we related to each other in Mindanao

- Difficulty of finding literatures about genealogical connections/origin stories. - denial that Teduray could be related to Maranao, Tausug to Manobo, Sama to Badjao,

etc.

• How can we come together to come up with a standardized instruction, given our diversity in experience, social context and backgrounds? - Marawi is different from IIT. Sulu is different from tawi-tawi. Maguindanao is

different from Gensan. Naawan is different from Maigo etc.

• Controversies in reviving the old systems (as part of self-determination) - Is it not a step backward? Example: undocumented communal ownership vs

documented individual land registration. - Is the sultanate really better than a republic? - What about the idea that it is not the type of government that determines the progress

or development of a country but the kind of people the country has...

• What about the diverse reactions of the Moros to Philippine Independence? - Some wanted a separate independence - Some wanted independence with the rest of the Filipinos - Some wanted to remain under the US - But why is it that those who favoured separate independence were the only ones who

were highlighted?

• Which is weightier in the issue of right to self-determination: ancestral rights or proprietary rights? - We respect the sentiments of the Moros and Lumads pero paano naman ang

pinaghirapan namin?


60



Appendix 6: Gender and Peace Education

By Prof. Jamila-Aisha Sanguila

Gender Profile of the Philippines• Filipino women as one of the most

advance in academic, professional,politics and legislation

• Only country in Asia to have closedgap on both education and health

• Scores on political empowermentcontinues to improve economicindicators

• Only country in the world wherewomen have parity to men in seniormanagement roles

• Legislative Reforms: ensured theprotection of women against economic,political, and social forms ofdiscriminations

• Passed important laws such for theprotection of women

• Vibrant women’s movement


61



Government Policy on Gender

• Adopted Philippine Plan for Gender Responsive Development (1995-2025)

• One of the few countries in the world that has adopted GAD Policy budget

• Framework Plan for Women 2001– Promotion of women’s economic

empowerment– Protection and advancement of

women’s rights– Promotion of gender responsive

governance

Gender in Education

• Female students fare very well in education

• National Board Examination– Female examinees scored

better in engineering– Male examinees fare better

in medicine, midwifery, nursing, nutrition, and social work

• Post graduate, more female enrollees


62



Gender

It refers to the socially constructed differencesbetween men and women and the unequal powerrelationships therein. It is a term used in contrastto sex, to draw attention to the social roles andinteractions between women and men, ratherthan to their biological differences (Alrasheed, 2012).

Gender also denotes the social meanings of male and female, and what different societies regard as normal and appropriate behavior, attitudes, and attributes for men and women. Although the details vary from society to society, and change overtime, gender relation always include a strong element of inequality between women and men and are strongly influence by ideology (Mainstreaming gender in peacebuilding: A Framework for action, p.10).


63



is the main strategy for ensuring that the governmentpursues gender equality in all aspects of thedevelopment process to achieve the vision of a gender-responsive society where women and men equallycontribute to and benefit from development. It is a set ofprocesses and strategies aimed at recognizing andaddressing gender issues in legislation, policies,programs and projects and institutional mechanisms ofthe government on a sustained basis. It is essentiallyinstitutionalizing gender concerns in the mainstreamdevelopment processes and agenda and not just in theperipheral programs and projects of the government(Juban, 2009; NCRFW 2001).

Gender Mainstreaming

An act providing for the Magna Carta of Women. TheState shall promote empowerment of women and pursueequal opportunities for women and men and ensureequal access to resources and to development resultsand outcomes. Further, it realizes that equality of menand women entails the abolition of the unequalstructures and practices that perpetuate discriminationand inequality. To realize this, the State shall endeavorto develop plans, policies, programs, measures, andmechanisms to address discrimination and inequality inthe economic, political, social and cultural life of womenand men. (Philippine Commission on Women, 2009)

Republic Act 9710


64



Section 16 Equal Access and Elimination of Discrimination in Education, Scholarships, Training

The State shall ensure that gender stereotypesand images in existing educational materials andcurricula are adequately and appropriatelyrevised. Gender-sensitive language shall beused at all times. Capacity building on genderand development, peace, and human rightseducation for teachers, and those involved ineducation sector, including the private sector,churches, and faiths groups be encouraged.

DepEd, CHED, TESDA shall:1. Develop and promote gender-sensitive curriculum;2. Develop gender-fair instructional materials;3. Ensure that educational institutions implement a capacity

program on gender, peace, human rights education for theirofficials, faculty and non-teaching staff and personnel;

4. Promote partnership between and among players of theeducation sector including the private sector, churches, andfaith groups;

5. Encourage advertising industry and other similar institutions toprovide free use of space and installation of displays forschools, colleges and universities for campaigns to enddiscrimination and violence against women; and

6. Guarantee that education institutions provide scholarshipprograms for marginalized women and girls. Conditions suchas age, pregnancy, motherhood, disabilities, or lack of consentof husband shall not be grounds for disqualification in the grantof scholarships.


65



DepEd, CHED, TESDA shall monitor and ensure compliance of educational institutions to the following:

1. Women faculty who become pregnant outside of marriage shall not be discriminated. They shall not be dismissed, separated from work, forced to go on leave, re-assigned or transferred. They shall have access to work already held with no diminution in rank, pay or status and shall be entitled to all benefits accorded by law and by the concerned learning institutions;

2. No female student shall be expelled, dismissed,suspended, refused or denied admission, or forced totake a leave of absence in any educational institutionsolely on grounds of pregnancy outside of marriageduring her school term. When needed, students whoare pregnant shall be accorded with a special leave ofabsence from school upon advice of the attendingphysician, and be given an opportunity to make up formissed classes and examinations. The same leavebenefits shall likewise be accorded to pregnant facultymembers, and school personnel and staff.


66



3. Pregnant students shall be assisted through availablesupport services while in school, such as but not limitedto counseling to ensure completion of their studies;4. Programs and policies to prevent Violence AgainstWomen (VAW) shall be developed, including institutionalmechanisms for complaints in cases of rape, sexualharassment, and other forms of violence anddiscrimination against women, and provide assistance tostudents, faculty, or personnel who have been victims ofVAW (survivors); and5. Coordination with PNP, DOJ, CHR, DSWD, and theLGU so that appropriate assistance are given to femalefaculty and students who are victims (survivors) rape,sexual harassment and other forms of violence againstwomen and discrimination.


67



Appendix 7: Peace Education, Multiculturalism and Mindanao’s People

By Dr. Moctar I. Matuan

Origin of peace research/studiesPeace research arose from the

development in the discipline of international politics after WW I.

After WW II that created the fear for possible nuclear holocaust, several new branches of research emerged from International Politics, including War Studies, Strategic Studies, Conflict Studies and Peace Studies.

1950’s - early peace research,wasparticularly concerned with the Cold War and interstate violence.

1960’s - it was seen that this focus was narrow, as researchers had focused on the problem on peace and conflict rather than on solutions. The emphasis had also been on direct violence (i.e. wars, terrorism and unrest) with the result that peace was defined negatively as merely the absence of war (negative peace).


68



1970's - researchers attention shifted from direct to indirect (structural) violence. This broadening of concern among peace researchers to examine issues of freedom and justice also led to a broader definition of peace. Instead of just being the absence of war, it was felt that peace should also involve co-operation and non-violent social changes, aimed at creating more equitable and just structures in a society (positive peace).

Because of this broadening of concerns among peace researchers, Galtung has suggested that the problems of peace studies are fivefold:

Violence and war to Non-violence Inequality to Economic welfare Injustice to Social justice Environmental to Ecological balance

damage Alienation to Participation


69



Expanding the meaning of violence

Violence - is actions, words,attitudes, structures or systemsthat cause physical, psychological,social or environmental damageto people, relationships or otherthings and/or prevents peoplefrom reaching their full humanpotential.

Institutional Development in the Peace Studies Field

In Europe, separate peace research Institutes◦ Peace Research International, Oslo (PRIO) (1959)◦ Stockholm International Peace Research Institute

(SIPRI) (1966)◦ Tampere Peace Research Institute, Finland (1970)◦ University of Bradford

In U.S., peace studies at universities and colleges◦ Manchester (1948), Manhattan College (Catholic)

(1971), Colgate (1970)◦ USIP (1984)


70



Peace education or educating for peace as one of the latest sub-field of peace research/studies.

Triggered by the 1974 UNESCO Recommendation Concerning Education for International Understanding, Cooperation and Peace.

What is peace studies/education?

A multi-disciplinary field - that combines research, education and action, focusing on three general areas of study: – the causes and conditions which

generate and sustain violent conflict– the mechanisms and models for the

resolution of violent conflict and, – the norms, practices and institutions for

building peace.


71



The recommendations that were promulgated during the 18th Session of UNESCO in Paris listed the following major problems of mankind that must be studied:

1. equality of rights of people;2. maintenance of peace; types of war;

discrimination;3. action to ensure the observance of human rights;4. economic growth and social development;5. conservation of natural resources;6. preservation of the cultural heritage of mankind7. the role of U.N. in solving such problems.

Some UN member states responded to the recommendation by starting their peace education programs in different forms, methodologies and emphasis.

Australia, Japan, the United Kingdom and New Zealand were some of the countries that accepted the fear for possible nuclear war as one of the main reason for their peace education. The ugly image of World War II and the Vietnam war were also cited.


72



In the case of India, Northern Ireland and to some extent, the Philippines, the incidence of ethnic conflicts became a rallying point to promote peace education.

Aims and purpose of peace education India - to work not only towards the elimination

of existing anomalies and inequalities but to build up a new social order which would be free from exploitation of man by man.

Japan - to create people who not only work to establish a world without war, but also a world without structural violence.

United Kingdom - to develop the skills, attitudes and knowledge necessary to resolve conflict peacefully in order to work towards a more just and less violent world.


73



Australia - concerned with nuclear disarmament and conflict resolution movements.

New Zealand - to inculcate in the minds of the young a desire to promote peace among the nations through changes in the history and civic syllabus.

Northern Ireland - to reduce "hatred" through contact between peoples.

U.S.A. - concentrated in analyzing the causes of war, violence and systematic oppression and explore processes by which conflict and change can be managed so as to maximize justice while minimizing violence.

Philippines - the major impulse to peace education are the daily realities of conflict, violence and grim human suffering related directly to problems and crises other than a potential nuclear holocaust.


74



Formal & informal peace education programs in Mindanao

Formal or degree granting programNDU in partnership with MSU, Xavier, Ateneo de

Davao and Ateneo de Zamboanga – offered M.A. and Ph.D. in Peace and Development with support from CHED-MAEP. 1997 – 2001.

Mindanao Anthropology Consortium – Xaxier, NDU, MSU, Ateneo de Davao, Ateneo de Zamboanga -with funding from Ford Foundation (2003-2006?)

Peace education framework of NDU revolved around these six problems and issues of conflict and vilonence:

- Militarization- Structural violence- Human rights- Environmental care- Cultural solidarity – to cultivate an awareness

of cultural diversity that is simultaneously committed to global unity

- Personal peace


75



Informal initiatives – from 1968 up1968 -First Annual Seminar on Islam and

AsiaPurpose – To improve understanding about

Islam on the part of the ChristiansPax – Protestants and Roman CatholicsTheme – Understanding Islam Today

1969 – 2nd seminar – the start of a sort of formal dialogue between Muslims and Christians as Muslims were invited to participate.Theme: Muslim Progress in the Philippines

1972 – The seminar name was changed to THE ANNUAL SEMINAR ON MINDANAO AND SULU CULTURES.

The seminar concern expanded by including the other minorities in Mindanao and Sulu


76



The National Council of Churches in the Philippines created the Muslim-Christian Reconciliation Study Committee (MCRS)

Study findings – Christians have a very negative image of the Muslims, while the Muslims are ready to accept and work with the Christians.

MCRS recommended for the creation of a Program Aimed at Christian Education About Muslims (PACEM-1974).

Purpose:1. Enlightened understanding of

Muslims by Christians, 2. Improved attitude of Christians towards Muslims, 3. Dialogue, 4. Joint dialogue and 5. Full reconciliation.


77



Materials produced by PACEM were adopted by several Protestant and Catholic congregations in a program called

Duyog Ramadhan

1974 –75 Establishment and operation of the Dansalan Research Center in a UCCP/NCCP related school)

A unique research center with twofold functions: a research center and a study center to improve Muslim-Christian understanding by expanding knowledge and heightening sensitivities in their relations.


78



DRC Study center programs: The MVV Collection on Islam and Muslim

Filipinos The Annual Summer Session on Mindanao

and Sulu Cultures (1975) and the International Summer Institute for Islamic Studies (1984)

The Annual Seminar on Mindanao and Sulu Culture

Annual Muslim-Christian Dialogues Student Dialogues Publication of the Dansalan Quarterly

1977 – Creation of the Prelature of St. Mary in Marawi. The only Catholic Church created to offer reconciling hands to the Muslims.

Main thrust – Dialogue of life and faith Became major partner of DRC in the

promotion of better Muslim-Christian Understanding/relations.


79



Other institutions created

MSU-SPCPS, BOR res # 1983 S. 1979, BOR Res. # 497. S. 1982 – Offering of a

3-unit elective course on Peace StudiesXavier Peace Center – 1983?Fr. Sebastiano D’ Ambra – Silsilah

Dialogue Movement - 1984NDU Peace Center - 1988

SPCPS was rejuvenated in 1992 (BOR Res. # 76. S. 1992) as MCCPS and renamed as IPDM in December 2001 through BOR Res. # 224. S 2001.

BOR Res. # 107. s. 2007 – IPDM Admin. Structure became system wide.

BOR Res. # 108. s. 2007 – IPDM as one of the implementers of the CWTS.

BOR Res. # 225 s. 2007 – Institutionalization of COP in education, research and action in the MSU System.

UN-Act for Peace and the British Council supported IPDM in these activities.


80



These new developments at MSU-IPDM and the support of UN-Act for Peace was influenced by Executive Order # 570 (Institutionalizing Peace Education in Basic Education and Teacher’s Education) issued on September 26, 2006.

Other peace building initiatives- The Ranao Muslim-Christian Movement for

Dialogue and Peace 1992-The Mindanao Bishop-Ulama Forum 1996- Pakigdait Movement, 2000- Baloi M-C Movement for Peace- Panday Kalinaw, 2006- The birth of various NGO’s with programs on

peace and Development, encouraged by the 1992 UNESCO Culture of Peace Program (CPP) and availability of funding.

- Vigorous use of the 1996 COP Manual produced by MINCARRD & OPAPP


81



The UNESCO Culture of Peace Program (CPP) linked peace to the issue of development"establishing a culture of peace is a vast project, multi-dimensional and world-wide in scope. It is linked to economic security and development; political security and democracy; cost-effectiveness and economic conversion; and the development of global solidarity.“ (1995 Working Paper of the CPP)

In explaining the term economic security and development, the paper states that:

Economic security and development is fundamental. Peace can only be assured when people are free from the fear of hunger. The various initiatives for a culture of peace, therefore, must link peace with development, which is endogenous, equitable and sustainable. If development is not endogenous, it risks contradicting and even disputing the traditional cultural and economic context of people's lives. If it is not equitable, it may perpetuate injustices, which lead to violent conflict. If not sustainable, it may damage and even destroy the environment and the existing social structures.


82



Mindanao Tri-People- Prior to 1380 we are all lumads with

our respective territories, language and culture.

- 1380 – arrival of Islam in Sulu,- 15th or 16th Century arrival in

Mindanao- Some of the lumads in Mindanao

embraced Islam and became dominant in the area.

-1521 – accidental landing of Magellan in Masao, present day Butuan. The controversial first Mass.

1565 Legaspi came back to claim the country under the Spanish King. Start of Christianization in Visayas and Luzon.

Who are then the people of the country at that time? Let’s take a look at the existing communities when the Spaniards arrived according to Rodil.


83



Barangay Communities – Tagalog, Cebuano, Hiligaynon, Waray, Bicol, Iloko, Kapampangan and Pangasinan- Each Barangay consisting of several families

acknowledge a common origin was ruled by a patriarchal head or datu.

- Recognizes several social statuses (social stratification)- Maharlika – Almost equal to the Datu in status- Timaua – No noble blood but freemen- Alipin namamahay – owning houses and personal

property but tilling the land of the maharlika- Alipin sagigilid – chattel slaves – captives in war or

reduced to bondage for failing to pay a debt.

Islamized Communities.

- the most developed – having reached the level of centrally organized life

- Sultanate of Sulu – 1450- Sultan Kudarat – United Maguindanao

and Buayan in 1619 as the Sultanate of Maguindanao


84



The warrior societies – Mindanao. Manobo, Bagobo,Tagakaolo, B’laan and Subanon. Cordillera: Isneg, Kalinga, and Tinguians.

Characterized by a distinct warrior class Membership is won by personal achievements,

entails privilege, duty and prescribed norm of conduct as requisite for community leadership.

Their raids is called MANGAYAW into unallied territory

Agricultural surplus is produced by increasing labor force through polygamy

Material possession can be accumulated through brideprice, wergild and legal fees.

Petty Plutocracies – Ifugao, Bontoc, Kankanay and Ibaloy

dominated socially and politically by a recognized class of rich men who attain membership through birthright, property and the performance of specific ceremonies.


85



The classless communities – Ilongot of Northern Luzon, Katalangan of Isabela Ikalahan of Nueva Vizcaya, Mangyan of Mindoro (with six distinct languages) Batak of Palawan , Sulod of Panay. the Negritoes (Aeta, Dumagat) Ata in Davao Mamanua in Agusan del sur and Tiruray of Cotabato.- Distinguish no class or group which exerts authority or

advantage over other classes or groups by virtue of ascribed or acclaimed status.

- None of them according to Dr. Scott had a concept of land ownership. To them land is the property of supernatural personalities whose permission must be ritually secured for safe and fruitful use (the khasawingritual among the Meranaos) The concept of vicegerent in Islam.

- The formalization of Chieftaincy – has been frequent response to contacts with more powerful groups .

- In group enterprise (eg. fishing or hunting) agreed schedule – recognizes division of labor , risk or leadership

- 1567 - Solaiman battle against the Spaniards in Tundo

- 1578 - first attempt of the Spaniards (aided by the new Christian converts from Luzon and Visayas) to conquer the Moros of Mindanao. Start of creating negative images of each other or demonization of the enemy.

- 1898 arrival of the Americans as new colonizers


86



1913-1917 – established 7 agricultural colonies in Mindanao.

NLSA – 7 settlement areasLASEDECO – 6 settlement areasEDCOR 4 settlement areasNARRA 8 settlement areas

Of these 32 settlement areas, 28 were established in the old province of Cotabatoand Lanao. The remaining 4 settlements were placed in Tawi-Tawi, Palawan, Bukidnon and Davao

Start of discourse on Lumad rights1978 – 11th Annual Seminar on Mindanao

and Sulu Cultures, CMU, Musuan, Bukidnon. Theme: The Changing Social Institutions of the Non-Christian and Non-Muslim Communities of Mindanao, and Development Goals.

intervention of Church related organization to protect the rights (human rights) of the Lumads from the abuses of the Martial Law regime.


87



June 1986 – representatives of 15 Tribes in Mindanao converged and decided to organize LUMAD MINDANAO with the goal to achieve self governance within their ancestral domain in accordance with their cultural practices.

Prevailing perception on the Tri-People of Mindanao:

The Moros marginalized the Lumad in the past. With the arrival of the Christian settlers aided by the government (Spanish, American, Filipino), both were oppressed by the newcomers.

Oppression eventually leads to committing injustices towards the minority group

Let’s examine the complaint of the Moros that may also apply to the case of the Lumads.


88



INJUSTICES OUTCOMESUnjust wars

Eradication of government system (Sultanate)

Systematic occupation of their homeland through land laws and resettlement programs to Mindanao

Government neglect on socio-economic programs

Political disenfranchisement

Hatred, negative image, poverty, etc.

Subordination to the majority Christian laws

Landless; Minority in their homeland

Underdevelopment;Poor human development

Lack of representation in government

These are the issues we must address through teaching history with a multiculturalistperspective


89



What is multiculturalism?

relating to, reflecting, or adapted to diverse culture.

affirming diversity or respect for cultural diversity.

Multiculturalism is opposed to “ethnocentrism” but closely similar to “cultural relativity”

In the field of education, any intervention that purports to respect for cultural diversity could legitimately claim to represent “multicultural education”

How to become multiculturalist

To learn more by reading and being involved in activities that emphasize pluralism.

To confront or eradicate our racism, biases, prejudices, discriminating behaviour like stereotyping and negative profiling of other groups.

Learn to see reality from a variety of perspective. Eg. We are one people before the arrival of Islam and Christianity.


90



Racial prejudice and discrimination can be dysfunctional to society (Arnold Rose, 1951) A society that practices discrimination

fails to use the resources of all individuals. Discrimination limits the search for talent and leadership to the dominant group.

Discrimination aggravates social problems such as poverty, delinquency, and crime and places the financial burden to alleviate these problems on the dominant group.

Society must invest a good deal of time and money to defend its barriers to full participation of all members.Racial prejudice and discrimination often undercut goodwill and friendly diplomatic relations between ethnic groups/nations.


91



Obstacle to multiculturalism.Multiculturalism is opposed to the

traditional “integration or assimilation” function of schools.

Proposed new meaning of “integration.”The minority groups are fully

integrated in the mainstream society when all the biases, prejudices and discriminations against them are fully eradicated

Four paths to peace (Pakigdait)

TruthCompassionJusticePositive peace


92



Arguments for the need in teaching Moro history (Gowing, 1981)

1. The need to liberate Philippine historiography and instruction from a certain Tagalog-Pampango parochialism.

2. Moro history and culture are a rich and colorful part of the Filipino national heritage.

3. Moro history is a vital part of the self-consciousness of the Muslim Filipino population and colors all their relationships with other Filipinos.

Request or appeal:Moro history must be more widely studied and understood. And it

must be honest history that is studied, not a rehash of the distortions and half-truths and lies and other forms of bad press which the enemies or false friends of the Moros have produced in the past.


93



The Indigenous “Christians” It must be stressed that when the Spaniards arrived in Mindanao in the

second decade of the 17th century, they already noted the significant Visayan-speaking peoples in the northern and eastern parts of the island. These people would eventually become the Christian communities in the Spanish controlled territories of Mindanao whose population was noted to be 191,493 in 1892. To help us know the indigenous Christians of Mindanao, B.R. Rodil is quoted:

It is no longer easy to identify them because they have assimilated into the migrant Visayan population which now compose the majority of the place. They are known locally by their place names like Davaweño in the Davao provinces… mostly in Davao Oriental; Butuanon in Butuan, Camiguinon or Kinamigin in Camiguin Island, Cagayanon in Cagayan de Oro… Iliganon in Iligan… Dapitanon in Dapitan, Dipolognon in Dipolog, Chavacano in Zamboanga… Surigaonon, Waya-waya and Jaon-jaon are spoken in the towns of Surigaodel Sur…

In other words, being a “Christian” is not necessarily being a “migrant”.

Thank you and Wassalam


94



Appendix 8: Mindanao Peace Process, Peace Education and Development

By Prof. Rudy B. Rodil1

The topic given to me was Peace Process and Peace Education for Development. More, specifically, meaning the formal peace negotiation between the government and the rebel groups, the MNLF or the Moro National Liberation Front and the MILF or the Moro Islamic Liberation Front, from 1975 to the present. As I understood it, I also include the way the government managed the MIM or Muslim Independence Movement back in1968 (soon renamed Mindanao Independence Movement). Let me approach it this way.

First, the conflict. When the MIM articulated its cause in 1968, its intention was to put up an Islamic State in predominantly Muslim areas of Mindanao; the MNLF’s proclaimed goal was to establish a Bangsamoro Republic covering the entirety of Mindanao, Sulu and Palawan; the MILF announced its vision to create an Islamic State covering the predominantly Muslim areas of Mindanao, Sulu and Palawan. The government has always been threatened and has consistently defended itself, insisting that it cannot allow the constitution and national sovereignty to be undermined and the territory of the republic to be dismembered. The assumption is that the republic is standing on solid foundation and must be defended at all cost.

Second, the peace talks. President Ferdinand Marcos had a private talk with Datu Udtog Matalam, the head of the Muslim Independence Movement (changed to Mindanao Independence Movement), and appointed as Presidential Adviser on Muslim Affairs and was gifted with his own gold wristwatch; no more activity in the MIM front. In the ensuing peace negotiations, informal and formal, with both the MNLF and later, the MILF, from President Marcos in the 1972 to President Cory Aquino to President Fidel Ramos to President Joseph Estrada to President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo to the current President Benigno Simeon Aquino III, the stand of the Office of the President to the peace negotiating panel is always: negotiate within the

1 *Teaching Enriched History and Bridging Cultures: In Search of Peace in Mindanao, Philippines, Crystal Inn, Iligan City, June 21, 2013.

♣Mindanao historian, peace advocate; retired full professor MSU-Iligan Institute of Technology, Oct 2007; Commissioner of Regional Consultative Commission in Muslim Mindanao, member Govt peace Panel in talks with the MNLF, 1993-96. Vice chair Government peace panel in talks with the MILF, 2004-2008.


95



framework of the Philippine Constitution and the territorial integrity of the Republic. And that was how the Tripoli Agreement of December 1976 was reached, with the insertion of two paragraphs, as follows: “First: The establishment of Autonomy in the Southern Philippines within the realm of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Republic of the Philippines”, and par. 16, “The Government of the Philippines shall take all necessary constitutional processes for the implementation of the entire Agreement.” The Final Peace Agreement on the implementation of the Tripoli Agreement was proof that the Philippine Government has opened itself to political restructuring, the creation of the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao.

But the MILF did not accept said Final Agreement and proceeded with the Moro struggle for self-determination. After years of GHP–MILF negotiation, from January 1997, the MOA-AD, short for Memorandum of Agreement on Ancestral Domain, was born in July 2008. Political oppositions immediately raised the issue to the Supreme Court; the Supreme Court aborted the signing and soon ruled it as unconstitutional in October 2008.

In the negotiations in the time of President Benigno Aquino’s term, the two panels arrived at what I call a historic convergence in succession, Ten Decisions (April 2012) and the Framework Agreement (October 2012), a political leap from the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (ARMM). What items are politically new? Let me cite four of the ten decisions:

• The recognization of Bangsamoro identity and the legitimate grievances and claims of the Bangsamoro people.

• The ARMM is unacceptable and a new autonomous political entity shall take the its place.

• The new autonomous political entity shall have a ministerial form of government.

• Power-sharing and wealth-sharing between the National Government and the new political entity.

The Ten Decisions became the guide in the formulation of the Framework Agreement on the Bangsamoro. Part of the Framework are the four annexes on power-sharing, wealth-sharing, normalization, and transition arrangements, the discussion of which are on-going. Let me highlight additional details:


96



• The Bangsamoro shall be governed by a Basic Law, formulated and ratified by themselves.

• Core territory of the Bangsamoro: (a) ARMM territory; (b) the six municipalities of Baloi, Munai, Nunungan, Pantar, Tagoloan and Tangkal in Lanao del Norte; barangays in the Municipalities of Kabacan, Carmen, Aleosan, Pigkawayan, Pikit, and Midsayap that voted for inclusion in the ARMM during the 2001 plebiscite; (c) the cities of Cotabato and Isabela; and (d) all other contiguous areas where there is a resolution of the local government unit or a petition of at least ten percent (10%) of the qualified voters in the area asking for their inclusion at least two months prior to the conduct of the ratification of the Bangsamoro Basic Law and the process of delimitation of the Bangsamoro as mentioned in the next paragraph.

• Bangsamoro’s justice system shall cover the customary rights and traditions of indigenous peoples.

• Vested property rights shall be recognized and respected.

• Indigenous peoples’ rights shall be respected.

• Settlement of legitimate grievances of the Bangsamoro people arising from any unjust dispossession of their territorial and proprietary rights, customary land tenure or their marginalization. In case reparation is not possible, there shall be adequate reparation collectively.

• A third party monitoring team composed of international bodies and domestic groups shall monitor the implementation of all agreements.

• The MILF shall undertake a graduated program for decommissioning of its forces, complete with normalization process and timetables.

Both panels are hoping that the GPH-MILF comprehensive compact shall be considered done, before the President Aquino steps out of Malacañang.

Third, re-reading and re-writing of Philippine history is a must. I have an important question at this point. Which Philippines are we talking about here? May I invite you to take one step backward to June 12, 1898. Or even several steps backward to 1450. Or to 1619.


97



On June 12, 1898, Emilio Aguinaldo proclaimed the independence of the Philippines. As an affirmation of that event we now celebrate our independence on June 12. Questions: Was that Philippines the same as the Philippines we have today? Did it include the Sulu Sultanate which had been a state since 1450 to 1898? Did it include the Maguindanao Sultanate which was put together by Sultan Kudarat in 1619 and was still intact in 1898.

My reading is that in June 1898, there were at least three states here in the region we now know as the territory of the Republic of the Philippines: the Philippines, the Sulu Sultanate and the Maguindanao Sultanate. All three suffered the same fate of victims of the manipulation of two colonial powers, Spain and the United States, embodied in the Treaty of Paris of 10 December 1898. Spain sold or ceded its so-called sovereignty over the Philippines, Sulu sultanate and Maguindanao sultanate. And that was how the Moros of the two sultanates and the Pat a Pongampong ko Ranao became, on paper, one body politic, and part of the present Philippines. Our defeats in the wars against the United States completed the process of domination. And unification without benefit of consent. We all became colonial subjects of the Philippines Islands, part of the island possessions of the United States of America. In 1946, the United States gave back only one independence, to the Republic of the Philippines. This was how the Moros became Filipinos.

So, please take note, identity-wise, who were the Filipinos in June 1898? Only those who were covered by the Philippines declared as independent by Aguinaldo. The citizens of the two sultanates of Sulu and Maguindanao and the constituencies of the Pat a Pongampong ko Ranao had their own respective identities, definitely not Filipinos.

The territory of the Philippines refers only to those parts which were colonized and governed by the Spaniards and declared as independent by the Aguinaldo government. The two sultanates of Sulu and Maguindanao, and the Pat a Pongampong ko Ranao were badly battered by war, suffered the ignominy of defeat many times and garrisons were maintained within their territories, but they were never effectively colonized or governed. They were certainly not colonized in the same way as the Filipinos were. I say that the two sultanates retained at least their de facto status as states--as de facto as the Philippines. This political reality is probably the reason why Aguinaldo sought authority from Congress to negotiate with the Sulu Sultanate for a possible confederation.

So what is the role of the Treaty of Paris in our current discourse? In what way is this connected with the Constitution of the Philippines?


98



American occupation of the Philippines (as defined in the Treaty of Paris) is premised on the legitimacy of this treaty. What basic documents were used to govern the Philippines Islands?

• The Philippine Bill of 1902 • The Jones Law of 1916 • The Tydings-McDuffie Act of 1934 • The Commonwealth Constitution of 1934.

Take note that each of these has affirmed the legitimacy of the Treaty of Paris. And since none of the subsequent constitutions have questioned this very point, I assume, too, that these latter constitutions have affirmed the Treaty of Paris. The Republic of the Philippines of 1946 as we know it today was anchored on this wrong, I repeat, wrong, fundamental premise. It was the structure grounded on this wrong premise that gave way to the extinction of the two respective Moro political structures.

Fourth, who created the Moro problem? First, there is the bad blood between Pinoy and Moros is the created and nurtured by the Spanish colonizers during the 333 years of Spanish-Moro war. It is still alive.

The American imperialists created a new political structure, one colony, one governance, one set of public land laws that lead into the resettlement of homesteaders from the rest of the Philippines into Mindanao and Sulu, imposition of English in governance and in the public school system. The marginalized situation of the Moros and the Lumad of Mindanao and Sulu was a direct product of these very structures. The structures were inherited from the American colonizers, Republic of the Philippines continued. It is precisely from these complex structures that the Bangsamoro is trying to extricate itself, thereby create its own political space. The Lumad, more specifically the Teduray, Lambangian and Dulangan Manobo who are located within the new Bangsamoro structure are also working hard to create their own social space with the Bangsamoro.

Fifth, search for political solution. The roadmap is already clear in the Framework Agreement. We easily get copies of the documents and follow the flow of events. What remains are the completion of the four annexes to the Framework and immediately the formulation of the Basic Law of the Bangsamoro and the installation of the new government structure. We need to reframe the foundations of this republic, this time based on the free and informed consent of the governed. We need to create new boxes, and see realities with new lenses. Our own lenses, not Crystal Inn, Iligan City June 21-23, 2013

99



those left behind by our colonizers. But the biggest question is the point of social consciousness. Are we ready for this constitutional change that will allow for distinct social spaces within the republic.

Sixth, even if a new comprehensive compact is arrived at in the coming months between the GPH and the MILF, it remains that there are many social problems inherited from history, one of which is straightening out our history. The teachers play a major role in the creating a new generation of the republic. One sensitive solution is for the teachers to teach, not only the corrected history but also nurture mutual respect and acceptance of each other’s culture. Allow me to some suggestions, to start with it: a) review all existing Philippine History books from grade school to college; b) list down major items that should be integrated; c) what culture do we use and practice; d) what kind of consciousness do we nourish among our children; e) we need to agree on the Mindanao-Sulu vision that we want.

Seventh, I want to share with you my own doubts about the long term impact of the use of English as a major of medium in teaching Philippine history. When the American colonial government imposed English in the Philippines it was not only as a tool of learning, it was also a weapon of subjugation. And the American government intention was a big success; that is why we are still deep to our neck with it. My question is, is it really correct teaching our own story to our own people using an alien tongue? Is this really the correct way to create a new generation of Filipinos using a foreign language? In my own experience I have had three successes, proof that it is possible: (a) I have written the Mindanao-Sulu history in English, (b) I have taught Philippine history in Tagalog, and (c) I have also taught Lumad-Moro in Bisaya. My students claimed that they had captured the local favour of the story. Barangay communities, to whom I have had the opportunity to speak before them, are able to appreciate their own history in their own language. Unfortunately this is not normally taught in school.

We have another century to nurture our own languages and in the process we also decolonize ourselves. Hopefully, we can settle our armed conflicts using our own languages, and do our peace processes within our own Republic.

***

Prof. Rodil is a retitred Professor of History at MSU Iligan Institute of Technology. He was Vice-Chair of the Government Peace Panel during the peace talks with the Moro National Liberation Front (MNLF) that resulted in the Final Peace Agreement in 1996. He also served in the same panel in the peace negotiations with the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) until 2008.


100



Appendix 9: Peace Education, Curriculum Making and Evaluation

By Prof. Jane Ruby J. Asperin

1

Peace Education, Curriculum Making and Evaluation

Jane Ruby Jacobe-Asperin, M.A.

Greetings of peace

2

Assalamualaikum!

Alaikumisalam!

Peace be upon you!

And also w/ you!


101



Part I

Definition of Peace in the context of a Culture of Peace that Promotes

Sustainable Development

3

• The meaning of peace has evolved through time.– From pre-colonial, Spanish period, American period,

commonwealth, Japanese Period to the Republic and the present.

• Peace is not simply the absence of war.” It as an end to all the forms of violence imbedded in the structures of the society: discrimination, H.R. abuses, corruption, poverty, even environmental degradation ….

• Peace is understood not only as the absence of traditional forms of direct violence, but also of the indirect forms of violence. 4


102



The core relationship between peace and violence

5

VIOLENCE

PEACE

INDIRECT

DIRECT NEGATIVE

POSITIVE

Personal: assault, rape, murderInstitutional: state sponsored war, indus’l environ’l. impact

Personal and institutional violence has been stopped.

Structural: discrimination, poverty, lack /no access to basic services & resources, deprivations of human rights

Sense of well being, quality of life, respect for human rights, and social justice has been achieved.

6

CULTURE OF

VIOLENCE

CULTURE OF

PEACE

Non-violenceRespect for H.R.

Cultural understanding

Tolerance and Solidarity

Transparency&

accountability

Participation andEmpowermentEcological

Integrity


103



What is at stake?- a culture of peace and

sustainable development

• Peace is essential for a sustained development and vice versa;

• Hence both is the strategic focus of UNESCO. The two is essential to each other;

7

CULTURE OF PEACE

SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

People

Environment

Economy

Part II

Framework of Peace Education and

Education for Sustainable Development

8


104



Educating For a

Culture of Peace

Dismantling the culture of war

Living with justice and compassion

Building cultural respect, reconciliation & solidarity

Promoting human rights & responsibilities

Living in harmony with the earth

Cultivatinginner peace

A Holistic Framework for Peaceby: Dr. Toh Swee-Hin

Laureate, UNESCO Prize for Peace Education

9

A Holistic Framework for Peace Education

Institutionalization of Peace Educ.

• In harmony with educational priorities• Wholistic approach• Participative• Cognizant to current issues and trends


105



What about Education for Sustainable Development?

• UN Declaration of “The Decade of Education for Sustainable Development” (2005 -2014)

11

The word “development” has carried different

meanings in the course of history


106



• development referred mainly to economic growth as in Rostow’s Stages of Growth that covered mechanization and industrialization.

Modern development thinking and economics focused on catching up w/ industrialized countries

Myth on Economic Growth

1st world countries

Rich countries will trickle down their development (W.W. Rostow)

Poor countries must imitate the first world/rich countries to catch up…

Take-off principle


107



Conditions in the 3rd world

- A development that meets theneeds of the present withoutcompromising the ability of futuregenerations to meet their ownneeds.


108



UN - DESD

• DESD (Decade of Education for Sustainable Development)In its 57th meeting in December 2002, the United Nations General Assembly proclaimed the UN Decade of Education for Sustainable Development, 2005- 2014, (DESD) 'emphasizing that education is an indispensable element for achieving sustainable development'. It also designated UNESCO as the lead agency to promote and implement the Decade.


109



Necessary Shifts of Educational Paradigms

•Reorienting education•Education for Change•Transformative Education

Education Stakeholders•Ensure that sustainable

development, the watchword of the century , be well incorporated in the lessons and values in the learning process at schools.


110



Students

•Learn early on, that nature is finite and there's a lot of catching up to do in terms of reviving the environment

A new era has dawned

• From belligerency to non-violence;• From disengagement to

dialogue/negotiation;• From independent endeavors to linkages

with various stakeholders; and• From emphasis on Human Rights to the

fact that nature has rights too.

23


111



Part IIICurriculum Making

and The Pedagogy of Peace

24

Curriculum:• Serves as a guide to what direction the

school envisions the students to become;

• A regular revisiting, reassessing and redesigning of the curriculum ensures its relevance and effectiveness;

25


112



26

PHILOSOPHY*Basic concepts

* Underlying principles* Beliefs or aims

SYLLABUS

Teaching Aids* Manual

* references* M & E

Pedagogy

STUDENTS

Some Basic Principles:

27

A philosophy. A curriculum that is founded on a carefully thought-out concepts, theories and principles and should be clearly connected to an institution's mission statement.

Clear purposes and goals. – what graduates should know and be able to do and those attitudes and values appropriate to well-educated men and women. These goals and their objectives are specified in considerable detail and in behavioral language that will permit assessment of their degree of achievement (the curriculum's actual outcomes).

Source: www.thenationalacademy.org


113




28

• A pedagogically sound process.–Student activities are chosen to developed the desired outcomes.

–Therefore, the choice of course experiences and the specific quality and efficacy of these experiences in producing the stated intended outcomes for all students is fundamental.

–It has been observed that there is little evidence that using traditional lectures will develop in students the higher-order cognitive abilities. Nevertheless, lecturing is still, by far, the predominant method of instruction in most institutions today.



29

A rational sequence. Educational activities are carefully ordered in a developmental sequence to form a coherent curriculum based on the stated intended outcomes of both the curriculum and its constituent courses.

Continuous monitoring and evaluation of the quality and effectiveness of the curriculum.

assessment is preplanned to monitor on a continuing basis the effectiveness of the curriculum in fostering student development and also the actual achievement of defined institutional VMG.



114



Defining Curricular Objectives

30

Provide the solid foundation of intended outcomes.Provide specific direction for the continuous

monitoring – assessment and evaluation – of the actual outcomes the curriculum produces.


Provide a sense of direction and prevents drifting away to some other purpose(s).

Ensures transparency, openness, and integrity.

The challenge for History as a subject or a discipline:“History is inherently an interdisciplinary

study. “ – Shinzo Hayase. Mindanao Ethnohistory Beyond Nations. 2007.

How do we do teach history cognizant to the concepts/theories of peace & development in a way that is meaningful to us and our students?

31


115



32

• Just as history is interdisciplinary so ispeace education.

• Peace education is holistic•The construction of peace does not solely

depend on knowledge but mostly onattitudes, behaviors and actions.(4 pillars of education).


116



COGNITIVE DOMAIN

34

REMEMBERING/KNOWLEDGE

UNDERSTANDING/COMPREHENSION

APPLICATION

ANALYZE

CREATE

EVALUATE

HIGHER ORDER THINKING SKILLS

LOWER ORDER THINKING SKILLS

Source: www.nwlink.com/-donclark/hrd/bloom.html. Accessed: 6/17/13

Affective Domain

35

EMOTIONS: Feelings, valuing, enthusiasm, appreciation, motivations, attitudes

Receiving: awareness, willingness to hear

Source: www.nwlink.com/-donclark/hrd/bloom.html. Accessed: 6/17/13

Responding: active participation, willingness to respond

Valuing: acceptance, commitment, internalization, manifest in behavior

Organization: comparing, relating and synthesizing values


117



36

PsychomotorChange of perception manifested in

dealing with…Readiness to act: participate in

activities…

Illustrate awareness through art forms….

Capacity to dialogue and negotiate in difficult situations

Organize activities: forum, meetings…

Some things to consider for M&E

37

* Is the curriculum consistent with MSU’s VMG?

* Have students been assessed to come up with assumptions of their developmental level; knowledge, attitude and skills?

* Does the curriculum have objectives that articulate the knowledge, attitude/values and skills that students must have?

A. Being clear about purpose and desired results


118



38

Some things to consider for M&EB. Student perception and level of

satisfaction for the subject History 3;

-on the relevance of the content

- on the applicability of the peace values integrated;

- on the methods/strategies of teaching;

39

Some things to consider for M&E

C. Outcome in terms of developmental levels of students:

- Knowledge of Mindanao;

-Attitude towards people, institutions and environment;

- Skills in the participation/contribution for peacebuilding, conflict transformation & care for the environment.


119



Curriculum Makingin History 3

I. ObjectivesII. Method

A. ActivityB. ProcessC. Materials

III. Content/AbstractionIV.Value Integration/ApplicationV. Evaluation

40

References:• UNESCO and a Culture of Peace, Culture of Peace Programme.

David Adams, (ed), 1995

• www.nwlink.com/-donclark/hrd/blooom.html Accessed: 6/17/13

• Hameedah Erlinda S. Ola-Casan, Ph.D. ppt. Presentation:PeaceEducation Framework and Its Pedagogical Strategies

• Marilou S. Nanaman, Ph.D. ppt. presentation: Education for Peace

• http://www.c-r.org/accord-article/philippines-national-unification-commission-national-consultations. accessed: 6-19-13

• Communications Unit. Office of the Secretary | Department of Education. Website: www.deped.gov.ph

•

41


120



Mankind must remember that peace is not God’s

gift to his creatures, peace is our gift to

each other.Elie Wiesel


121

PROGRAM - University of Hawaii System History Seminar ... Prof. JAMILA SANGUILA . 2:15-2:30 pm –...

Documents

Transcript of PROGRAM - University of Hawaii System History Seminar ... Prof. JAMILA SANGUILA . 2:15-2:30 pm –...