Paul Latapí - Conference to receive honorary doctorate at the Autonomous Metropolitan University of Mexico REIC - Ibero-American Electronic Journal on Quality, Efficiency and Change in Education, 2007, Vol 5, No. 3
Latapí Keynote Paul Sarre to receive honorary doctorate Metropolitan Autonomous University of Mexico
February 20, 2007
Dr. José Lema Labadie
, Rector General
Guiding Units Azcapotzalco, Cuajimalpa, Iztapalapa and Xochimilco
Distinguished members of the College Academic
Teachers, Researchers and Students the University Distinguished Guests
Friends:
In suggestive and evocative language of symbols, the Autonomous Metropolitan University today issued a message through the highest distinction that can provide: message expresses its appreciation to my academic career and educational research in the country today somehow to represent you; message also expressed its willingness to make manifest the affinity of its institutional values \u200b\u200bwith those who have inspired my work. Receipt and thank you, deeply moved, this honorable distinction.
understand this doctorate in recognition of a collective effort, myself and many colleagues over forty years, to open a new field of research, the educational research in Mexico, to train its investigators and consolidate its institutions. As noted by the Rector Adrian De Garay on the generous presentation that has been made of my person, I corresponded to initiate a process that has matured to give a certificate of citizenship education research, understood as the meeting point of many disciplines .
In this process I have accompanied many researchers (who did not mention by name so as not to incur in omissions), so I think it right to extend the distinction that now I get them all, many of whom are present here. Without their contributions, the process of building educational research in Mexico we know it today would not have occurred.
Special reference must be made to the educational researchers working in the four units of this university: many indeed, and highly valued in our guild-UAM members dedicated to clarify the problems of education country, for all this doctorate is also a well-deserved recognition and a sign of the will of this University to strengthen educational research and to strengthen its institutional presence in the formulation of national education policies.
I also thank my institution, the CESU-now Research Institute and University Education, National Autonomous University of Mexico, the very valuable support given to me in developing my academic activities I particularly appreciate the climate of academic freedom, trust and camaraderie that it prevails. (P. 210)
And the achievements of academic life are inseparable from broader coordinates we perform human beings want to do, on this important occasion, a loving appreciation to my wife Maria Matilde: for thirty years She has accompanied me every day in all my steps, and-what is more, both built together our certainties and our responses from the faith we share, to the ultimate questions of human life. For all this, Mary Matilda, this Doctorate is also yours. I was asked to deliver a keynote address at this solemn occasion, it is a message to this university community authorities, teachers, researchers, students and workers. I consider it a great privilege and I intend to share with you some reflections on the risks faced by Mexican universities today. They are personal concerns, criticisms, which can be understood as warnings or warning signs. Not everyone will agree with them, of course, the university is an institution made for dissent, "Please respectfully consider those who do not share at least as propositions that deserve discussion.
Universities of the country are living difficult transitions. Demographic and social pressures, policy requirements, budgetary anxieties, cultural and educational changes and especially the challenges of national and international economy, the overwhelming and face decisions any easier. Quality are required, they are forced to modernize, to be efficient, to produce the tables required by the market, to develop a corporate culture to innovate in their teaching methods and management processes to assess and accredit on solid foundations , and were proposed "Knowledge society" as the paradigm of the future obligation: if knowledge is-and will increasingly, the backbone of global economies, it is for educational systems and especially to universities build, provide and distribute that knowledge indispensable. You, officials, teachers and students, know better than I the implications of these challenges and suffer every day the consequences firsthand.
My message today will be to raise four critical concerns to some mistakes that are causing these challenges, concerns arising from my personal way to understand what education is and what is the University of "Educational philosophy" (if we call it) that I built over my life.
First concern: The goal of "Excellence"
Today is proclaimed as binding on the University's ideal of "excellence": the institution should be excellent training programs and also teachers, and students should aim and prove to be excellent.
Let me say that I consider this ideal of excellence as an aberration. "Excellent" is the superlative of "good" good is the "ExcelLite" which stands out as one above all others, in practice perfect. In education, talk of excellence would be legitimate if it meant a gradual process of improvement, but is terrible if it means perfection. Educating has always meant growth, capacity development, maturation, and a good education should make a permanent provision to be followed by beating, but no educational philosophy had earlier proposed the illusory claim to make men perfect. (P. 211)
I believe that excellence is not a virtue, I prefer, with the poet, thinking that "no matter come first, but come together and on time." The purpose of being excellent leads the trap of arrogance secret. Best we can and should be, not perfect. What sound pedagogy should aim is to encourage us to develop our talents, worrying about serving others.
Wanting to be perfect leads to narcissism and selfishness. If we are better than others, and all are in some way-we must forgive us our superiority, which will succeed if we share with others our own vulnerability and put our capabilities to its service.
On this subject I once wrote: "Perfection is not human. We are essentially vulnerable, our contingency accompanies all our steps and we should always feel dispensable. We are back and forth between longing and disappointment, a mixture of bad and good, test often failed. We live a few splendid moments to return to repeatedly check that we have large absolute Good. For this is good history and classics are good: we approach the wonder of our inherent imperfection. " (End quote).
At 85 Jorge Luis Borges wrote: "If I could live my life again / in the next try to make more mistakes. / Do not try to be so perfect / me relax more, be more foolish than I was ... / If I could live again travel lighter. / If I could live again begin to walk barefoot early spring / and remain so until the end of autumn ... "(End quote).
The paradox of being better without separating from the others, to be strong without using power to oppress, be safe without being arrogant, remains a difficult educational challenge, if unresolved, like so many other challenges our own human condition requires us to walk through canyons where cliffs surround us on both sides. Let us not, therefore, no medals of excellence, these medals often hide a wicked heart.
We train our students in reality. Let us invite them to develop self-esteem and become better and mature, but always assuming their risky human condition, and strengthen ties of solidarity with all, especially the weakest.
Second concern: the definition of quality of education
This brings us directly to the broader issue of quality. Universities around the world, even ours, are now under pressure from the demand for quality, the problem is that apparently no one has a fully convincing definition of quality. Have identified factors that undoubtedly influence better education, both in infrastructure and the programs and teaching methods, and apply measures to strengthen these factors. In contrast, there are known bad practices that impede quality. Some identify it with the results obtained by students in their exams and play with the statistics, and even indulge in establishing systems of institutions or programs misleading. The fact is that we lack a clear definition of the quality we seek and we must demonstrate, and debate is still open and probably will remain open.
I am concerned, first, to confuse quality with the learning of knowledge, which falsely simplifies the problem because education is not just knowledge. I am also concerned that comparisons to schools or institutions that ignore differences between contexts or circumstances of the students, sometimes abysmally different. And I worry about (p. 212) all that the quality of education to be confused with the "success" in the workplace, defined by reference to the values \u200b\u200bof the system. It is a perversion
inculcate in students a philosophy of success by which they should aspire to the highest position, the best salary and possession of more things is a mistake to bring educational ruthless competition with their peers because they must be "winners." For there to be winners, I ask myself "there must be losers trampled by the winner? Are we not all necessarily and often losers who, along with other losers, we share with them our common limitations? Similar criticisms have to do with the concept of "leader" who preach the ideology of some universities, based on complacency, selfishness and a deep contempt for others. Quality education, however, will encourage us to be better but also make us understand that we all need from others, that we are "beings-in-the-limit", sometimes triumphant and sometimes losers.
Surely the low quality of education has to do with a multiplicity of factors, and I agree that for purposes of macroplaneación it is defined, as is usually done by the concurrence of the four traditional criteria of educational system development: effectiveness, efficiency, relevance and equity.
That said and accepted, I suggest a conception of quality that whenever I reflect back on the subject: speaking as an educator, I believe that quality starts at the micro level, in everyday personal interaction and teacher the student and develop this attitude toward learning.
I have often wondered: What was it that was in my education that I believe made it, at least in certain moments, good or very good? What did my teachers, my parents, teachers, older siblings and classmates, to make such education to be good? If I had to summarize in one sentence my answer, I'd say I brought my teachers when they managed to convey to quality standards that invited me to beat. Increasingly, in many ways, in different areas of my human-development in the knowledge, skills, training of my values \u200b\u200b- my teachers sent me standards and also prompted me to compare myself with those standards, to understand that above was something that I could give more, or helped me form a habit of self-imposed reasonable.
Many years later I came to know that this was precisely the definition of quality that gave Ortega y Gasset: the ability to demand more. A quality education is, therefore, for me, a habit that is reasonable self-imposed. I say "reasonable" not to fall into unhealthy perfectionism or destructive narcissism. The quest to be better must be reasonable, moderate for solidarity with others, the spirit of cooperation and common sense.
would thus have a formal definition of educational quality, "formal" because improved standards can be applied to different issues and different worldviews and different content will appreciations Rate this formal definition.
I think, therefore, to find a quality education is not to invent bizarre things (like filling the classrooms of electronic equipment or multiplying teleconferences with Nobel Laureates), but know back to basics. An example: a English composition notebook, corrected in red pencil, in which the teacher explains why each fix is \u200b\u200btransmitting "exceeded standards" and leading the student to understand that there are better ways of using language, he can write better, and what motivates them to demand more. (P. 213)
This conception of educational quality rests on two assumptions: that in order to transmit quality is necessary to recognize, and recognize it is necessary to have it. Nothing in this vicious circles or tautological, but the recognition that education is essentially a process of interaction between people, and that quality depends crucially on the teacher.
educators address the problem of quality not from business theory of "total quality" or from the desire to improve our "supply" business to succeed in competition, but from deeper existential perspective, we want to give young people experiences personal through which we acquire our own vision what a quality life, and strive for the student to be himself, a little better every day, instilling a habit of self-imposed unreasonable always accompany him.
Ultimately educators convey only what we are, what we have experienced: some wisdom and some venerable virtues that go out of style: a bit of compassion and solidarity, respect, truthfulness, sensitivity to beauty, loyalty justice, and sometimes outrage capacity for forgiveness, and some encouragement for our students discover their potential and build freedom. It's little, but if the young men and women gather these lessons and if it is taken to themselves with a sense of humor, may meet with the task of decently become grown men and women who are up to take charge of themselves and others.
Third concern: the knowledge that question in the "knowledge society"
today is proposed to institutions of higher education, as I said earlier, take the paradigm of "knowledge society" to regulate its transformations: before the inevitable globalization, they should strive, "says the orthodox discourse, to provide knowledge needed by countries for their development. But it is not specified, usually, what is that knowledge, rather it is understood that this is particularly the knowledge needed to conquer the markets, or practical knowledge, applied, connected to the economy, which produces profitable innovations and ensures success in the competition.
I also question this glorious banner of the "knowledge society" that is ideal wave as required of any institution of higher education, not because it is a valid ideal but because it is incomplete and misleading. The knowledge society requires not only connected to the economy are many other kinds of knowledge. Universities exist not only to create and promote economically useful knowledge, but all forms of knowledge required by a society. Therefore we argue that they are the rightful home of Philosophy and Humanities, History, theater, poetry and music, also defend the deep human sense of the natural sciences and affirm the value of the useless and what free as part of the mission of the university. Therefore we also believe in the value of the coexistence of different university communities, so characteristic of our public universities. Therefore, we say "yes" to the knowledge society, including the universality of human knowledge, and we warn against the trap of making the universities in factories practical inventions, they are creations of "homo sapiens", not reduce them to workshops of "homo faber."
Should be linked to the demands of the economy? Of course. Do you have to be competitive professionals to meet the challenges of globalization? Totally agree. Is there a (p. 214) to conduct applied research, linked to business requirements? Nobody doubts that, with such defining conditions. But to meet these demands, we must not forget that the university is something more: it is not an appendage of the company but an institution responsible for building, protect and promote all types of knowledge that requires the country, including the seemingly unproductive.
And I want to say more on this topic: Current University should be a bulwark against the devastating total marketing process that is taking the enthronement of the market.
extreme at this stage of capitalism, globalization is leading to the commercialization of the world. Many goods are now considered commodities that determine the existence, sold the water is indispensable to us and comes from the sky, industrialization, export and announced, will soon follow the air and sun. Health has long since traded in a highly technical market.
are now sold TK, patented by transnational pharmaceutical companies to the use without giving credit to its source, and it comes with the full force of "cultural industries", reducing works of the mind and human creativity to the category of mere commodities
dimension trade now extends to all domains of life, every day there are new goods subtle, ingenious, many fanciful and most expendable, and are not things or services, are commodities, satisfactions of fads, inventions of advertising, virtual images that flatter the vanity or exploit the fears or regrets. Anything goes to sell because any sale made advance to the capital, even at the expense of common sense and our dignity, and men going away without realizing it, in invisible networks that decrease dependence on our freedom.
The commodity culture is changing our values, awareness of who we are and even the memory of what we were, and the limits of what we define as a possible and desirable.
We lost that old sense of tragedy that we had left Greece with its myths, gods and passions. And I do not know enjoy the sunsets because they are still free. Homo mercantilis
not interested in questions of the Sphinx, not sinks its enigmas or torture with their perplexities; he does not get his full humanity requires, at times, betting on an uncertain or jump to the level of generosity, an area which by definition is outside the market and is condemned by him.
Before this era of total merchandise, to this global effort to turn us all into merchants, the University, I think, has a mission to not be swayed uncritically by the play of complicity in the market-opening race in investigations undertaken or the services it provides, but to warn against abuse of this process: the raptors that are destroying nature and the planet and threaten the wonder of life, psychological perversions of advertising, the unchecked power of the TV, and, what is at the bottom of all this, the profit motive above all. The University should promote the recovery of our humanity diminished.
debate, therefore, these issues by defining the responsibilities of the contemporary university. (P. 215)
Fourth concern: prison break
rational knowledge that is said universities are the temples of reason. It is true, because they are taught to think and do science, we discuss epistemology and irrational prejudices are destroyed.
His professions and his research rely on the knowledge, rational knowledge, and respect rules this is what gives them their legitimacy.
I wonder if there is, even here, a misunderstanding or a conflict with the aim of the university to educate, because education goes beyond the rational knowledge. Education, for me, neither begins nor ends in the territories of reason. Embraces other forms of development of our spirit which now begin to glimpse the theories of multiple intelligences and emotional intelligence.
best education I received, and I have been educated intellectually demanding, it was precisely the non-rational, opening up to human dimensions that I consider essential: the symbolic and artistic, the scope of the Dionysian, the order of the ethical basis of the dignity of our species, and the fundamental human virtues, especially respect for others and life. I am appalled that excludes education compassion, to give up the search for meaning or close the doors to the possibilities of transcendence.
frequently reread this verse of Octavio Paz:
"I am a man.
little hard and the night is enormous.
But look up:
The stars write. Without understanding
understand: I am also writing
and at this moment
anyone reading me. "(End quote)
Universities born before the Enlightenment and Rationalism and survive when the influences of those times give rise to other, should remain open to other forms of knowledge and unexplained mysteries of man (the "do not understand I understand ..." that said Octavio Paz). It would be regrettable that they might understand the "knowledge societies" as confined to the knowledge of reason alone and forgotten in their educational work the relatively unexplored but critical areas of human development that go beyond the rational.
This also leads us to consider critically the concept of science that prevails in the contemporary university, successful concept by the rapid progress of science and its technological applications, but dangerous if absolute as the only valid knowledge.
science should be made following its rules and methods, but without forgetting that scientific truth, always provisional, does not exceed the validity of their methods. It is important to be aware of what we know but also what we do not know, and ask the philosophies of science that require the scope and meaning of it, from the dialectic between what we know and what we ignore. It is bad science that destroys the wonder, that attitude present in the great scientists who are generally modest, far from self-reliance, used to doubt and admire, shut up and watch. (P. 216)
Thus understood, science echoes this statement referring Hasidic rabbi Martin Buber: "Hear, hear, hear: the world is full of great mysteries and lights formidable man tries to hide with her little hands. "On this
once wrote:" Knowing is not known perplexities involved beyond the plane of reason and lead to other dimensions of consciousness: the true scientist is surprised that, being the part man nature as to believe all of that nature that still destined to die, beyond imaginable, and that being immersed in evil, can claim a final reconciliation. The wonder is opening our minds to non-rational forms of knowledge, a bridge between the small saving scientific truth and absolute truths, perhaps the only hope now. "(End quote).
Universities should explore the nature of scientific knowledge and its limits: the scientific knowledge that seeks explanations, add the "cultural knowledge" that seeks meaning. The first is, we might say "computer" assumes that the fundamental activity of our mind is to seek information, and that it is finite, unambiguous, codify, clarify and subject to verification. The second, cultural, accepts that our mind would not exist were it not for the culture, and therefore we know is given meaning relations, which depend on the symbols created for each cultural community, starting with the language. This is why the human mind has a different nature from that of the perfect computer, it can detect and decode different meanings of the same event. Its distinctive function is to understand, beyond the role of scientific knowledge to explain.
An author, Jerome Bruner (The culture of education, Harvard University Press, 1996) insightfully notes that the design knowledge that is the basis of modern science has resulted in an impoverishment of education, and perhaps is enabling our species to develop in one direction, cutting their genetic potential and spiritual.
Record these concerns, these suspicions in our agenda of reflections on our work as academics. Conclusion
conclude. I've shared with you four personal concerns regarding our universities today and, in my view, merit discussion: first, the ideal of "excellence" to consider perverted, second, the uncertainty of the quality of education, suggesting that we emphasize the quality of teacher-student interaction and focus on forming habits of self-imposed, third, the failure of a "knowledge society" containing only the useful knowledge economy subordinated to the University to the company, and fourth, I called "the prison of rational knowledge," prison that must be broken to open education with other human dimensions, including a review of the meaning of scientific work.
In expressing these concerns have mixed personal reviews from, as I said earlier, a philosophy of education that I built, not wanting and willing-along many years and I believe. You do not pretend that all agree with what I have said, I've only tried to offer some of my personal experience in some way to thank the distinction is now generously gives me this university. (P. 217)
educators proclaim that it has not reached the end of history is always restarting it, that there are other alternatives that we have to create them. For this we will continue running after our utopias and experiencing the risks of our precarious liberty, which are ways of saying that we still have hope. (P. 218)
