HOBBES’ CONCEPTION OF JUSTICE 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION

1. Hobbes’ Conception of Man

1.1 Hobbes’ Life and Historical Background

1.2 Nature of Man

1.3 Man and the State

2. Justice

2.1 What is Justice?

2.2 Natural Justice

2.3 Manmade Justice

2.4 Justice in Hobbesian Anthropology

3. Personal Evaluation

3.1 Impact of Hobbes’ Conception of justice on Human Justice

Positive Impacts

Negative Impacts

CONCLUSION

BIBLIOGRAPHY

INTRODUCTIONHuman beings are not the same. There are rich and poor people. There are strong and the

weak. There are intelligent and ignorant people. There are so many other differences that I cannot enumerate them here. These differences are sources of conflicts that exist among men or among various groups of people. Those who share the same qualities are against those who are different from themselves. Those who are strong always force the weaker to follow their interests and if they don’t then conflict takes its part. These differences lead men to be in the state of war against other men who are different from them. To prove that what I am saying is true, see what is happening in Congo, Somalia, Rwanda, Burundi and other countries where people are killing one another. Now under this situation of war of one man against his/her enemy can we talk of justice?

The above problem lured me to make a study on Hobbes’ conception of justice. I am interested to know how Hobbes considered human nature. After that to understand how do men relate to other men and through this relationship, I can know if there is justice or not among them. The primary source I am going to use is Hobbes’ Leviathan. To know more about justice and to see how different thinkers viewed it I will use some secondary sources.

My work is limited to philosophical anthropology and political philosophy. Understanding other areas of justice is not the concern of this work. Methods that I am going to use are hermeneutical, analytical as well as comparative method.

This paper is divided into three main chapters. The first chapter deals with Hobbes’ conception of man. Here we shall examine the nature of man and how man relates to the state according to Hobbes. In the second chapter, we examine the meaning and the nature of justice and the particular meaning of it in Hobbesian anthropology. The third chapter is my own personal evaluation where we evaluate the positive and negative aspects of Hobbes’ conception of justice.

 

 

 

 

1. Hobbes’ Conception of Man1.1 Hobbes’ Life and Historical Background

Thomas Hobbes lived between the years 1588 to 1679. He was born in Melmesbury, Wiltshire, England. When he was fourteen years of age, Thomas joined the University of Oxford where he studied classical literature. He also studied logic but he was not interested with the Aristotelian logic in the university though he performed it very well at the end of his studies. He left Oxford in 1608 and became a tutor to the young son of William Cavendish, the governor of Devonshire.

Hobbes traveled to many places and met different thinkers of the time. In Italy he met Galileo, and in France he met Descartes’ admirer Marsenne and Descartes’ antagonist Gassendi and he formed a long lasting friendship with them. When he returned to England he met Francis Bacon and started relationship with him.

Hobbes’ translation of Thucydides was one among his many attempts to make his people conscious of the “tragedy that they courted: that of civil war, from which proceed slaughter, solitude, and the want of all things.”1 Thomas Hobbes shifted his interest from history to mathematics after discovering the exactness of mathematics from Euclide’s Elements.

Mathematics had a great influence on Hobbes’ philosophy. “Hobbes caught the spirit of the time.”2 The intellectual atmosphere of the sixteenth and the seventeenth centuries was covered with radical change. Copernicus (1473-1543) argued that the earth is the centre of the universe. And he came to this conclusion after long observation of the motion of other planets and after the calculation of the earth around the sun. What was discovered by Copernicus was latter on influenced Kepler and Galileo, which lead to more development in astronomy and science as a whole. What these scientists had in common was “their belief that human knowledge about the nature of things is available to anyone who uses appropriate method in its pursuit.”3 Hobbes joined this group of scientists and applied geometry in the study of nature. Thomas Hobbes exaggerated in using this

1

2

3

approach in various forms of knowledge such as his study of physical nature, the nature of man and the nature of human society.

In his lifetime Hobbes wrote many works. In 1640 he wrote “The Elements of Laws, Natural and Politic;” in 1642 he published De Cive (The Citizen); in 1655 he wrote De Corpore (Concerning the Body); in 1658 he published De Homine (Concerning Man); and later on in France he wrote the famous work called Leviathan. His two books De Cive and Leviathan were read as the books for the grammar of obedience.

Hobbes’ political philosophy made him very famous. It was here that he used mostly logic and the scientific method. In his political philosophy Hobbes tried to explain the relationship between the new nation state and the individual citizens. His explanation of the relationship between sovereign and the individual citizen was so severe that it led many people to criticize his political theory.

What led Hobbes to write such a severe relationship between the sovereign and the citizens was the severe political situation in England at that time. England was faced by the problem of political instability and moral corruption. These two main problems prompted Hobbes to frame his unique theory of political obligation. The political instability was caused by some leaders who prepared their people to fight with others in order to be more powerful. This experience of violence led to the disagreement between men on political matters. By considering these two problems, Hobbes assumed a materialistic view of human nature, in which human behaviour could be explained simply in terms of bodies in motion.4

Hobbes died in 1679. In his lifetime he contributed greatly to philosophy. He was the first one to apply the scientific method to the study of human nature. Hobbes also departed from the medieval understanding of natural law to the authoritarian concept of sovereignty. At the age of 84 Hobbes wrote his autobiography in Latin verse and at 86 he published a translation of the Illiad and Odyssey. After his death Hobbes became almost a kind of English institution. 1.2 Nature of Man

Hobbes considered man as an individual person who is by nature living independently from another. Since man by nature, is an individual, every man tends to be afraid of other men in “the state of nature”5. This fear leads man to be in the state of fighting with other men. The driving force of man in the state of

4

5

nature is to survive, and the fear people had in the state of nature is the fear of death especially the fear of violent death.

“Men are by nature equal.”6 Nature has made man equal in both his mind and body. The differences in strength can be eradicated and the weak can have enough strength to overcome the strong. To the faculties of mind the equality discussed here is that of prudence and not the equality in the knowledge of science and arts. In the state of nature all human beings are equal for all of them have rights to what is necessary for their lives. Equality here means, “anyone is capable of hurting his neighbour and taking what he needs for his own protection.”7 In the state of nature there is the right of all people. The term right in this context means that every man is free to do anything he likes and to enjoy all that he could get.

In the nature of man, we find three main causes of quarrels. First is competition. Men are competing for the purpose of gaining something or making themselves superiors over others. Now when men are competing, everyone tries to defeat the other and none is accepting to be defeated. As a result, men end up quarrelling with one another. Second is mistrust. In the state of nature no individual trusts the other. “If any two men desire the same thing which nevertheless they cannot both enjoy, they become enemies.”8 In this case people become enemies because no one here believes the other. Every man was an enemy to his fellow man. Mistrust was just like a weapon for man’s safety. People depended on it for defending their properties and families from other men who were their enemies. Third is glory. Glory is always for recognition. When man has done something so successfully, he needs to be glorified or to be recognized by other people. When he gives out any point of views, men need to be supported by their friends. When people pose different view which will undervalue him, this will lead them into conflict.

“Out of the civil state there is always war of everyone against everyone.”9 The consequences of this war of everyone against everyone was that everyman became the enemy to everyman. Nature always pushes man to invade and destroy the other man. No man under the sun would trust the interference of another person. Consider it in the modern societies, why is it that men made strong doors?

6

7

8

9

Why is it that men keep dangerous dogs? Why is it that the well-off men employ others to guard them? Why is it that human beings electrify their gates? All these manifest that men are enemies to each other.

In this case every man is moving against everyman. When one man does one thing, the other man considers it negatively because no man believes the other. And all men’s actions are for their own preservations and security, which is mostly depending on their own strength and capabilities. Whatever man does is for his defense. “The driving force in man is the will to survive, and the psychological mood pervading all men is fear, the fear of death, and particularly the fear of violent death.”1010 In the state of war nothing was done for the purpose of development because each and everyone works only to acquire only what is necessary for his survival. Nothing is done for the purpose of development because production is uncertain. So the life of man in the natural state is absolutely poor, nasty, and the life span is very short.

According to Hobbes, in the state of nature men have many desires and passions, e.g., the desire to suppress all his enemies in order to be free, etc. In the state of nature no desire or passion is intrinsically bad because there is no law that forbids people to do what is bad and commands them to do what is good. Even the actions that proceed from those desires or passion are not bad in themselves. Even when I decide to kill my fellow human beings for the purpose of preserving my life it is by itself good because there is no law that forbids me to do such a thing. Besides, in the state of nature there is no distinction between good and bad, the notion of right and wrong has no room here. How can one consider these things while there is no law to enforce them? “In such war nothing is unjust.”1111

In the state of nature men knew the natural laws, which are important for their own safety and peace. Men are inclined towards peace by the passion. The passion that leads men towards peace is the fear of death and desire to survive. But this natural law is the command of the reason that is contrary to the natural passions which is contrary to the natural passions for the purpose of the security and self-preservation.

1.3 Man and the State

According to Hobbes man lived in the state of war of everyone against everyone in the jungle. This war created fear among men in the jungle. Men feared

10

11

death, particularly violent death. Because of this fear, men in the jungle decided to hand over their right of governing themselves, to one person who is called the sovereign. Those individuals who gave up their rights to him are called subjects. The sovereign can either represent his own will or he can represent the will of people. The society emerged from the natural state of war after individuals submitted their will to the sovereign.

The origin of human society is a jungle. In the jungle, every man is in the war against everyman. Everyman has an equal right to everything in the jungle. In this state of nature man has no obligation to respect others. There is no moral distinction of what is good or bad. From his survival in the jungle, man discovered the natural law, which he followed for his own safety. A natural law “is a precept or general rule, found out by reason, by which man is forbidden to do that which is destructive of his life, or taketh away the means of preserving the same, and to omit that, by which he thinketh it may be best preserved.”1212 If I want to survive, for instance, I can deduce from the natural law the rules that will help me to survive. The first and fundamental law of nature in the jungle is “to seek peace and follow it.”1313 By this law it is obvious that to look for peace is something natural because it is the fundamental condition for my survival. So I have the best opportunity to survive if I create the condition for peace. My desire to survive enforces me to seek peace. The second law of nature according to Hobbes is,

That a man be willing when others are so too, as for peace, and defense of himself he shall think it necessary, to lay down this right to all things; and be contended with so much liberty against other men, as he would allow other men against himself.1414

Men have rights to all things in the state of jungle not because there is no any obligation but because “if a man were modest, tractable, and kept his promises in such time and place where no man else should do so should but make [himself] a prey to others…”1515 Hobbes was aware that anarchy would be the outcome of men living in the state of war, because as we have already seen, everyone is at war against everyone. To avoid such a condition, every individual should renounce some of his own rights by following the dictates of natural law so as to seek peace.

12

13

14

15

Therefore, men enter the social contract, which in turn produces the artificial person.

The social contract is the agreement by which man avoids the state of nature and enters civil society. In the state of nature men were very busy seeking self-preservation and security but they were not able to attain this purpose in the natural condition of war. The laws of nature cannot achieve this goal by itself unless it is accompanied by the coercive power to enforce its observance by sanctions. Seeing this condition, men decided to confer all their powers and strength upon one man or upon the assembly of men. This person to whom all people renounced all their rights is the person “whose words or actions are his own, or as representing the words or actions of another man or of any other thing to whom they are attributed, whether truly or by fiction.”1616 If the words and actions are his own, then he is a “natural person.”1717 But if his words and actions are representing other people’s will he is an “artificial person.”1818

How does the social contract take place? The social contract takes place by agreement between the individuals in the state of war in such a way as if every man should say to everyman “I authorize and give up my right of governing myself, to this man or to this assembly of men, on this condition, that thou give up thy right to him, and authorize all his actions in like manner.”1919 When this is successfully done, man enters the commonwealth.

The third natural law is “that men perform their covenant made.”2020 This was the foundation of justice. So everybody should involve himself in keeping the contract he entered. To obey the sovereign is the essence of Hobbesian justice. The law can be bad but there is no unjust law according to Hobbes. When the sovereign commands a bad law the subjects have no right to judge it that way, nor they should show any kind of disobedience towards it. When people disagree on what has been commanded by the sovereign then they will return to the state of war of everyone against everyone.

16

17

18

19

20

In the commonwealth people do not constitute the sovereign. The essence of commonwealth is one person who represents multiple acts of the individuals in the commonwealth through the mutual covenants of one with another. This makes everyone in the state of war to be the author of the commonwealth. The person who represents others is called the sovereign and the represented are called the subjects. The proximate cause of the creation of the commonwealth is the covenants made between individuals. These individuals become part of the covenant. The sovereign himself is not a part of this covenant although his sovereignty is from this covenant. Commonwealth is instituted for a specific purpose namely, the security of those who are part of the covenant. So whatever the commonwealth performs is for the preservation of the subjects’ security from the natural state of war of everyone against everyone.

The sovereign power is entire and indivisible. The subject of the sovereign power cannot change the sovereignty or repudiate the authority of the sovereign for the sovereign power is absolute. That sovereignty is indivisible, doesn’t mean that monarchy, for example, cannot confer executive power or consultative power to individuals or to an assembly of men. Sovereign in the commonwealth cannot divide part of its sovereignty to the subject. The parliament exercises its power under the sovereign. Since people are authors of the sovereign power, whatever is done by the sovereign should be accepted by the people because they are the ones who gave him sovereignty. And it is logically believed that since it is them who put the sovereign into the power he can never do anything that will be dangerous to them. Among the duties of the sovereign is to judge which doctrines are good to be taught for the purpose of preserving peace and security in the commonwealth. Anything that endangers peace and security in the commonwealth cannot be accepted by the sovereign.

Hobbes distinguished two types of commonwealths: a commonwealth by institution and a commonwealth by acquisition. The commonwealth by institution is established through the covenant of everyone with everyone. While the commonwealth by acquisition is when power is acquired by force. The latter occurs when men afraid of death decide to subject themselves to the person or assembly of men that have liberty and rights in their hands. The former occurs when people subject themselves to the elected sovereign because of the fear of one another. Men entered commonwealth because of fear. Among the bad diseases of the commonwealth is the tendency of the individual to judge what is good or bad according to his own conscious. Good or bad is measured by one’s conscience. Whoever does anything against his conscience commits sin. This was working in

the natural state of war, but in the commonwealth the measure of good and evil is the civil law, which is the public conscience.

The civil law begins when there is a sovereign. The civil law is understood as the command of the sovereign. Without the sovereign power there is no law. The civil law is legal only when there is a sovereign power to enforce its observance by sanctions. “Covenants without the sword are but the words.”2121 In order for the law to be legal, it should be accompanied with commands and punishments from the sovereign. Otherwise that law won’t have any effect on the people and it is obvious that people will not observe it.

Hobbes denied the possibility of unjust law. Justice and morality begin only with the sovereign. Hobbes enumerated two arguments to show that the law is never unjust. Firstly, justice for him means to obey the law. The question of justice comes only when there is a law. Since it proceeds from the law, justice cannot be the standard of that law. Secondly, when the absolute sovereign make a law, everybody in the society participates in making it through the covenant they made in the state of nature. Consequently the individuals cannot make the agreement, which is unjust.

21

2. Justice2.1 What is Justice?

Justice seems necessarily to entail “the conflict between the exponents of might and the exponents of right.”2222 It is the conflict between those who think that justice occurs when might does what is right and those who think that justice cannot be measured through the exercise of power. Different philosophers have tried to talk about this problem and came up with different understandings of the same thing.

Plato considered justice as “the interest of the stronger.”2323 It is obvious that different forms of government make the laws, which are for the interest of the stronger and not for the interest of the subjects. According to them it is justice for the subject to obey the laws made by the stronger. Whoever breaks these laws should be punished. Justice in this understanding has two implications: “for the stronger it means that they have the right, as far as they have the might, to exact from the weaker whatever serve their interests.”2424 The stronger can’t do injustice. The weaker, “can only do injustice but not suffer it.”2525 Injustice for the weaker resides in not obeying the law of their rulers. The subjects will only suffer injustice if they will follow their own interest rather than the interest of the stronger.

The above understanding of justice was somewhat repeated by Hobbes. He defined justice as “men perform their covenant made.”2626 Here the nature of justice involves keeping ones valid covenant. It should be kept in mind that the validity of any covenant starts with the constitution of civil power. This power is necessary to force men to keep them. Any attempt to break a valid covenant is injustice. And observance of this covenant is justice.

There are philosophers who take the opposite wing on the understanding of justice. They consider justice as the agent for the organization and the operation of

22

23

24

25

26

the state. Plato, who belongs to both wings, considered justice as the organizing principle of an ideal state. According to him, a just person is wiser and better than an unjust. When the unjust participate in any action they will injure one another. This is because “the unjust are incapable of common action.”2727 So according to Plato, only justice that will enable men to live together and do things together without injuring one another.

Aristotle described justice as the unity of men in the state, which is the determination of what is just. It is the principle of order in a political society. Being a political animal, man without a state is “either a bad man or above humanity.”2828 Aristotle described man as the worst of all animals if he is separated from law and justice. It is only justice that enables us to relate with our neighbours well. It is only justice that implies the notion of duty. It requires us to do what is good to our neighbour.

St. Thomas explained justice, as a habit whereby a man renders to each one his due.2929 An action is considered to be just if it is done knowingly, deliberately as well as decisively. Any action done without these properties is considered neither just nor unjust. Justice involves the relation of one man with another. It deals with equality among men.

Turning to political institution, justice is confronted by the following alternatives: “either the principle of justice is antecedent to the state… or the determination of what is just and unjust is entirely relative to the constitution of a state.”3030 When the second choice is taken, only the subjects will be judged just or unjust. The government cannot be judged that way because it determines what is just or unjust. If the first choice is taken, then a just action on the part of citizens will be on law-abiding conduct.

In any case, all these philosophers despite their differences, point to the same thing: justice involves the relation of one man with another. It only does what is good to our neighbour. It indicates how to live happily in the society. It is only justice, which gives us the notion of duty. From political point of view justice shows us how government and its people relate. This differs from one government

27

28

29

30

to another. Justice manifests itself in two forms: natural justice and manmade justice.

2.2 Natural Justice

Natural justice has been a controversial problem for many philosophers. Some suggest that justice originates from nature. Others say that in nature there is no justice because justice starts only with human reason. Some say that natural justice is not changeable while others say it is changeable. So in this sub-chapter I will try to present what some philosophers say about natural justice.

Aristotle and St. Thomas both agree on natural justice but they disagree on whether it is changeable or unchangeable. Aristotle considered justice to be partly natural and partly legal. Natural justice is the one, which has the same force everywhere, and it is prior to human reflection and it is changeable.

St. Thomas considers natural justice to be an integral part of natural law. His first precept of natural law indicates it. It states that “good is to be done, and evil is to be avoided.”3131 The desire of man towards the good is first of all towards preserving human life and then an inclination towards things. Man has natural desire to know the truth about God and then to live in society. It is in this way that St. Thomas considered natural justice to be an integral part of natural law.

Justice according to St. Thomas has its source in nature and it works according to the rule of reason. Other behaviors came into being by reason of their use. Justice, which emanated from nature and was approved by custom, was sanctioned by fear and reverence for the law.3232 Natural justice according to St. Thomas is unchangeable in its first principles because it is an integral part of the natural law. But this justice can only be changed by the way of addition or by the way of abstraction. Changes in natural justice open the door for manmade justice.

Thomas Hobbes takes an opposite opinion. He said that natural law “is a precept or general rule, found out by reason, by which a man is forbidden to do that which is destructive of his life…”3333 He said that in nature there is neither justice nor injustice. Justice starts when there is power and law. But in nature all people are equal and there is no law which forces people to obey it. So in the

31

32

33

natural state of war of everyman against everyman with reference to justice all things are indifferent.

All in all, there was nothing compelling enough in the state of nature to make people live together. Natural justice allows equality only among people who are living in the state of nature. Under this condition, everybody is free to do whatever they like. This makes community life impossible. To make community life possible, people decided to change the natural justice. It is this change of natural justice opens the door for manmade justice. 2.3 Manmade Justice

Manmade Justice can be defined as “the outcome or decision arrived at by the proper functioning of machinery of law.”3434 The purpose of existing laws, which are accepted through the process of a judicial system, is to achieve justice, which enables people to live together in the society. As the outcome of the law, manmade justice involves reference to some set of values, which is presumed to be higher than the values embodied in the law.

Plato considered manmade justice as a moral principle of political organization. It brings harmony and friendship among the people in the society. People who are in societies that exercise justice conduct good and happy life. Even the evil men can only work together if there is justice among them. Injustice on the other hand, causes disunity and conflict among the people in the society. It makes people incapable of common action.3535

Aristotle talked of the state as the outcome of nature. Man for him is a political animal. He is a political animal because of his power of speech. It is this power of speech, which makes him able to differentiate between good and evil, just and unjust, and it is this power that enables men to live together in societies such as families, villages and the state. When the individual is separated from the state he is not self-sufficient because he is a political animal. When man is perfected, he is the best of all animals. But when man is without law and justice he is the worst and the most dangerous animal. He uses his powers and qualities for bad ends. Only justice can unify men in the society, for it is the sole principle of order in political society. Political society exists for the sake of the good life. According to Aristotle, only those who consider virtues and vices can lead a good state. 3636

34

35

36

St. Thomas considered manmade justice as meant for common good. Manmade justice should be different from one society to another. The rule that governs democratic governments should be different from the one that rules the absolutist government.3737 St. Thomas distinguished between human law and the divine law. Human law is ordained for civil community. It implies the reciprocal duties of man with one another. These reciprocal duties, which are manifested by outward action, enable men to live together in the community. It is this reciprocal duty, which manifests justice. Divine laws show the relationship between man and God. Man is united with God by his rational power, which is God’s image.3838

Thomas Hobbes considered manmade justice in his third law of nature. This law obliged man to transfer to others the rights that hinder peace to them. According to Hobbes, justice is to fulfill the covenant they have made to each other. And injustice is to go against the covenant agreed by people in the society. 3939

All in all, manmade justice is meant to make people live well in the society. This is made possible by the laws, which are made by men. This law is only the instrument that can bind all people. Without this law, there could be no order and as a result, the society would be impossible.

 

2.4 Justice in Hobbesian Anthropology

Hobbes considered man in a mechanistic way. Man for him is an individual person who is independent from others. Being individual and independent, men tend to fear each other. This fear creates enmity among them, which terminates in fighting one another. This life of fighting one another, endangers people’s survival. The need of survival leads people to form a state by making a social contract. In order for life to be possible in the state, people had to obey their social contract and this is the essence of Hobbes’ justice.

Hobbes considered his third law of nature as justice. In this law, people are obliged to transfer to another all rights that hinder peace in the state. This opens the

37

38

39

door for his justice: “that men perform their covenants made.”4040 If the covenants made are not fulfilled, then they are empty words, which again subject people to the ‘state of war’. 4141

The origin of justice according to Hobbes is in the observance and performance of the covenant made by the people in the state. If there is no covenant made, then every man has a right to everything. Under this circumstance no action can be just or unjust. Hobbes defined injustice as “the not [non] performance of covenant.”4242 Any attempt of going against the covenant made is an unjust action.

Justice according to Hobbes begins with constitution of commonwealth. Before justice, the coercive power should be there to compel people to fulfill the covenant made by them. “The covenants without the sword, are but words, and of no strength to secure a man at all.”4343

Obedience to the sovereign is the root of Hobbesian justice. All people reduce the plurality of their will to one person, namely the sovereign. To ensure peace and security in the state, every individual ought to obey the sovereign. Whatever the sovereign does represents the people’s will. Any attempt to disobey the sovereign implies that I disobey my own will. This is because I installed the sovereign of my own will.

Whatever the sovereign does, cannot be an injury to the subject. In no case, can the sovereign be accused of injustice or be punished by the subject. Punishing the sovereign is injustice because he cannot do anything that will hurt the subject. Even if the action done by him looks bad, the subject should not see it that way. For whatever he does, by definition cannot be injury to his subject.

Some people disobey their sovereign by making a new covenant with God. Hobbes said, “this pretence of covenant with God, is so evident a lie.”4444 This is unjust according to Hobbes because there is no covenant with God. There is only a

40

41

42

43

44

covenant made with the representative of God who is the lieutenant of God and has sovereignty under God.

The sovereign has the right to make laws. These laws help the subject to know what is his own and prevent other subjects from taking it from him without his consent.4545 This is what Hobbes calls propriety. Before the sovereign came to power, each individual had the right to all things and this led to war of everyman against everyman. Disobedience to the sovereign will lead people to this situation again.

All in all, Hobbes’ justice gives more power to the king. He considers man in a mechanistic way, which leads him to say that it is only by obeying the sovereign that justice, will be obtained in the state. This is because it is the covenant made between the people in the state Hobbes considered the sovereign as a kind of God who cannot do evil because he represents the will of people who gave him the authority. In addition, the subjects have no right to go against the will of sovereign. Any attempt of subjects to oppose their king is equal to opposing oneself because the subject is the one who put the king in authority. And this act, according to Hobbes is injustice because it is against the covenant made by the people.

45

3. Personal Evaluation3.1 Impact of Hobbes’ Conception of justice on Human Justice

Here I would like to show the ramifications of Hobbes’ conception of justice on human justice. Justice according to Hobbes starts with the sovereign and the law. People voluntarily reduce the plurality of their wills and give their consent to be governed by one person called the sovereign. Whatever the sovereign says and decides is just because it cannot be an injury to the subject. The subject is not allowed to punish the sovereign. Any attempt of punishing the sovereign tantamount to punishing oneself. To obey and to perform what the sovereign orders is the essence of Hobbes’ justice. This is because obedience to the king is the covenant made between the people in the society.4646

Before speaking of the positive and negative impact of Hobbes’ concept of justice on human justice, I would like to touch a bit on what is human justice. Human justice according to St. Thomas is about implementation of equality to all people.4747 Human justice is against all forms of inequality. Its purpose is to make all people equal and to treat them fairly before the law. It follows from the human law that “one will be just by accomplishing the good prescribed by the law and avoiding the evil that the law prohibits.”4848 Human justice is a universal value. Most people expect justice to be the same everywhere.

Hobbes’ conception of justice is clearly different. It does not force people to accomplish the good prescribed by the law nor does it force people to avoid the evil, which is prohibited by the universal law. Hobbes’ justice gives all powers to the sovereign. Justice for him occurs when subjects obey and accomplish what the sovereign orders, whether it be good or bad. His conception of justice emphasizes inequality between the sovereign and the subject. Hobbes’ aim was to make the sovereign superior and the subject inferior so as to acquire peace. He considered the sovereign to be a kind of god who is perfect and cannot be contradicted by his subjects. But frankly speaking, the sovereign is a human being who is not perfect in everything. That being the case, there are orders given by him, which are wrong. To obey and to perform them according to human justice is not just for it deviates from the implementation of equality to all people before the law. In addition it

46

47

48

escapes from the rule “do good and avoid evil”4949 although it keeps peace in the state. Hobbes’ justice has got its merits and demerits as shown, below. Positive Impacts

Hobbes’ conception of justice works positively in areas where there is no peace. If his conception of justice is followed then peace and order may be acquired easily but at a price. But if the people in this state break the social contract then they will end up in killing one another. Thus the following are the positive impacts of Hobbes’ conception of justice.

First, Hobbes’ conception of justice makes administration of the society easy. The state will be run by the mind of one person namely the sovereign. Whatever the sovereign thinks, wills, decides and executes is taken to be good. No other mind can criticize his ideas or plans. Any attempt of criticizing the plans of the sovereign is unjust. So to avoid injustice, people perform what the sovereign commands without arguing. In this case the work of the sovereign in ruling his subjects becomes easy.

Second, Hobbes’ conception of justice reminds people to adhere to the covenant they have made. When people agreed to do one thing, Hobbes reminds them that they should fulfill it. Going against the covenant may lead people to the state of war. In order to keep peace and security in the society, everybody ought to keep aside his interests and fulfill the common interest. In this way the community life becomes possible. Thus it makes easy to implement peace and order in the state.

Third, Hobbes’ justice shows us the necessity of coercive power. Coercive power should be there to ensure the fulfillment of the covenant made between the people. Any agreement made between the people in the state cannot last long without the coercive power. Without this coercive power, people will go on fighting and they will not attain peace and order in their state.

Negative Impacts

First, Hobbes’ conception of justice reduces man to the level of a machine. He considers man to be a creature, which can be set, and work without thinking. Frankly speaking, this is not always the case because man is a rational being who can work himself without being forced. It is not necessary that if one does one thing then the outcome must be the same all the time. Man is above that. He/she

49

can use intellectual power and follow different ways to come up with the same answer. Hobbes’ conception of justice reduces humanity to a machine, which by itself is a pure injustice.

Second, his conception of justice fails to achieve the equality among the people in the society. Being human, all people are equal. The equality of people cannot be measured by the property we possess, by the power we have, or by the sex we are. Human equality can only be measured according to our human nature. Justice should insist on this type of equality and not otherwise as Hobbes did.

Third, Hobbes’ conception of justice limits freedom of the subjects. The subjects are not free to do anything, which is different from the sovereign’s mind. Nor are they free to express their feelings that seem to be different from the sovereign’s. If that happens, they will be punished by the coercive power. This situation creates fear in the state and it makes people slaves in their own state.

All in all, Hobbes conception of justice can help to implement peace and security in areas where there is war. In these areas people are not looking for ways to acquire development but rather they are working for peace and security in their society. So in his conception of justice, Hobbes suggests ways, which can bring peace and order in states, which are without them. But on the other hand, his conception of justice has negative impacts particularly in areas where there is peace. In these areas people are looking for ways to acquire development and to do away with all things that hinder all forms of freedom in their state. To follow Hobbes’ justice in such a state will bring neither development nor freedom but war of every man against every man, the very situation Hobbes is trying to overcome.

 

 

CONCLUSION

Hobbes’ conception of justice is the outcome of his understanding of man. Man for him is nothing but the individual person who is by nature living independently from other men. He is controlled by laws of motion just like any other being here on earth. This man is in dread of other men because of his independent nature. This fear leads man to move against other men. This is the state of nature according to Hobbes. In this state of nature all men are equal. The equality Hobbes talks about is that everyone is free to do whatever he likes and to enjoy all that he could get in order to survive in the state of nature.

In Hobbes’ view, in the state of nature, justice is impossible, because if man is left free, his nature will induce him to war against other persons. Hobbes was looking for how to limit the freedom of men in order to let them live together in society. He argued that people might come together when there is law and the sovereign. We can’t talk of justice if law and the sovereign are absent. The sovereign can only be installed through a social contract whereby every individual submits all his rights to him. Keeping the covenant made in the social contract is what Hobbes called justice. Hobbes’ conception of justice can bring peace in areas where there is war. In these areas people are busy saving their lives from the hands of their enemies. Here man has no time to think about his value as a human person but rather on how to annihilate his enemy in order to survive. If Hobbes’ conception of justice is not applied here people will end up killing one another. As a result, peace, love, and justice will only be a dream in these areas.

In areas where men live in peace, Hobbes’ conception of justice is not relevant. Here man is aware that his human nature is more valuable than a complicated machine. He is the substantial unity of body and soul. What Hobbes described as justice can’t do full justice to human nature. A human person has got the ability of going beyond the limitation of space and time because of his spiritual nature. Justice here should go hand in hand with freedom, love, will, and intellect, which are qualities that are fundamental to man. Justice is possible when there is equality among people in our societies. It is this justice, which will bring people together and make them equal before the law and make each one get what is due to him or her. If justice could be understood in this way, then our world could be peaceful and a paradise to live.

Learning Modalities"Sensory preferences influence the ways in which students learn ... Perceptual preferences affect more than 70 percent of school-age youngsters" (Dunn, Beaudry, & Klavas, 1989, p. 52). There are three Learning Modalities adapted from Barbe, Swassing, and Milone:[8]

1. Visual

2. Auditory

3. Tactile (Kinesthetic)

Descriptions of Learning Modalities:

Visual Kinesthetic AuditoryPicture Gestures ListeningDrawings Touching Sounds PatternsShape Body Movements RhythmsSculpture Object Manipulation TonePaintings Positioning Chants

Learning modalities can occur independently or in combination, changing over time, and becoming integrated with age.[9]

 

Visual, Auditory, and Kinesthetic Learning Styles (VAK)

The VAK learning style uses the three main sensory receivers: Visual, Auditory, and Kinesthetic (movement) to determine the dominant learning style. It is sometimes known as VAKT (Visual, Auditory, Kinesthetic, & Tactile). It is based on modalities—channels by which human expression can take place and is composed of a combination of perception and memory.

VAK is derived from the accelerated learning world and seems to be about the most popular model nowadays due to its simplicity. While the research has shown a connection with modalities and learning styles (University of Pennsylvania, 2009), the research has so far been unable to prove the using one's learning style provides the best means for learning a task or subject. This is probably because it is more of a preference, rather than a style.

Learners use all three modalities to receive and learn new information and experiences. However, according to the VAK or modality theory, one or two of these receiving styles is normally dominant. This dominant style defines the best way for a person to learn new information by filtering what is to be learned. This style may not always to be the same for some tasks. The learner may prefer one style of learning for one task, and a combination of others for a different task.

Classically, our learning style is forced upon us through life like this: In grades kindergarten to third, new information is presented to us kinesthetically; grades 4 to 8 are visually presented; while grades 9 to college and on into the business environment, information is presented to us mostly through auditory means, such as lectures.

According to the VAK theorists, we need to present information using all three styles. This allows all learners the opportunity to become involved, no matter what their preferred style may be.

While there is some evidence for modality specific strengths and weaknesses (Rourke, et al. 2002), what has has not been established is matching the instructional style to individual learning strength improves their learning abilities. For example, one study (Constantinidou and Baker, 2002), found that visual presentation through the use of pictures was advantageous for all adults, irrespective of a high or low learning-style preference for visual images. Indeed, it was especially advantageous for those with a strong preference for verbal processing.

Hints for Recognizing and Implementing the Three VAK Styles

Auditory learners often talk to themselves. They also may move their lips and read out loud. They may have difficulty with reading and writing tasks. They often do better talking to a colleague or a tape recorder and hearing what was said. To integrate this style into the learning environment:

Begin new material with a brief explanation of what is coming. Conclude with a summary of what has been covered. This is the old adage of “tell them what they are going to lean, teach them, and tell them what they have learned.”

Use the Socratic method of lecturing by questioning learners to draw as much information from them as possible and then fill in the gaps with you own expertise.

Include auditory activities, such as brainstorming, buzz groups, or Jeopardy. Leave plenty of time to debrief activities. This allows them to make connections of what they leaned and how it applies to their situation.

Have the learners verbalize the questions. Develop an internal dialogue between yourself and the learners.

Visual learners have two sub-channels—linguistic and spatial. Learners who are visual-linguistic like to learn through written language, such as reading and writing tasks. They remember what has been written down, even if they do not read it more than once. They like to write down directions and pay better attention to lectures if they watch them. Learners who are visual-spatial usually have difficulty with the written language and do better with charts, demonstrations, videos, and other visual materials. They easily visualize faces and places by using their imagination

and seldom get lost in new surroundings. To integrate this style into the learning environment:

Use graphs, charts, illustrations, or other visual aids. Include outlines, concept maps, agendas, handouts, etc. for reading and

taking notes. Include plenty of content in handouts to reread after the learning session. Leave white space in handouts for note-taking. Invite questions to help them stay alert in auditory environments. Post flip charts to show what will come and what has been presented. Emphasize key points to cue when to takes notes. Eliminate potential distractions. Supplement textual information with illustrations whenever possible. Have them draw pictures in the margins. Have the learners envision the topic or have them act out the subject

matter.

Kinesthetic learners do best while touching and moving. It also has two sub-channels: kinesthetic (movement) and tactile (touch). They tend to lose concentration if there is little or no external stimulation or movement. When listening to lectures they may want to take notes for the sake of moving their hands. When reading, they like to scan the material first, and then focus in on the details (get the big picture first). They typically use color high lighters and take notes by drawing pictures, diagrams, or doodling. To integrate this style into the learning environment:

Use activities that get the learners up and moving. Play music, when appropriate, during activities. Use colored markers to emphasize key points on flip charts or white boards. Give frequent stretch breaks (brain breaks). Provide toys such as Koosh balls and Play-Dough to give them something to

do with their hands. To highlight a point, provide gum, candy, scents, etc. which provides a cross

link of scent (aroma) to the topic at hand (scent can be a powerful cue). Provide high lighters, colored pens and/or pencils. Guide learners through a visualization of complex tasks. Have them transfer information from the text to another medium such as a

keyboard or a tablet.

Learning Modalities By S.D. Powell PBS Parents

Updated on Jul 24, 2013

Learning styles and learning modalities are often spoken of interchangeably. Modalities refer to how students use their senses in the learning process. We commonly consider four modalities: visual (seeing), auditory (hearing), kinesthetic (moving), and tactile (touching). As you might guess, the more senses or modalities we can activate, the more learning will take place.

The great majority of students can learn using all four modalities, but we all have preferences that can be capitalized on, as well as weaker leanings that can be enhanced. In our classrooms, we must provide an environment that is conducive to all four. Traditional classrooms rely heavily on auditory stimulation with lecture and discussions. Now that we have considered the developmental characteristics of young adolescence, we realize that visual, kinesthetic, and tactile modalities also play strong roles in adolescent lives.

The below table will help us understand characteristics we may observe in students who learn best through hearing, seeing, moving, and touching.

Traits of auditory, visual, kinesthetic, and tactile learners.

 

Auditory learners tend to...

enjoy reading and being read to. be able to verbally explain concepts and

scenarios. like music and hum to themselves. enjoy both talking and listening.

Visual learners tend to...

have good spelling, notetaking, and organizational skills.

notice details and prefer neatness. learn more if illustrations and charts

accompany reading.

prefer quiet, serene surroundings.

Kinesthetic learners tend to...

be demonstrative, animated, and outgoing.

enjoy physical movement and manipulatives.

be willing to try new things. be messy in habits and surroundings.

Tactile learners tend to...

prefer manipulatives when being introduced to a topic.

literally translate events and phenomena. tolerate clutter. be artistic in nature.

Learning ModalitiesThere are three basic modalities to process information to memory: visual (learning by seeing), auditory (learning by hearing), and kinesthetic (learning by doing). Most people have one predominant modality, but some have a balance between two or even all three. Many students are aware of their preference, which helps them approach their own learning more efficiently.

Personality Characteristics of the Learning Modalities Visual Auditory Kinesthetic

Mind wanders during verbal activities

Has trouble following or remembering verbal instructions

Doodles

Is easily distracted Quickly looses

interest in visual demonstrations

Taps pencil or foot while thinking, studying, or writing tests

Enjoys doing experiments

Prefers to observe rather than actively participate in group activities and

Enjoys listening activities

Is active in group activities and

Enjoys handling objects

Uses excessive hand gestures and body

discussions discussions language Makes physical

contact with people when talking to them

Likes to read silently

Likes to be read to Prefers reading

aloud to silent reading

Listens to music while studying or doing homework

Tends not to enjoy reading

Enjoys hands-on activities

Enjoys problem-solving

Is neat and organized

Pays attention to detail

Has neat handwriting

Has sloppy handwriting

Is unorganized

Is a good speller   Is a poor speller

Easily memorizes by seeing pictures and diagrams

May have a"photographic memory"

Memorizes lists and sequences easily

Remembers faces

May have trouble memorizing lists, numbers, etc.

Is usually quiet, shy, or reserved

Is fairly outgoing Is outgoing Easily expresses

emotions

Depending on their preferred learning modality, different teaching techniques have different levels of effectiveness. Effective teaching requires a variety of teaching methods which cover all three learning modalities. No matter what their preference, students should have equal opportunities to learn in a way that is effective for them.

Effective Teaching Techniques for Each Learning Modality Visual Auditory Kinesthetic

Guided Imagery Demonstrations

Auditory Tapes Reading Aloud

Experiments/Labs Plays, Acting Scenes

Copying Notes Highlighting Key

Ideas in Notes/Textbooks

Flash Cards Color Coding Diagrams,

Photographs, Charts, Graphs, Maps

Filmstrips, Movies, TV

Mind Maps, Acronyms

Oral Instructions Lectures Repeating Ideas

Orally Using Rhythmic

Sounds Poems, Rhymes,

Word Association Group Discussions Music, Lyrics TV

Out, Role Playing Games Problem-Solving Field Trips Writing Notes Making Lists Props, Physical

Examples Associating Emotions

with Concepts

3. What is Learning Modality? 4. Learning Modalities are the ways we process information to memory and there are basicaly three ways. 5. Visual Way 6. People who experience the world primarily visually like to take in information through their eyes. Visual Way 7. They like to see things written down, read books, look at pictures, diagrams and so on. The take notes (usually neatly) in order to look at them again. Visual Way 8. Auditory way 9. People who experience the world primarily auditorily like to get information through their ears. Auditory Way 10. They like to hear things being said, listen to audio, perhaps even have a chance to repeat things in their own head. They would rather record a lecture than take notes. Auditory Way 11. Kinaesthetic way 12. People who experience the world primarily kinaesthetically like to get information through their hands or bodies or emotions. Kinaesthetic Way 13. They like to touch things, move their hands or feet, walk around the room. They also take notes, not necessarily to look at them again, but because the movement of their hand across the page helps them to absorb information. Kinaesthetic Way

14. Everyone uses all three learning modalities, but generally there is one modality that is more dominant or that fosters better concentration. 15. Knowing which is your dominant modality can help you to assimilate information and communicate information better. 16. It’s pretty common to see facilitators teach in a way that is convenient for them… 17. ...but not the most effective way for the participants to absorb it! 18. Think of a teacher trying to teach the alphabet through all three learning modalities. How it would be? Let’s try some options. 19. Shows pictures, or video of the alphabet Visual Way 20. Has the students sing the alphabet Auditory Way 21. Has the students act out the letters Kinaesthetic Way 22. On an average we remember….

1. Learning Modalities Becky Renegar 2. I hear and I forget. I see and I remember. I do and I understand. - Confucius 3. 3 Common Modalities Everyone learns in different ways. However, there are three main modes of learning: Visual Auditory Kinesthetic Most people have a primary mode of learning. 4. Visual Visual learners learn best by seeing . People who learn best through the visual modality learn best by seeing. Involves the use of seen or observed things, including pictures, diagrams, demonstrations, displays, handouts, films, flip-chart, etc. About 60% of people are visual learners. 5. Auditory People who learn best through the auditory modality learn best by hearing. Involves the transfer of information through listening: to the spoken word, of self or others, of sounds and noises. About 30% of people are auditory learners. 6. Kinesthetic Kinesthetic learners learn best by moving and doing. Involves physical experience - touching, feeling, holding, doing, practical hands-on experiences About 10% of the general population are kinesthetic learners. 7. "Children enter kindergarten as kinesthetic and tactual learners, moving and touching everything as they learn. By second or third grade, some students have become visual learners. During the late elementary years some students, primarily females, become auditory learners. Yet, many adults, especially males, maintain kinesthetic and tactual strengths throughout their lives.“ ( Teaching Secondary Students Through Their Individual Learning Styles , Rita Stafford and Kenneth J. Dunn; Allyn and Bacon, 1993)

BATAS PAMBANSA BLG. 232      September 11, 1982

AN ACT PROVIDING FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT AND MAINTENANCE OF AN INTEGRATED SYSTEM OF EDUCATION

I. GENERAL PROVISIONS

CHAPTER 1Preliminary Matters

Section 1. Title - This Act shall be known as the "Education Act of 1982."

Section 2. Coverage - This Act shall apply to and govern both formal and non-formal systems in public and private schools in all levels of the entire educational system.

CHAPTER 2Declaration of Basic State Policy and Objectives

Section 3. Declaration of Basic Policy - It is the policy of the State to established and maintain a complete, adequate and integrated system of education relevant to the goals of national development. Toward this end, the government shall ensure, within the context of a free and democratic system, maximum contribution of the educational system to the attainment of the following national developmental goals:

1. To achieve and maintain an accelerating rate of economic development and social progress;

2. To ensure the maximum participation of all the people in the attainment and enjoyment of the benefits of such growth; and

3. To achieve and strengthen national unity and consciousness and preserve, develop and promote desirable cultural, moral and spiritual values in a changing world.

The State shall promote the right of every individual to relevant quality education, regardless of sex, age, creed, socio-economic status, physical and mental conditions, racial or ethnic origin, political or other affiliation. The State shall therefore promote and maintain equality of access to education as well as the enjoyment of the benefits of education by all its citizens.

The state shall promote the right of the nation's cultural communities in the exercise of their right to develop themselves within the context of their cultures, customs, traditions, interest and belief, and recognizes education as an instrument for their maximum participation in national development and in ensuring their involvement in achieving national unity.

Section 4. Declaration of Objectives - The educational system aim to:

1. Provide for a broad general education that will assist each individuals in the peculiar ecology of his own society, to

(a) attain his potentials as a human being;

(b) enhance the range and quality of individual and group participation in the basic functions of society; and

(c) acquire the essential educational foundation of his development into a productive and versatile citizen;

2. Train the nation's manpower in the middle-level skills for national development;

3. Develop the profession that will provide leadership for the nation in the advancement of knowledge for improving the quality of human life; and

4. Respond effectively to changing needs and conditions of the nation through a system of educational planning and evaluation.

Towards the realization of these objectives, and pursuant to the Constitution, all educational institutions shall aim to inculcate love of country, teach the duties of citizenship, and develop moral character, personal discipline, and scientific, technological, and vocational efficiency.

Furthermore, the educational system shall reach out to educationally deprived communities, in order to give meaningful reality to their membership in the national society, to enrich their civic participation in the community and national life, and to unify all Filipinos into a free and just nation.

II. THE EDUCATIONAL COMMUNITY

CHAPTER 1Preliminary Provisions

Section 5. Declaration of Policy and Objectives - It is likewise declared government policy to foster, at all times, a spirit of shared purposes and cooperation among the members and elements of the educational community, and between the community and other sectors of society, in the realization that only in such an atmosphere can be true goals and objectives of education be fulfilled.

Moreover, the State shall:

1. Aid and support the natural right and duty of parents in the rearing of the youth through the educational system.

2. Promote and safeguard the welfare and interest of the students by defining their rights and obligations, according them privileges, and encouraging the establishment of sound relationships between them and the other members of the school community.

3. Promote the social economic status of all school personnel, uphold their rights, define their obligations, and improve their living and working conditions and career prospects.

4. Extend support to promote the viability of those institutions through which parents, students and school personnel seek to attain their educational goals.

Section 6. Definition and Coverage - "Educational community" refers to those persons or groups of persons as such or associated in institutions involved in organized teaching and learning systems.

The members and elements of the educational community are:

1. "Parents" or guardians or the head of the institution or foster home which has custody of the pupil or student.

2. "Students," or those enrolled in and who regularly attend and educational institution of secondary or higher level of a person engaged in formal study. "Pupils," are those who regularly attend a school of elementary level under the supervision and tutelage of a teacher.

3 "School personnel," or all persons working for an educational institution, which includes the following:

a. "Teaching or academic staff," or all persons engaged in actual teaching and/or research assignments, either on full-time or part-time basis, in all levels of the educational system.

b. "School administrators," or all persons occupying policy implementing positions having to do with the functions of the school in all levels.

c. "Academic non-teaching personnel," or those persons holding some academic qualifications and performing academic functions directly supportive of teaching, such as registrars, librarians, research assistants, research aides, and similar staff.

d. "Non-academic personnel," or all other school personnel not falling under the definition and coverage of teaching and academic staff, school administrators and academic non-teaching personnel.

4. "Schools," or institutions recognized by the State which undertake educational operations.

Section 7. Community Participation. - Every educational institution shall provide for the establishment of appropriate bodies through which the members of the educational community may discuss relevant issues, and communicate information and suggestions for assistance and support of the school and for the promotion of their common interest.

Representatives from each subgroup of the educational community shall sit and participate in these bodies, the rules and procedures of which must be approved by them and duly published.

CHAPTER 2Rights

Section 8. Rights of Parents - In addition to other rights under existing laws, all parents who have children enrolled in a school have the following rights:

1. The right to organize by themselves and/or with teachers for the purpose of providing a forum for the discussion of matters relating to the total school program, and for ensuring the full cooperation of parents and teachers in the formulation and efficient implementation of such programs.

2. The right to access to any official record directly relating to the children who are under their parental responsibility.

Section 9. Right of Students in School - In addition to other rights, and subject to the limitation prescribed by law and regulations, and student and pupils in all schools shall enjoy the following rights:

1. The right to receive, primarily through competent instruction, relevant quality education in line with national goals and conducive to their full development as person with human dignity.

2. The right to freely chose their field of study subject to existing curricula and to continue their course therein up to graduation, except in cases of academic deficiency, or violation of disciplinary regulations.

3. The right to school guidance and counseling services for decisions and selecting the alternatives in fields of work suited to his potentialities.

4. The right of access to his own school records, the confidentiality of which the school shall maintain and preserve.

5. The right to the issuance of official certificates, diplomas, transcript of records, grades, transfer credentials and other similar documents within thirty days from request.

6. The right to publish a student newspaper and similar publications, as well as the right to invite resource persons during assemblies, symposia and other activities of similar nature.

7. The right to free expression of opinions and suggestions, and to effective channels of communication with appropriate academic channels and administrative bodies of the school or institution.

8. The right to form, establish, join and participate in organizations and societies recognized by the school to foster their intellectual, cultural, spiritual and physical growth and development, or to form, establish, join and maintain organizations and societies for purposes not contrary to law.

9. The right to be free from involuntary contributions, except those approved by their own he organizations or societies.

Section 10. Rights of all School Personnel - In addition to other rights provided for by law, the following rights shall be enjoyed by all school personnel:

1. The right to free expression of opinion and suggestions, and to effective channels of communication with appropriate academic and administrative bodies of the school or institution.

2. The right to be provided with free legal service by the appropriate government office in the case of public school personnel, and through the school authorities concerned in the case of private school personnel, when charged in an administrative, civil and/or criminal proceedings by parties other than the school or regulatory authorities concerned for actions committed directly in the lawful discharge of professional duties and/or in defense of school policies.

3. The right to establish, join and maintain labor organizations and/or professional and self-regulating organizations of their choice to promote their welfare and defend their interests.

4. The right to be free from involuntary contributions except those imposed by their own organizations.

Section 11. Special Rights and/or Privileges of Teaching or Academic Staff - Further to the rights mentioned in the preceding Section, every member of the teaching or academic staff shall enjoy the following rights and/or privileges:

1. The right to be free from compulsory assignments not related to their duties as defined in their appointments or employment contracts, unless compensated therefor, conformably to existing law.

2. The right to intellectual property consistent with applicable laws.

3. Teachers shall be deemed persons in authority when in the discharge of lawful duties and responsibilities, and shall, therefore, be accorded due respect and protection.

4. Teachers shall be accorded the opportunity to choose alternative career lines either in school administration, in classroom teaching, or others, for purposes of career advancement.

Section 12. Special Rights of School Administration - School administrators shall, in accordance with existing laws, regulations and policies of the Ministry of Education, Culture and Sports, be accorded sufficient administrative discretion necessary for the efficient and effective performance of their functions.

School administrators shall be deemed persons in authority while in the discharge of lawful duties and responsibilities, and shall therefore be accorded due respect and protection.

Section 13. Rights of Schools - In addition to other rights provided for by law, schools shall enjoy the following:

1. The right of their governing boards or lawful authorities to provide for the proper governance of the school and to adopt and enforce administrative or management systems.

2. The right for institutions of higher learning to determine on academic grounds who shall be admitted to study, who may teach, and what shall be subjects of the study and research.

The best Characteristics of Great TeachersBy: Bobby Coles

Published: March 23, 2012Updated: March 23, 2012

The teaching profession is filled with wonderful educators who are taxed with the responsibility of reaching each and every child and inspiring them to reach their full potential. Being a teacher can often be a thankless, tiresome, and difficult job to do. The key to being a great teacher is to hone your craft on a daily basis, constantly upgrading your skills and knowledge, and sticking to the tried and true principles necessary to be effective.

The characteristics of great teachers are vast; many great teachers have combined a plethora of different traits and attributes into a successful blend that allows them to be great educators.

*Fairness

Fairness is a remarkable characteristic befitting a great teacher. The classroom should be a leveller for all students; a place where they can come, regardless of ethnicity, talent, skills, intelligence, gender, religious affiliation, or sexual orientation. A fair teacher conducts the class in a manner that allows each student to feel safe and secure. The classroom needs a teacher that will treat each student in an honourable fashion.

*Motivational

Another characteristic of a great teacher is that they are highly motivational. A motivational teacher is inspirational to students. The motivated teacher arrives for each class eager and willing to do whatever necessary to reach each child. The motivated teacher goes above and beyond normal expectations and seeks out alternative ways of helping students achieve a state of higher learning.

*Communication Skills

Teachers must be excellent communicators if they wish to be great. This is a characteristic found in most leaders, and especially in teachers. Teachers must change on a regular basis, so that they fluctuate with the trends of today’s society. Teachers need to communicate with students and parents to ensure that everybody is looking out for the best interests of the student.

*Creativity

Great teachers tend to be creative. They make their lesson plans in unique manners so that students are more engaged and alert. Teachers need to use creative methods in or to sustain the attention of their charges. Creativity allows teachers and students to transcend boundaries and utilize imagination to its maximum potential.

*Respect

A characteristic to bear in mind to become a great teacher is respect. Respect is typically considered as something deserved, but rarely given. A teacher must give respect to the student body before assuming any respect on their own behalf. Respect needs to be reciprocal. Without respect, the teacher and student may find themselves on separate pages, and the desire to learn will be temporarily or permanently lost.

*Organized

An organized teacher is more efficient, as they rarely waste any time. A class needs to be run smoothly, like a finely tuned engine. Great teachers know how to arrange their class so that there is always plenty of time left after the lesson for seatwork and active discussions.

*Calmness

The ability to remain calm can greatly enhance a teacher’s ability to remain in control of the classroom. Calm teachers use this demeanour in their favour, creating a sense of serenity in the classroom environment.

*Enthusiasm

Great teachers have enthusiasm as an endearing characteristic in their arsenal. An enthusiastic teacher is better able to motivate his or her students, since their energy level will be addictive. Enthusiastic teachers appear to be more believable, and they are seen as great teachers.

*Confidence

A great teacher needs to have an abundance of confidence. This characteristic serves teachers well. It can be tough to stand up in front of a classroom and motivate students, but standing tall and confident can help to garner a vote of confidence from the student body. Confidence allows a teacher to speak clearly and with conviction, certain of their knowledge and ability.

*Consistency

A classroom needs to be run with consistency. This includes notions of discipline and fairness. The consequences should be the same for each student for a similar infraction. A great teacher is one that has a sturdy resolve when it comes to teaching. A consistent teacher conducts his or her class in the same fashion from day to day and semester to semester. This allows the students to feel a level of stability that is comforting.

*Flexibility

Great teachers must be flexible. The daily lesson plan that was diligently prepared may not be working, or the day may be filled with numerable absences or

interruptions. A lesson plan should be a skeletal blueprint, and not much else. Great teachers can improvise on the spot, adapting to whatever changes are deemed necessary by circumstances beyond their control. They also incorporate auditory, visual, and kinesthetic lesson plans so that each child has the same advantages as their fellow classmates.

*Integrity

The characteristic of integrity is crucial to the success of a great teacher. Having integrity means that you say what you mean, and you follow through at all times. Great teachers have integrity, and they stand behind their convictions in the face of adversity. A great teacher has principles that remain uncompromised.

*Sense of Humour

A teacher needs to be able to keep the atmosphere in the classroom light. A sense of humour can help the teacher restore a sense of order, can help to quell tense situations, and can show a sense of humility. A great teacher can make light of their flaws and mistakes, rather than point out the negative aspects of their students.

The characteristics of a great teacher will vary from generation to generation, and across cultures. For the most part, however, great teachers will have many of the aforementioned characteristics and attributes.

 

Qualities of an Effective TeacherTen Qualities of an Effective TeacherBy Derrick Meador

Ads:

The Teacher Teacher Training Programs How Can I Be a Teacher Effective Communication Teacher Education Jobs

Think back to when you were in school. Who was your favorite teacher? Who was the teacher you dreaded having? Almost everyone will instantly be able to answer these two questions. We’ve all had terrific teachers and, unfortunately, most of us have had teachers that were not effective. So what qualities does an effective teacher have that an ineffective teacher does not? The answer is that it takes a perfect blend of several qualities to create a truly effective teacher who can have a lasting impact on virtually every student. In this article, we examine ten qualities that virtually every effective teacher will possess.

An effective teacher loves to teach. The single most important quality that every teacher should possess is a love and passion for teaching young people. Unfortunately, there are teachers who do not love what they do. This single factor can destroy a teacher’s effectiveness quicker than anything else. Teachers who do not enjoy their job cannot possibly be effective day in and day out. There are too many discouraging factors associated with teaching that is difficult enough on a teacher who absolutely loves what they do, much less on one who doesn’t have the drive, passion, or enthusiasm for it. On top of that, kids are smarter than what we give them credit for. They will spot a phony quicker than anyone and thus destroy any credibility that the teacher may have.

An effective teacher demonstrates a caring attitude. Even teachers who love their job can struggle in this area, not because they don’t care, but because they get caught up so much in the day to day routine of teaching that they can forget that their students have lives outside of school. Taking the time to get to know a student on a personal level takes a lot of time and dedication. There is also a line that no teacher wants to cross where their relationship becomes too personal. Elite teachers know how to balance this without crossing that line and once a student believes the teacher truly cares for them, then there is no limit to what that student can achieve.

An effective teacher can relate to his or her students. The best teachers work hard to figure out how to relate to each of their students. Common interest can be hard to find, but exceptional teachers will find a way to

connect with their students even if they have to fake it. For instance, you may have a student who is a Lego fanatic. You can relate to that student if you do something as simple as ordering a Lego catalog and then going through it and discussing it with that student. Even if you have no actual interest in Lego’s, the student will think you do and thus naturally create a connection.

An effective teacher is willing to think outside the box. There is no one set cookie cutter way to teach. A cookie cutter approach would likely be boring for both teachers and students. What makes teaching so exciting is that kids learn differently, and we have to find and utilize different strategies and differentiated learning to reach every student. What works for one student, will not work for every student. Teachers have to be willing to be creative and adaptive in their lessons, thinking outside the box on a continual basis. If you try to teach every concept in the same manner, there will be students who miss out on key factors because they aren’t wired to learn that way.

An effective teacher is an excellent communicator. To be the best possible teacher you must be an effective communicator. However, in this area you are not just limited to being a skilled communicator to your students although that is a must. You must also be a strong communicator with parents of your students as well as your faculty/staff team within in your building. If you have a difficulty communicating with any of these three groups, then you limit your overall effectiveness as a teacher.

An effective teacher is proactive rather than reactive. This can be one of most difficult aspects for a teacher to conquer. Intense planning and organization can ultimately make your job all the more less difficult. Teachers who plan ahead, looking for aspects that they might have issues with, and proactively looking for solutions to solve those problems will have less stress on them, than those teachers who wait until a problem arises

and then tries to address it. Being proactive does not replace being adaptive. No matter how well you plan, there will be surprises. However, being proactive can cut down on these surprises tremendously, thus making you more effective overall.

An effective teacher strives to be better. A teacher who has grown complacent in what they do is the most ineffective kind of teacher. Any teacher who is not looking for new and better teaching strategies isn’t being an effective teacher. No matter how long you have taught, you should always want to grow as a teacher. Every year there is new research, new technology, and new educational tools that could make you a better teacher. Seek out professional development opportunities and try to apply something new to your class every year.

An effective teacher uses a variety of media in their lessons. Like it or not we are in the 21st century, and this generation of students was born in the digital age. These students have been bombarded by technological advances unlike any other generation. They have embraced it, and if we as teachers do not, then we are falling behind. This is not to say that we should eliminate textbooks and worksheets completely, but effective teachers are not afraid to implement other forms of media within their lessons.

An effective teacher challenges their students. The most effective teachers, are often the ones that many students think are the most difficult. This is because they challenge their students and push them harder than the average teacher does. These are the teachers who are often students’ least favorite teachers at the time, but then later on in life they are the ones that we all remember and want to thank, because of how well they prepared us for life after our time with them. Being an effective teacher does not mean you are easy. It means that you challenge every one of your

students and maximize your time with them so that they learn more than they ever thought they could learn.

An effective teacher understands the content that they teach and knows how to explain that content in a manner that their students understand. There are teachers who do not know the content well enough to effectively teach it. There are teachers who are truly experts on the content, but struggle to effectively explain it to their students. The highly effective teacher both understands the content and explains it on level. This can be a difficult skill to accomplish, but the teachers who can, maximize their effectiveness as a teacher.

Frederick Froebel - Father of Kinder garten

Many educational reforms of today may appear to be innovative, but the ideas that inspired them have been around from the 18th century.

Frederick Froebel (1782-1852), was born on Central Germany. As a lonely boy, neglected by his stepmother and distracted father, he formed youthful kinship with nature that blossomed into spiritual exaltation.

He fashioned a personal philosophy of unity that embraced the spiritual potential within a person; the relations between people in a free society; the place of individual in relation to the nature that surrounds and includes him; and the life force that controls growth in all things.

Thus, were born the three main ideas of Froebel’s education philosophy

- Unity of creation - Respect for the individual child; - The importance of Play in children’s education Johan Heinrich Pestalozzi & Christain Weiss played a vital

role in Froebel’s education philosophy. Their influence on

development of both art & architecture was profound on Froebel’s education philosophy.

Pestalozzi was one of the first educators to advocate more active, hands on activities for what he termed “Object lessons” or direct concrete observation. Pestalozzi developed techniques that combined the two “Teaching of Writing” and the “Comprehension of Form”.

Under the tutorship of Pestalozzi, Froebel observed that “children have extraordinary relatedness in exploring, observing and interacting with nature.

Froebel saw how nature’s domain invited the child to uncover its secrets, each child has a strong impulse to know why they love nature’s manifold. He says, “Therefore, the child would know himself why he loves the thing; he would know all its properties, its innermost nature, that he may learn to understand himself in his attachment.” Thus showing that each child gains knowledge through observation & experiment.

The child’s primary route to knowledge begins with an instinct for activity which issues from a deep interest in nature and not from a conscious thought.

In 1814, Froebel took an assistant’s job at Mineralogical Museum of the University of Berlin under Professor Christain Weiss. Weiss was then in process of formulating the parameters & technique of modern crystallography, changing the field from a branch of natural philosophy to an exact mathematical science.

Froebel discovered that each shape of crystal had systematic variations in the design of their forms, planes & symmetries – providing an obvious unique structure to themselves.

Froebel viewed nature as a great work of design by a higher power and this intense & prolonged occupation with geometric handiwork of God had a profound impact on his future work.

FROEBEL’S STUDY COSMOLOGY (adapting unity of creation that embraced

spiritual potential within a person) (relations between people in free society)

(person relation with nature) (life force controls growth in all things)

MINERALOGY (understanding minerals, crystallogy, understanding systematic variations in forms of crystals and

why they grow like that) (Planes and Symmetries) He began to perceive “transforming developing energy” in

the smallest fixed forms of nature, and learned to think of crystals, plants & human beings as equivalent consequences of the same laws of growth.” Froebel postulated that since the forms of crystals are the outcome of the same natural laws that also shape growth of individuals & societies, handling these forms properly could reveal and illuminate the creator’s mind itself.

In 1816, Froebel formed his own school for children and after 20 years of teaching he concluded that a rigid dullness was often found within children who began schooling at officially mandated age of 7.

Two years later, Froebel opened his first revolutionary invention “KINDERGARTEN”. This concept related Two Ideas.

- Organisational Model (A garden for use by children) - Its Spiritual foundation (a garden in which children should

be raised). Kindergarten, was meant to convey the interconnectedness

of all forms of growth – Froebel designed physical tools, which he called “Gifts” – he created a methodology that when properly utilized, provided children with infinite number of conceptual links between gifts and the world.

These GIFTS were used to create structures of pictures into 3 Fundamental Categories – Forms of Nature (or Life), Forms of Knowledge (or Science) and Forms of Beauty (or Art).

Life forms were tangible (Trees, People) Knowledge forms ( mathematical) Forms of Arts (systematical patterns) Kindergarten has continued to include singing and dancing

as well as close observation of nature: growth of plants, symmetries of crystals and seashells. This practical and philosophical heart of the system, interconnected the series of 20 gifts and occupations – exercises involving sticks,

coloured paper, mosaic tiles and serving cards as well as building blocks and drawing equipment.

The ultimate lesson of Kindergarten was straightforward. The forms of world, mathematics and art are equivalent and interchangeable.

Frederick Froebel taught that children should not be allowed to draw from casual appearances of nature until they had first mastered the basic forms lying hidden behind appearances.

Pioneers In Our Field: Friedrich Froebel - Founder of the First KindergartenThe first installment in Early Childhood Today’s series on the Roots of Early Childhood EducationBy Early Childhood Today Editorial Staff

Grades: Early Childhood, PreK–K, 1–2

Print Share 1

The learning experiences with the children in the garden convinced Froebel that action and direct observation were the best ways to educate. 

Froebel's Kindergarten GoalsFroebel's kindergarten was designed to meet each child's need for:

physical activity the development of sensory awareness and physical dexterity creative expression exploration of ideas and concepts the pleasure of singing the experience of living among others satisfaction of the soul

A Classroom GardenChildren can discover Froebel's "gifts" with indoor garden experiences.

Plant window boxes with bulbs. Paper-white narcissus bulbs will grow and bloom quickly indoors.

Create a classroom terrarium in a clear fish tank. Fill the tank with layers of gravel, sand, and soil and plant with mosses and ferns. Caring for this mini-ecosystem lets children observe life.

Plant seeds of fast growing vines such as beans and sweet peas.

"Children are like tiny flowers: They are varied and need care, but each is beautiful alone and glorious when seen in the community of peers." - Friedrich Froebel (1782-1852)

Friedrich Froebel was a motherless child. Losing his mother before the age of 1, and being raised by a father who had little time for him and his two brothers, left Froebel with a yearning for something seemingly impossible to satisfy.

Froebel spent much of his time alone in the gardens surrounding his home. Here, as a young boy, he would play all day and explore his surroundings. This led to a deep love of nature that would remain with Froebel to the end of his days and influence all of his future achievements.

As a young man, Froebel accepted a teaching position at the Frankfurt Model School. Frankfurt Model School was based on the teachings of Johann Heinrich Pestalozzi, a well respected educator of the day. Pestalozzi welcomed the poor into his school, including orphans practice that was revolutionary. His philosophy included the idea that children need to be active learners.

Froebel applied his "hands-on learning" approach when he left the school to be a private tutor. The parents of the children he tutored offered Froebel a small patch of their property to use as a garden. The learning experiences with the children in the garden convinced Froebel that action and direct observation were the best ways to educate.

In 1837 Friedrich Froebel founded his own school and called it "kindergarten," or the children's garden.

Prior to Froebel's kindergarten, children under the age of 7 did not attend school. It was believed that young children did not have the ability to focus or to develop cognitive and emotional skills before this age. However, Froebel expressed his own beliefs about the importance of early education in the following way: ". . . because learning begins when consciousness erupts, education must also."

Froebel labeled his approach to education as "self-activity." This idea allows the child to be led by his own interests and to freely explore them. The teacher's role, therefore, was to be a guide rather than lecturer.

In the end, Froebel's most important gifts to children were the classroom, symbolically viewed as

an extension of a lovely, thriving garden, and that which he needed most as a child a teacher who took on the role of loving, supportive parent.

This article originally appeared in the August, 2000 issue of Early Childhood Today.

The German educator, Friedrich Froebel, was one of these pioneers of early childhood educational reform. As an idealist, he believed that every child possessed, at birth, his full educational

potential, and that an appropriate educational environment was necessary to encourage the child to grow and develop in an optimal manner (Staff, 1998). According to Watson (1997b), Froebel's vision

was to stimulate an appreciation and love for children and to provide a new but small world--a world that became known as the Kindergarten--where children could play with others of their own age group

and experience their first gentle taste of independence. Watson further adds that this early educational vision laid the foundation for the framework of Froebel's philosophy of education which is

encompassed by the four basic components of (a) free self-activity, (b) creativity, (c) social participation, and (d) motor expression.As an educator, Froebel believed that stimulating voluntary

self-activity in the young child was the necessary form of pre-school education (Watson, 1997a). Self-activity is defined as the development of qualities and skills that make it possible to take an

invisible idea and make it a reality; self-activity involves formulating a purpose, planning out that purpose, and then acting on that plan until the purpose is realized (Corbett, 1998a). Corbett

suggests that one of Froebel's significant contributions to early childhood education was his theory of introducing play as a means of engaging children in self-activity for the purpose of

externalizing their inner natures. As described by Dewey (1990), Froebel's interpretation of play is characterized by free play which enlists all of the child's imaginative powers, thoughts, and

physical movements by embodying in a satisfying form his own images and educational interests. Dewey continued his description by indicating that play designates a child's mental attitude and should

not be identified with anything performed externally; therefore, the child should be given complete emancipation from the necessity of following any given or prescribed system of activities while he

is engaged in playful self-activity. In summarizing Froebel's beliefs regarding play, Dewey concluded that through stimulating play that produces self-activity, the supreme goal of the child is the

fullness of growth which brings about the realization of his budding powers and continually carries him from one plane of educational growth to another.To assist children in their development of

moving from one plane of educational growth to another, Froebel provided the children with many stimulating activities to enhance their creative powers and abilities. Froebel designed a series of

instructional materials that he called "gifts and occupations", which demonstrated certain relationships and led children in comparison, testing, and creative exploration activities (Watson, 1997b). A

gift was an object provided for a child to play with--such as a sphere, cube, or cylinder--which helped the child to understand and internalize the concepts of shape, dimension, size, and their

relationships (Staff, 1998). The occupations were items such as paints and clay which the children could use to make what they wished; through the occupations, children externalized the concepts

existing within their creative minds (Staff, 1998). Therefore, through the child's own self-activity and creative imaginative play, the child would begin to understand both the inner and outer

properties of things as he moves through the developmental stages of the educational process.A third component of Froebel's educational plan involved working closely with the family unit. Froebel believed that parents provided the first as well as the most consistent educational influence in a child's life. Since a child's first educational experiences occur within the family unit, he is

already familiar with the home environment as well as with the occupations carried on within this setting. Naturally, through creative self-activity, a child will imitate those things that are in a

direct and real relationship to him-things learned through observations of daily family life (Dewey, 1990). Froebel believed that providing a family setting within the school environment would provide

children with opportunities for interacting socially within familiar territory in a non-threatening manner. Focusing on the home environment occupations as the foundation for beginning subject-matter

content allowed the child to develop social interaction skills that would prepare him for higher level subject-matter contnt in later educational developmental stages (Dewey, 1990).Over one hundred

and fifty years ago, Froebel (1907) urged educators to respect the sanctity of child development through this statement:We grant space and time to young plants and animals because we know that, in

accordance with the laws that live in them, they will develop properly and grow well. Young animals and plants are given rest, and arbitrary interference with their growth is avoided,/because it is

known that the opposite practice would disturb their pure unfolding and sound development; but, the young human being is looked upon as a piece of wax or a lump of clay which man can mold into what he

leases (p. 8).Motor expression, which refers to learning by doing as opposed to following rote instructions, is a very important aspect of Froebel's educational principles. Froebel did not believe

that the child should be placed into society's mold, but should be allowed to shape his own mold and grow at his own pace through the developmental stages of the educational process. Corbett (1998b)

upholds Froebel's tenets that a child should never be rushed or hurried in his development; he needs to be involved in all of the experiences each stage requires and helped to see the relationships of

things and ideas to each other and to himself so that he can make sense out of both his subjective and objective world. Corbett further agrees that development is continuous, with one stage building

upon another, so that nothing should be missed through haste or for any other reason as the child moves through the educational process. Responsible educators should strive to recognize each child's

individual level of development so that essential materials and activities to stimulate appropriate educational growth can be provided. Froebel believed that imitation and suggestion would inevitably

the United States in the late 1840's (Watson, 1997b), and Froebel's basic philosophic principles of free self activity, creativity, social participation, and motor expression are valuable components

which exist functionally, with some modifications, in most current early childhood education programs. The education of society's children is still a difficult and fascinating issue studied by world

philosophers. Educators of the future will continue to look to philosophers of the past for assistance in striving to attain the common goal of being jointly responsible for nurturing, educating, and

cultivating each child toward his or her maximum potential through the educational process.