Robert L. Youngblood

Student-Parent Agreement on Socioeconomic Indicators: A Research Note from Manila

CURRENT RESEARCH on the Philippines suggests that while traditional norms dictate courteousness and hospitality toward strangers, other cultural values at work within the society tend to inhibit frankness with individuals outside the family and kinship group (Hollnsteiner, 1964; Lynch, 1964). Rather than risk being shamed or offending a stranger who may be powerful or have powerful allies, Filipinos will frequently respond to queries in a way deemed acceptable to the stranger without revealing sensitive, personal information about themselves or their families (Bulatao, 1964). The employment of distance-producing social mechanisms to deal with strangers raises questions about the reliability of survey research techniques to gather data on the Filipino family, particularly when such techniques rely on the reports of a single individual. The question examined in this paper is the degree to which students and parents in Manila agree on family socioeconomic indicators obtained from survey questionnaires. More precisely, the analysis attempts to determine whether patterns of agreement are similar to those found in comparable research conducted in the United States.

Church‐military relations in the philippines 1

(1981). Church‐military relations in the philippines. Australian Outlook: Vol. 35, No. 3, pp. 250-261.

Book Reviews : Raghaven N. Iyer, The Moral and Political Thought of Mahatma Gandhi. New York, Oxford University Press, 1973, pp. xiii, 449,

Theravada Buddhism in Southeast Asia consists of two parts. The first part deals with the three main features of Buddhism, namely, The Buddha, The Dhamma, and The Sangha, each of which is treated in the light of the scripture and tradition. Part I deals with the practice of Buddhism: the author describes three main elements, namely, The Way of the Monk, The Monk and Society, and The Way of the Laity. Prof. Lester’s treatment of the chapter, The Monk and Society, is commendable and his interpretation of the role of the Monk in the Theravada Society is quite accurate. The Monk’s influence in primary education in these Theravada countries should not be minimized. In view of many &dquo;development-minded leaders&dquo; the Monk should be restricted to the teaching of ethics and spiritual subjects, and the lay educators should be responsible for the teaching of secular subjects. As Prof. Lester has observed correctly, the Monk in modern times is increasingly well educated both in the spiritual and secular subjects and, therefore, is capable of teaching secular subjects, and in most instances, may be even more effective than the lay teacher. The most significant chapter in this work is the author’s interpretation of the role of Theravada Buddhism in &dquo;change&dquo;. I agree with Prof. Lester that on the surface there have been changes in the Theravada countries with regard to the education of the Monk, and the progressive outlook on the part of Sangha as well as of government leaders. There seem to be many significant innovations with respect to the education of the Nlonk. There are also many signs that both the Monk and the Laity have become more sophisticated in this modernizing world. However, Prof. Lester’s view on Theravada Buddhism and Change might be too optimistic. Superficially, the available data seem to point to a bright future for the Theravada countries. However, one can only wait and see if these new signs of development will really effect substantial change.