Ernesto Benavides Ornelas has been Director of Social Training at the Technological Institute of Monterrey since 1998. He graduated from the Strengthening of Social Leadership Programme offered by the Latin American School for Studies (LASPAU) of Harvard University. He coordinates the Social and Citizenry Training Programme along with the National Citizens Academy. He has worked for the National Rural Confederation of the state of Tamaulipas and as a Lecturer-Researcher at the Independent University of Tamaulipas and at the Monterrey Technological Institute. He currently works in the Management Division of Training and Social Development of the Academic Vicerectory. His publications include: Training and Social Development (2009) Monterrey Technological Institute; The transformation of the Community Social Service in the Monterrey Technological Institute (2007) Monterrey Technological Institute, United Mexico: Civic and Voluntary Participation (2008), 70 Years of Social Service in Mexico: The Mexican Social Service in the Current Educational and Social Climate (2006).

Contacto: Dirección de Formación y Desarrollo Social – (IDeSS), Vicerrectoría Académica, Tecnológico de Monterrey. Av. Eugenio Garza Sada 2501 Col. Tecnológico MONTERREY N.L.MÉXICO.  ebenavid@itesm.mx

   Versión para Imprimir - Printable  Version

  

 Ernesto Benavides COMMENT COMENTA.pdf

GLOBAL EDUCATION, AN EDUCATION FOR DEVELOPMENT

We all inhabit this space we call Planet Earth and we all have an active role to ensure social well-being. The right to development is not only a universal right but also everyone’s responsibility; it is an essential human right in which society and all the elements that form it converge. Its connection to political, social, cultural, civil and economic rights is practically unbreakable, although the reality of today’s society, however, seems to show it does not matter that development is being managed in an exclusive, unequal and unsustainable manner.

 

EDUCATIONAL IMPERATIVES FOR DEVELOPMENT THROUGH HIGHER EDUCATION

The idea that higher education and its graduates joining the wave of university social responsibility is long overdue is fundamentally wrong. I ask myself instead, at what point did we decide that University not being socially responsible was even an option? With an unequivocal presence, social responsibility is inherent to the origins of university. In turn, civic education at university must be designed as a means of implementing the university’s mission, which aims to train the students to become active citizens and leaders in the development of a civil society that builds fairer societies and indeed, plural societies. Today it is not enough to focus on making the society in which one lives more just; a healthy social fabric requires a civil society that participates on both local and global spheres.

It is civic education that accompanies and instructs the student to understand and develop the skills necessary to carry out their civic duties in the context of plural societies and modern emerging democracies that are consolidating or are already consolidated. University social responsibility should never have been ignored. Rather, what is needed in higher education is the responsibility to be more active in civic participation.

Below, the imperatives of current and future higher education are mentioned:

- Updating the educational model to meet the industrial, technological development, economic and scientific requirements as well as those of humanities, all with the aim of giving social relevance to the knowledge being gained, promoted, accumulated and seeking to transfer to all aspects of daily life at a personal, family, local, regional, national and international level.

- Ethical and citizenship training is essential to stop the unfortunately widespread force that is damaging the social fabric in order to contribute towards inclusion, cohesion and social development.

- Education for democracy, social inclusion, ideological diversity and equal development opportunities for all societies.

- Articulating the different spaces that make up the educational model of any educational intuitional: the curricular space, cross curricular, co-curricular and finally the environment that prevails in the class room and institution.

-Not replicating the flawed system, that is to say, not replicating those educational models and learning environments that come to light from the simplest eminently exclusive diagnostic.

 

CIVIC TRAINING FROM SERVICE-LEARNING (S-L)

Dr Andy Furco’s article “The section of Self-assessment for the Institutionalisation of Service-Learning in Higher Education” proposes an idea formed by many researchers and academics who, from the 80′s and 90′s, took on the responsibility of raising the debate of teaching systems and methods that would go on to help civic education. The article’s contribution is highly significant, triggering large debates and actions in Universities in the USA, South America and Mexico. Interestingly, in recent years this methodology has been catching on in Spain and other European and African countries.

There are many, many important figures in the noble educational area of promoting S-L; the contribution of those who have given and continue to give life to the Campus Compac and its promotion by people that lead and form part of national organisations in the USA is paramount. In Latin America, the contribution of the Latin American Centre for Service-Learning (CLAYSS) and the “Build the Country” movement in Chile (where another Pioneer in S-L originated and which endorses the Spanish translation of the article) are other examples of merit.

This count is by no means exhaustive, as I would incur serious errors and omissions if I were to attempt to name all S-L promoters, forerunners and sources of inspiration with regards to the people and institutions they represent. The upshot is that in the collective memory of all of us who currently work to help global educational causes, the article named “The section of Self-assessment for the Institutionalisation of Service-Learning in Higher Education”, is up-to-date, far-reaching and has a very broad spectrum. Sometimes our batteries may run out due to disappointment or indifference and it is always worth flicking through the pages of the article when in need of some sparks of encouragement.

For any higher education institution or organisation that tries to implement S-L, the critical pathway and itinerary described in this article is undeniable. The compilation of experiences that gave life to it is truly exhaustive and in-depth, and offers the learning experience of great thinkers and experts of education for development.

S-L in education is a conscious decision that helps promote civic-ethic as well as personal and social action points for us, the individuals, who shape society.

Its study and operation places an emphasis on the development of skills that structure an educational process and gives the institution the ideologically neutral stance required; S-L is simply a proselytiser to the construction of universal citizenship, allowing the learning of its own specific content in any degree or study plan subjects while developing social skills for life, a good life.

With S-L, learning is carried out while working with others and within the environment in which we live. Combing the visions of two exciting worlds: first, meaningful learning achieved by “doing” (which includes all the theories that formed this current teaching practice) and second, but equally relevant, the importance of intermediate outline through “S” and “L” – the vision of creating a clear, genuine and convincing social use to what is learnt.

This is how the hopeful yet realistic pairing is formed, which leaves out the utopias of teaching and learning. It is a pairing that offers a global education that generates an accepting attitude, active respect, true cooperation, solidarity, mutual trust, community well-being and a spirit of generosity. It is an education that contributes to the integration of different acting forces that are committed to the activities of S-L and that allow the formation of better democracies. To anyone that argues this is exaggerated I will say that at least it allows any elements of an existing democracy to improve its prominence in society.

S-L has a specific quality about it: it encourages students -and this is brilliant as applied to both young children or adults – to have freedom of choice of any specific citizenship model, as it helps develop skills, attitudes, knowledge and values essential to conduct oneself freely and fully in the societies within which we live that are becoming more complex and plural. S-L allows any model or type of citizen found documented in the old or contemporary bibliography to be carried out successfully.

 

DEMOCRACY, GLOBAL EDUCATION AND DEVELOPMENT COOPERATION

It can be said that without democracy there would be no complete society; current societies call for a citizen base developed from the practice of personal and professional skills allowing people to satisfactorily involve themselves in matters of public life, thus becoming promoters of a social justice that is shared by all.

I am referring to a shared justice that ensures everyone’s interests are considered, not just those of a select few. How can one ask someone to collaborate, to work with others and to involve themselves in development cooperation if they consider the treatment they receive from their society to be unfair? Here lies one of the main evils of our time, an evil that fosters violence and promotes individualism and fear or disappointment when dealing with civic matters.

Higher education should contribute to the development of new theories and generate new justice models that are egalitarian and accepted by society as a whole. In our specific case, S-L has already established itself as an alternative that is genuinely available to any education entity wishing to promote democracy as a way of life and government.

S-L provides students with an in-depth understanding of the local community in which they live with their fingers on the pulse, synchronising with its rhythm. Why learn things at school that enable us to contribute to the social and economic development of our society and then outside of education carry out voluntary acts so “we feel” we are better people? This is the S-L integrality concept, while at the same time learning aspects of professional life and always valuing our daily life in the context of our own environment.

S-L generates a sense of belonging in and appreciation for the immediate and peripheral community, and instils solidarity. Is this not the objective of civic and development education? Civic duties lie on fundamental pillars, including the sense of belonging, solidarity, justice and the participation of its citizens. S-L merges these elements and goes even further, developing a sense of commitment, belonging, civic involvement and social skills, among others, in the lives of those involve with S-L.

S-L favours the understanding of a democratic life, generating social capital, bringing about and praising social networks that are responsible for the social transformation that is required, a transformation that leaves behind that which was considered possible only by the state; S-L opens up new the possibility of constructing a responsible and determined civil society.

 

A LACK OF EDUCATIONAL POLICIES THAT SUPPORT GLOBAL EDUCATION EQUALS A LACK OF SOLIDARITY

The institutionalisation of educational policies that favour global education in educational systems is enjoying a great deal of progress. All it takes to see this is simply reading any research reports that with a simple click can be accessed in any digital peer library. It is however clear that it is not enough. So what is needed? If you are not yet convinced of its effectiveness in higher education, simply take a look at the communities of any suburban, rural or even any historical city centre.

Citizenship is something that transcends the individual; someone is a citizen as a result of their interaction with their peers in their professional and everyday lives. Citizenship is knowing: knowing what to do and knowing how to work together. S-L brings together this knowledge, provides tools and civically empowers individuals; it opens constructive dialogue to plurality and tolerance, it brings out appreciation for justice, equality, the common good and appreciation for democracy as a way of life and government.

The section of the article that concerns us comes from the itinerary suggested to achieve S-L institutionalisation. It is not an easily-to-make cooking recipe, rather it is a group of well structured reflections that come from a logical appropriation of the methodology. It strives to combine the institutions’ own nature and environment with the method; afterwards, it follows it up step by step in order to achieve progress that will stand the test of time.

The largest contribution that institutionalising a programme such as S-L can bring, as Andy Furco’s article suggests, is that it has left an indelible mark on institutions of committing to working towards global education. Established programmes are shielded from the daily variations of their institutional dynamics, the progress made is protected and guarantees the contribution made to reduce the lack of solidarity that is evident today.

Institutionalising the promotion of global education in higher education is rather worthwhile in itself, opening new horizons, and justifying – in the case of many of us – calling ourselves university graduates; on the one hand, civic training is also worthwhile and justifies all efforts made and to be made in its favour from the cultural, economic, political and social development perspectives. It seeks to establish positive circles, synergies, empowerment and balancing of power; the key is to promote positive contribution and avoid going backwards or becoming divided.

Higher education is vital in the task of promoting practices and successful methods in favour of democracy and social development. The process of institutionalising internal educational policies that favour proliferation of these practices is imperative; precisely there lies the historical relevance of the article by Dr Andy Furco and that you, as our reader, can understand and reflect upon in the very first edition of this journal that goes out into cyberspace today. Congratulations and I wish you every success!