Multiple Intelligences: Learners VS Teachers

The study investigated the relationship of the multiple intelligences of the Bachelor of Secondary Education students and their teachers in their major subjects. Four hundred eighty-five (485) BSED students and twenty-two (22) teachers in their respective major subjects participated. The result demonstrates statistically significant in the multiple intelligences of the Bachelors of Secondary Education Major in Technology and Livelihood Education and Music, Arts, Physical Education and Health and their teachers in their respective major subjects. However, result also demonstrates no significance in the multiple intelligences of the Bachelors of Secondary Education Major in Filipino, English, and Mathematics and their teachers in their respective major subjects. The study shows that the dominant intelligences of the BSED students and their teachers in their major subjects are the interpersonal, intrapersonal, and their suited intelligences for their major subjects. The result evidently showed that the BSED students and their major teachers are people and self smart. This only shows that as a teacher, one should know how to socialize appropriately with others and have a deeper understanding with themselves. It also showed that the teachers are really smarter than their students in their major field of specialization. Educators must also consider the multiple intelligences of their students to fully develop their learning capabilities.

Revitalization of Indigenous Knowledge Systems and Sustainable Rural Development in the Punjab

Indigenous Knowledge System (IKS) as evident from the title is an entire system of livelihood which is the intellectual property of a particular community. The study was conducted in a village Sacha Soda of Sheikhupura district of Punjab province in Pakistan. The methodology of the study is descriptive in which different anthropological methods were used. The data collection for this study was conducted during 2005 and 2006. The current research basically undertook the objectives of studying the IKS connected with agriculture as an idea as well as a set of practices, secondly, to study the features of indigenous perception of development and its relationship with sustainability. Thirdly, to construct a case that highlights the fact that what passes for development activity in name of agricultural developmental projects is just another face of elitist and hegemonic systems of exploitation and control in rural areas and finally, to present the characteristics of IKS as viable alternatives that can be implemented for agricultural development, local empowerment and effective decentralization. The aim of the study was to investigate the extent to which the local population in the study locale still practicing their indigenous life styles. In this regard, chapter one is ‘Introduction’ that discusses the research problem along with the detailed narration on the objectives of study, research problem and the hypotheses. The research problem explains that why indigenous knowledge is not consulted in countries like Pakistan. Extensive survey of literature was done to develop a theoretical base for sake of study. Chapter two is ‘Review of Literature’ also includes the hybrid model of study and the concepts borrowed from scholars for the sake of study. Chapter two consists of three main sections including debate on ‘development’ as a concept, ‘indigenous knowledge’ and also a case of rural development in Pakistan. 15Chapter three is ‘village setting’ that provides information on the geographic setting of district including historical details. The chapter highlights the socio-economic life of village people. The social organization of village contains information about social quartiles of village population divided into different quams i.e. Zamindars, Sufaid Posh, Mazaray, and Kammis. The importance of Tabbar (nuclear family) and Kunba (extended family) in social and cultural life of village is also included as well as various other facets of cultural life styles are discussed in the chapter. This chapter also briefly delineates about the political organization and its actors in village. Information on agricultural practices and related occupations brings forth details about the agriculture as main profession of the village people and problems faced by farming community in village. Chapter four is ‘Village Development Process’. This chapter talks about the major interventions made by the agriculture development agencies to cope with the hurdles impeding the agriculture development and sustainability. The chapter contains information on four major development initiatives including Agronomic Research Project (ARP), Second Scarp Transition Project (SSTP), Water Management Program (WMP) and finally, ‘Devolution of Power’ as a composite development scheme to replace the previous development through local government institutions. Chapter five is ‘Agriculture in Sacha Soda’ that adumbrates about the agriculture domain in country as well as in village. The cropping pattern of village is explained in detail with reference to the cultural concept of Zar (capital or money), Zamin (land) and Zaraat (agriculture). After discussing the aridity classification of village, the merits and demerits of Land Tenure System (Zamindari system) operational in village is also sketched with reference to historical and current perspectives. The most important section of chapter is the note on consequences of farm mechanization in Sacha Soda due to which modernization in agriculture domain and mechanization of agriculture became responsive to influential and powerful people in village and adjacent villages.