rja2015
May 8, 2015
Research Papers / ROTC and Security Awareness Research - Need critique for the conceptual framework [6]
My research is about ROTC and security awareness. I argued that security awareness is fundamental to defense preparedness and military training. Hence, without security awareness, military training is fruitless. For my research, I administered objective exams to ROTC students to know the level of their security awareness. Unfortunately, none of them passed, suggesting that the ROTC education in the country does not focus on security issues.
Below are the brief normative arguments that I used for my conceptual framework. The following arguments are not empirically grounded. They are normative assumptions that I derived from the theory of the military philosopher Clausewitz. I used his theory to argue that ROTC (Reserved Officer Training Corps) education in the Philippines must focus on both military training and security and civic awareness. If the ROTC focuses exclusively on military training, it is a form of academic militarization which is incompatible with democratic education. I was wondering if the following brief arguments are logically sufficient for my conceptual framework. Thank you very much in advance!
_______________________________________________________________________________
Conceptual Framework:
The study highlights the importance of security awareness in developing a democratic security as postulated by Clausewitz in his Trinity of War. Clausewitz' pioneering theory can be utilized to support each of the following postulates.
(a) National Security Awareness is in itself important in a Democratic Society
Simply put, security awareness is in itself important, since public support, participation, and scrutiny sustains their government's defense posture. More so, it is their responsibility to do so to check on their government.
(b) National Security Awareness defines the objective of Defense Preparedness
One can take a less exhaustive way to argue that security awareness precedes defense preparedness. We can assert that the latter requires the former so that it becomes "goal-specific" in a scientific sense. In this sense, defense preparedness is misguided if it is not theoretically grounded in or informed by the concepts in line with national and domestic security.
(c) Defense Preparedness yields better results if added to National Security Awareness
Educational perennialism postulates that education, especially those programs that are considered of national significance, should focus on teaching topics having "eternal value" and positive social effect (Barrow, Robin, and Woods, 1971). A democratic education ought to give utmost regard to justice, social equality, and nationalism. Thus, ROTC training should equally focus on both theoretical topics and military training. Among these essential theoretical topics are security and civic awareness.
Indeed, being knowledgeable about domestic and international security issues contributes to effective citizenry. Not only does it enable an individual to understand public dialogues and forums on security issues, it would also make him more critical in evaluating whatever reasonable measure the government may adopt for its security.
(d) National Security Awareness breeds a democratic security culture that Defense Preparedness alone cannot.
Security awareness maybe too abstract to be useful in an actual combat situation. Indeed, security awareness and defense preparedness may not have a pragmatic relationship, considering that the former is theoretical and the latter is practical. Hence, it may be absurd to assume that those with good security awareness are necessarily capable and prepared to defend their country.
There is, however, an indirect but significant relationship between the two. A security conscious individual, being aware of the different the internal and external threats, is more supportive to the security and foreign policies of his government than someone with a highly personal security understanding. This support, or passion in Clausewitz' term, may prove to be as beneficial as combat preparedness, especially when the government seeks legitimate justification for its defense strategy.
My research is about ROTC and security awareness. I argued that security awareness is fundamental to defense preparedness and military training. Hence, without security awareness, military training is fruitless. For my research, I administered objective exams to ROTC students to know the level of their security awareness. Unfortunately, none of them passed, suggesting that the ROTC education in the country does not focus on security issues.
Below are the brief normative arguments that I used for my conceptual framework. The following arguments are not empirically grounded. They are normative assumptions that I derived from the theory of the military philosopher Clausewitz. I used his theory to argue that ROTC (Reserved Officer Training Corps) education in the Philippines must focus on both military training and security and civic awareness. If the ROTC focuses exclusively on military training, it is a form of academic militarization which is incompatible with democratic education. I was wondering if the following brief arguments are logically sufficient for my conceptual framework. Thank you very much in advance!
_______________________________________________________________________________
Conceptual Framework:
The study highlights the importance of security awareness in developing a democratic security as postulated by Clausewitz in his Trinity of War. Clausewitz' pioneering theory can be utilized to support each of the following postulates.
(a) National Security Awareness is in itself important in a Democratic Society
Simply put, security awareness is in itself important, since public support, participation, and scrutiny sustains their government's defense posture. More so, it is their responsibility to do so to check on their government.
(b) National Security Awareness defines the objective of Defense Preparedness
One can take a less exhaustive way to argue that security awareness precedes defense preparedness. We can assert that the latter requires the former so that it becomes "goal-specific" in a scientific sense. In this sense, defense preparedness is misguided if it is not theoretically grounded in or informed by the concepts in line with national and domestic security.
(c) Defense Preparedness yields better results if added to National Security Awareness
Educational perennialism postulates that education, especially those programs that are considered of national significance, should focus on teaching topics having "eternal value" and positive social effect (Barrow, Robin, and Woods, 1971). A democratic education ought to give utmost regard to justice, social equality, and nationalism. Thus, ROTC training should equally focus on both theoretical topics and military training. Among these essential theoretical topics are security and civic awareness.
Indeed, being knowledgeable about domestic and international security issues contributes to effective citizenry. Not only does it enable an individual to understand public dialogues and forums on security issues, it would also make him more critical in evaluating whatever reasonable measure the government may adopt for its security.
(d) National Security Awareness breeds a democratic security culture that Defense Preparedness alone cannot.
Security awareness maybe too abstract to be useful in an actual combat situation. Indeed, security awareness and defense preparedness may not have a pragmatic relationship, considering that the former is theoretical and the latter is practical. Hence, it may be absurd to assume that those with good security awareness are necessarily capable and prepared to defend their country.
There is, however, an indirect but significant relationship between the two. A security conscious individual, being aware of the different the internal and external threats, is more supportive to the security and foreign policies of his government than someone with a highly personal security understanding. This support, or passion in Clausewitz' term, may prove to be as beneficial as combat preparedness, especially when the government seeks legitimate justification for its defense strategy.
