Titles and Ranks 101

I originally intended to entitle this blog entry as “Robert’s System of Titles and Ranks,” but since most suggestions below came from already established sources I opted to simplify it. Anyway, as the title above suggests, this entry will talk about how one addresses another, particularly within an academic community.

Who is a professor? Who is the Professor? College instructors, regardless of their actual rank and position, are identified as professor. But not all college instructors have the rank of Professor. Personally, I believe only those who have such rank deserve to be called as one, as form of respect to their seniority, academic achievements and expertise. So how do you address your college instructors?

Instructors are usually bachelor’s degree holders, either fresh (and sometimes not so fresh) graduates or with some graduate units. They are to be addressed as Mr or Ms or Miss. For example, Juan dela Cruz is an Instructor; you address him as Mr Juan dela Cruz or Mr dela Cruz. It is not a practice to append the degree at the end of his name, to wit: Juan dela Cruz, BA, so do not do it.

Next in rank are the Assistant Professors. They are usually Master’s degree holders, at the very least, but sometimes, there are doctorate degree holders (especially if you start teaching already with a PhD). They are to be addressed in three ways. You can use the full spelling of the position when addressing for the first time in a document, e.g. Assistant Professor Juan dela Cruz. In succeeding mentions, you can use Asst Prof [Juan] dela Cruz, or Prof [Juan] dela Cruz.

Assistant professors and associate professors follow the same scheme. The rank of Associate Professor is awarded by merit. That means if you have published journal articles and satisfied other criteria for promotion, you can be promoted to the rank. Usually, Associate Professors have PhDs but it does not mean a Master’s degree holder cannot be one. Again, the basis of rising up to this rank is merit. In the first instance, you can use Associate Professor Juan dela Cruz. In succeeding mentions, you can use Assoc Prof [Juan] dela Cruz or Prof [Juan] dela Cruz.

The rank of Professor is the highest rank. Like the rank of Associate Professor, the rank of Professor is awarded by merit. By practice, only a full professor can be addressed with a fully spelled “Professor.” In this case, you use Professor Juan dela Cruz or Professor dela Cruz.

Dr? Dra? Or PhD? By personal preference, you only choose between using Dr and PhD (or MD, DrPH, DSc, DPA, as the case may be). Also, you don’t use Dra, even if you are addressing an MD, and most especially if you are addressing a PhD! For example, Juan dela Cruz has a doctorate degree. You can address him as Dr Juan dela Cruz or Juan dela Cruz, PhD.  Now, if Juan dela Cruz is a college instructor with the rank of Associate Professor, you can address him as Associate Professor Juan dela Cruz, PhD. After that, you may address him as either Assoc Prof dela Cruz or Dr dela Cruz. In other universities abroad, they combine the rank and degree, e.g. Assoc Prof Dr dela Cruz. However, such form is not widely used in our universities.

How about Master’s degree holders? It is rare that MA or MS is appended in the name, e.g. Juan dela Cruz, MA. If Juan dela Cruz, MA is a college instructor, you can address him as Assistant Professor Juan dela Cruz even without the MA. The rank already denotes that he has an MA degree. I noticed, however, that some Master’s degrees are appended like MPA, MPM, MPAf, MHPEd and MPH. This may be used to distinguish their degrees from the usual MA or MS.

I don’t know if you’ve noticed. I did not use period (.) to in between letters of PhD, and after titles Prof, Mr, and Ms. In the British system, they drop the period; so, Mr dela Cruz, Ms dela Cruz, Dr dela Cruz, Prof dela Cruz, and Juan dela Cruz, PhD.

If you are curious, how about a Teaching Associate? I am a Teaching Associate. You can address me like this: Mr Jan Robert Go. Why? I have the same case with an Instructor, but I have a different rank. It’s complicated so I won’t discuss it now.

This is how I do my addressing of people. I hope I was able to share my method to everyone.

On my father

Nickname-wise, my father and me would share one. He is Robert. I am Robert. Aside from that, we don’t have any other similarities. My father is good in mathematics. He was an electronics engineering major when he was in college, while today I venture into the social sciences studying politics and government. My father was a good basketball player during his younger years; I never had the chance to play basketball outside physical education classes. In short, we never shared interests.

I grew with my mother and sisters in Batangas. My father was left in Manila to work. Solitude may have tempted him to choose an undesirable path. It resulted to two half-brothers. But life was not as harsh as I first imagined it to be. Things went well, better than during what I consider the dark ages of my early life. There were misunderstanding between my parents, among them and my sisters. I chose to stay on the side and reflect on that challenge we had to face. My father left us for some time. My mother kept us fed and sustained us. Thank God, we finished our secondary education, no matter what.

My father decided to work abroad, to distance himself from the troubles haunting him and to have some peace and quiet. It worked for all parties involved. Qatar was far, but that was better, I think. My mother continued working. There is no point for my parents to stop working while all three of us are studying in college. Both of my sisters were in private universities; I was the only one who studied in a public university.

Even if my father is working abroad, the salary is not enough. He is just getting the same amount he is getting here. The distance was the only difference. Contrary to expectations of relatives and other friends, working abroad does not translate to greener pastures and bulky pockets. The earnings of my father were enough to pay for the house rental and the tuition instalments for my sisters’ education. My mother’s kept us eating and living by paying for our food and other bills. We were living a simple life, just at the sustenance level. For my part, I had to work as a student assistant in our department to supplement my 50-peso allowance during college. I brought packed-lunch to save money.

Seldom do I speak about my father. I cannot say we are very close. Neither can I say that we are not close. He is my father. But I guess things and events in our lives were made perfectly to give us a balance of successes and hardships, triumphs and challenges. I still believe that my father is the best father one could have, that I could have. I wouldn’t be myself without my father.

Next week, my father will come back from Qatar. He’ll be spending much of his time fixing his papers and will return back a week or so after. I don’t know if my father will be able to read this, but as much as I love my mother, I do so for my father. I told my mother once, if anyone would hurt my father or her, I will do my very best to defend both of them.

RTW

It’s one of a kind. A rare occasion on my life so far. I can’t believe I went there and appreciated whatever was there. I’m talking about the show I attended, which is part of Philippine Fashion Week.

Fashion is the keyword. Who would expect to see me there? Nobody. The fact of knowing it is taken as a kid or joke. But I did. Thanks to my former student, Mike Lavarez, who invited me to come and watch. Mike is one of designers participating in this season’s fashion week. It was his show, together with other designers, that I watched.

I was a bit hesitant when invited me before. I was like: It’s not me. As some would put it, it was funny to know I’m going in such activities. Maybe because of what they perceive about me and how they know me. But then, it’s a break and Sunday. I’m free and have nothing important to do.

I came. It was stunningly cold. Good thing I brought my jacket, surprisingly jiving with the ‘fashion’ theme of the event. Inside, I’m wearing my usual teaching attire in response to the semi-formal dresscode indicated in the ticket. From the moment I entered the venue, I felt like a total outlier and stranger, a visitor who missed the tour and went somewhere else. But then, it would be shameful to step back.

I’m there, right at the middle of many people with varying fashion tastes, some outlandish but tolerable. But I am amused by the sight. The guests came with their own style. Uniquely different. I, on one side, is like a corporate executive amidst these fashionistas.

It was my first time to see models walking in what they call runway. It was my first fashion show. For me, it was like undertaking a qualitative research using participant observation, trying to absorb their culture, and observe the nuances between and among individuals in the room.

The designs would need an artistic eye to be appreciated. I was not a stranger in this sense, thankfully. I like the minimalist designs but evoking elegance. I think the models also add a factor in the elegance of an design. Colors are experimented on. I’m used to monochromes. Some designs were too colorful to be placed in one item. But I don’t have proper training to criticize those designs. Mike’s however was simple. It does not seek to impress nor does it sink into oblivion. Simple and good.

All in all, this experience is something new to me that I will add to my chest of knowledge. I hope this allows me to expand my universe and be able to socialize (in a positive sense) with other people.

Again, I thank Mike for this chance, and also congratulate him for the great show. That’s all!

On meanings

Are meanings constructed or found?

This is a very essential question, I believe. Everyday, we interact with people. We use expressions and utterances. But what do we mean when we use a word? Are we talking about the word itself or the meaning that the word implies? How do we know what that word means?

Meanings could be both constructed and found. But if you will insist, meanings are firstly constructed, then found. We all know what the word with letters O, N, and E means. It means the first number with actual value, after zero and before two. It refers to a singular entity. But the meaning of the word “one” was constructed before we found it. Somebody somewhere in sometime thought of the word and placed a meaning on it, just like other words we use everyday or occasionally. Once constructed, meanings are found. Probably the first place to find a meaning is the dictionary. But the real dictionary, I believe, is the society itself. Society, through the individuals, constructs the meanings, not only of words, but also of other things beyond words (e.g. actions).

But it is not society per se; it is the individuals within the society that create meaning. I can create my own meaning for a word. I can actually impose that meaning if I wanted to. Anyone can do the same. However, the question there is whether people will accept the meanings you have created. Of course at your level, you have already accepted your meaning, but on another level, that is somebody else not you or not your fictitious character in mind, it also have to be accepted.

Why is it necessary to be accepted? Meanings have to be accepted in order for them to operate. If we both agree that ONE means what I meant ONE to be, then it will mean the way it means. Otherwise, we would have different conceptions of ONE, which may not be bad at all, but may prevent us from arriving at anything we could want. But then, being accepted does not translate to being right. It is a different matter altogether. And with emphasis, right is, so far, hard to determine. Acceptance is something workable for the moment.

Why is right hard to determine? Why is acceptance workable? Because meanings are not necessarily right. They are constructions. They are impositions. And who has the monopoly of determining the “right” meaning or the “right” in itself? Acceptance, now, becomes a manageable alternative to the dichotomy of right and wrong, true and false.

So how do we evaluate given that things are either accepted or not and not determined as either right or wrong? There is an assumption: We have to evaluate. But do we really have to? You see, when you seek to evaluate, you assign values. Whoever evaluates assign the values. It is not a matter of everyone imposes his or her own “right” or “good” over something, which is evaluated. It is a matter of knowing what it is and accepting it. We go back to the previous question when we deal with this one. Who determines what when one evaluates? In fact, it is not always the case that things be labelled as good or bad or anything.

To sum up, meanings are firstly constructed, and then found. Meanings have to be accepted in order for them to operate. Meanings are not necessarily right or wrong; it is a matter of knowing what it is and accepting it.

On love

What will you answer if someone tells you ‘I love you’?

As of the moment, there are three answers that come to mind. These three answers will show how the recipient of the message is responding.

Thank you. This could probably be the lamest answer that one can give. Definitely, someone who has the guts to tell you that s/he loves you would expect a more meaningful response. That is not to say that appreciation of one’s admiration or affection is less meaningful, if not meaningless. Thank you is a response for a different statement. It’s not for ‘I love you’. Unless ‘thank you’ would be assigned a deeper meaning, it will be the lamest response.

I love you, too. Or maybe you want to take a notch or two higher by responding properly. ‘I love you, too.’ But of course, there is a condition here: That you also love the person who expressed his/her love for you. Otherwise, you can opt to respond the lamest way (see explanation above).

Also, when one responds ‘I love you, too’ the ‘too’ in the sentence means a mutual understanding of the meaning of ‘love’: That they agree on what love means for them, and that they agree to express such feelings to each other. But such a response is not a binding contract between the parties involve. It is simply an expression and more importantly an acceptance of such feeling and giving it back as an affirmation.

But what if they do not agree? What if one party does not understand? What could be the possible answer?

What is love? The last, and I believe the most meaningful, answer is to ask what love is. I do not demand for a well-meaning answer, nor an answer that can be used by all mankind. What do you mean when you say ‘love’? Our assumption earlier is that people express, accept and affirm love from another because they understand or they have a common perception of love. But what if they don’t?

Love is one of the many four letter words you can find in the dictionary. It could be assigned with various meanings, basically depending on who uses it and how it is used. When one uses the word ‘love’ s/he can be blinded by the feelings and emotions wrapping his/her heart, mind and body. That makes perfect love an illusion. And until such time that the two parties realize that they love each other the way they both understand, love will never be the same for the two of them. They will simply be enmeshed with an emotion they might not be able to escape, or worst bring them suffering and despair.

So when somebody tells you that s/he loves you, how will you respond?