St. Thomas Aquinas Views on Ethics in the Field of Teaching by Rogelio G. Dela Cruz (October, 2004)

St.Thomas Aquinas was a teacher for the most part of his life. He was born in 1225 and died in 1274. During that time he was engaged, just like us, for the most part in teaching. And like any teacher, not only during his generation but even after his generation, St. Thomas Aquinas had the kind of prominence that he and others encountered. As a matter of fact when he was still a student of the University of Paris, because of the conflict between the seculars and the regulars in the University of Paris, the secular did not want the regulars to be taking up teaching positions. Because of this conflict between the regulars and the seculars, St. Thomas Aquinas who belonged to the regular order was not able to get his degree on that time. And probably what St. Thomas Aquinas said in main part of Summa Theologica, Hardly irrelevance of teaching are reflected in the students that we have.

According to him, teaching involves three kinds of relations; first, the intellectual relation between the teacher and the students; second, the relation between the teacher and his fellow teachers; and third, the relation between the teacher and the school authorities.

Why is the ethical relation important in the learning process? It is important in the learning process because the ethical relation as signified by these three relations that I have mentioned contribute effectively to the learning process, for unless the atmosphere in the school between the teacher and the students, between the teacher and his fellow teachers, between the teacher and the school authorities is ethical then the students will not learn very much. What will come about is some sort of division in the school and as a result of that division the students, instead of attending to their lessons, will be more occupied in promoting divisions in trying to justify themselves against the other.

The reason why ethical relation is very important between the teacher and the students, between the teacher and his fellow teachers, between the teacher and the school authorities is because that ethical relation which is ideal, which is proper, contributes to the concord in the school. St. Jerome makes the following statements about concord. He says, just as concord makes small things works, so discord destroy the greatest things. In other words, if there is concord in the school even the small things can work, the students will learn, the professors will progress, everybody will be happy, the school authorities at the same time can carry on their work in its task of educating the youth. And without it, the effort of the students, the effort of the teachers, and even the school administrators are dissipated in trying to justify themselves against those with whom they are in discord. That is important in promoting concern and concord can only be promoted in the requirements of teaching.

Let us take the first relation - the relation between the teacher and the students. What is the ethical aspect of that relationship? The ethical aspect of the relationship between the teacher and the students may be summed up by two obligations on the part of the teacher. First, there is the obligation in justice and second is the obligation of charity. What is meant by the obligation of the teacher to his students in justice? This means that the teacher in school is supposed to teach. If the teacher does not teach, that means therefore that the teacher is violating his fundamental obligation, which is the obligation in justice. Coming down to the specifics of the matter, what is meant by the obligation in justice? As a teacher, he is supposed to prepare his lessons. Second, he is supposed to communicate what he is supposed to communicate. If the teacher prepares for the lessons but the moment the teacher gets to the class the teacher talks about something else, then, the teacher is not communicating the subject. That again is a violation in justice. So if you noticed that the first obligation of the teacher is preparation, it is required on the part of the progress of knowledge in order to be able to impart something to the students. Unfortunately, there are some teachers who pride themselves in the fact that the kinds of notes, and the kinds of books, the kind of knowledge that they have imbibed when they were still students. I used to remember the University of the East, when a certain teacher would go to class and fondly remember her student days and say, "You know, class, the note’s that I’m using in this class are the notes that I used when I was still a student." And probably she felt that she was doing well by doing that. But, she did not quite realize that doing that kind of statement did not do justice to her as a teacher. There is nothing wrong with a teacher utilizing the kind of notes, which she used when she was still a student. There’s nothing wrong with that except that in so using those kinds of notes it is incumbent upon the teacher to update them and try to find out whether the kind of notes, and the kind of knowledge that she want to impart is up-to-date. Otherwise, the teacher is doing a disservice to the students. That is the obligation in justice.

Together with that, the obligation of preparation on the part of the teacher is the obligation to communicate the subject. Communicating the subject means really making the student learn, and making the student learn is a very complex affair. It’s not merely a matter of a student coming to class opening the book and reading from the book. Unfortunately, that is the practice with so many teachers. A lot of teachers don’t probably realize the evil or the kind of injury they do to the students. That kind of mechanical learning does not really lead to developing one’s mentality. So much so that when the student graduates, if that student ever graduates at all, the students is not quite able to make use of his or her native ability to engage in some kind of independent thinking. When a teacher gets to class it is incumbent upon that teacher to communicate what he or she knows about the subject. Communicating knowledge to the students is a very tricky affair. Of course it is required that the teacher should be able to talk. If the teacher is not able to articulate herself, then certainly that teacher is not fit to be a teacher. And yet, it doesn’t necessarily follow that simply because a teacher is able to talk, that he is already teaching. There are some teachers who believe that every time a student raises a question, even if the question involves an honest difficulty, this particular student is trying to put her or his knowledge to test, which should not be. After all, if the professor is really ready with the subject there is no question of which any teacher can be afraid. These are the two obligation of a teacher. One, there is the obligation of preparation, two, there, is the obligation of communication.

But there is an additional obligation on the part of the teacher, which is also an obligation in justice. That obligation has to do with grading the students. The students must be graded fairly and grading the student fairly means that that student has to be graded on the basis of his own achievement. St. Thomas Aquinas says that in matter of grading the students, they have to be graded according to what they deserve. This is an aspect of what we call commutative justice, it stresses equality.

Distributive justice according to St. Thomas Aquinas, is violated by what we call respect of persons. There is respect of persons when something is given to another not on the basis of due cause but on the basis of this person being this particular kind of person. In class, for instance, if I have to give a higher grade to one students more than to the other because one student belongs to a more influential family than the other, then that is disrespect of persons because the grade given is not on the basis of the due cause. Now, what did St.Thomas Aquinas mean by this: that something is given to another upon reason that is proper for them. In class, students are supposed to be graded on the basis of their abilities, on the basis of their performance, that is due cause. If a student is graded because a student is prettier than the other, or because the student is richer than another or cause this particular student is always nice to this particular professor, then, that is violations of distributive justice, which is respect of person.

Passing on to another relation we now have relation between the teacher and his fellow teachers. What kind of relation should prevail? I think that the very relevant portion of the Summa Theologica of St. Thomas Aquinas that deals with this is friendliness: that there should be friendliness between one teacher and another teacher, among all the teachers in a given school. What is meant by friendliness? Friendliness does not quite mean friendship. Friendliness simply means that a person does not displease his fellow men. Being agreeable to others may be manifested on a number of little ways. They’re so little that probably nobody notices them and probably nobody pays them enough significance. Greetings, for instance, one teacher a good morning, good afternoon, how are you? A ready smile is another example of being pleasant, being friendly. Still another example is doing little favors, being considerate in some little matter, being thoughtful and most of all, not engaging in that kind of gossip that ruins the reputation of one teacher in the eyes of others.

It’s so hard to define in specific terms what is meant by being friendly to others. Friendliness is the kind of attitude that is best exemplified rather than better described. I’m quite sure everybody knows what being friendly means. Even a student can detect what being friendly means. Approaching a professor for instance, asking a question and the professor dismissing the student curtly. The student says, "he is not very friendly, or she is not very friendly." So these are all little ways that somehow contribute to the atmosphere of a school and because they contribute to the atmosphere of a school, it makes very much easier the learning process. Not everybody is a fast learner. There are some learners among us who are little bit slow. A student may find a little difficulty understanding a lesson and the student may dislike going to the teacher if the teacher is not exactly friendly on the matter. The teacher certainly has lost an opportunity of forming a friendship with a student.

Now still on friendliness. Sometimes, we condone because we think it’s a very natural reaction on the part of people. I’m speaking now of envy. St. Thomas Aquinas defines envy as when a person grieves, or he feels sorrow over a good that is possessed by another. Envy is when a person is sorry not because somebody possesses the good but because somebody who possesses the good is not true. What can we do about envy?

Envy has to do with certainty that is conferred upon a person, another person learns about it and that person becomes envious. St. Thomas Aquinas analyzes envy from two standpoints. St. Thomas Aquinas says, "The good that is possessed by one person is possessed by that person either deserving or not deserving the good; the good is either deserved or not deserved." Let us say for instance somebody is conferred a certain good by way of promotion, rank, salary, or anything either deserved or not deserved. Let’s talk about the good that is not deserved. Of course, if the good is not deserved, it should but be any occasion for envy. But then, what should be the attitude? St. Thomas Aquinas says this, "If the good is not deserved, then you must take faith in the fact that in God’s just ordinance, a good that is not deserved is conferred upon a person, either for his correction or for his condemnation."

Supposing for instance, the good is deserved. What should be the attitude? St. Thomas Aquinas says that, "if the good is deserved and you feel bad because he has the good and you are envious then that is your sin." Because If it is a good that is deserved, why envy a person if that person deserves it? St. Thomas Aquinas says that a good that is conferred upon a person that is deserved by that person should never be an occasion for envy. On the contrary, it should be an occasion for rejoicing and emulation and we should act with respect to this good.

Finally, the ethical aspect of the relationship between the teacher and the school authorities may be summed up on observance and obedience. What is meant by observance? Observance, according to St. Thomas Aquinas is paying honor and respect to people who are in positions of dignity and authority. Whether you like it or not, as we are teachers in school, there are people over and above us in matters of administration and these are the people who govern the school and they know the school better than we do. From our own limited perspective maybe we feel we are right about a lot of other things and yet when seen from other perspective we begin to see that we’re not exactly correct. The best way to find out as to whether or not the person is reacting justly with respect to power and authority and then we begin to realize that things are not quite then same when it is there than when he was not there. In another case, St. Thomas Aquinas says that with respect to people, it’s cruel, wrong to question positions of dignity and positions of authority. We owe them honor and respect and because there is authority, we obey. Obedience is something that trends against one’s sensibility. It’s not easy obeying. There are people, having distorted notions than when they obey they are inferior. The feeling is generated that if I were to obey somebody, I am surrendering my will in favor of another’s will that imposes it upon me. That is why obedience is something that is rejected, that is repulsive. But notice what St. Thomas Aquinas says about obedience. The will of one man is not sovereign; the will of another man is not sovereign also. So, I cannot be subject to the will of that particular man. But how can obedience come in? St. Thomas Aquinas says if the will of the person who is over and above me adheres to the will of God then what he wills me to do is something that God wills me to do, assuming only that it adheres to the will of God. In other words, if I obey a lawful command, it is not because I’m inferior. If I obey a lawful command, it is assuming that lawful command in the ultimate analysis comes from God assuming only that it is lawful. The person who commands it has the necessary authority.

If all these, the relation of the teacher to the students, the relation of the teacher to the fellow teachers, the relation of the teacher to the school authorities are harmonious, then we have concord. Now, what is meant by concord? St. Thomas Aquinas says concord does not mean union of opinions. When there is concord it does not mean that people are united in everything that they think about and in everything that they accept. St. Thomas Aquinas says that concord is an effect of charity and when it functions in our institutions, truly, then we have a good school and we have effective students and effective teachers.