02 Rizal and the Theory of Nationalism

TASK PERFORMACE

Jose Rizal is the father of nationalism, and therefore we must incorporate him in our teaching and

learning. That is why Republic Act 1425 authorized the study of his life, activities, and writings, particularly

his books Noli me Tangere and El Filibusterismo. Additional policy statement is also from the Commission

of Higher Education (CHED) No. 3, s. 1995, which states that instruction, specifically his two books, must

be incorporated throughout college. It is only right that students, instructors, and the people of the

Philippines learn about Jose Rizal's outstanding ideals.

The study of Rizal's course requires us grasp what nationalism, patriotism, and volunteering are

showing that you should demonstrate your patriotism without turning to violence or the use of a weapon.

The day of the GomBurZa's execution, Filipinos demonstrated their patriotism and nationalism. There is a

wealth of literature about nationalism produced by a variety of authors with varying lines of descent. As a

result, we can't be sure if the material in the literature was real, credible, and relevant.

The educational subject on Jose Rizal's life, works, and writings was not prescribed by law for

nothing. Apart from being impracticable, the course provides so many advantages that certain modern

academics claim it is more helpful than many courses in other curricula, especially when taught well. In

different ways, the topic teaches that education is a necessary component for a person or a country to be

free and prosperous. The history forced us to figure out who we are. We have completely defined

ourselves not just in terms of where we are heading, but also in terms of where we came from. Our

heredity, past practices, and old propensities as well as country are all significant indicators and drivers of

our current situation. Surprisingly, the presence of a very important public verified.

Our scholar's role in nation building, focusing unusually on a fraction of the challenges that

presently challenge us as a country. When coupled with the similarly problematic term "public," the

concept "scholarly" is so deeply mismanaged that it is difficult to grasp what sophisticated task it is relied

on to perform. When I am referred to as a "public academic," I cringe. I've had many kinds of pride in my

life, but I've yet to encounter someone who transmits the calling: "Public scholarly." A mastermind is

someone who spends her time creating, studying, or thinking out ideas rather than creating stuff. In every
event, this indistinguishable term would cast such a wide net that it would very definitely fail to distinguish

the sort of work we implicitly anticipate of scholars.