Basic education in crisis

The last topic GMA discussed with P-Noy inside the car on their way to the Quirino grandstand was her concern on education. Well, she chose a universal topic to talk about in an uncomfortable moment. It is a subject that people are deeply interested in as we all agree that education is and must be a priority for all.

It is a major priority for all governments as it develops the citizenry who will be the machinery that will lead any country toward progress. Education is necessarily bound up with the life of the nation. Gentleman that he is, P-Noy must have graciously listened to GMA but he actually has already studied all the flaws in the educational system during Arroyo’s administration.

The Liberal Party has an official think tank or research group called the National Institute for Policy Studies which promotes liberalism and democracy in the Philippines. The report entitled, Basic Education under the Arroyo Administration: Opportunity Wasted states the following:

Philippine education is in crisis. This is manifest in performance indicators that reveal high rates of drop-outs across the system, poor performance in national and international achievement tests, poor reading abilities and functional literacy of older students, lack of student preparedness for study in high school and university as revealed in diagnostic tests and entrance exams, and the recognition by the business community of declining abilities of Filipino workers in language proficiency, technical skill and ability to think and solve problems.

For GMA, in her nine years in office, the problem of basic education is directly related to shortages in the system. Hence, the focus is on inputs rather than outcomes; to address shortages in the system rather than work for structural change in basic education.

In the Medium Term Philippine Development Plan (MTPDP) for 2004-2010, indicators on classroom, teachers, textbooks, and computers show that while the Arroyo administration met some of its targets: number of classrooms to be built per year; classroom-pupil ratio; teacher-pupil / student ratio; textbook-pupil / student ratio in some subjects; and the provision of computers in high schools, the manner of measuring success ( for example, the use of double shifting as a way of decreasing the number of classrooms needed) has been questioned.

Government spending in basic education is another indicator of its investment in the future of the young children. The eight years of the Arroyo administration can be broken down into two periods: The first four years of benign neglect (education spending barely keeping up with enrolment), followed by four years of frantic catch-up spending. Overall, the past administration has seen the basic education budget grow at an average of 6.9% per year versus 9.1% annual growth of the national budget.

In contrast, during the time of Cory Aquino and Ramos, growth in basic education spending outpaced growth in the national budget (18.6% vs. 16.1% and 18.8% vs. 12.8%).

In 2003, recognizing the inadequacy of a short 10-year basic education cycle, the DepEd under then Secretary Edilberto de Jesus put in place a High School Bridge Program as a first step towards building an expanded high school. Work also began on a universal preschool program. The combination of both would have added two years to the basic education cycle, enough to catch up with the rest of the world. Instead, in 2004, the Administration scuttled the Bridge Program for political reasons and announced that the day-care centers would be the de facto preschools needed by the system.

In basic education, four indicators matter most: participation (enrolment in schools), retention (leading to graduation), and achievement (learning with competence). In between elementary and high school, there is transition. Focus on getting these indicators right and we solve the majority of problems in the system.

P-Noy has obviously prioritized this matter as reiterated in his 10-point agenda on education. These are: 1. 12-Year Basic Education Cycle (expand basic education in this country from a short 10-year cycle to a globally-comparable 12 years before the end of the next administration (2016).; 2. Universal pre-schooling for all (all public school children and all public schools) will have a full year of pre-schooling as their introduction to formal schooling by 2016.); 3. Madaris Education as a sub-system within the Education system. ( a full basic education for ALL Muslim Filipino children anywhere in the country.); 4. Bring back technical vocational education to high school. ( re-introduce technical-vocational education in our public high schools to better link schooling to local industry needs and employment.); 5. “Every Child a Reader” by Grade 1 (by the end of the next administration, every child must be a reader by Grade 1.); 6. Science and Math proficiency (rebuild the science and math infrastructure in schools so that we can produce more scientists, engineers, technicians, technologists and teachers in our universities so that this country can be more globally competitive in industry and manufacturing.); 7. Assistance to private schools as partners in basic education ( expand the Government Assistance to Students and Teachers in Private Education Program (GASTPE) to a target of 1 million private HS students every year through education service contracting (ESC) while doing away with the wasteful education voucher system (EVS) of the past administration.); 8. Medium of Instruction rationalized (we should become tri-lingual as a country: Learn English well and connect to the World; Learn Filipino well and connect to our Country; Retain your mother tongue and connect to your heritage); 9. Quality textbooks (Textbooks will be judged by three criteria: quality, better quality, and more quality.); 10. Covenant with Local Governments to build more schools (build more schools in areas where there are no public or private schools in a covenant with LGUs so that we can realize genuine education for all.)

Historically public education has mirrored society’s constant ability to change which is really evident up to the present times. Declining growth rates coupled with a failure to compete internationally and globally has resulted in several criticisms believed to be brought about by the country’s prevailing educational practices. Students are unmotivated with academics which may be due to the lack of relevance of the present schools’ curricula to real-life issues and failure to embody a holistic view of the world. Thus, the deteriorating present school situation has led curriculum reformers and developers to believe that problems prevalent in schools today are an outcome of unrealistic, outmoded curriculum structure which has failed to keep pace with the rapid changing times and with the advances in society.

Education in this country has been imperfect and deficient. It is the responsibility of our educators to help the government and the nation to carry on that vital work of giving the right kind of training to our growing generations, an education that will serve as the foundation of our national life, the first step of our national defense, and the guarantee of enduring prosperity and the future greatness of our country.

If we fix basic education, we fix the long-term problems of the country. And if we fix the country’s problems, we will build a truly strong society we can proudly call the Philippines. –Sara Soliven De Guzman (The Philippine Star)