Glenne B. Lagura
http://dnsc.academia.edu/ennelgArugal
A Policy Paper in PA 241 (Public Policy and Program Administration)
An Analysis of the Policy: K-12 Education Program
Submitted to:
PROF. RODRIGO B. GIDUCOS, MPA Instructor
Submitted by:
HELEN GRACE A. DE JUSTO ELMAR JOHN O. DIGAL GLENNE B. LAGURA “academe group”
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHEASTERN PHILIPPINES COLLEGE OF GOVERNANCE BUSINESS AND ECONOMICS Master of Public Administration
March 31, 2012 Page | 1
I.
Background
Enhancing the quality of basic education in the Philippines is urgent and critical. Due to that, one of the discussions of DepEd which incurred last October 2010 is to enhance the basic education program of the country in a manner that is least disruptive to the current curriculum, most affordable to government and families, and aligned with international practice through the K-12 policy. The poor quality of basic education is reflected in the low achievement scores of Filipino students. Many students who finish basic education do not possess sufficient mastery of basic competencies. One reason is that students do not get adequate instructional time or time on task. This quality of education is reflected in the inadequate preparation of high school graduates for the world of work or entrepreneurship or higher education. High school graduates also do not possess the basic competencies or emotional maturity essential for the world of work. 1 While the availability of economic opportunities contributes to this, it also illustrates the mismatch in the labor and education markets. The World Bank Philippines Skills Report in 2009 reveals, based on a survey of employers, serious gaps in critical skills of graduates such as problemsolving, initiative and creativity, and, to a lesser extent, gaps in job specific technical skills. The enhanced K-12 program, or the Department of Education’s (DepEd) proposal to overhaul the basic and secondary education curriculum by adding two more years to the system is arguably one of the most drastic and controversial programs of the Aquino administration. The program is proposed to start in school year 20122013 for Grade 1 and first year high school students with the target of full implementation by SY 2018-2019. According to SEAMEO Innotech 2011, which is considered as the preferred education solutions provider in Southeast Asia and also an ISO 9001: 2008 Certified, the Philippine is the last country in Asia and one of only three countries in the world with a 10-year pre-university program. The K-12 model to be implemented in the country is an educational system for basic and secondary education patterned after the United 1
DepEd discussion paper, “The Enhanced K+12 Basic Education Program “, 05 October 2010.
Page | 2
States, Canada, and some parts of Australia. The current basic education system is also an archetype of American schooling but with a 10-year cycle. DepEd reasons that it is high time to adopt a K-12 system, attributing the low achievement scores and poor quality of basic education to the present school setup. Following wide protests over the proposal, the department released its official position defending K-12.2 “We need to add two years to our basic education, those who can afford pay up to fourteen years of schooling before university. Thus, their children are getting into the best universities and the best jobs after graduation. I want at least 12 years for our public school children to give them an even chance at succeeding.” quoted from the statement of His Excellency President Benigno S. Aquino III. K-12 has been met with criticism from youth and student groups, teachers, parents and the academic community. The DepEd, for its part, appears determined to enact the program with its proposed budget catering mostly to preparing the grounds for its eventual implementation. The DepEd argues that the K-12 program will be the solution to yearly basic education woes and the deteriorating quality of education. Critics, however, counteract that the education crisis needs to be addressed more fundamentally and adding more school years would only exacerbate the situation. With the proposed policy K-12 program, various arguments and criticisms were formulated. Different conditions generate different assumptions, which in turn create different policies. The success of any policy depends on the correctness of its policy assumptions.3 Taking this fact into consideration, questions take place, should policy assumptions be made based on current realities? Or should policy be based on policy conditions as expected to happen, but which may not exist by the time the policy implementation was started? The below mentioned problems are just some of the queries where necessary answers are in need to be sought in order to satisfy 2
Sarah Katrina Maramag, “Is the K-12 model good for the Philippine Education System?”, Philippine Online Chronicles, May 2011. 3
Junifen F. Gauuan, “K+12 Policy Framework: Pessimistic, Optimistic or Realistic?”, 26 March 2011.
Page | 3
uncertainties with regards to the implementation of this educational changes provided in K-12 Policy. II.
Problem Statement
1. What is the status of the country’s educational resources as to: a. b. c. d.
teaching force; facilities and equipments; learning materials; and budget?;
2. What are the provisions of the policy to the following direct entities: a. family; b. manpower;∗ and c. instructional apparatus**?; 3. What is the level of preparedness of the concerned implementing stakeholders e.g. DepEd, CHED as to the execution of this educational reformation?; and 4. What is the stakeholders:
level
of
acceptance
of
the
following
affected
capability
of
the
following
affected
a. teaching staff; b. parents; and c. students? 5. What is the stakeholders:
level
of
a. teaching staff; b. parents; and c. students?
III.
Objectives
The formulation of policy for the K+12 Education System requires rigorous systems analysis. Many patchworks of issues, opinions and statistical analysis have already been presented by so many sectors in so ∗
teaching force and staff ** learning materials, school facilities and equipments
Page | 4
many meetings and consultations. But what is more important to see now is the entire picture, the whole tapestry of Cause-Effects and CostsBenefits that the policy, if adopted, will create. The following are the main objectives of the K-12 policy as stated in their guiding principles4: 1. To enhance the curriculum of the Enhanced K+12 Basic Education Program as the central focus. The curriculum enhancement will be designed in line with the desired competencies and skills of a K+12 graduate. The Department of Education will constitute a body to review the current basic education curriculum and detail the implementation plan. 2. To develop tracks based on different competencies and/or student interest as an integral component of the program. Basic education program should develop tracks based on competencies to meet the country’s varied human capital requirements, and to prepare students for productive endeavor. The SHS curriculum will offer areas of specialization or electives. 3. To enhance the basic education curriculum being undertaken hand in hand with the vigorous efforts to ensure adequacy of inputs as part of the bigger basic education reform, Expanding the education program (additional years of schooling) will be pursued mindful of the need to address the input shortages – teachers, classrooms, desks, water and sanitation, and quality textbooks. DepEd already included a provision for substantial physical requirements for 2011 budget, and is looking to introduce in subsequent years a budget that will constitute a significant increase not just in nominal terms but also in real terms. 4. To alter change in two-fold: curriculum enhancement and transition management. The intention of K+12 is not merely to add two years of schooling but more importantly, to enhance the basic education curriculum. 4
Guiding Principles (DepEd discussion paper), “The Enhanced K+12 Basic Education Program “, 05 October 2010, page 10.
Page | 5
DepEd is preparing a carefully sequenced implementation plan to ensure smooth transition with the least disruption. 5. To have an open and consultative process to be adopted in the promotion of the Enhanced K+12 Basic Education Program. In accordance with the “Tao ang Boss” principle, an open and consultative process will be adopted to ensure the successful development and implementation of the K+12 program. Action Steps5 1. Creation of a Task Force. To jumpstart the program, a Task Force will be formed to refine and detail the K+12 implementation model. The Task Force will be chaired by DepEd. 2. Stakeholder Consultations. Regional Consultations leading to a National Summit on Enhanced Basic Education will be conducted to solicit inputs and feedback on the proposed model. Consultations will cover all stakeholders (PTAs, public and private elementary and high schools, legislators, government agencies, business sector, education experts, teacher associations, students and education associations) and all regions. The nationwide consultation will start in October 2010 and the Education Summit will be held in the first quarter of 2011. 3. Financial Study. In parallel, a study will be undertaken to determine the financial implications (government, implied costs to households and private education) and the options for financing of the K+12 Basic Education model that will be adopted. 6The financial study will also look into the GASTPE provision to accommodate senior high school students in private HEIs during the transition years and to review government support to education beyond GASTPE. 4. Curriculum Review and Enhancement. This will start with the development, validation, and nationwide implementation of the Enhanced Basic Education Curriculum for Grade I and HS I by SY 20112012. Senior High School curriculum shall be developed and validated, along with the development of appropriate learning resources. 5. Teacher Training. The training of Grade I and HS I teachers using the Enhanced Basic Education Curriculum will start in SY 2011-2012. 5
Action Steps (DepEd discussion paper), “The Enhanced K+12 Basic Education Program “, 05 October 2010, page 11. 6
The 2010 education budget is 11.35% of national budget and only 2.21% of GDP (benchmark is 6% of GDP).
Page | 6
The training of Grade 2 to 12 teachers will be implemented in subsequent years. 6. Legislation. DepEd will work for the passage of all necessary and related legislations on the K+12 Basic Education program. 7. K-12 Information, Education and Communication. All stakeholders shall be consulted. A massive public information campaign based on the 12-year design model and implementation scheme will be implemented. From the aforementioned view of the proposed K-12 Education System, the following are the policy assumptions7 and the appertaining conditions affecting them: 1. Increasing Basic Education from 10-12 years automatically expands the educational financing requirements for infrastructure, personnel, learning resources, training and development. These requirements can only be achieved if the following conditions are met: 1.1 Enough National Government and Local Government Budget (LGU) Budgets are made available; 1.2 Families can meet the financial burden for the additional 2 years of study; 1.3 Operational efficiencies and synergies are created within the public school system to create savings which can be re-allocated to more essential programs; and 1.4 The educational policy must not destroy the financial viability of private Schools. Otherwise, students which may be orphaned by Private School closures and program terminations will simply create new financial and logistical burdens for the public schools. 2. Increasing Basic Education from 10-12 years requires a higher level of organizational core competence which can only be achieved if the following conditions are met: 2.1 If the core competencies of secondary schools administrators and teachers can be upgraded to the level of Technical-Vocational and College administrators and faculty. The Senior High School Curriculum 7
COCOPEA North Luzon Consultation, “Comprehensive Policy Impact Analysis”, University of Baguio, Baguio City, November 27, 2010
Page | 7
requires the core competencies of Technical-Vocational and Tertiary Schools (Junior College). As they are now, our secondary schools cannot manage the senior High School Curriculum. 2.2 If Teacher Competence can be enhanced to use cost-effective tools and methods, such as information and communications technologies and multimedia. 3. Increasing Basic Education from 10-12 years requires a reprogramming of the curricula and re-engineering of the entire educational system. This re-programming and re-engineering starts from the pre-school, elementary, and secondary through the technical-vocational and tertiary education levels; aligning them in a step-ladder progression to achieve international professional standards mandated for various industries and socio-economic sectors. 4. Increasing Basic Education from 10-12 years requires that proper consideration of student needs, interests, capabilities and differences be made in the formulation of policy.
IV.
Options
The paper presented elucidates what the K-12 policy is all about, the rationale of formulating it, the target stakeholders and beneficiaries. Further, it tackles also the current situation and the adaptation scenario as it was going to be implemented this coming school year. Various facts, criticisms and assumptions from different reliable sources were asserted in order to substantiate details needed for the best understanding. The presenters wanted to obtain information as to the queries being questioned in the above stated problems in order to have a bird’s eye view to the content and specifications of the said policy. Since the policy is soon to be implemented, the discussion presented is more on the assessment of the provisions and guidelines stipulated in the educational reform in relation to the affected stakeholders. The come up of the following options were based from the personal assessments from the presenters out from the ideas and thorough discussions gained from the varied reliable sources. Further, some contents of this part contain documentation of issues and problems base from the current news and information cited from different reliable sources. Moreover, the views and opinions of the Page | 8
presenters do not necessarily reflect the contents or discussion of the neither class nor stand point of the subject instructor, thus all the generated opinions are purely coming from the presenters.
1. Eradicate and impede the implementation of the policy. Constraints and limitations are highly contradicting the concerned K-12 policy, not to mention the unwillingness to embrace the pro’s and con’s brought by this. 2. Suspend the realization of the policy and reschedule for the next succeeding years. Government and direct implementing agency are not well prepared for the changes to be incurred. Further trainings and seminars, strengthening of the workforce are hereby in need as well as deep penetration to the students and parents for the better understanding and acceptance. 3. Put into practice the K-12 policy this coming school year. The country needs to improve the standard of the educational system in order to keep in line with the paces the other country is pacing. The long term outcome of the said implementation would serve as a positive outcome that will uplift the morale of the society thus bringing noticeable growth to the citizens specifically and to the country as a whole.
V.
Analysis of Options 1st Option: Eradicate and impede the implementation of the policy.
It is remarkable and inspiring to see that Philippines is now progressing economically and as such, to sustain and possibly prolong this stream, targeting the Education sector of the country is a must. But, unpreparedness, poor educational participation and development will surely yield to negative outcomes. The biggest issues the K-12 Education System must address are its requirement educational inputs and processes. If these are not given solution, the K-12 Education System policy is already ruined from the very start. Page | 9
In view of Sarah Katrina Maramag’s idea, “the crisis of the Philippine education system, in all levels, is stemmed not on the superficial, in this case the number of schooling years, but rather on the conditions and foundation on which it subsists. Unless the government addresses in earnest poor public spending, high costs of schooling, the predominance of a colonial curriculum, lack of transparency and accountability amid widespread corruption within the sector and the development of the country’s science and technology for domestic development, all efforts will remain on the surface and neither 10 nor 12 years would make much of difference.” To relate with the statement of President PNOY “to achieve something out of this move to K-12, we need to have a realistic set of plans” and reality check, the plan doesn’t coincide as to the current situation. Though implementing K-12 would be possible, these paradigm changes would be harder for the public system for them to cope up with the rapid changes. Why? Let us settle to the article of Junifen F. Gauuan, firstly, the budget for the education sector of the Philippines is, compared to other Newly Industrialized Countries (NICs), relatively low (for example, difference of almost 5% GDP with Malaysia and Brunei – 3.1% GDP Philippines). Secondly, the infrastructure of the state schools are not conducive enough to admit more students (picture students taking double-shifted school time i.e. 7am-1pm + 1pm-7pm – is that good for students to not meet in a one-off-one-time schedule? OR even cram 50 students in one class?). To correlate demand and supply, more demand = more supply. With the current shortage of teachers, as claimed by ACT (Alliance of Concerned Teachers) there is no capacity for the public system to admit more students, even more to prolong the year of study. Finally, financial constraints, millions of people in the Philippines (to be exact 23 millions under the Asia-Pacific poverty line) are still living below the poverty line. Are those parents belonging to that line can really afford another 2 years extra in education? Ideally, the long term goal which can be brought by the policy is good, but reality wise, the road in reaching the target is under construction, not yet completed thus so far behind.
Page | 10
2nd Option: Suspend the realization of the policy and reschedule for the next succeeding years. It is the belief of some educators that the K+10 Education System failed because it lacked 2 more years of study. We can consider that as one reason. But to the idea of the presenters, the bigger reason why K+10 Education System failed is because of poor educational resources such as classrooms, lack of teachers, facilities and equipment in short budget. Now, though greater budget is allocated to the reform of the educational system in the country but unfortunately what hinders most is the present situation of the affected stakeholders such as parents, students and teachers not to mention the unavailability and lacking of the educational resources. There is a need of empowerment to the part of the teaching force since it is a great change which requires greater understanding and preparation. It can’t be denied the fact that the country has great teachers worth to be proud of, but with the change of educational pattern which they will experience, a further training and seminar is indeed a need for them to be fully equipped. Aside from that, the acceptance of pursuing the reformed educational system must have to start from them since they are considered to be the initial medium that will mediate and enlighten the process of the changes both to the students and the parents. To the part of the parents, it would be a sudden change that will greatly affect their economic standing in terms of the added financial obligations added also the uncertainties and queries about the changes wherein not all of them are aware. Further enrichment for them to have a better understanding about the policy is a must and it will surely take some time. It is a considerable way to enlighten the parents since they are the first in hand who can motivate and guide their children. To the implementing agency, the country cannot attempt a trial and error outcome out of this policy. They must have to consider this not an experimental thing to be tested and evaluated. Beforehand, all of the possible consequences and preparations to counter any of those must be well handled and planned already. An evaluation of the educational resources, a budget plan for the teaching force – a long term plan of all of these including the construction of some additional facilities and equipment must be comprehended.
Page | 11
To the part of the presenters, they assumed that those implementing agency are not well interacted to the possible instances that may come up and the way to respond in case any unhanding occurrences will arise. As will as the parents and students, together with the current situation of the country connotes unpreparedness for the implementation of the policy. Pursuing the policy without having some intervention with the direct stakeholders and considering the factors affecting the outcome of the policy would obstruct sustainability. 3rd Option: Put into practice the K-12 policy this coming school year. The government is in to it, the policy was recommended to be implemented, government agencies relating to the educational reform took already an action and somewhat due to the media interaction the society can be said as informed about it. The vision is to uplift the educational standards of the country, the mission is to implement procedures and processes provided in the policy, regardless of all the comments and criticisms since government already spent money for it, then like it or like it very much it should be implemented.
VI.
Recommendation
Initially, the DepEd justifies the K-12 model by saying that the present short basic education program affects the human development of Filipino students. Ultimately, regardless of whichever “model”, what the youth and country direly needs is for the development and establishment of an education system that caters to the needs of the Filipino youth and the society in general. Unfortunately, data shows the current situation that the country is facing in terms of the educational system that might obstruct the implementation of the said policy. But then, the policy is soon to be implemented this coming school year. To make a recommendation as to the presented options is a mind boggling duty that the presenters could ever come up. But just to satisfy the means of having this paper the end is, the presenters chose the second option, 2nd Option: Suspend the realization of the policy and reschedule for the next succeeding years.
Page | 12
The presenters select option two as the best option not due to the fact that the Philippines is the last country in the region to adopt a K-12 basic educations system because it is not all about the trending basis but checking in accordance to the “reality”. During the assessment done by the prestigious organization Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS), they conclude that the problem about the present curriculum in squeezing 12 years of basic education into just 10 is that students are overloaded with subjects which resulted to poor quality of basic education as reflected in the low achievement scores of Filipino students. International tests results like 2003 TIMSS rank the Philippines 34th out of 38 countries in HS II Math and 43rd out of 46 countries in HS II Science; for grade 4, the Philippines ranked 23rd out of 25 participating countries in both Math and Science. In 2008, even with only the science high schools participating in the Advanced Mathematics category, the Philippines was ranked lowest. This quality of education is reflected in the inadequate preparation of high school graduates for the world of work or entrepreneurship or higher education. It is not the question of teaching force because internationally we can say that the country is equipped of well trained educators capable enough for the learning needed by the students in our country. In fact, teachers in our country are highly demanded and most preferred to be hired and work in other country. But it is the matter of the educational system that we have which is designed to teach a 12-year curriculum, yet it is delivered in just 10 years. Though some criticizing it as a way only to realigned as to what is the trending educational system to must have, then why not follow it if it will sustain the development of the educational system of our country and there is nothing wrong with it. As to the question of the consequences that will be brought by the policy, surely there will be many of those and it’s a part of the changes. Better because the government exists to uplift the standard of education in the country and not just sitting down to their respective offices and waiting what will happen to the future of the students experiencing the current system. The policy exist with provisions of program to be administered for the sustainability of it, thus to relate it with economic hindrances it should be another story that is worth to be reflected and should not serve as a hindrance for the development of one system in our country (education). To reach the development wherein the citizens are wanting, admitting the fact that it couldn’t be happening simultaneously is the first step.
Glenne B. Lagura
http://dnsc.academia.edu/ennelgArugal
Page | 13
But, out of the advantages that can be given by the policy, what is now to be considered as constraint is the time. There is a need to develop to the part of the teaching force, the facilities and the equipments the country presently have, further evaluation and thorough analysis as to the whatever outcome that can be brought by it. Implementing programs that will lead to the positive realization of the policy and usage of media is a help to penetrate the minds of the parents and making them realized the long term output that the policy can give by. In short, a more prepared country is in need for the advancement to incur in the educational system.
Page | 14
References: PDF files:
Batomalaque, Antonio. Basic Science Development Program of the Philippines for International Cooperation. University of San Carlos.; Marinas, Bella and Ditapat, Maria. Philippines: Curriculum and Development. UNESCO International Bureau of Education International Engineering Alliance. The Washington Accord. http://www.washingtonaccord.org/WashingtonAccord/FAQ.cfm (Accessed 11 September 2010) Mullis, I.V.S., Martin, M.O., Robitaille, D.F., & Foy, P. (2009). Chestnut Hill, MA.Trends in International Mathematics and Science Advanced 2008. National Center for Education Statistics. Highlights from the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study 2003.December 2004 Seamo-Innotech. Additional Years in Philippine Basic Education: Rationale and Legal Bases. Presentation to the Department of Education on 25 August 2010. Presentation notes of Dr. Isagani Cruz, 28 September 2010.
Articles/ Journals:
Jane Uymatiao. Why we need DepEd’s K-12 Program, Sunday, 22 January 2012. Retrived from http://www.thepoc.net/commentaries/14612-why-we-need-depeds-k12-program.html (Accessed 15 March 2012) Joe Padre. Pros & Cons in the K+12 Basic Education Debate, October 14, 2010. Retrived from http://mlephil.wordpress.com/2010/10/14/pros-cons-of-the-k12debate/ (Accesed 14 March 2012) Jonathan Plucker . Problems as Possibilities: Problem – based learning for K-12 education. Retrieved from Page | 15
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_hb6470/is_1_22/ai_n28742235/ (Accessed 11 March 2012) Junifen F. Gauuan. K+12 Policy Framework: Pessimistic, Optimistic or Realistic?, March 26, 2011. Retrieved from http://www.aldersgatecollege.com/news/high-school/k12-policy-framework-pessimisticoptimistic-or-realistic/ (Accessed 6 March 2012) K-12 Challenge to Philippine Tertiary Education. Retrieved from http://rodrigo75.wordpress.com/2011/04/19/k-12-challenge-tophilippine-tertiary-education/ (Accessed 29 March 2012) Sarah Katrina Maramag. Proposed K12 Basic Education System in the Philippines, Is the K-12 model good for the Philippine Education System?, via Philippine Online Chronicles. Retrived from http://blogwatch.tv/2011/05/proposed-k-12-basic-education-systemin-the-philippines/ (Accessed 10 March 2012) Virnads. K12 in the Philippines: A Reform or Deform. Manila Philippines, June 13, 2011. Retrieved from http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-news/9379822-k12-in-thephilippines-a-reform-or-deform (Accessed 12 March 2012)
http://dnsc.academia.edu/ennelgArugal
Glenne B. Lagura Page | 16
