UP PROFESSORS ON K TO 12: LENGTHENING THE SUFFERING, INCREASING THE BURDEN

UP PROFESSORS ON K TO 12:  LENGTHENING THE SUFFERING, INCREASING THE BURDEN

Congress of Teachers/Educators for Nationalism and Democracy –University of the Philippines (CONTEND-UP) Member, Alliance of Concerned Teachers-Philippines (ACT-Phils.)

It is true that the Philippines is one of the few countries in the world that has only four  years of secondary education.

It is also true that with a conservative figure of around 35 students per teacher in high school, the Philippines has currently the worst teacher student ratio in the secondary level of education  in the East
Asia and the Pacific region. For example, Malaysia and Singapore have a ratio of 14 pupils per teacher, Thailand 19, Indonesia 12, Vietnam 18. (All data cited represent the latest available from UNESCO.)

It furthermore cannot be denied that the Philippines allocates only a measly 2.6 % of annual Gross Domestic Product (GDP) to the total education budget in contrast to Indonesia, Thailand and Singapore which allot more than 3 %. Vietnam on the other hand allocates more than 5 % while Malaysia spends close to the ideal 6 % yearly. The industrialized nations of the world spend on average 6 % of their GDP on education. The Education Development Index (EDI) which ranks countries according to compliance with the United Nations Millennium Goal of “Education for All” puts the Philippines at rank 85 while neighboring Indonesia and Malaysia are 69 and 65 respectively. The lack of adequate budget and resources has consistently been identified in the past as the main reason for the deterioration and demoralization of Philippine education.

In 1970, the Philippines and China were the only nations with four years of secondary education. In 1977 China added one year and another year subsequently to make a total of six. Of the 39 countries which
had five years of secondary education in 1970 only nine have shifted from five years to six and another five countries from five years to seven.

Bhutan, the setting of the fictional Kingdom of Yangdon in the telenovela “The Princess and I” underwent a similar transition to that which the Philippines will undergo under the so-called K to 12 Program. In 2003, Bhutan lengthened secondary education from four to six years. Bhutan may be a poorer country than the Philippines in many respects but it seems to have a better sense of educational priorities. In 2001, two years before the change to six years, it increased public expenditure in education as percentage of GDP from
5.8% to 5.9%. After two years of implementing the transition, public expenditure for education rose to a very high 7.2 percent of the GDP. (It has since then been lowered to around 4 percent currently.) In
1998 its teacher to pupil ratio was 38.6, but in 2006 this had been reduced to 22.8 even with the additional two years of secondary education. Having learned nothing from Yangdon, even as it currently
implements K to 12 (which the Department of Education estimates will cost P150B), the Philippine government has made no significant gesture at increasing the budget for education as a whole and towards
improving such important indicators for quality as the teacher-pupil ratio.

However, the more fundamental question is, does the Philippines really have to undergo such a transition to six years? A study by Felipe and Porio in 2010 has shown that the deplorable, bottom-rung results of the Philippines in international Math and Science tests (TIMMS) is not the result of merely having a shorter education cycle. They discovered that elementary students from countries such as Russia, Latvia, Hungary, Italy, Egypt and Iran with even shorter elementary cycles than the Philippines were easily able to surpass the Filipino 4th and eighth graders. It was also determined in another study that although Malaysia and Brunei had longer education cycles, it turned out that the Philippines had actually allotted longer hours of instruction time per subject. These longer hours of instruction however did not translate into higher scores. The superior results of these other countries could probably be better explained by the higher percentages of GDP reserved for education as a whole and their use of more comprehensible national languages in math and science. Some even less developed and poorer countries than the Philippines do indeed have
longer basic education cycles. But this does not imply that these longer periods necessarily translate into higher quality. These may instead merely result in longer periods of “education” languishing in decrepit and deplorable conditions.

The supposed “shortage” of time in teaching is simply not as urgent as the other major shortages which have plagued Philippine education for decades. The notion that the curriculum needs to be “decongested”
implies that there is not enough time to learn everything that must be learned. But who or what dictates this “everything” which supposedly must be learned and the number of hours which it must be taught? What
are these knowledges, or curricular contents, which are supposedly comparable and exchangeable internationally? It is taken for granted that these are derived from some vague “international standards.”
However these are actually dictated and imposed by international business interests and their spokesmen in the World Trade Organization (WTO) and in treaties such as the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS). The loss of national sovereignty in determining national standards and priorities in basic education is mystifyingly taken for granted by the “anti-congestion” proponents of K to 12. The deep erosion of academic freedom in institutions of higher education in the name of neo-liberal ideology, managerialism and the domination of market forces is furthermore accepted without question.

Another reason cited by the Department of Education in defense of the K to 12 Program is that the Philippines must lengthen secondary education by two years in order to comply (at least on paper) with “international standards” set by treaties such as the Bologna Process and the Washington Accord. The explicit principal intent of the Bologna Process is to make European Universities “more competitive” internationally in attracting foreign (especially Asian) students. Ironically, our “compliance” with it is intended to make us more eligible buyers and “consumers” of the educational “products” which they offer. This has obviously nothing to do with Philippine economic interests. On the other hand, the government’s labor export policy also faces the very real obstacle posed by international professional standards which supposedly require twelve years of basic education for the practice of professions. In the contemporary situation in which at least 45% of Filipinos live in poverty, a better proposal than making all poor households pay more for the additional two years of high school would be to make those who want to work or study abroad pay for
the additional costs through other appropriate systems of assessment and accreditation.

Rather than spreading further the education budget for this big project, which merely reflects the politics of educational reform in our country, the State should concentrate its efforts and budget in basic education -improving the quality, building science education, scholarship, establishing centers for teachers continuing education.
 
We can be certain that the K to 12 Program of the current government will not raise the quality of Philippine education, instead it will only lengthen the suffering of students in a decrepit, corrupt and miserably underfunded system. The additional two years will also constitute an additional and insupportable burden among the majority of poor families struggling to put their children through high school.
Finally, the K to 12 Program will not redound to the benefit of the Filipino people since it firmly puts foreign interests before the development priorities and educational needs of our country.

Stop Implementation of PNoy’s K12-Phase2!

Prioritize Implementation of Quality Kinder Education!

Immediately Address Shortages of Teachers, Classrooms & Facilities!

Upgrade Salaries of Teachers & Increase Base Pay of Employees!

Provide Greater Education Budget, 6% of GDP Now!

27 May 2012

Malaganap na kalituhan, kaguluhan, disoryentasyon at diskuntento ang umiiral ngayon, isang linggo bago magpasukan, sa hanay ng mga guro sa buong bansa, pati na rin sa hanay ng mga estudyanyante, magulang at administrasyon ng mga pampubliko at pribadong paaralan sa basic pati na rin sa tertiary education.

Ito ay dulot ng pagmamadali, pwersahan at iresponsableng pagpapatupad ng DepEd at ni PNoy ng K12-Phase2 ngayong taon kahit wala pa itong batas, walang kurikulum, walang kahandaan, walang pondo at malaki pa ang shortages sa bilang ng mga teachers, classrooms at sanitation facilities.

Palpak at disaster ang partial implementation ng Kinder Program

Nitong nakaraang taon, SY2011-12, ay pwersahan ding pinatupad ng DepEd at ng Malacanang ang tinuran nitong “universal kinder program” kahit wala pa itong batas; walang matinong kurikulum; walang pag-aaral, pagsasanay at paghahanda; walang sapat na bilang ng teachers, classrooms, chairs, textbooks at sanitation facilities; at walang pondo.

Kaya naman nagmistulang mga basang sisiw ang mga mahigit sa 1 milyong batang kinder at nagdusa naman ang libo-libong volunteer teachers na kinontratang tumanggap nang P3000-P6000 allowance lamang sa pagtuturo ng kinder, delayed pa.

Nang magreklamo ang mga teachers, students at parents sa pamumuno ng ACT hinggil sa palpak na pwersahang pagpapatupad ng “universal kinder program”, ang napakairesponsableng sagot lamang ng DepEd at ng Malacanang sa mga guro, bata at magulang ay wala pa raw kasing batas kaya wala pang pondo para sa “universal kinder program.”

Mas malaking kapalpakan at disaster ang implementation ng K12-Phase2

Ganito na naman ang nangyayari ngayong SY2012-13. Muli na namang nagyayabang ang DepEd at Malacanang sa iresponsable, pwersahan at madalian nitong pagpapatupad ng K12-phase 2, at ngayon ang kawawang mga biktima naman ay mga Grade 1 at first year high school teachers and students.

Hindi na natuto ang DepEd at ang Malacanang sa palpak na pagpapatupad nila sa K12-phase1 o “universal kinder program”,  kaya tiyak palpak na naman sila sa pagpapatupad ng K12-phase2. Tiyak na mas malaking disaster kaysa sa nakaraang taon ang nag-aabang sa mga teachers, students at mga magulang ngayong pasukan.

Ngayon pa lang, isang linggo bago ang pasukan, ay malaking kalituhan at kaguluhan na ang dulot ng adelentadong pagpapatupad ng K12-phase2 sa hanay ng mga teachers na nitong huling linggo ng Abril lamang sinimulang isalang ng DepEd sa trainors’ training ng K12.

Malaganap na kalituhan, kaguluhan, disoryentasyon at diskunteto sa K12

Sandamakmak ang mga katanungan, kalituhan at kaguluhan. Bakit wala pang batas ay pinapatupad na ang K12? Bakit walang K12 kurikulum? Nasaan ang mga teksto, module at lesson plan? Paano ituturo ito?

Bakit sisimulan na ang K12-phase2 sa Grade1 samantalang ngayong SY2012-13 pa lamang sisimulan ang pormal na mandatory universal kinder program ayon sa batas nito bilang K12-phase1?

Bakit sisimulan na rin ang K12-phase2 sa “Grade 7” o “1^st year Junior high school” samantalang nasa lumang grade school kurikulum pa ang mga graduates nito na magiging incoming first year highschool? Bakit tumalon na agad sa high school ang K12 kurikulum samantalang wala pa namang K12 kurikulum sa grade school? Mababawasan ba o madadagdagan ang oras ng pag-aaral at pagtuturo sa isang araw?

Ano naman itong mother-tongue/multi-language? Panibago ba itong subject? Paano ito gagamitin? Paano ito ituturo?

Ano na ang laman ng Senior high school? Kung ituturo na sa dalawang taong Senior high school ang general education sa unang dalawang taon sa college, ano na ang ituturo sa unang dalawang taon sa college? Sino na ang magtuturo sa Senior high school, mga college instructors at professors? Tatanggalin na ba sa college ang P.E. subjects at ililipat na lang ito sa Senior high school?

Ano ang mangyayari sa SY2016-17 at SY2017-18 kung saan walang magiging senior high school graduates kaya wala ring papasok sa college bilang mga freshies? Sakop at saklaw ba ng K12 ang mga private schools? Ano ang magiging kurikulum sa kolehiyo?

Napakaraming katanungan at ang bawat kasagutan kung meron man ay nag-aanak pa ng mas maraming katanungan, kalituhan, kaguluhan, disoryentasyon at diskuntento. Ito na mga senyales ng magaganap na mas malalang kapalpakan at disaster ngayong pasukan dahil talagang napaka-amateur, unprofessional, pwersahan, iresponsable at atat na atat na nagmamadaling pinapatupad ng DepEd at ng Malacanang ang K12 na wala pa namang batas, pondo, laman at kahandaan!

Mga Kagyat na Panawagan at Kahilingan

Kung talagang seryoso ang DepEd at ang Malacanang sa pagreporma ng edukasyon, dapat nitong unahin muna ang pag-atupag sa pagpapatupad at pagpapaunlad ng quality kinder education program na naisabatas nitong Enero 2012 lamang, samantalang wala pang batas ang K12!

Kailangan din munang unahin ang pagpuno at pagresolba sa krisis sa shortages ng teachers, classrooms, sanitation facilities, textbooks, instructional materials, at ang pagdoble ng badyet sa MOOE ng mga paaralan; ang pagsasabatas at pagpapatupad ng salary upgrading ng mga teachers (SG15) at instructors (SG16) at P6,000 dagdag sa base pay ng mga kawani; at, ang paglaan ng malaking badyet sa edukasyon na di bababa sa UN standard 6% of GDP.

Kaya ang Alliance of Concerned Teachers (ACT) ay nananawagan sa DepEd at kay PNoy mismo na:

1.      Ihinto na ang pagpapatupad ng ikalawang yugto ng K12 ngayong SY2012-13.

Isalang pa ito sa mas seryoso, mas komprehensibo at mas depenidong pag-aaral, pagbabalangkas at paghahanda batay sa mas malalim at mas komprehensibong pagsusuri at pagtukoy ng mga pundamental na suliranin ng sistema ng edukasyon sa partikular at ng sistema ng lipunan sa kabuuan.

At huwag ibatay ang anumang reporma sa edukasyon ng ating bansa nang basta-basta na lang ayon sa pag-aaral at panukala ng mga foreign-business institutions & corporations tulad ng SEAMEO-Innotech, Washington Accord at Bologna Process.

Kailangang magsilbing pananaw at balangkas natin ang pagtataguyod ng isang edukasyong makabayan, siyentipiko at makamasa na magsisilbi sa pagtataguyod ng pagtatatag ng bansang may tunay at ganap na kalayaan, demokrasya, katarungan, kaunlaran, kasaganahan at kapayapaan.

Kailangang magbuo ng isang Komisyon na may buong kredibilidad, awtoridad at pondo upang maisagawa ang lahat na ito.

2.      Pagtuunan at pagbuhasan muna ng buong panahon, pondo, rekurso at paghahanda ang pagpapatupad at pagpapaunlad ng Quality Kinder Education bilang pundasyon ng basic education ng kabataang Pilipino.

a.      At least 30,000 new regular teaching items para sa kinder; iayon sa pasweldo ng SSL3; hindi dapat kontraktwal at volunteer; may sapat at angkop na kwalipikasyon sa pagtuturo ng kinder

b.      Teacher Aide per class na siyang maaaring ituring na “volunteer”;

c.      25 kinder students per class

d.      Sa mga Grade 1 teachers at iba pang non-kinder teacher na pagtuturin sa kinder, dapat iayon sa magna carta ang additional compensation

e.      Sapat na bilang ng classrooms at sanitation facilities

f.        Kalidad na curriculum/teaching & study guide/training/textbooks/instructional materials

3.      Punuan at iresolba muna ang krisis sa shortages sa bilang ng mga teachers, classrooms, sanitation facilities, textbooks, instructional materials, atbp. Doblehin ang budget sa MOOË ng mga paaralan.

4.      Isabatas at ipatupad muna ang Salary Upgrading ng mga Teachers (SG15) at Instructors (SG16), at dagdagan ng P6,000 ang base pay ng mga kawani.

5.      Maglaan muna ng malaking badyet sa edukasyon na hindi bababa sa UN Standard 6% of GDP.