K-12 boon or bane?

Plato once said: The state is essentially an educational community. It is created by education and can survive only on condition that all its citizens receive an education that will enable them to make rational political decisions.”

We may appear to be a society divided on so many issues but we have remained united in the belief that investing in the education of our children shall lead to the success of our nation. Unfortunately, notwithstanding such commitment, our education system remains deceased and plagued with the same ills that have been ravaging it for generations: lack of teachers, classrooms, books, defective facilities, inefficient instruction, etc. Now comes the government’s K to 12 Program. Is it boon or bane?

The K to 12 Program which covers Kindergarten and 12 years of basic education (six years of primary education, four years of Junior High School, and two years of Senior High School) aims to prepare graduates for tertiary education, middle-level skills development, employment, and entrepreneurship. Ironically, colleges and universities began dismissing even tenured employees in anticipation of the impact of the government’s K to 12 Program in 2016 when the supposedly fourth year high school students by then could not yet enter college because they have to take additional 2 years of Senior High School. An estimated 30,000 teachers could be at risk of losing their jobs by 2016.

At the House hearing held a few weeks ago, Commission on Higher Education (CHED) officials discussed the proposed P29-billion stabilization fund over five years. P10 billion is earmarked for higher education institutions, P17 billion for displaced teachers and P2 billion for the non-teaching personnel to be affected. School officials actually take this fund as just a “palliative” measure. The question is where will the P29 billion come from?

Pasig Rep. Roman Romulo, who is the chairperson of the House Higher Education committee asked CHED and labor officials to iron out the details concerning the use of the funds. He also urged them to formulate and finalize the plans related to the K to 12 Program to address the growing pains of the transition period. By the way, where are the Implementing Rules and Regulations of this program?

*   *   *

The government shifted to the K to 12 Program to be at par with the world because the Philippines used to be 1 of only 3 countries worldwide left with a 10-year basic education program. Of course, we need to elevate our status to be at par with the rest of world. But it seems that we are doing everything in great haste, hence, the lack of foresight resulting in various problems bound to affect the efficient implementation of the K to 12 Program.

First of all, we should have started with pilot schools. Second, we should have analyzed the problem first. With the old 10-year basic education program we already had an edge in the world market. Many Filipinos who graduated with the 10-year basic education program and who received college degrees equally qualified with their counterparts from different countries who underwent the 12-year program. Our engineers, our nurses, our teachers, our IT graduates are in demand.  Sure our educational system maybe deteriorating but why change the whole system abruptly?

Right now, DepEd seems ovewhelmed with all the concerns in public education not to mention the number one problem – classrooms. It has difficulty focusing on the planning of the K-12 program. Don’t forget, when this new program was introduced a few years back, the government boldly declared that all input shortages will be wiped out before the end of 2013. A 1:1 ratio for student-to-textbook and student-to-seat will be achieved within SY 2012-2013. Shortages in classrooms, teachers, and toilets will be fully addressed. Was this done? Looks like a long shot to me!

Public schools now have to master the art of shifting schedules, with children of tender age having to go to school at 5 o’clock in the morning. Some schools are trying a shortened school-week because of lack of classrooms and facilities. With 2 additional years of basic education under a system that could not cope with a simple roadmap in terms of solving the backlog of classrooms, facilities, instructional materials, teacher training, etcetera, the government seems to have added 2 layers of inefficiency to its perceived inefficient basic education program.

It has also been argued that the K to 12 Program is a standard for recognition of Filipino students intending to do further studies or work in European countries who are members of the Bologna Accord and in the United States under the Washington Accord.

The Washington Accord prescribes 12-years basic education as an entry to recognition of engineering professionals while the Bologna Accord requires 12 years of education for university admission and practice of profession in European countries.

Out of the 553,706 students who graduated this year, how many will actually do further studies or work in Europe or America? Why should we drag our whole population into this mess right now? As it is, the Philippines is one of those countries holding provisional status in the Washington Accord. As such, we are still in the process of qualification accreditation or recognition. Eventually, we can reach that goal of achieving signatory status. But this cannot be done right away.

Shifting to a 12-year program is very expensive and may be detrimental to our economy and national growth. We should take it slow because we really do not have the capacity nor the means to implement such a program in the entire archipelago. Sure it sounds good and very ideal. The question is, are we implementing this new program correctly?

The dangerous effect this program has caused within a 2-year period is that schools have interpreted it in different ways. They have come up with their own solutions actually contradicting the goal of the government. For instance, there are schools that have created “acceleration” programs allowing a Grade 6 student to jump to Grade 9, thus skipping 2 years of middle school. And mind you these are big private schools in the metro. They have used the Philippine Educational Placement Test (PEPT) as a tool to bypass Grades 7 and 8. Is this part of the K to 12 advocacy?

Why has DepEd allowed such a jump when they are increasing the number of years? Is this actually valid? The PEPT is intended to determine the grade or level placement of out-of-school children and youth and open the door for them to go back to formal schooling. Thus, a 16-year old who had to drop out in grade 2 due to say poverty, shall have the option to skip the grade or year levels he would normally be required to complete for as long as he can prove that his competency is equivalent to students of his age. Without going back to grade 2, he can be admitted to high school or even college. Yet, if DepEd will allow the PEPT result to take the place of grades 7 or 8, will this not run counter to the intent of the K to 12 Program? Or must DepEd allow this transitory shortcut because it is not really prepared to immediately implement the K to 12 Program? Boon or bane?