Vocational training outside the campus

The Germans define “vocational training” as “vocational training preparation, initial training, further training and retraining.”

Our law defines the system more lengthily: “Dual training system refers to an instructional delivery system of technical and vocational education and training that combines in-plant training and in-school training based on a training plan collaboratively designed and implemented by an accredited dual system educational institution/training centre and accredited dual system agricultural, industrial and business establishments with prior notice and advice to the local government unit concerned. Under this system, said establishments and the educational institution share the responsibility of providing the trainee with the best possible job qualifications, the former essentially through practical training and the latter by securing an adequate level of specific, general and occupation-related theoretical instruction. The word ‘dual’ refers to the two parties providing instruction: the concept ‘system’ means that the two instructing parties do not operate independently of one another, but rather coordinate their efforts.”

Simply put, dual training means that students spend part of their time in schools and part of their time in workplaces. This was in the original plan for SHS. The Steering Committee for the K to 12 system even introduced the term “immersion.”

Originally, because the Technical Education and Skills Development Authority (TESDA) insisted that students needed a large number of hours to complete the training required to get a National Certificate (NC) in any particular occupation or skill, the Department of Education (DepEd) agreed to have SHS students spend practically half of their time in workplaces rather than on campuses.

Unfortunately, the trifocal structure of our educational system worked against this original plan. Both DepEd and the Commission on Higher Education (CHED) are academic agencies, interested primarily in the academic preparation of students under their care. In fact, when the CHED experts worked on the curriculum, the understanding was that they were dealing only with the academic track of SHS. I co-chaired the committee (with Education Secretary Armin Luistro) in charge of the SHS curriculum, and we worked on that premise.

Unfortunately, sometime after the committee was disbanded, the academic curriculum was used as a basis for the Technical-Vocational-Livelihood (TVL) track. A number of academic subjects were added to the track, which were irrelevant for students aiming at getting a techvoc job immediately after high school. These subjects were labeled “Contextualized Subjects.” Although DepEd has clarified that the subjects are meant to obtain the same competencies that all SHS students would get, though the content of each subject would depend on the tracks, the time spent on them was taken from the time for immersion. Worse, the term “immersion,” which was clearly meant to take students away from the school and into workplaces, was redefined the way academics define it, namely, as “work immersion, research, career advocacy, culminating activity.” The idea of getting students out of the classroom and into the world of work was killed.

Fortunately, during the visit of President Aquino to Germany last month, the government made a crucial commitment, indicated in Section 2.1 of the “Joint Declaration of Intent between the Republic of the Philippines and the Federal Republic of Germany in the Field of Technical and Vocational Education and Training (TVET).”

Section 2.1 reads: “The Participants intend to support the integration of dual training into the educational system of the Republic of the Philippines; with the Technical Education and Skills Development Authority (TESDA) as lead implementing agency, and in close coordination with the Department of Education (DepEd), especially on its K to 12 program.”

This is now the legal basis for DepEd to revise its TVL curriculum to fulfill the hours needed for training outside school.

This all looks very theoretical and even boring, but look at what happens when we get down to specifics.

For example, a student who wants to work in a beauty salon or spa is supposed to achieve three NCs by the time s/he finishes SHS. From Grade 7 to Grade 9, s/he needs to fulfill all the training regulations of “Beauty/Nail Care” for an NC II. In Grade 10, s/he needs to do the work needed to get an NC II in “Wellness Massage.” During SHS or Grade 11 and Grade 12, s/he needs to fulfill all the hours needed for an NC II in “Hairdressing.”

TESDA has a required number of hours for each of these NCs. One might argue that all these NCs could be taken within a school (although it is hard to imagine any school, public or private, investing in the equipment and rooms needed to put up a mock salon or spa). Dual training, however, makes it possible for a student to qualify for all these NCs.

The student can take the theoretical or lecture part of the training in school, assuming that the school has qualified teachers for each of these subjects.

Learning by doing, however, is more efficient and less costly. If we send the student to a salon or spa, s/he will learn much faster, by actually working on the nails or hair of real clients, or doing actual massage, under the supervision of people who do these things every day. A mentor in a company is worth much more than a teacher in a school. (To be continued)