Written and delivered by Francisco “Ka Dodong” Nemenzo Former President University of the Philippines during the Action and Solidarity for the Empowerment of Teachers'
(ASSERT) Conference
Knowing my
professional background, I suppose you expect a reaction to Department of
Education (DepEd) discussion paper from the standpoint of a university. Since
my experience is limited to tertiary education, I gauge the quality of basic
education by the kind of students we get. I can do this with confidence,
because, as the President of UP, I constantly monitored our student profile to
check how those who entered as freshmen performed in later years.
Despite passing a
tough and highly competitive entrance exam, many of them are not prepared for
college work. Their mathematical and communication skills leave much to be
desired, and they lack intellectual curiosity and the capacity for critical
thinking. For this reason we require them to take courses they should have
already taken in high school. This cuts down the period for specialization
since most degree programs are designed for only four years.
We therefore have
a vested interest in upgrading basic education, especially in the public
sector. I favor the addition of two years to the secondary curriculum, for
reasons cited in the DepEd discussion paper. But before this is fully implemented,
some fundamental changes have been made. Two
more years of bad education will not improve its quality. It will just
saddle the parents with unnecessary financial burden. In this paper I shall
discuss what changes ought to be instituted to prevent the proposed, “Enhanced
K+12 Basic Education Program” from going the way of previous reform efforts.
Recruiting teachers
The DepEd
discussion paper gives incontrovertible proof and arguments that the present
Grades 1-10 scheme is inadequate both as a preparation for work and a
preparation for college. But this is not the fundamental problem. The
fundamental problem is the lack of teachers who have mastered the subjects they
are teaching, who are strongly motivated, innovative and enthusiastic. This
shortage of good teachers should be tackled first before putting into effect
the K+12 plan. If we are serious about improving basic education, this is where
to start.
Natatandaan ko na
nuong ako’y estudyante pa, mas magaling ang faculty ng public shools kay sa
private schools. They attracted some of the best and the brightest. Although
teaching was never a remunerative profession, it offered psychic rewards.
Teachers enjoyed professional pride. Kaya ang pinakamagaling naming mga kaklase
ay galling sa public high schools. Sa umpisa siga-siga ang galling sa elite
high schools katulad ng Ateneo dahil mahusay silang magsalita ng English. Pero
paglipas ng iilang semester, kulilat na sila. Ang mga student leaders,
Collegian editors at honor graduate kadalasan produkto ng public high schools.
Hindi na ganito ngayon.
Alam ko na
mayroon pang magagaling na guro, pero tumatanda na sila dahil ang kabataang
graduado ay umiiwas sa pagtuturo sa elementary at high schools. The remaining few are demoralized by
dismally low salaries and the low public regard. Good teachers are
insufficient to cope with the enormity of the basic education sector. Worse,
their ranks are being depleted because of the Americans are actively recruiting
the better ones for their schools in depressed areas where white teachers do
not want to go. Hongkong is also pirating Filipino teachers on a massive scale.
Many Filipino domestics in Hongkong are veteran teachers who were recruited on
the basis of their English proficiency because Chinese families prefer maids
who can double as English tutors for their children.
The DepEd discussion paper has ignored this trend.
It has no plan for reversing this. Unless, we provide incentives for them to
stay, the decline of basic education in the public sector will continue because
the recruiters target the best we have. Seguradong papalpak na
naman itong K+12 plan kung hindi
mapigilan ang exodus ng mahuhusay na guro.
The first time I
examined the UP student’s profile, I was delighted to note an increase in the
number of students in the College of education. However, my enthusiasm
diminished when I learned that when most of them entered as freshmen they opted
for the most coveted degree programs; they shifted to education because they
failed to maintain the required averages in engineering, economics, business
administration, etc.
Since they are
nonetheless doing well in the College of Education, I wanted to believe that
they have, at last, found their true calling. But I soon discovered that very
few of them go into teaching after graduation. They just want a UP diploma to
pursue other careers, or go abroad.
How can we
attract and retain good teachers in basic education? Besides raising their
salaries and restoring their professional pride, we should also upgrade the normal schools and colleges of education:
these are our primary fields of recruitment. Pero tila mababa rin ang
kalidad ng mga ito. UP professors have complained that the knowledge levels of
BSE degree holders who are taking graduate courses is pathetic. They seem to
have mastered the techniques of teaching but not the subjects they are supposed
to teach.
The language issue
The DepEd
discussion paper laments the miserable performance of Filipino students in the
TIMMS surveys. TIMMS is (Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study)
is a US-based research organization that conducts international countries of
elementary and secondary students’ competencies in mathematics and science. In
2003 the 4th grade Filipino pupils ranked 23rd out of the
25 participating countries in both science and mathematics; in other words, we
are 3rd from the bottom. Our 2nd year high school
students fared no better. 43rd out of 46 in science and 34th
out of 38 in mathematics.
Some experts
attribute this to the use of the English language as medium of instruction.
They seem to forget that English has always been the medium of instruction for
Mathematics and Science. They also overlook the fact that, in the TIMMS
surveys, the countries where English is the medium of instruction lag behind
the Asian countries that use their own languages for teaching.
I put forward the
hypothesis that the use of English for teaching Science and Mathematics has
been counter-productive. It might even have contributed to our poor performance
in the TIMMS survey. We should also
reexamine the assumption that the Philippine languages are inappropriate for
teaching science and mathematics because they lack the equivalents to English
terms.
In my view, the
important thing is not the terms used but how they are explained. Just as
biology borrows Latin terms, we can use English terms but explain them in
language the students are most familiar. This is how the Japanese do it. My
son, a professor of Mathematics at U.P who did his Ph. D in Tokyo, told me that
in his field (i.e., number theory) they use Japanized German terms because it
was the Germans who introduced number theory to Japan in the early 20th
century. They did not bother to translate the German terms, but in the
classrooms and textbooks they explain the concepts in Nihonggo.
The exponents of
English constantly point out that the Chinese, Japanese, Koreans, Thais, etc.
are now learning English, suggesting that English is the language of progress.
It is true the progressive Asian countries encourage their students to learn
English as second language. The Japanese even require English in their Senior
high school curricula. But none of these countries have shifted to English as
medium of instruction. They use their own languages for teaching.
I am not
proposing that we drop English altogether. In several occasions I have
articulated my stand on the language issue. Please allow me to reiterate it
here: Filipino students ought to be bilingual or trilingual. They should master
English as the international language, Tagalog as the national language and, if
they are non-Tagalogs, they should also be proficient in their regional
languages.
is this asking
too much of our young people? Hindi ko mapaniwalaanna mas bobo ang Pinoy
comparer sa mga Dutch at Scandinavians. As anyone who has been to Europe can
attest, the Dutch at Scandinavians speak English, French and German besides
their native languages. The Filipino talent for languages is demonstrated by
the case with which the OFWs in the non-English speaking countries pick up the
languages of the host countries.
The role of the
mass media
The objective of education is not to pack young
brains with facts, but to arouse their curiosity so they will be driven by
thirst for knowledge. Teachers who can instill the habits of questioning, of
reading and forming intelligent opinions of their own must themselves possess
these habits. Judging by the freshmen we get in UP, these habits are getting rare.
Computers, videos
and televisions are often cited explain why young people today do not read as
much as those who grew up before the advent of these technologies. But rather than cry over the degradation of
youth culture, the better course of wisdom is to learn how to use these new
technologies for education. These technologies are not bad per se. They are
good or bad depending on how they are used and for what purpose.
What we should deplore and fight against is their
commercialization, the fact that the mass media (especially
televisions) are operated for profit. They thrive on advertising revenues. Commercialized television is responsible
for idiotizing or mis-educating our people. They cancel out the values
taught in school. They nurture
intellectual laziness; the unthinking acceptance of what they see on television
and read in the newspaper.
But we should not
overlook the positive side of audio-visual technologies. They are potentially a
powerful instrument for education. Instead of banning them, DepEd should
encourage the teacher training colleges to teach the future teachers how to use
visual teaching. These technologies have
opened up the prospect of realizing the ideal of a learning society where education occurs not only in school. They
make possible life-long learning.
We have media
professionals who have actually produced excellent educational programs.
Unfortunately their works, if utilized at all, are broadcast in the most
inconvenient times, or broadcast in cable channels that are accessible only to
subscribers. The leading television networks, in their relentless drive for
profit, reserve prime time for telenovelas and other inane shows.
Since the mass media have virtually dislodged the
schools in shaping the hearts and minds of people, they have become in fact an
integral part of the educational system. Just like the private schools, they
should be regulated by the state; and turned into an extension of the
classrooms.
Vocational
courses in the Curriculum
I agree with
DepEd discussion paper that the prevailing concept of secondary education as a
preparation for college is too narrow and misdirected. Ideally, high school
graduates should be adequately prepared to gainful employment or, if they have
the capital, to embark on entrepreneurial ventures. I would even go further: let us persuade the prospective employers to
drop the requirement of college degrees because, in fact, a wide range of jobs
do not really need a four-year college education.
In
1991 the EDCOM (Joint Congressional Commission on Education) put forward a bold
proposal to convert the substandard and politics-ridden state universities into
community colleges offering two-year intensive skills development cour4ses. I
don’t know what happened to this proposal. I agree with EDCOM report that
excellent community colleges are less expensive to establish and maintain than
full-blown universities. With such institutions it is easier to adapt skills
training to the requirement of the job market.
Social
Studies in the High School Curriculum
In striving to promote science and mathematics, we should
not neglect the social studies. While preparing young people for jobs, they
should also be prepared to understand and cope with the realities of Philippine
Society, and the global village. To imbue them with the spirit of Nationalism,
they should have an adequate grounding in history, economics, political science
and sociology. A critical mind is
absolute necessary for life in this age of Information Technology, and the
social studies, if properly taught, are the most powerful catalysts for
critical-thinking.
Everyday we are bombarded with information and
misinformation in media and the internet. Without
critical minds, our people are prone to relegate to media the task of thinking.
We have often heard, even among supposedly intelligent UP students, statements
like “it must be true because I saw in television…or I read it in the
newspapers.” This reduces one of our
most precious chartered freedoms- the freedom of thought- into a mockery.
For democracy to be meaningful, the citizenry should be equipped with the
capacity to process information, i.e., to read between the lines and see beyond
TV images. This is why the social studies are crucial in basic education.
Intellectual lassitude lies at the roof of widespread
apathy among the present crop of students. They do not seem to care about the
country; and their adulation of affluent countries like the United States is
disgusting. This is reflected in their choices of degree programs in the
university. Nursing, physical therapy, hotel and restaurant administration,
tourism etc. draw the largest enrolment because these are perceived as pathways
to self-advancement.
I do not condemn our compatriots who seek greener
pastures abroad. Insofar as those who leave because they want to forget our
country are concerned, I am only too glad to see them go. Floaters who have no
sense of national identity tend to cause problems whenever they live. We can
offer them as a gift to the United States. The Mexicans have a nice word for
them: venganza bilogica”- the biological
revenge of the Third World.
But there are also many who leave and settle in foreign
countries but retain their patriotic commitment. Their departure is not
necessarily a brain drain but a brain gain. Some countries owe their
development to their overseas nationals. India is one example.
In the boom days of Silicon Valley several Indian
Scientist and engineers immigrated to the United States. It turned out that
they contributed to India’s fantastic leap from a backward nation to a
super-power in the IT industry. When they left India for lack of opportunities
at home, they brought with them a strong sense of nationalism, a strong
commitment to lift their native land out of backwardness. Over the years they
passed on to the Indian Institutes of Technology the most advanced knowledge
and skills they learned in America. And when the Silicon bubble burst, they
persuaded Intel, Microsoft, Oracle, etc. to relocate their research and
development facilities to Bangalore and Hyderabad where there is an abundance
of world-class scientific and technological manpower.
That is the kind of overseas Filipinos we
should be cultivating through the social studies component of our educational
system. Fired by a strong sense of nationalism, they will not only keep our flagging
economy afloat with their remittances; they also serves as channels for
technology transfer.
Summing
up
To summarize the points I
made earlier: If we truly want our youth to get the education they deserve, we
should restore the dignity of the teaching profession. We should make teachers’
salaries competitive vis-à-vis the other professions. The curricula of teacher
training colleges should lay greater emphasis on subject matter content. We
should fix these essential flaws to prevent the Enhanced K+12 Basic Education
Program from going down the path of previous educational experiments. And we
must act now before the General Agreement on Trades and Services consign our
youth to the margin of our own labor force.
