Philippine Education System - Compiled Threads [Archive] - Page 10

Parchie

December 19th, 2011, 10:08 AM

@Parchie, if you think we're just kowtowing to major world powers by "following to their heeds" because of this Washington Accord in 2016, imagine if we're still stuck up with the old system of exporting manpower to other countries and courting investors in this country. Do you think they'll hire engineers in our country if they saw our curricula? This is of no offense to our engineers.

Pray that these companies would implement a "skills against curricula" kind of hiring process and hope for the best.
FYI, I had very passionate discussions re education in the Philippines with one of my previous expat manager before and I was surprised that it is the skills that matters most when we talk about workers. It doesn't matter to those managers if you got a bigger and more beautiful diploma than me if i can deliver the goods/services management wants me delivered. The bottom line of any business is productivity and quality.

That said, Filipinos who present their school/ college papers and are considered for hiring don't get hired right away. They are interviewed, asked about important questions related to the job and if you don't have any idea/skills about those, you won't get hired.

As he repeatedly said, there were only three requirements he will be looking for in an applicant: 1) attitude, 2) attitude, and 3) more attitude! He further said to me that it doesn't make a person a good mechanic just basing on the length of time that person spent going to the mechanical shop! One needs to get dirty, wipe some oil on his pants, assemble the parts and test-run the equipment he assembled to claim such status of being a good mechanic!

It's been a long fight for us telling our professional organization as well as those disciplines close to us to please tell the CHED to focus more on the narrowing of the big gap between the academe and the industry. During some of our yearly annual conventions, we get replies that the agency is requiring graduating students to undergo OJT so as to familiarize them before they get to graduate and finally work in the field. What happened was that schools cannot assure that the students faithfully did their share in learning the trade (they called it immersion) when they are assigned to an industry of their schools choice. Just like it is easy to get certificates from that street near PRC and these students breezed thru to graduation without having to get "immersed" (thereby nullifying the very reason why they are required to do the dirty portion of their training).

But for all the arguments, it seems CHED and DepEd decided to extend "more visits to the mechanical shop to be a good mechanic", so to speak. I hate to say we are deleting the use of the faculties in our brain here. A failure in the implementation of the education program is now being covered-up by lofty statements in which it will be Juan dela Cruz who will shoulder the enormous costs. This is retrogressing, not progress. Progress is about building on the things that made us great. Jumping from program to program is not a good idea, IMHO.

MatudNilaBaby

December 19th, 2011, 10:42 AM

^^speaking of skills: the extra two-year of basic education will improve and strengthen skills development. it includes interpersonal or communication, reading and writing, analytical or critical thinking, problem solving/ or mathematical, manual and theoretical and computational or computer skills.

im hoping that teachers will focus more on the development of higher order learning skills and not emphasized on rote-memorization. generally, a mechanic with a k+12 curriculum is more likely to be much better prepared for the workplace than a mechanic with a k-10 curriculum.

lets support ched/dep. ed's new basic education curriculum for a better philippines. we have no more reason of feeling inferior to graduates of other countries if our curriculum are compared.

mikael21

December 20th, 2011, 03:13 AM

Ady001

December 20th, 2011, 03:13 AM

@Parchie, amen to that. My friend who was reared under the auspices of UWash did inform me that while there are some aspects of Philippine education that are "quite harder" than learning in the US, it's all pure theory, pure memorization, nothing more than that.

I remembered that anecdote my father gave to me about this cum laude graduate from a prestigious university we had in Davao but he can't even be acquainted in going through the city's major thoroughfares.

Theory will remain theory and useless as it is when it is left unused, only speculated, left unlearned. Yet not all theories can be understood at once. Understanding will take time, and time means an added four years.

amigo32

December 20th, 2011, 08:53 AM

I remembered that anecdote my father gave to me about this cum laude graduate from a prestigious university we had in Davao but he can't even be acquainted in going through the city's major thoroughfares.
ngek:D common sense lang namn kailangan doon:D

Parchie

December 20th, 2011, 10:12 AM

ngek:D common sense lang namn kailangan doon:D
Si senor! Un buen sentido común! Mi amigo!

Si, si, sipa-in kita dyan! hahaha

b_9904

December 20th, 2011, 10:22 AM

Theory will remain theory and useless as it is when it is left unused, only speculated, left unlearned. Yet not all theories can be understood at once. Understanding will take time, and time means an added four years.

Our school forced its students to become MATH pros. (Chinese school po kasi)

Our teachers made us learn math subjects being taught at the College level as in BS Math level ha. Ang dami sa batch ko nasa maka-math na courses like engineering.

How did my school do it? Sinimulan nila kami paka-inin ng math sa elementary level palang.

Parchie

December 20th, 2011, 10:45 AM

Our school forced its students to become MATH pros. (Chinese school po kasi)

Our teachers made us learn math subjects being taught at the College level as in BS Math level ha. Ang dami sa batch ko nasa maka-math na courses like engineering.

How did my school do it? Sinimulan nila kami paka-inin ng math sa elementary level palang.
The Chinese way of learning has its own advantages and disadvantages. We call those as the rote method of learning. Repeating and repeating things until everything becomes second nature. But the world is not full of scenes as if all are running like machines. Predictable, such that the mere click of a well-practiced chore solves it all!

More often than not, we are subjected to random events with which a rote-learned human sometimes cannot cope up with. That is where the basic understanding of the things in life hold supreme, IMHO. That is what I meant when I said it's not the length of time spent burning candles and or "visit to the machine shop" that matters. It is how the person/s was learning what ought to be learned. It's no question "quality" is better than "quantity".

Then I will go back to my rant, why did our government follow a path where we are extending the time when the problem was "quality" of education? Does it mean students will have to repeat and repeat things so that they will be considered "learned"? I don't even believe that our government understand that every person is unique. They wanted to set the time frame for all to hurdle thru, time wasted for fast learners; time not enough for mediocre, mirrors of the present admin.

Sorry, I guess it's the weather getting thru me.

Ady001

December 20th, 2011, 10:47 AM

Parchie

December 20th, 2011, 11:13 AM

^^ Iba din kasi approach ng school nyo kasi, para atang binombard kayo ng mathematics subjects until you get to appreciate it. Well, it could be a good or bad thing for some but it does produce results.

Unfortunately not all of us start young and start rich.

@Parchie, repeating things does work for the Kumon method.
For HMI or working with machines, maybe. To live and survive in this ever competitive environment, I guess not. I thought about having my kids go there, but like I have said, I have doubts as to whether it's worth the hassles.

See it like this:K+12 is good, I'd say why? And ask back: Why not? Then I remembered what an SVD priest explained to me how education was and is in Germany! That was a Jew from Germany who is a priest! (Please learn how they mold their children in Germany).

Could it be that we are benchmarking on the wrong education system? You can deny through your teeth but it seems all signs tell us it is so.

b_9904

December 20th, 2011, 11:21 AM

The Chinese way of learning has its own advantages and disadvantages. We call those as the rote method of learning. Repeating and repeating things until everything becomes second nature.

Generally, I agree with this statement.

Pero they didn't just made us memorize it. They simplified the entire process and thought us the REASON behind the equation and the RATIONALE behind the simplification.

they didn't give us easy problems either. They gave us "life-like" problems wherein these equations can be applied, although they stuck to the most basic of examples.

More often than not, we are subjected to random events with which a rote-learned human sometimes cannot cope up with. That is where the basic understanding of the things in life hold supreme, IMHO.

Though I agree with your comment but I believe that comes with experience. A lot of it.

Kaya laking pasalamat ko sa Counter Strike eh. Dahil sa kanya na kick out ako. Napilitan akong mag work muna, then dun ko lang na realize I wanna take up a business related course and it reminded me na gusto ko talaga mag law.

Your comment somehow reminded me of the movie "with honors" by Brendan Frasier.

why did our government follow a path where we are extending the time when the problem was "quality" of education?

I don't think its just the quality of the education that is the problem. Circumstances surrounding the student affects his performance MORE than the school could impact him.

I've seen this happen with a lot of people in Cavite. The student is really struggling to study in school AND to help his father support their HUGE family (RH BILL!). In the end, yung mga younger siblings lang nila ang nakapag tapos ng college.

^^ Iba din kasi approach ng school nyo kasi, para atang binombard kayo ng mathematics subjects until you get to appreciate it. Well, it could be a good or bad thing for some but it does produce results.

Unfortunately not all of us start young and start rich.

@Parchie, repeating things does work for the Kumon method.

Yes, they did. Binomba talaga kami nun. Sabi ko nga eh... FORCED kami maging math pros halos lahat kami nag grad ahead sa HALOS LAHAT ng mga freshmen. Although, hindi gaano nadevelop yung ibang talents namin like sa arts and literature.

Trade off I guess.

Yeah, hindi lahat nakakapag aral sa private school. Which is sad.

-------------

Anyways, ang puno at dulo ng sinasabi ko ay... PWEDE ITO GAWIN IN FOUR YEARS OF HIGH SCHOOL.

Shazzam

December 20th, 2011, 11:43 AM

I think BS Astronomy is offered sa UP Diliman pero if you mean high school, sa mga special science high schools, may basic astronomy course din ata.

Rizal Technological University, in Boni Ave Mandaluyong City has BS Astronomy, subsidized by the DOST I supposed. Guaranteed may trabaho agad pagka-graduate.

Officialdmcileasing

December 21st, 2011, 01:29 AM

Rizal Technological University, in Boni Ave Mandaluyong City has BS Astronomy, subsidized by the DOST I supposed. Guaranteed may trabaho agad pagka-graduate.

^^^^ many schools already promises jobs after graduation.. but.. :ohno::ohno: Some are just promises that we're meant to be broken. :nuts::nuts:

skyion

December 21st, 2011, 01:30 AM

How are the Academic Institutions in this country doing its expected responsibility in addressing the recent alarming problems occurring, in particular the deadly typhoon that recently ravaged Northern Mindanao?

Ady001

December 21st, 2011, 03:12 AM

Yes, they did. Binomba talaga kami nun. Sabi ko nga eh... FORCED kami maging math pros halos lahat kami nag grad ahead sa HALOS LAHAT ng mga freshmen. Although, hindi gaano nadevelop yung ibang talents namin like sa arts and literature.

Trade off I guess.

Yeah, hindi lahat nakakapag aral sa private school. Which is sad.

-------------

Anyways, ang puno at dulo ng sinasabi ko ay... PWEDE ITO GAWIN IN FOUR YEARS OF HIGH SCHOOL.

It is doable in four years.

However, not everyone can do it in four years.

Let me ask you, how many years did you study in that school or how many years did that program flourish?

Were there pressures in between?

If you placed in 2 years more, you would've added a little bit of art and literature in your subjects and would've added that kind of skill in your schooling.

Pero these are factors why some could do it in four years:

1 - Familial pressures
2 - School pressures
3 - Self-pressure
4 - talagang bright lang
5 - They started young
6 - their environment is conducive to study
7 - Cultural pressure
8 - Merit-based incentives

And perhaps adding the humanities would've widened your view (and appreciated law as well!)

Ady001

December 21st, 2011, 03:13 AM

^^^^ many schools already promises jobs after graduation.. but.. :ohno::ohno: Some are just promises that we're meant to be broken. :nuts::nuts:

Oh yeah, I remember those being advertised by some well-known computer schools :lol:

Ady001

December 21st, 2011, 03:20 AM

For HMI or working with machines, maybe. To live and survive in this ever competitive environment, I guess not. I thought about having my kids go there, but like I have said, I have doubts as to whether it's worth the hassles.

See it like this:K+12 is good, I'd say why? And ask back: Why not? Then I remembered what an SVD priest explained to me how education was and is in Germany! That was a Jew from Germany who is a priest! (Please learn how they mold their children in Germany).

Could it be that we are benchmarking on the wrong education system? You can deny through your teeth but it seems all signs tell us it is so.

We're probably benchmarking with some wrong educational system but remember, no educational system is perfect in a way, although nasa estudyante pa din kung saan siya pupunta at saan siya paroroon. However, as a country we have to know where we fit in and where we should stand. Singapore used the borrow and adapt method but they made their own curricula in math and look at what they've reached!

I hope experimental and incubation classes would be set up to test new curricula, put up good variables, and see on where our new curricula would stand.

Parchie

December 21st, 2011, 03:53 AM

We're probably benchmarking with some wrong educational system but remember, no educational system is perfect in a way, although nasa estudyante pa din kung saan siya pupunta at saan siya paroroon. However, as a country we have to know where we fit in and where we should stand. Singapore used the borrow and adapt method but they made their own curricula in math and look at what they've reached!

I hope experimental and incubation classes would be set up to test new curricula, put up good variables, and see on where our new curricula would stand.
So I caught the magic word! "experiment and incubate"! Very noble idea. I now have to ask the DepEd and CHED why not "experiment and incubate" first before forcing the K+12 to all the people? Like the branded medicines we are enjoying the benefits of, medical labs use large amounts of money to test and verify the efficacy of those tablets as well as the side-effects. Who's going to benefit from all these exercises? Is it the book printers? The educational materials suppliers? etc. Poor Juan dela Cruz and his kids! They're not on the list.

b_9904

December 21st, 2011, 07:58 AM

It is doable in four years.

However, not everyone can do it in four years.

Let me ask you, how many years did you study in that school or how many years did that program flourish?

And perhaps adding the humanities would've widened your view (and appreciated law as well!)

question... humanities at literature and art lang ba idadagdag sa K+12?

maybe not everyone could do it in four years but how could we explain batch after batch of students with above average aptitude for math? This also holds true in other Chinese schools, though average lang sila :lol: kidding.

I transferred to my school when I was in grade five. so... 6 years?

If you placed in 2 years more, you would've added a little bit of art and literature in your subjects and would've added that kind of skill in your schooling.

i dont think so. its the policy of that school to prepare us for highly technical courses (eng, health sciences, science course, etc.). hangang ngayon alam ko ganun pa din policy ng school na yun. pero malay ba natin... pag nag K+12 baka nga mag dagdag sila ng ibang subject na hindi related sa math or science.

re: law. bata pa ako gusto ko na mag law. pero hindi ko sure if kaya ko yung +4 years na pag aaral. its only when I worked and realized na kaya kong mag tiis kahit mahirap ang work ko na kaya ko din tiisin ang +4 years of law.

Were there pressures in between?

Pero these are factors why some could do it in four years:

1 - Familial pressures
2 - School pressures
3 - Self-pressure
4 - talagang bright lang
5 - They started young
6 - their environment is conducive to study
7 - Cultural pressure
8 - Merit-based incentives

teka... kelan ba nawalan ng pressure ang school? :lol:

I might agree with your factors EXCEPT number 4.

Ady001

December 21st, 2011, 08:38 AM

^^ Actually being brainy is one of the probably more obvious reasons why some kids still have the capability to go for four years. Kung matalino ang estudyante at merong ibubuga talagang fit na fit na ang four years.

If you went to a public school, especially those in the provinces, you will see why.

I think it's not only arts and literature; they'll probably even out some of the subjects, maybe add more practical ones and deleter less useful ones. It's all a matter of school policy on what they will probably find as useful. Perhaps your old school might come out with what, intermediate or advanced Mandarin? Or some unusual subjects like actuarial science.

Sorry I haven't been schooled in a Chinese school (alang pera eh:cry::cry:)

And your six years obviously gave you an advantage in their curriculum; at least nasanay ka na within that time period.

@Parchie the big problem with incubation is that some of those in DepEd had been doing it but they're not doing it very well. May ibang nakulangan sa pondo, or nalihis ng landas yung curriculum or di siguro akma sa ibang grupo ng estudyante because of socio-economic factors. If only there's a rigid program that they could plan in order to remedy this.

And of course, if the accord will go in full force sometime now (in 2016 or 2020?) they have no choice but to fully implement it in a wide-scale to catch up.

b_9904

December 21st, 2011, 10:03 AM

Actually being brainy is one of the probably more obvious reasons why some kids still have the capability to go for four years. Kung matalino ang estudyante at merong ibubuga talagang fit na fit na ang four years.

may pustahan kami ng best friend ko sa law school. pinagpustahan namin whether or not the creme de la creme class of San Beda Law would out perform the lowest of the low. My theory is this... SIPAG at TIYAGA, his was... its in the genes.

After a semester later... I won the bet.

So what is my point? Well, impossible naman na lahat ng mga bata na nagtapos sa school namin ay brainy. hindi din sila mayayaman. as a matter of fact, isa kami sa mga subsidized schools ng mga Buddhist monks. It ain't as cheap as public school but compared to other private schools for sure nasa baba kami ng listahan.

If you went to a public school, especially those in the provinces, you will see why.

yung mga pinsan ko sa mother side sa Negros nag public school din. pero ok naman sila eh. capable in math and science AND magaling din sa english!

well... teacher naman kasi din yung tita ko :lol:

I think it's not only arts and literature; they'll probably even out some of the subjects, maybe add more practical ones and deleter less useful ones. It's all a matter of school policy on what they will probably find as useful. Perhaps your old school might come out with what, intermediate or advanced Mandarin? Or some unusual subjects like actuarial science.

if schools will be FORCED to add subjects aimed at giving kids vocational skills then I'm all for K+12. Otherwise, there is no point.

pero pag tumagal ako sa school na yun malamang marunong na ako mag luto ng shabu ngayon. barkada ko pa yung magaling na "thief" ng mga test papers dun. super rebellious ng mga tao saamin. :lol:

good thing nalang talaga apat na taon lang ang HS. :D

Sorry I haven't been schooled in a Chinese school (alang pera eh)

public school ka po ba?

nung 1999 i think yung tuition namin ay nasa 15k ata kada sem. so 30k kada taon yun.

And your six years obviously gave you an advantage in their curriculum; at least nasanay ka na within that time period.

swim or die dun eh. so no choice ka. :lol:

May nabasa ako dati sa isang leadership manual: our schools force round pegs into square holes. I tend to agree.

Instead of K+12 dapat siguro ipursige ng pamahalaan yung sports academy at yung performing arts school.

xxxriainxxx

December 21st, 2011, 01:11 PM

Ako 5 years lang ang grade school ko instead of 6. :D

Parchie

December 21st, 2011, 03:33 PM

Ako 5 years lang ang grade school ko instead of 6. :D
If I may be allowed to ask: if you were to live your life all over again, do you feel you should have gone thru 7 years of grade school and go 5 more years in high school?

I don't to make fun of you but I just want others to hear an honest reply re this K+12 thing. This question can also be directed to others who may want to answer.

b_9904

December 21st, 2011, 04:42 PM

Parchie

December 21st, 2011, 06:28 PM

masaya na ako sa old system.
Plus 1, makes us 2!

mikael21

December 22nd, 2011, 02:20 AM

If I may be allowed to ask: if you were to live your life all over again, do you feel you should have gone thru 7 years of grade school and go 5 more years in high school?

I don't to make fun of you but I just want others to hear an honest reply re this K+12 thing. This question can also be directed to others who may want to answer.

the traditional system would do, most especially when they provide quality education both private and public sector. Provide adequate facilities in the country mostly in remote areas.

Ady001

December 22nd, 2011, 02:57 AM

may pustahan kami ng best friend ko sa law school. pinagpustahan namin whether or not the creme de la creme class of San Beda Law would out perform the lowest of the low. My theory is this... SIPAG at TIYAGA, his was... its in the genes.

After a semester later... I won the bet.

So what is my point? Well, impossible naman na lahat ng mga bata na nagtapos sa school namin ay brainy. hindi din sila mayayaman. as a matter of fact, isa kami sa mga subsidized schools ng mga Buddhist monks. It ain't as cheap as public school but compared to other private schools for sure nasa baba kami ng listahan.

Di nga lahat pero may iba naman. Yes, not all students who are considered brainy could be considered as achievers in their field. Nasa sipag at tiyaga talaga yan pero it's still a plus if you have the brains and the environment to live in.

And of course, remember those child prodigies you see in TV in the nineties? where are they now?

However, di naman tayong lahat maging kagaya ni Algernon or (ugghh) Budoy.

yung mga pinsan ko sa mother side sa Negros nag public school din. pero ok naman sila eh. capable in math and science AND magaling din sa english!

well... teacher naman kasi din yung tita ko :lol:

Well, at least I was born to be straight-laced. I have no "connections" but I guess it helped me survive though.

if schools will be FORCED to add subjects aimed at giving kids vocational skills then I'm all for K+12. Otherwise, there is no point.

pero pag tumagal ako sa school na yun malamang marunong na ako mag luto ng shabu ngayon. barkada ko pa yung magaling na "thief" ng mga test papers dun. super rebellious ng mga tao saamin. :lol:

good thing nalang talaga apat na taon lang ang HS. :D

They have to. Otherwise, balewala lang ang four years di ba?

public school ka po ba?

nung 1999 i think yung tuition namin ay nasa 15k ata kada sem. so 30k kada taon yun.

Too expensive at that time. I was from the Assumption School of Davao during my elementary days 1993-1999 and we spent around 4-5k per academic year.

when I went public, wala pang isang libo or siguro 500 ang nagagasta ko kada school year.

And in UP days, it was no more than 6000 per sem (2003-2007.)

swim or die dun eh. so no choice ka. :lol:

May nabasa ako dati sa isang leadership manual: our schools force round pegs into square holes. I tend to agree.

Instead of K+12 dapat siguro ipursige ng pamahalaan yung sports academy at yung performing arts school.

Mahirap din ata yan. If you bend students to do sports and performing arts, they'd be bent to follow to that discipline; that wouldn't make them well-rounded students.

And of course, bibihira lang sa atin yung na-da-draft sa PBA and bibihira lang talaga ang pwedeng masabing career yung arts, unless you're teaching. I'm not saying na walang pera sa art, it's just that man doesn't live by bread alone. He had to know the ropes as well.

Ady001

December 22nd, 2011, 02:59 AM

If I may be allowed to ask: if you were to live your life all over again, do you feel you should have gone thru 7 years of grade school and go 5 more years in high school?

I don't to make fun of you but I just want others to hear an honest reply re this K+12 thing. This question can also be directed to others who may want to answer.

Depende.

If I was born bright with all the elements to make my learning conducive, I-accelerate mo pa ako, SIGE!

Pero kung I was born poor, or born ugok na talagang slow-learning, I'm going for K+12 years.

all in all, K+12 pleases everyone and it's the status quo.

Ady001

December 22nd, 2011, 03:03 AM

the traditional system would do, most especially when they provide quality education both private and public sector. Provide adequate facilities in the country mostly in remote areas.

How then can you provide quality education if the student's learning curve isn't the best?

It's like forcing people to watch cerebral, experimental films when all they want is Ang Panday or Enteng Kabisote.

And another thing. If you want students with that kind of level of thinking, you have to adjust your society to be mature as well.

Which, unfortunately, is not the case in this country.

Ergo, to make this society mature, not only do our leaders have to be one, but us as well.

And it all starts at school.

Parchie

December 23rd, 2011, 05:46 AM

Depende.

If I was born bright with all the elements to make my learning conducive, I-accelerate mo pa ako, SIGE!

Pero kung I was born poor, or born ugok na talagang slow-learning, I'm going for K+12 years.

all in all, K+12 pleases everyone and it's the status quo.
Ang lupit at ang anghang ng mga salita mo dyan! Hehehehe!

I can't help but have my personal understanding on how DepEd and CHED sees all of our children in the Philippines, if that's the case: all our children are "born ugok", "slow-learners" and most of all "born of poor parents" that's why K+12 should be implemented at all costs!

But your claim re "Depende" perhaps absolves you there, good buddy!
FYI, I personally know of a congressman who breezed thru high school in two year! He spent just half a year for every year level. When he took the bar, he placed third. That only proves education psychology is indeed wanting in our education system.

amigo32

December 23rd, 2011, 06:25 AM

A friend named Doogie Howser MD became a doctor at age 14:D

Ady001

December 23rd, 2011, 06:41 AM

Ang lupit at ang anghang ng mga salita mo dyan! Hehehehe!

I can't help but have my personal understanding on how DepEd and CHED sees all of our children in the Philippines, if that's the case: all our children are "born ugok", "slow-learners" and most of all "born of poor parents" that's why K+12 should be implemented at all costs!

But your claim re "Depende" perhaps absolves you there, good buddy!
FYI, I personally know of a congressman who breezed thru high school in two year! He spent just half a year for every year level. When he took the bar, he placed third. That only proves education psychology is indeed wanting in our education system.

Kaya nga depende eh.

Sasalain ng K+12 yung mga mahihina at malalakas. It's not that all kids in this country are slow learners or "born ugok," it's just that not all have the chance and the pace to learn like others do.

And of course kung babagsak ang estudyante, there could be other factors that are not only based on understanding like busy and estudyante or family problems.

About the congressman, bakit kaya naimbento ang Honoris Causa Parchie ano? Bakit kaya?

Ady001

December 23rd, 2011, 06:42 AM

A friend named Doogie Howser MD became a doctor at age 14:D

One acquaintance of mine who took up her masters in the US in Mathematics had a kid whiz (underage kid) who takes the class with her.

Parchie

December 23rd, 2011, 10:35 AM

Kaya nga depende eh.

Sasalain ng K+12 yung mga mahihina at malalakas. It's not that all kids in this country are slow learners or "born ugok," it's just that not all have the chance and the pace to learn like others do.

And of course kung babagsak ang estudyante, there could be other factors that are not only based on understanding like busy and estudyante or family problems.

About the congressman, bakit kaya naimbento ang Honoris Causa Parchie ano? Bakit kaya?
Honorary awards are given by institutions just as the word means, because of the honor one gives to the discipline! BTW, that congressman I was personally aware of was a practicing lawyer before he entered politics. Passing the bar has nothing to do with awards given by universities to government officials by virtue of ones help, to state a fact.

Back to the original topic, I think we don't need K+12 in order to know how our students are learning. Acceleration of grade promotions if students exhibit fast learning has been done before. I don't know if DePEd still has existing guidelines on this.

b_9904

December 23rd, 2011, 12:39 PM

Mahirap din ata yan. If you bend students to do sports and performing arts, they'd be bent to follow to that discipline; that wouldn't make them well-rounded students.

And of course, bibihira lang sa atin yung na-da-draft sa PBA and bibihira lang talaga ang pwedeng masabing career yung arts, unless you're teaching. I'm not saying na walang pera sa art, it's just that man doesn't live by bread alone. He had to know the ropes as well.

hindi yun ang tinutukoy ko...

madami saatin ang talent ay nasa sports at the arts... so those SPECIALIZED schools should cultivate those talents.

MatudNilaBaby

December 23rd, 2011, 11:17 PM

hindi yun ang tinutukoy ko...

madami saatin ang talent ay nasa sports at the arts... so those SPECIALIZED schools should cultivate those talents.

you can call such specialized school as magnet school. in cebu, the mandaue city highschool for the performing arts is a magnet school for students interested in developing their skills in music, visual arts, theater arts, creative writing, media arts and dance aside from the required general education classes.

sports is already an integrated curriculum in all schools but it has not been a specialized field yet.

Ady001

December 24th, 2011, 03:27 AM

hindi yun ang tinutukoy ko...

madami saatin ang talent ay nasa sports at the arts... so those SPECIALIZED schools should cultivate those talents.

Art does not pay alone. You have to learn how to sell it as well.

Ady001

December 24th, 2011, 03:30 AM

Honorary awards are given by institutions just as the word means, because of the honor one gives to the discipline! BTW, that congressman I was personally aware of was a practicing lawyer before he entered politics. Passing the bar has nothing to do with awards given by universities to government officials by virtue of ones help, to state a fact.

Back to the original topic, I think we don't need K+12 in order to know how our students are learning. Acceleration of grade promotions if students exhibit fast learning has been done before. I don't know if DePEd still has existing guidelines on this.

Different strokes for different folks.

We need to have K+12 to give breathing space to our students. How many school days does the Philippines have? How many typhoons pass us every year? How many school hours are lost then? and are all of those school days easily replaced?

epik ll ian

December 25th, 2011, 02:46 AM

Parchie

December 25th, 2011, 02:38 PM

Different strokes for different folks.

We need to have K+12 to give breathing space to our students. How many school days does the Philippines have? How many typhoons pass us every year? How many school hours are lost then? and are all of those school days easily replaced?
I would like to believe that what you're pointing out is the correct basis for a "proper education system" that we should have. Granting, without admitting the obvious line of reasoning I got from your post, what can y'all say about this web post:

Longer School Days, Better Outcomes?
. . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .
9 Conclusions

This paper presents new evidence of the effects of time spent in school during secondary education on a variety of different dimensions, ranging from schooling attainment and social behavior during adolescence to cognitive, socio-emotional and labor market outcomes during adulthood. We do this by exploiting the convenient structure of the Chilean schooling system and its changes during the period 1995-2000.

"Our results suggest in general longer school days have positive effects on individual's behavior which do not necessarily translate into better labor market outcomes."More (http://cemapre.iseg.utl.pt/events/1e3/papers/Tiago%20Pires.pdf)

Ady001

December 25th, 2011, 08:18 PM

^^ Oh great, some people are ranting the same thing. This is from Singapore:

http://www.salary.sg/2008/mba-not-so-good-after-all/

http://forums.sgclub.com/singapore/masters_degree_holder_380069.html

http://www.asiaone.com/News/Education/Story/A1Story20100616-222438.html

And look at this:

4M98x-FLp7E

Y_ZwY99womA

Now, with the current market, do you all think we should still get K-12? Some of you might think it's already obvious but I think otherwise. Thoughts?

Parchie

December 28th, 2011, 03:34 AM

Improving Student Achievement by Extending School: Is It Just a Matter of Time?
by Julie Aronson, Joy Zimmerman, and Lisa Carlos

In cases where time is already well utilized, such that there is a high proportion of engaged and academic learning time, extending the length of the school day or year is likely to have the desired outcome of increasing student achievement.
In cases where time is not already well utilized, increasing allocated time is not likely to produce substantial gains in student achievement. In such cases, the first step should be to improve the quality of existing time.
At the school level, strategies such as better time management, increasing the proportion of time spent on academic subjects, and adopting alternative academic calendars can help to maximize the amount of time available for student learning.
The key to increasing student learning is to maximize the amount of academic learning time; that is, to utilize education time in ways in which students are actively engaged in learning at appropriate levels of difficulty.
Standards-based education increases the need to give students more academic learning time.
Teachers also need more time, especially for professional development.
Time outside of school can be used to enhance student learning.

Conclusion
In conclusion, it appears that time is but one of several important variables in the complex equation that determines how much students learn in school.

The research literature suggests that, while time is certainly a critical factor, by itself it has little direct impact on student performance.

Simply adding time to the school year or day would not likely produce large-scale gains in student achievement. Rather, what research studies repeatedly find is that in education, quality is the key to making time matter. Of particular importance is providing curriculum and instruction geared to the needs and abilities of students, engaging them so they will return day after day, continuing to build on what they have learned. In other words, educators must — to the greatest extent possible — make every hour count. What matters most are those catalytic moments when students are absorbed in instructional activities that are adequately challenging, yet allow them to experience success.

This then — maximizing the time during which students are actively and appropriately engaged in learning — is one lens through which any education reform measure should be viewed. Policymakers and practitioners should evaluate any potential reform with an eye to whether and how it will contribute to increasing the amount of time when students are truly learning. Only when time is used more effectively will adding more of it begin to result in improved learning outcomes for all students.

FULL TEXT (http://www.wested.org/online_pubs/po-98-02.pdf)

b_two

December 28th, 2011, 05:10 AM

mikael21

December 28th, 2011, 07:43 AM

:ohno:Tama, kaso ilang henerasyon na nagdaan, ilang administrasyon na rin ang humawak still main problem pa rin ang inadequate schools resources, good teachers sa bansa.

amigo32

December 28th, 2011, 09:11 AM

wait lang ha, dahil tuwid na ang daan, magkatotoo ang inyong mga pangarap:lol:

mikael21

December 29th, 2011, 03:08 AM

wait lang ha, dahil tuwid na ang daan, magkatotoo ang inyong mga pangarap:lol:

:angel1:

MatudNilaBaby

December 29th, 2011, 04:12 AM

imo before we jump into the k+12 system it is a must that we fix our education sector first. problems like the ratio of books, classrooms, teachers, etc. to students in the present system should be solved first. if we are facing huge problems with the present system... how much more with the proposed k+12?

be realistic.

with the way flips think and behave, what you wish for will not happen in our lifetime. its good to adapt a new strategy to put back our competitiveness in the global market.

actually what you hoped for can be accomplished in areas like the metropolitan or highly urbanized places thats in keeping with what other global cities are doing. but speaking for the improvement of the quality of education for the entire country is a hard sell. we can only make baby steps to acquire what we hoped for our younger generation.

Ady001

December 29th, 2011, 05:58 AM

imo before we jump into the k+12 system it is a must that we fix our education sector first. problems like the ratio of books, classrooms, teachers, etc. to students in the present system should be solved first. if we are facing huge problems with the present system... how much more with the proposed k+12?

be realistic.

Wishing for that is like wishing for world peace sir. Let's be realistic as well. Unless may panggastos ka for that then we could go with that plan. Corruption is a festering boil that seems to grow like a Promethian wound that cannot be killed. It's part of the system.

What the system needs is something uncorruptible, something new; a new battleground that we all could work on. and that is one of the most precious things that money could never buy- Time.

Money can bribe, steal, cheat, and lie, but it cannot buy time.

And time is what everyone needs now.

Let's work with realistic goals first, and I know K+12 is more realistic than doing all of those. The reason why we have K+12 is to free up the system and give a leeway to the students.

davaob4now

December 29th, 2011, 02:01 PM

Asian University Ranking 2011
Rank School Name Country Classification Score
1 The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology Hong Kong M|CO| 100.00
2 University of Hong Kong Hong Kong L|FC| 99.80
3 National University of Singapore (NUS) Singapore XL|FC 99.30
4 The University of Tokyo Japan L|FC| 97.40
5 The Chinese University of Hong Kong Hong Kong L|FC| 97.20
6 Seoul National University Korea, South L|FC| 96.90
7 Kyoto University Japan L|FC| 96.30
8 Osaka University Japan L|FC| 96.09
9= Tohoku University Japan L|FC| 94.30
9= Tokyo Institute of Technology Japan M|CO| 94.30
11 KAIST - Korea Advanced Institute of Science & Technology Korea, South M|CO| 94.20
12 Pohang University of Science And Technology (POSTECH) Korea, South S|FO| 93.59
13 Peking University China L|FC| 93.30
14 Nagoya University Japan L|FC| 92.80
15 City University of Hong Kong Hong Kong M|CO| 91.20
16 Tsinghua University China XL|FC 90.20
17 Nanyang Technological University (NTU) Singapore L|CO| 89.40
18= Yonsei University Korea, South XL|FC 86.90
18= Kyushu University Japan L|FC| 86.90
20 Hokkaido University Japan L|FC| 85.80
21= Fudan University China L|FC| 85.09
21= National Taiwan University (NTU) Taiwan XL|FC 85.09
23 University of Tsukuba Japan L|FC| 82.30
24= Keio University Japan XL|FC 81.90
24= University of Science and Technology of China China L|CO| 81.90
26 Korea University Korea, South XL|FC 80.80
27= Sungkyunkwan University Korea, South L|FC| 79.59
27= Zhejiang University China XL|FC 79.59
29 Nanjing University China L|FC| 79.20
30 The Hong Kong Polytechnic University Hong Kong L|CO|
.............................
..............................................
rankings (http://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings/asian-university-rankings/2011)

el_dasik_oo1

December 29th, 2011, 03:53 PM

suntex

December 29th, 2011, 04:04 PM

suntex

December 29th, 2011, 04:08 PM

siguro ang 1 at 2 spot ay subrang tatalino dyan no? daig pa nila ang top 1-10 sa world, di naka 100% ang rate sa grading

parang ganito lang yan

1. maganda ang school? grade-perfect
2. may research sa loob at labas ng klase? perfect
3. perfect ang exam ng bawat quiz or exams? perferct, dyan masasabi ko sila na ang superhuman sa mundo

el_dasik_oo1

December 29th, 2011, 04:10 PM

^ Not that I'm favoring the government pero it takes two to tango. We also have to blame ourselves din naman.

Ady001

December 30th, 2011, 03:14 AM

rAxviLLe

December 30th, 2011, 03:20 AM

Share ko lang ito

Asian University Rankings Results 2011

Rank School Name/Score
62= University of the Philippines/58.10
65 Ateneo de Manila University/57.20
104= University of Santo Tomas/47.10
107 De La Salle University/45.90
201+ University of Southeastern Philippines/18.70
201+ Silliman University/18.50
201+ Xavier University/16.40
201+ University of San Carlos/14.00
201+ Central Mindanao University/13.60
201+ Mapua Institute of Technology/11.40
201+ Adamson University/10.40
201+ Saint Louis University/10.00
201+ Father Saturnino Urios College/6.20
201+ Polytechnic University of the Philippines/6.10
201+ Mindanao State University/5.70

pulsephaze22

December 30th, 2011, 01:52 PM

^^ Imagine if UP's got facilities comparable to those on the Top 10. Feeling ko yun lang ang kulang sa kanila eh.

todjikid

December 30th, 2011, 06:05 PM

^^ Imagine if UP's got facilities comparable to those on the Top 10. Feeling ko yun lang ang kulang sa kanila eh.

With UP's National Science Complex, National Engineering Complex and Technology Business Incubation and research oriented initiatives such as Philippine Genome Center ...UP is on-track towards modernization.

National Institute of Physics
http://i778.photobucket.com/albums/yy68/todjikid1/DSC02165.jpg
http://i778.photobucket.com/albums/yy68/todjikid1/DSC02166.jpg
http://i778.photobucket.com/albums/yy68/todjikid1/DSC02169.jpg

Institute of Math
http://i778.photobucket.com/albums/yy68/todjikid1/DSC02162.jpg
http://i778.photobucket.com/albums/yy68/todjikid1/DSC02159.jpg

Institute of Chem
http://i778.photobucket.com/albums/yy68/todjikid1/DSC02172.jpg
http://i778.photobucket.com/albums/yy68/todjikid1/DSC02173.jpg
http://i778.photobucket.com/albums/yy68/todjikid1/DSC01795-1.jpg

Institute of Biology
http://i778.photobucket.com/albums/yy68/todjikid1/DSC02185.jpg
http://i778.photobucket.com/albums/yy68/todjikid1/DSC02184.jpg

National Institute of Molecular Biology and Biotech
http://i778.photobucket.com/albums/yy68/todjikid1/images.jpg
http://i778.photobucket.com/albums/yy68/todjikid1/DSC02181.jpg

Institute of Meteorology and Environmental Sciences
http://i778.photobucket.com/albums/yy68/todjikid1/DSC01778.jpg

National Institute of Geological Sciences
http://i778.photobucket.com/albums/yy68/todjikid1/DSC01775.jpg

Marine Science Institute
http://i778.photobucket.com/albums/yy68/todjikid1/DSC01766.jpg

National Science Complex Oval
http://i778.photobucket.com/albums/yy68/todjikid1/DSC02182.jpg
http://i778.photobucket.com/albums/yy68/todjikid1/DSC01326.jpg

Materials Mining and Metallurgy
http://i778.photobucket.com/albums/yy68/todjikid1/DSC02149.jpg
http://i778.photobucket.com/albums/yy68/todjikid1/DSC02150.jpg
http://i778.photobucket.com/albums/yy68/todjikid1/DSC02152.jpg

Electrical and Electronics Engineering Phase 2
http://i778.photobucket.com/albums/yy68/todjikid1/DSC02146.jpg
http://i778.photobucket.com/albums/yy68/todjikid1/DSC02145.jpg
http://i778.photobucket.com/albums/yy68/todjikid1/eeei2.jpg

Under construction din ang Institute of Civil Engineering
http://i778.photobucket.com/albums/yy68/todjikid1/Slide1-6.jpg

and Institute of Energy and Environmental Engineering (but I can't get in to take pictures)
http://i778.photobucket.com/albums/yy68/todjikid1/Picture123.jpg

I think malapit na rin matatapos ang Industrial and Mechanical Eng'g building
http://i778.photobucket.com/albums/yy68/todjikid1/me.jpg
http://i778.photobucket.com/albums/yy68/todjikid1/DSC02006.jpg
http://i778.photobucket.com/albums/yy68/todjikid1/DSC02002.jpg

Engineering Library II
http://i778.photobucket.com/albums/yy68/todjikid1/DSC02147.jpg
http://i778.photobucket.com/albums/yy68/todjikid1/DSC02148.jpg

Kita ko na rin ang skeleton ng National Science Complex Admin Building

todjikid

December 30th, 2011, 06:22 PM

and it was former president GMA who alloted close to 5B pesos (i think) in the construction of the National Science and Engineering Complexes.

ralfy

December 31st, 2011, 08:14 AM

Parchie

December 31st, 2011, 09:19 AM

We cannot fix other problems and not impose a K-12 system because part of the problem is lack of years, i.e., we're actually cramming a 12-year curriculum into 10 years.

What has happened is that for the past 80 years (the 12-year program was first proposed in 1921) we've been setting aside dealing with one problem by using another as an excuse. Because of that, we now have multiple problems piled on top of each other.

The recent move to require K-12 was brought about by an APEC regime requirement. That is, APEC members want us to graduate students who received this type of education by 2020, or else we're out of the regime. We'll also not be able to agree to things like the Washington and Bologna accords because these will also require 12-year systems, too.

The consequences may be unacceptable, as other countries might accept only students or graduates from countries that require 12 years.

No amount of posting pretty pictures of campus buildings or even ratings will help. For the first, our colleges and universities face the same problems as our primary and secondary schools. For the second, we have something like the twelfth largest college population in the world, and we can barely get four schools into rankings.

Worse, we cannot even follow our own standards, which are already very low. For example, we require at least a master's degree for tertiary college and uni profs (it's a PhD for some countries) but only around 25 pct of our teachers qualify, and only around 6 pct have PhDs. See, you did know that it is really not a matter of extending the number of school years! look closely:
Worse, we cannot even follow our own standards, which are already very low. For example, we require at least a master's degree for tertiary college and uni profs (it's a PhD for some countries) but only around 25 pct of our teachers qualify, and only around 6 pct have PhDs.You are saying that our existing system lacks quality due to teachers' qualifications/ capacity to teach! How about commenting on this portion of a previous post of mine?:
Conclusion
In conclusion, it appears that time is but one of several important variables in the complex equation that determines how much students learn in school.

The research literature suggests that, while time is certainly a critical factor, by itself it has little direct impact on student performance.

Simply adding time to the school year or day would not likely produce large-scale gains in student achievement.

Rather, what research studies repeatedly find is that in education, quality is the key to making time matter. Of particular importance is providing curriculum and instruction geared to the needs and abilities of students, engaging them so they will return day after day, continuing to build on what they have learned. In other words, educators must — to the greatest extent possible — make every hour count. What matters most are those catalytic moments when students are absorbed in instructional activities that are adequately challenging, yet allow them to experience success.

Ady001

December 31st, 2011, 01:36 PM

^^ Cite reliable proof that shorter years in formal education is beneficial please.

coffeeworld

December 31st, 2011, 02:06 PM

Parchie

December 31st, 2011, 04:34 PM

^^ Cite reliable proof that shorter years in formal education is beneficial please.
I would be very much obliged if people really want to know. But take note that my point in these arguments is that on the need to focus on the "quality of education" and not extending the number of school years after kindergarten! If I may post again the research findings I've posted earlier:

In cases where time is already well utilized, such that there is a high proportion of engaged and academic learning time, extending the length of the school day or year is likely to have the desired outcome of increasing student achievement.
In cases where time is not already well utilized, increasing allocated time is not likely to produce substantial gains in student achievement. In such cases, the first step should be to improve the quality of existing time.
At the school level, strategies such as better time management, increasing the proportion of time spent on academic subjects, and adopting alternative academic calendars can help to maximize the amount of time available for student learning.
The key to increasing student learning is to maximize the amount of academic learning time; that is, to utilize education time in ways in which students are actively engaged in learning at appropriate levels of difficulty.
Standards-based education increases the need to give students more academic learning time.
Teachers also need more time, especially for professional development.
Time outside of school can be used to enhance student learning.

The questions I wanted to ask earlier would be:

Is our state of education a case where time is already well utilized, such that there is a high proportion of engaged and academic learning time?
If time was well-utilized, did DepEd provide more time to our teachers for professional development?
Were our teachers taught well about better time management?

Above questions if addressed before, could be the solution in improving the student performance, IMO.

MatudNilaBaby

December 31st, 2011, 09:06 PM

I would be very much obliged if people really want to know. But take note that my point in these arguments is that on the need to focus on the "quality of education" and not extending the number of school years after kindergarten! If I may post again the research findings I've posted earlier:
[/LIST]
The questions I wanted to ask earlier would be:

Is our state of education a case where time is already well utilized, such that there is a high proportion of engaged and academic learning time?
If time was well-utilized, did DepEd provide more time to our teachers for professional development?
Were our teachers taught well about better time management?

Above questions if addressed before, could be the solution in improving the student performance, IMO.

studies studies studies and more studies lol.
lookin at item 1: usually regular class period here (usa) is less than 1 hour about 50minutes but some proponents want to increase learning and teaching time to 1hr. regarding the year, they wanted to add more school days to a year. case 1 has nothing to do with the additional 2 years of school that we already lag behind. this study doesnt really apply to our state of education since we dont have the k-12 curriculum yet.

skyion

January 1st, 2012, 04:18 AM

The academe shuld have been doing its responsibilty by now in addressing the major problem that occurred recently that victimized thousands of lives in the recent Sendong calamity. It should have been addressed scientifically where the academe's role is supposed to have the part rather than this mediocritized society relying on stupid, selfish politicans they elected.

it was U.P. that did research on the effects on Sea Surface Temperature from Coal plants. it should have researched further that SST now has very crucial role in Global Warming and even directional change of its track and intensity of tropical storms and such should be heeded that could make a difference in national decision makings that could even spell lives saved, but it's not doing enough :ohno:

It was reported that the local academic research institutions in CDO had already warned the LGU there of impending dangers of putting up settlements on certain riverside areas but they were ignored by the LGU there, and neither does coporate media give importance to such as it's more interested in focusing on mediocre telenovelas and slapstick shows to keep ratings up, as mainstream society is neither interested with those anyway.

tragedies such as these only revealed the inefficiency of the country's academic institutions, corporate media, mainstream society, and of course the ineffective politicans elected which, manifested the mediocrity, corruption, warped paradigms infecting the mainstream national mentality and as consequences to such folly it always end up being caught empty handed at the cost of widespread destruction and even lives.

Even the thread here should have been addressing the recent tragedy in seeking solutions as taught by their supposedly "premier" institutions, but Nah :nuts: :ohno: the academic institutions and system in this country is not doing enough of its expected responsibility, it should stop illussioning at conveniently sitting on its laurels for it doesn't have it yet :bash:

todjikid

January 1st, 2012, 05:22 AM

UP through National Institute of Geological Studies made recommendations to the national government and LGUs regarding our geo-hazard terrain a few years back but no one really listened. Recently UP sent its own team of experts to Iligan to do relief operations and more importantly conduct research work on the area specifically on root-cause and relocation/resettlement.

UP was also heavily engaged in gas leak clean up in Makati to the point that the the decision of the supreme court us "subject" to UP's independent finding.

What's sad about it is that the government thinks that UP will run on a budget that's just enough to feed the teachers and some maintenance fund...zero on R and D.

Recent news

http://www.gmanetwork.com/news/story/243128/news/nation/geologist-warns-other-cities-can-suffer-the-same-fate-as-iligan-cagayan-de-oro

Geologist warns other cities can suffer the same fate as Iligan, Cagayan de Oro.

A geologist on Friday warned that other Philippine cities can suffer the same fate as devastated Iligan and Cagayan de Oro because of similarities in their topography.

These include Vigan, Laoag, Alaminos (Pangasinan) and General Santos, which may be vulnerable to disastrous floods similar to those brought by Tropical Storms Sendong and Ondoy, according to the University of the Philippines’ National Institute of Geological Sciences (UP-NIGS).

These cities sit on river deltas that flow out to sea. The web site Nababaha.com, maintained by UP-NIGS, contains flood hazard maps for these coastal zones that have rivers flowing right through them and are down slope from mountains and hills.

Nabartek

January 1st, 2012, 05:44 AM

Parchie

January 1st, 2012, 08:45 AM

^^

What use will be the studies if the government does not do any precautionary measures during heavy rains/typhoons? Remember that before CDO, there was Ormoc, what has the government from then on? Nothing. Wait until heavy casualties!

Heavy rains are definitely NOT uncommon in the Philippines, so there is no excuse for the government not have to do anything!
I agree with you here. Studies were perhaps done and recommendations given. It's just that our government leaders don't act on recommendations! What needs to be done? Do we have leaders who care for the good of their bosses - the people?

mikael21

January 6th, 2012, 03:06 AM

More budget for public high schools offering SPED

By Nikka Garriga

http://l.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/0UF5XX04rcDoVYPqe1D34Q--/YXBwaWQ9eW5ld3M7Zmk9aW5zZXQ7aD0zODQ7cT04NTt3PTUxMg--/http://media.zenfs.com/en-PH/News/loQal/yahoo-jan5-photo1-sped.jpg

PASIG CITY, METRO MANILA - The Department of Education (DepEd) has released additional funds for secondary schools that offer special education (SPED) programs.

About153 specialized public high schools implementing SPED will be provided subsidy for the coming school year to further boost the effectivity of the program’s delivery to pupils with “exceptionalities”.
Exceptionalities are defined under DepEd Order 98 as students who have difficulty learning because either they are visually or hearing- impaired, have autism or Down Syndrome or other learning disabilities and therefore need special educational attention.

Schools that specialize on one exceptionality will receive P50, 000; two for P100, 000; three for P150, 000; four for P200, 000; and five or more exceptionalities for P250, 000.

Read more here... (http://ph.news.yahoo.com/more-budget-public-high-schools-offering-sped-025809840.html;_ylt=AkP7zxVcCNAPmEDOyX4L___mV8d_;_ylu=X3oDMTNkcW9vN2lkBG1pdAMEcGtnA2Q4NjcyZDc5LWFkMmMtM2U2My05NGUyLTEwYzkwMDNlYTUxZQRwb3MDMwRzZWMDbG5fbG9RYWxfZ2FsBHZlcgMxOWFmZDZjMC0zNzQ5LTExZTEtODdkNy05OTU1ODYxZTZkODQ-;_ylv=3)

ralfy

January 9th, 2012, 01:16 PM

See, you did know that it is really not a matter of extending the number of school years! look closely:
You are saying that our existing system lacks quality due to teachers' qualifications/ capacity to teach! How about commenting on this portion of a previous post of mine?:

More years have to be added because what we have is a twelve-year program crammed into 10. We also have to do everything else that we set aside the past eight decades.

Ultimately, it will not matter what excuses we come up with, as the APEC regime requires a 12-year program for students and graduates who want to work in member countries. The same may apply to the Bologna and Washington accords.

It gets worse when member nations assume that if PH cannot follow something as basic as a 12-year pre-tertiary requirement, then very likely it will not be able to follow various international standards.

Parchie

January 10th, 2012, 08:29 AM

More years have to be added because what we have is a twelve-year program crammed into 10. We also have to do everything else that we set aside the past eight decades.

Ultimately, it will not matter what excuses we come up with, as the APEC regime requires a 12-year program for students and graduates who want to work in member countries. The same may apply to the Bologna and Washington accords.

It gets worse when member nations assume that if PH cannot follow something as basic as a 12-year pre-tertiary requirement, then very likely it will not be able to follow various international standards.
Yeah. We're always like that. We were educated to conform to every buzz or fad ever since. When other countries wore wide bottomed pants, we copied. When they were sporting uncombed long hair, we did too. When other countries revolted and made their countries communistic, some of us bought the idea, luckily most kept their minds clear and saw better, etc. etc.

We still have to know what makes us good at things and what we really wanted to be. I guess the APEC leader countries want us to follow their system so that they can catch up with our fast way of learning. It's like we heard our wheels squeak and we knew it just needs aligning and lube; but we choose to take another car! Egads! When do we learn to make things saner!

ralfy

January 10th, 2012, 09:25 AM

Yeah. We're always like that. We were educated to conform to every buzz or fad ever since. When other countries wore wide bottomed pants, we copied. When they were sporting uncombed long hair, we did too. When other countries revolted and made their countries communistic, some of us bought the idea, luckily most kept their minds clear and saw better, etc. etc.

We still have to know what makes us good at things and what we really wanted to be. I guess the APEC leader countries want us to follow their system so that they can catch up with our fast way of learning. It's like we heard our wheels squeak and we knew it just needs aligning and lube; but we choose to take another car! Egads! When do we learn to make things saner!

No, this is not the same as fashion trends, let alone following "countries communistic" (?) but agreeing to international standards.

Now, if most citizens believe that there's no need to do so, then we shouldn't.

By the way, it's not "APEC leader countries" but APEC members.

Finally, even if citizens are deluded (e.g., thinking that they can still study in another country or apply for work in countries that follow such standards) at least the result will be the same. That is, if there is any reason why it will be useless to follow international standards, it's because the global economy on which those standards are based won't last.

In which case, citizens are probably better off doing what they're doing right now: localization, fending for themselves with little support from government or big business, and learning basic skills like planting their own food, localized health care, etc.

Parchie

January 11th, 2012, 05:30 AM

No, this is not the same as fashion trends, let alone following "countries communistic" (?) but agreeing to international standards.

Now, if most citizens believe that there's no need to do so, then we shouldn't.

By the way, it's not "APEC leader countries" but APEC members.

Finally, even if citizens are deluded (e.g., thinking that they can still study in another country or apply for work in countries that follow such standards) at least the result will be the same. That is, if there is any reason why it will be useless to follow international standards, it's because the global economy on which those standards are based won't last.

In which case, citizens are probably better off doing what they're doing right now: localization, fending for themselves with little support from government or big business, and learning basic skills like planting their own food, localized health care, etc.

Precisely my point there! We are raised to be "conformists". You are not allowed to do something because it is not the way it is done; it is not the standard way of doing things, etc. etc. You are assuming that all people are made from the same mold and that a certain procedure or task should be followed - standards my axx!

There is no "one system fits all" in learning. Each country will have to design its own system and consider all the learning factors typical of the country, so forget about that standards of yours. You only standardize if you are assured that certain procedures or measures exhibit better results than the other options studied (for the same homogeneous lot/run, if not, it's crazy standardizing when each item is different).

By trying to follow how others do things, we get less students. We loose out to the other countries because by being told to conform and extend school years, we loose some number of the students who might be tempted to quit school as parents cannot finance longer school years. Please see what percentage of dropout rate (http://www.nscb.gov.ph/stats/statdev/2006/education/Chapter_Education.asp), it's not getting lower - it's increasing with this system. One of the reasons are financial in nature.

Then comes this CCT, but it seems the DSWD is clueless!

This is not some product where repeatability is the prime goal. This is about reaping the best out of the various students' minds! The system has been there, a lot of fine-tuning are very much needed and the solution chosen was to do as APEC said! I couldn't get any logic from that, IMHO.

ralfy

January 11th, 2012, 02:37 PM

Precisely my point there! We are raised to be "conformists". You are not allowed to do something because it is not the way it is done; it is not the standard way of doing things, etc. etc. You are assuming that all people are made from the same mold and that a certain procedure or task should be followed - standards my axx!

Actually, PH has been non-conformist for 80 years. The result is, at least for TIMSS, it is ranked near the bottom worldwide in math and science, and last place in Asia.

Thus, what you want to see has been in place for decades. Our "standards" is a class size of 60, a ten-year educational system, a book-to-student ratio of 1:3, etc.

There is no "one system fits all" in learning. Each country will have to design its own system and consider all the learning factors typical of the country, so forget about that standards of yours. You only standardize if you are assured that certain procedures or measures exhibit better results than the other options studied (for the same homogeneous lot/run, if not, it's crazy standardizing when each item is different).

Those are not "my" standards but those which are followed by almost all countries. And the standards include not just twelve years of education but also a certain class size, etc. Countries have different standards but when it comes to pre-tertiary education, almost all have twelve or thirteen years of pre-tertiary education, and for many that includes a year of technical and vocational training.

What takes place in PH is that students take ten or eleven years of education with no technical or vocational training, then are asked to take such training or to even go to college for many jobs that don't require a college degree.

By trying to follow how others do things, we get less students. We loose out to the other countries because by being told to conform and extend school years, we loose some number of the students who might be tempted to quit school as parents cannot finance longer school years. Please see what percentage of dropout rate (http://www.nscb.gov.ph/stats/statdev/2006/education/Chapter_Education.asp), it's not getting lower - it's increasing with this system. One of the reasons are financial in nature.

Actually, 50 pct of PH students already drop out with the current ten-year program. The implication is that PH loses (not "looses") students because of factors other than the number of years of schooling. If the problem continues, it will be because these other problems, including the lack of books, etc., have not been solved.

The irony is that for eighty years PH has been using one problem as an excuse not to solve another (e.g., decrease class size first before adding more years). Now, the same excuses are being used.

Unfortunately, the country has been heavily dependent on exports and overseas work, and countries that are importing and that are hiring are now agreeing on standards.

In which case, it really doesn't matter what you think of these standards. What matters is whether or not you are willing to accept the consequences of not following them. That's all.

Then comes this CCT, but it seems the DSWD is clueless!

That's a different topic. And if you were to ask me about it, I'd say that that's a good example of not conforming.

This is not some product where repeatability is the prime goal. This is about reaping the best out of the various students' minds! The system has been there, a lot of fine-tuning are very much needed and the solution chosen was to do as APEC said! I couldn't get any logic from that, IMHO.

Actually, adding two years of schooling, together with other solutions, is what allows PH to reap "the best out of various students' minds." Cramming doesn't work.

Fine-tuning is an understatement. In terms of years of schooling, we're cramming what is essentially a twelve-year curriculum into ten, so there's no other way to solve that except to add more years.

epik ll ian

January 11th, 2012, 05:12 PM

As easy as it may seem to say that you can't implement a "one size fits all" learning standard, the reality of it is is that we go to school in hopes of getting a good job and becoming prosperous. There is a learning standard required to be competitive in the workforce, likewise, there is a standard required for the Philippines to become a competitive country. You can't expect the Philippines to become competitive when it's education program is cut short 2 years of the rest of the ENTIRE world. This whole excuse of not being like other countries and needing to implement a "unique program without adding the two years" will keep the Philippines far behind other countries. Time is quite necessary. Those two years add a lot of maturity to a person, and there is so much curriculum you can fit in two years. No matter what the counter argument is, the students will at least be doing SOME kind of learning within those 2 years. Sure it might not be the best program when it's first implemented, but it will be improved upon. We just need to get that first stepping stone out there, and to me - spending those two years at least doing SOMETHING is a lot better than doing nothing at all. 16 years old is way to early of an age to be putting people out into the workforce or in college. 18? MAYBE. But 16 is out of the question.

Parchie

January 11th, 2012, 06:43 PM

So let's dissect each item you just posted then!
Actually, PH has been non-conformist for 80 years. The result is, at least for TIMSS, it is ranked near the bottom worldwide in math and science, and last place in Asia.
IDK where you got your data but I cannot be sure if 80 years is true and whether 80 years is the correct number of years that Philippine education is non-conforming. If you start with the "education system of the Philippines" which was initiated by the US's 45 years of reign of our country (ending in 1946), 80 years is too long and your claim is untrue. When the US was supervising the system of education when it reigned over our country, our system “conformed” to the US system of education. Only after the country gained independence (1946) from the US did our educational system strayed away from the US system (read as “non-conforming). To quote from the encyclopedia:During the period of governance by the United States, Education in the Philippines changed radically, modeled on the system of Education in the United States of the time. After gaining independence in 1946, changes in the US system were no longer automatically reflected in the Philippines, which has since moved in various directions of its own.
http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/Education_in_the_Philippines
But that was 66 years before, not 80. Even if you base your counting from the late Spanish colonial rule, Filipinos started to be accepted to tertiary education only in 1863 (Educational Decree 1863). And that also was 149 years ago, not 80.
On the TIMSS issue, it is very clear that Philippines won’t have a good rating since we don’t have year 9! Does it prove that Filipino students are bad because the TIMSS results tell us were rock bottom? Or do we need to follow K+12 to get a good rating from TIMSS?
Thus, what you want to see has been in place for decades. Our "standards" is a class size of 60, a ten-year educational system, a book-to-student ratio of 1:3, etc.
I am sorry but the DepEd says it did try to reduce the pupil to room ratio. It’s not a 60 pupil to room standard. It is a fact brought about by lack of funds on the department side and corruption in the construction of school rooms and the lack of teachers.The department said the classroom to student ratio in the public elementary level stood at 1:39, while the figure for the secondary level is at 1:53, though in the Kindergarten level, the figure is at a staggering one classroom per 63 students.
The teacher-student ratio stood at 1:36 in the elementary level and 1:38 in high school, though it was an astounding 1:65 in the kindergarten level.
Those are not "my" standards but those which are followed by almost all countries. And the standards include not just twelve years of education but also a certain class size, etc. Countries have different standards but when it comes to pre-tertiary education, almost all have twelve or thirteen years of pre-tertiary education, and for many that includes a year of technical and vocational training.
Let me help you with solid data from the various countries in the world re education profiles. It seems you are at a loss on this:

1 Germany: primary = 4 yrs; secondary = 9 yrs; total yrs = 13; compulsory age = 13 yrs Age before college = 26
2 Belgium primary = 6 yrs; secondary = 6 yrs; total years = 12 yrs; compulsory age = 13; Age before college = 25 yrs
3 Netherlands 6yrs; secondary = 6 yrs; total yrs = 12 yrs; compulsory age = 13 yrs; Age before college = 25
4 Dominican primary = 7 yrs; secondary = 5 yrs; total yrs = 12yrs; compulsory age = 13 yrs; Age before college = 25 yrs
5 Saint Kitts and Nevis primary = 7 yrs; secondary = 5 yrs; total yrs = 12 yrs; compulsory age = 13 yrs 25 yrs
18 Australia primary = 7 yrs; secondary = 6 yrs; total yrs = 13 yrs; compulsory age = 11 yrs 24 yrs
26 Israel primary = 6 yrs; secondary = 6 yrs; total yrs = 12 yrs; compulsory age = 11yrs; Age before college = 23 yrs
41Kazakhstan primary = 4 yrs; secondary = 7 yrs; total yrs = 11 yrs; compulsory age = 11 yrs 22 yrs
72 Russia primary = 4 yrs; secondary = 7 yrs; total yrs = 11yrs; compulsory age = 10 yrs 21 yrs
116 Malaysia primary = 6 yrs; secondary = 5 yrs; total yrs = 11yrs; compulsory age = 9 yrs; Age before college = 20 yrs
126 Solomon Islands primary = 6 yrs; secondary = 7 yrs; total yrs = 13yrs; compulsory age = 7 yrs; Age before college = 20 yrs
141 Zambia primary = 7 yrs; secondary = 5 yrs; total yrs = 12 yrs; compulsory age = 7 yrs; Age before college = 19 yrs
154 Venezuela primary = 6 yrs; secondary = 5 yrs; total yrs = 11 yrs; compulsory age = 7 yrs; Age before college = 18 yrs
169 Philippines primary = 6 yrs; secondary =4 yrs; total yrs = 10 yrs; compulsory age = 7 yrs; Age before college = 17 yrs

Q: Why do you think those at the top are not the ones topping the economic ratings? (if we correlate education systems with progress).
What takes place in PH is that students take ten or eleven years of education with no technical or vocational training, then are asked to take such training or to even go to college for many jobs that don't require a college degree.
(See above for the correct data.)
Actually, 50 pct of PH students already drop out with the current ten-year program. The implication is that PH loses (not "looses") students because of factors other than the number of years of schooling. If the problem continues, it will be because these other problems, including the lack of books, etc., have not been solved.
I don’t think lack of books is a factor for students to drop-out of school. Just please disprove my claim that extending the years in school is financially hard to the parents supporting their kids.
The irony is that for eighty years PH has been using one problem as an excuse not to solve another (e.g., decrease class size first before adding more years). Now, the same excuses are being used.
Again, where did you get “80 years”? We know the problems. Some of those problems you yourself admitted. Classrooms, teachers, etc . Add to that real -time review of schools’ progress, teacher to student fit, curriculum changes, engagement to proper learning, utilization of school time, etc.
Unfortunately, the country has been heavily dependent on exports and overseas work, and countries that are importing and that are hiring are now agreeing on standards.
Standards again! It doesn’t matter if you have a very large cache of diplomas because if you can’t do what the hiring officer asks you to do, you won’t get the job. A high school grad got hired not because he finished 15 years of formal education; he was hired because he can deliver, period. He was a skillful wood worker.
In which case, it really doesn't matter what you think of these standards. What matters is whether or not you are willing to accept the consequences of not following them. That's all. Again, let’s talk about standards. What do you understand about it? A standard is defined as a reference, with some amount of tolerance plus or minus that one uses as guide to achieve his goal with lesser losses, a layman’s way of clarifying it here. Are you saying there is only one standard in the whole world? Nuts!
That's a different topic. And if you were to ask me about it, I'd say that that's a good example of not conforming. It is relevant because it uses as a pre-condition for families to be considered as beneficiary to the program that the children should go to school. If I may be allowed to say, it can’t be “non-conforming” because the program was just let loose.
Actually, adding two years of schooling, together with other solutions, is what allows PH to reap "the best out of various students' minds." Cramming doesn't work.Say again” “cramming”? How can you prove that the time management in our schools properly utilizes daily subject study/lecture times? Haven’t you read the news of teachers doing personal business while on duty? Haven’t you seen kids allowed to weed the school gardens all day long because the teacher/s had better personal business done? Or did you try to look at the teachers if they have done their lesson plans for the day? Still, did you scan the subjects for each grade and see a common trend of lesser intelligent studies and more on cleaning the rooms, etc.?
Fine-tuning is an understatement. In terms of years of schooling, we're cramming what is essentially a twelve-year curriculum into ten, so there's no other way to solve that except to add more years.It might be an understatement but since the needs exist, notwithstanding the gravity of any of those means it is imperative to solve each one and not run away from it. Could be the problem-solving team failing to ask the right question resulting into the problem not being solved.

MatudNilaBaby

January 12th, 2012, 12:38 AM

Actually, PH has been non-conformist for 80 years. The result is, at least for TIMSS, it is ranked near the bottom worldwide in math and science, and last place in Asia.

Thus, what you want to see has been in place for decades. Our "standards" is a class size of 60, a ten-year educational system, a book-to-student ratio of 1:3, etc.

Those are not "my" standards but those which are followed by almost all countries. And the standards include not just twelve years of education but also a certain class size, etc. Countries have different standards but when it comes to pre-tertiary education, almost all have twelve or thirteen years of pre-tertiary education, and for many that includes a year of technical and vocational training.

What takes place in PH is that students take ten or eleven years of education with no technical or vocational training, then are asked to take such training or to even go to college for many jobs that don't require a college degree.

Actually, 50 pct of PH students already drop out with the current ten-year program. The implication is that PH loses (not "looses") students because of factors other than the number of years of schooling. If the problem continues, it will be because these other problems, including the lack of books, etc., have not been solved.

The irony is that for eighty years PH has been using one problem as an excuse not to solve another (e.g., decrease class size first before adding more years). Now, the same excuses are being used.

Unfortunately, the country has been heavily dependent on exports and overseas work, and countries that are importing and that are hiring are now agreeing on standards.

In which case, it really doesn't matter what you think of these standards. What matters is whether or not you are willing to accept the consequences of not following them. That's all.

That's a different topic. And if you were to ask me about it, I'd say that that's a good example of not conforming.

Actually, adding two years of schooling, together with other solutions, is what allows PH to reap "the best out of various students' minds." Cramming doesn't work.

Fine-tuning is an understatement. In terms of years of schooling, we're cramming what is essentially a twelve-year curriculum into ten, so there's no other way to solve that except to add more years.

try to explain what timss stands for so others who are non educators can understand what to acronym means.

Parchie

January 12th, 2012, 12:45 AM

try to explain what timss stands for so others who are non educators can understand what to acronym means.
Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trends_in_International_Mathematics_and_Science_Study)

ralfy

January 12th, 2012, 02:13 PM

So let's dissect each item you just posted then!

IDK where you got your data but I cannot be sure if 80 years is true and whether 80 years is the correct number of years that Philippine education is non-conforming. If you start with the "education system of the Philippines" which was initiated by the US's 45 years of reign of our country (ending in 1946), 80 years is too long and your claim is untrue. When the US was supervising the system of education when it reigned over our country, our system “conformed” to the US system of education. Only after the country gained independence (1946) from the US did our educational system strayed away from the US system (read as “non-conforming). To quote from the encyclopedia:During the period of governance by the United States, Education in the Philippines changed radically, modeled on the system of Education in the United States of the time. After gaining independence in 1946, changes in the US system were no longer automatically reflected in the Philippines, which has since moved in various directions of its own.

http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/Education_in_the_Philippines
But that was 66 years before, not 80. Even if you base your counting from the late Spanish colonial rule, Filipinos started to be accepted to tertiary education only in 1863 (Educational Decree 1863). And that also was 149 years ago, not 80.

I read in one newspaper article that a 12-year program was first proposed in 1931, but I can't remember the details.

On the TIMSS issue, it is very clear that Philippines won’t have a good rating since we don’t have year 9! Does it prove that Filipino students are bad because the TIMSS results tell us were rock bottom? Or do we need to follow K+12 to get a good rating from TIMSS?

Yes, and yes. And the first word for the last question should be "and," not "or." Finally, we need to do many other things together with adding two years.

I am sorry but the DepEd says it did try to reduce the pupil to room ratio. It’s not a 60 pupil to room standard. It is a fact brought about by lack of funds on the department side and corruption in the construction of school rooms and the lack of teachers.The department said the classroom to student ratio in the public elementary level stood at 1:39, while the figure for the secondary level is at 1:53, though in the Kindergarten level, the figure is at a staggering one classroom per 63 students.
The teacher-student ratio stood at 1:36 in the elementary level and 1:38 in high school, though it was an astounding 1:65 in the kindergarten level.

The government reports 35 to 50 while another source argues that it's 60 to 110. I think it's between these two estimates, so I use 60.

Let me help you with solid data from the various countries in the world re education profiles. It seems you are at a loss on this:

1 Germany: primary = 4 yrs; secondary = 9 yrs; total yrs = 13; compulsory age = 13 yrs Age before college = 26
2 Belgium primary = 6 yrs; secondary = 6 yrs; total years = 12 yrs; compulsory age = 13; Age before college = 25 yrs
3 Netherlands 6yrs; secondary = 6 yrs; total yrs = 12 yrs; compulsory age = 13 yrs; Age before college = 25
4 Dominican primary = 7 yrs; secondary = 5 yrs; total yrs = 12yrs; compulsory age = 13 yrs; Age before college = 25 yrs
5 Saint Kitts and Nevis primary = 7 yrs; secondary = 5 yrs; total yrs = 12 yrs; compulsory age = 13 yrs 25 yrs
18 Australia primary = 7 yrs; secondary = 6 yrs; total yrs = 13 yrs; compulsory age = 11 yrs 24 yrs
26 Israel primary = 6 yrs; secondary = 6 yrs; total yrs = 12 yrs; compulsory age = 11yrs; Age before college = 23 yrs
41Kazakhstan primary = 4 yrs; secondary = 7 yrs; total yrs = 11 yrs; compulsory age = 11 yrs 22 yrs
72 Russia primary = 4 yrs; secondary = 7 yrs; total yrs = 11yrs; compulsory age = 10 yrs 21 yrs
116 Malaysia primary = 6 yrs; secondary = 5 yrs; total yrs = 11yrs; compulsory age = 9 yrs; Age before college = 20 yrs
126 Solomon Islands primary = 6 yrs; secondary = 7 yrs; total yrs = 13yrs; compulsory age = 7 yrs; Age before college = 20 yrs
141 Zambia primary = 7 yrs; secondary = 5 yrs; total yrs = 12 yrs; compulsory age = 7 yrs; Age before college = 19 yrs
154 Venezuela primary = 6 yrs; secondary = 5 yrs; total yrs = 11 yrs; compulsory age = 7 yrs; Age before college = 18 yrs
169 Philippines primary = 6 yrs; secondary =4 yrs; total yrs = 10 yrs; compulsory age = 7 yrs; Age before college = 17 yrs

Q: Why do you think those at the top are not the ones topping the economic ratings? (if we correlate education systems with progress).

Actually, I was arguing the opposite.

(See above for the correct data.)

Your data has no connection to what I wrote.

I don’t think lack of books is a factor for students to drop-out of school. Just please disprove my claim that extending the years in school is financially hard to the parents supporting their kids.

It's not, but it's one of many problems that affect quality of education.

I did not argue that adding more years is not "financially hard to the parents supporting their kids." But that's another problem that we have to deal with together with the lack of years of schooling.

The irony is that we are using that problem as an excuse for not solving other problems, based on the assumption that adding more books, classrooms, teachers, and years of schooling will require more taxes, and thus add to parents' financial burden.

The "solution" is to let parents do the work themselves, which is what we're seeing. Around 50 pct of schools in the country are operated by the private sector. Parents who can afford to avoid public schools as much as they can, and several even pay a premium to send children to schools where standards are higher.

Among other things, several private schools already require 11 years, with international schools requiring 12.

Again, where did you get “80 years”? We know the problems. Some of those problems you yourself admitted. Classrooms, teachers, etc . Add to that real -time review of schools’ progress, teacher to student fit, curriculum changes, engagement to proper learning, utilization of school time, etc.

See my comment above. For the rest of your paragraph, that is why fine-tuning won't work, or even absurd arguments such as not having to follow standards.

Standards again! It doesn’t matter if you have a very large cache of diplomas because if you can’t do what the hiring officer asks you to do, you won’t get the job. A high school grad got hired not because he finished 15 years of formal education; he was hired because he can deliver, period. He was a skillful wood worker.

Exactly! What the hiring officer requires are the standards. In this case, the "hiring officer" is APEC member nations, and the APEC registry requires 16 years of education for college graduates:

http://criticplaywright.blogspot.com/2009/04/education-reform-in-philippines.html

I think the same goes for the Washington accord, although the Bologna accord requires 15 years.

The logical thing to do is not to add two years of post-secondary but to add two years of secondary schooling.

Again, let’s talk about standards. What do you understand about it? A standard is defined as a reference, with some amount of tolerance plus or minus that one uses as guide to achieve his goal with lesser losses, a layman’s way of clarifying it here. Are you saying there is only one standard in the whole world? Nuts!

Actually, there are around three standards, although two (Washington and APEC) are the same. The Bologna accord has one year less.

Yes, I know it's "nuts," but that's what happens in a global capitalist economy where even industries follow standards.

It is relevant because it uses as a pre-condition for families to be considered as beneficiary to the program that the children should go to school. If I may be allowed to say, it can’t be “non-conforming” because the program was just let loose.

I think families should be made aware of the APEC registry requirement and various standards imposed by other countries. From there, they can decide whether or not more years should be added.

Say again” “cramming”? How can you prove that the time management in our schools properly utilizes daily subject study/lecture times? Haven’t you read the news of teachers doing personal business while on duty? Haven’t you seen kids allowed to weed the school gardens all day long because the teacher/s had better personal business done? Or did you try to look at the teachers if they have done their lesson plans for the day? Still, did you scan the subjects for each grade and see a common trend of lesser intelligent studies and more on cleaning the rooms, etc.?

Time management is a separate issue from teaching a twelve-year program in ten years.

It might be an understatement but since the needs exist, notwithstanding the gravity of any of those means it is imperative to solve each one and not run away from it. Could be the problem-solving team failing to ask the right question resulting into the problem not being solved.

Which is what we've been trying to do for several decades. If only other Asian countries had not met and decided to come up with shared standards:

http://www.changinghighereducation.com/2008/12/an-asian-bologna-process-moves-forward.html

if only they did not meet with European counterparts and do the same:

http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?articleId=578792&publicationSubCategoryId=442

if only Filipinos did not feel the need to see accreditation as important:

http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?articleId=574687

and if only there was actually no connection at all between the length of time for schooling and quality:

http://mlephil.wordpress.com/2010/10/14/pros-cons-of-the-k12-debate/

then there'd probably be no need to rush.

Of course, if what I've said about the global economic crisis, peak oil, and the long-term effects of climate change are true, then following international standards will be the least of our concerns.

So, you see, I agree with you about not pushing through with K+12, but I have different reasons.

Parchie

January 13th, 2012, 07:33 AM

Thanks a lot for bearing with me. I seldom see posters who respond like you sans sarcasm! Here:

I did not argue that adding more years is not "financially hard to the parents supporting their kids." But that's another problem that we have to deal with together with the lack of years of schooling. There you go. It gets harder to argue with anybody if at one aspect one agrees but then the ramifications of things proposed are just going to be ignored. Don't you think that the solution to the problem is part and parcel to the problem itself? The problem and the solutions should go hand in hand, does it? We can't go on playing semantics here, you know?
The irony is that we are using that problem as an excuse for not solving other problems, based on the assumption that adding more books, classrooms, teachers, and years of schooling will require more taxes, and thus add to parents' financial burden. Hold your horses there. I was of the impression that we are talking about pre-tertiary education. That said, it is a government promise (perhaps a self-assumed responsibility) to be able to provide for the things collateral to, and incidental with the governments' promise of a free elementary and secondary education for all. I thought the parents are there to provide basic support as before – notebooks, paper, pens and ballpens! Besides those, books, classrooms, teachers, and facilities, etc., problems are there for the government to solve not to be used as excuses.
The "solution" is to let parents do the work themselves, which is what we're seeing. Around 50 pct of schools in the country are operated by the private sector. Parents who can afford to avoid public schools as much as they can, and several even pay a premium to send children to schools where standards are higher.
See my comment above. For the rest of your paragraph, that is why fine-tuning won't work, or even absurd arguments such as not having to follow standards. On this, I don't see government ever taking much, working for solutions. It is compounding the problems. The existing problems were:
1. lack of classrooms,
2. lack of teachers,
3. re-defining the curricula,
4. close monitoring of education districts,
5. development programs to increase enrollment figures and
6. some textbook issues.
Now, with this "new" order will have to deal with:
1. greater lack of classrooms (due to more levels being required),
2. more lack of teachers, (additional levels require additional teachers)
3. curricula adjustment, (additional levels require tweaking of subjects for each level)
4. greater job of monitoring educations districts,
5. more programs to increase enrollees,
6. more textbook issues, plus
7. the problem of increased dropouts
Exactly! What the hiring officer requires are the standards. In this case, the "hiring officer" is APEC member nations, and the APEC registry requires 16 years of education for college graduates:http://criticplaywright.blogspot.com/2009/04/education-reform-in-philippines.html “Country education standards” aim to exact from our students the common core of knowledge they ought to possess and be useful citizens to help our country. This you called APEC standards, what is it for? It is but proper for people to question the value of this standard in relation to the betterment of our economy? Does this standard aim to produce workers who will be service exports? Are we to produce workers to serve the economic endeavors of other nations? Too bad, if that’s the case!
The logical thing to do is not to add two years of post-secondary but to add two years of secondary schooling.
Actually, there are around three standards, although two (Washington and APEC) are the same. The Bologna accord has one year less.
Yes, I know it's "nuts," but that's what happens in a global capitalist economy where even industries follow standards. “Standards-based education” is applicable if we only have a single sector/industry as a target industry. We’ve seen a myriad of industries than we intend to have our kids to go for. It seems our planners forgot we are a diverse group of people, islands with different possibilities with respect to the industries than can be supported by each island, etc. What we need is a “place-based education system” geared at choosing which educational learning supports what business/industries each locale is very strong with. This standard-based system is the cause of worker migrations; to urban places or foreign places at most. Why can’t we find a system of education that molds our kids and connect with what industries we have in our different localities and let them live a productive and useful life helping our economy? This is the reason why there is a very wide disconnect of what the academe is teaching/training as compared to the many requirements of the different industries we have in our 1000+ islands! Global competition is not won by playing their game. The competition is best addressed by strengthening our capabilities, not destroying it. We make sure our kids get the correct, updated core competencies by analyzing our strengths versus our weaknesses, our threats versus the opportunities presented to us. I don’t need to get pedagogical here.
I think families should be made aware of the APEC registry requirement and various standards imposed by other countries. From there, they can decide whether or not more years should be added. Yep, I guess they’ve been apprised about it a long time ago. That I think is the reason why you hear people against this move.
Time management is a separate issue from teaching a twelve-year program in ten years.
Which is what we've been trying to do for several decades. If only other Asian countries had not met and decided to come up with shared standards:
http://www.changinghighereducation.com/2008/12/an-asian-bologna-process-moves-forward.html
if only they did not meet with European counterparts and do the same:
http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?articleId=578792&publicationSubCategoryId=442 Perhaps you missed to connect the two, or simply brush it aside! If the dedicated learning hours are “not well –utilized”, you need to know why it is so and make changes to make the most of the time allotted for teaching. That is “time management”, literally. You don’t need to add more years in school. Crystal!

If you have found out that the learning time is really not enough; owing to the great number of subjects that students ought to learn, or the available time in a year does not suffice, you have to add more days in school per year; or at worst, an additional level/year to spread-out the subjects. It is simple “time to learn” thing that doesn’t need rocket scientists!
if only Filipinos did not feel the need to see accreditation as important:
http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?articleId=574687
and if only there was actually no connection at all between the length of time for schooling and quality:
http://mlephil.wordpress.com/2010/10/14/pros-cons-of-the-k12-debate/
then there'd probably be no need to rush. IDK anymore where these moves for accreditation to foreign standards is leading us. I even don’t know if this has something to do with this thread in anyway also. What I know is that people are happier if they can land a job very much near their homes. The number of broken families is increasing just because parents have to work away from home. Because their acquired skills while studying fit those jobs abroad, not here in our country.
Of course, if what I've said about the global economic crisis, peak oil, and the long-term effects of climate change are true, then following international standards will be the least of our concerns. You know what, I have spent long nights before when I was still studying, trying to picture out the “peak oil” and the like. Stephen P. Holland (2006) modeling of peak oil, Jonah J. Ralston (2008), M. King Hubbert who concluded that global “Peak Oil” would occur early in the 21st century and it’s not going to end just yet, etc..
International standards will change as the technologies evolve. It is a standard anyway – agreed upon by most and not written on rock.
So, you see, I agree with you about not pushing through with K+12, but I have different reasons. Whatever suits you. I am just saying what I thought about this issue/s too, hoping to find the truth in all these from those who respond.

ralfy

January 13th, 2012, 10:54 AM

Thanks a lot for bearing with me. I seldom see posters who respond like you sans sarcasm! Here:
There you go. It gets harder to argue with anybody if at one aspect one agrees but then the ramifications of things proposed are just going to be ignored. Don't you think that the solution to the problem is part and parcel to the problem itself? The problem and the solutions should go hand in hand, does it? We can't go on playing semantics here, you know?

Failure to meet standards given in the APEC Registry will have a significant effect on overseas employment and studies.

The irony is that parents who complain that adding two years will add to their financial burden will end up paying for those two years themselves as their children will be asked to fulfill various requirements by foreign employers. This is, in fact, the status quo.

The difference is that with the APEC registry, big business which likely takes up the bulk of tax revenues, will be paying for the cost of public education.

Finally, likely APEC members prefer to have standards in place for the whole country than on a school-to-school basis, which is the case for PH.

Hold your horses there. I was of the impression that we are talking about pre-tertiary education. That said, it is a government promise (perhaps a self-assumed responsibility) to be able to provide for the things collateral to, and incidental with the governments' promise of a free elementary and secondary education for all. I thought the parents are there to provide basic support as before – notebooks, paper, pens and ballpens! Besides those, books, classrooms, teachers, and facilities, etc., problems are there for the government to solve not to be used as excuses.

Actually, the government has to pay for everything, including basic support. It's not a "promise" but actually a duty as pre-tertiary education is mandatory.

What has been happening is that the government makes families pay not only for basic support but even more. Thus, it provides only ten years of education. If overseas employment requires more, then families have to pay for additional years.

From there, it claims that it does not have enough funds to add more years, provide basic support, etc., which is why it has to do things slowly. And "slowly" is an understatement, as the proposal to add years of schooling was made in the Monroe Survey in 1925 (sorry, not 1931), or more than 80 years ago.

Now, we face an APEC requirement to graduate students with twelve years of pre-tertiary education by 2020. The implications are given at the start of my post.

Given that, I think it is up to parents to decide what to do: should the government continue to procrastinate and let parents pay for additional resources themselves (which APEC members will probably no longer accept) or should they force the government to solve these problems as soon as possible, preferably by 2020?

On this, I don't see government ever taking much, working for solutions. It is compounding the problems. The existing problems were:
1. lack of classrooms,
2. lack of teachers,
3. re-defining the curricula,
4. close monitoring of education districts,
5. development programs to increase enrollment figures and
6. some textbook issues.
Now, with this "new" order will have to deal with:
1. greater lack of classrooms (due to more levels being required),
2. more lack of teachers, (additional levels require additional teachers)
3. curricula adjustment, (additional levels require tweaking of subjects for each level)
4. greater job of monitoring educations districts,
5. more programs to increase enrollees,
6. more textbook issues, plus
7. the problem of increased dropouts
“Country education standards” aim to exact from our students the common core of knowledge they ought to possess and be useful citizens to help our country. This you called APEC standards, what is it for? It is but proper for people to question the value of this standard in relation to the betterment of our economy? Does this standard aim to produce workers who will be service exports? Are we to produce workers to serve the economic endeavors of other nations? Too bad, if that’s the case!

This is probably the best reason for not pushing through with K+12. Given that, parents will have to accept the status quo, in addition to implications for the APEC Registry as well as the Bologna and Washington accords.

Thus, what should not happen are parents accepting what is in place, then paying a premium to send their children to the best schools which include, ironically, additional years of schooling, and then to be told upon their kids' graduation that APEC countries are no longer hiring graduates from non-member nations, or that their degrees or credentials are not recognized elsewhere.

With that, what should change aren't educational standards but reasons for going to school. Given your reason, the country should no longer push for the best for its children, or at least push for the same but very, very slowly, perhaps for another 80 years.

“Standards-based education” is applicable if we only have a single sector/industry as a target industry. We’ve seen a myriad of industries than we intend to have our kids to go for. It seems our planners forgot we are a diverse group of people, islands with different possibilities with respect to the industries than can be supported by each island, etc. What we need is a “place-based education system” geared at choosing which educational learning supports what business/industries each locale is very strong with. This standard-based system is the cause of worker migrations; to urban places or foreign places at most. Why can’t we find a system of education that molds our kids and connect with what industries we have in our different localities and let them live a productive and useful life helping our economy? This is the reason why there is a very wide disconnect of what the academe is teaching/training as compared to the many requirements of the different industries we have in our 1000+ islands! Global competition is not won by playing their game. The competition is best addressed by strengthening our capabilities, not destroying it. We make sure our kids get the correct, updated core competencies by analyzing our strengths versus our weaknesses, our threats versus the opportunities presented to us. I don’t need to get pedagogical here.

Actually, that is what has been taking place. Improvements are made only for schools involved in target industries (like nursing), with foreign employers accepting applicants from schools accredited by the government. PH has been following a "puwede na 'yan" scheme, making adjustments in one or another training program to meet whatever is in demand abroad. On top of that, it's not the government but citizens who pay for additional resources required.

Now, with APEC and other agreements, there will no longer be such schemes. Foreign employers will now require assurance from the government that all schools are accredited, i.e., they follow standards imposed by member nations in which such employers are located.

Finally, if we were to follow your views, then citizens and even local industries will have to accept the fact that APEC and other trade regimes will likely not work with PH; instead, they will work with member nations who can follow standards, which will likely mean most countries in Asia.

Given peak oil, climate change, and the possibility of a global economic collapse, I agree with you. The focus should be localization, with small, community-based schools teaching the basics, including skills needed for sustainable living, from planting one's own food to basic health care. One should forget dreams of going to college or even a middle class lifestyle. If any model will have to be followed, it will be that of Cuba.

Yep, I guess they’ve been apprised about it a long time ago. That I think is the reason why you hear people against this move.
Perhaps you missed to connect the two, or simply brush it aside! If the dedicated learning hours are “not well –utilized”, you need to know why it is so and make changes to make the most of the time allotted for teaching. That is “time management”, literally. You don’t need to add more years in school. Crystal!

The two are not connected because you cannot cram a twelve-year program into ten years, especially given children who need time to learn. More reasons are given in this policy brief:

http://www.senate.gov.ph/publications/PB%202011-02%20-%20K%20to%2012%20The%20Key%20to%20Quality.pdf

But that doesn't mean you don't need time management, even with a twelve-year program.

If you have found out that the learning time is really not enough; owing to the great number of subjects that students ought to learn, or the available time in a year does not suffice, you have to add more days in school per year; or at worst, an additional level/year to spread-out the subjects. It is simple “time to learn” thing that doesn’t need rocket scientists!

Which is what we have.

IDK anymore where these moves for accreditation to foreign standards is leading us. I even don’t know if this has something to do with this thread in anyway also. What I know is that people are happier if they can land a job very much near their homes. The number of broken families is increasing just because parents have to work away from home. Because their acquired skills while studying fit those jobs abroad, not here in our country.

You can look at the current requirements given to PH for nursing, seamanship, various engineering jobs, and even vocational work. Organizations like TESDA take these requirements very seriously. Now, the APEC Registry and various agreements want these requirements part of the educational system of a member nation, not something that appears on a school-to-school basis.

By the way, the "acquired skills" which "fit those jobs abroad" are usually above the requirements "here in our country." If only we did not have to rely heavily on exports or overseas work, then we won't have to follow the 12-year requirement. In fact, the government can just do what it has been doing the past few decades, with parents paying for whatever is lacking (which is usually a lot) on a per-need basis.

You know what, I have spent long nights before when I was still studying, trying to picture out the “peak oil” and the like. Stephen P. Holland (2006) modeling of peak oil, Jonah J. Ralston (2008), M. King Hubbert who concluded that global “Peak Oil” would occur early in the 21st century and it’s not going to end just yet, etc..

Actually, the IEA just confirmed that peak oil took place in 2006. More organizations, such as the U.S. military (including the Pentagon), the German military, Lloyd's of London and Chatham House, various UK industrial groups, Deutsche Bank, HSBC, the governments of UK, AU, and NZ, Morgan Stanley, and more have done the same.

International standards will change as the technologies evolve. It is a standard anyway – agreed upon by most and not written on rock.
Whatever suits you. I am just saying what I thought about this issue/s too, hoping to find the truth in all these from those who respond.

Hence, the 12-year requirement. Before that, foreign employers and admission offiers would verify the schools and other credentials of PH applicants. Even before, citizens didn't even have to seek work abroad, or even schooling. Back in the early 1960s, UP-Diliman was considered a top school, with students from SE Asian countries and even South Korea applying.

Indeed, standards do change.