REFORM SHOULD BE BOTH RADICAL AND INCREMENTAL

Reform should be both Radical and Incremental

By

PROF. ROLANDO S. DELA CRUZ
Educating a Nation

MASSIVE SUPPORT FOR CHANGE

The administration of President Noynoy Aquino has both fortune and misfortune on its side. It is lucky to be enjoying massive support akin to a post-revolutionary spring of hope. It is in the best position to forward meaningful changes that could have lasting effects, boosted by the trust rating Aquino enjoys. People believe that he is anti-corruption and incorruptible. It is in this context that the K-12, a program which revises the curriculum in Basic Education and extends it by three years, operates.

Aquino is again lucky that he starts implementing K-12 on his second year. The negative impact in terms of additional tuition and other fees on those who will be Grade 7 by June 2012 (1^st Year High School) will start on their Grade 11 which is in June 2016, the month when a new President will take his oath. Any complaints, therefore, for new tuition and other fees for their additional full Grades 11 and 12, will be made when Aquino is already out of power for about 12 months, enjoying his retirement.

HIGH EXPECTATIONS AND PRESSURE

Aquino, however, suffers also from the misfortune of high expectations and pressure. He has to implement K-12 early in his term to harness immediately the support from the people, especially the business sector which looks up to him to implement changes in educating those who will man various industries. He is also pressured to implement a program that cannot be altered immediately by a new President who might be against him or his program. To assure that his program stays, he has to attack the very structure of the educational program of the country.

But implementing the K-12 immediately beginning School Year 2012-13 exposes the program from the same possible problems that all other major reforms had suffered in the past, like the lack of intense ideas and preparation to address the heart of the problem. One really wonders how deep is the preparation of the Department of Education (DepEd) from May 2010 up to May 2012 to implement such a radical reform by June 2012.

QUESTIONS TO ANSWER

Some questions are worth noting, however: 1) Why do most, if not all, schools up to this writing have not received yet the K-12 curriculum, at least for Grades 1 and 7?; 2) Where are the books to be used?; 3) What will happen to the colleges which will have no high school graduates to absorb in SY 2016-17 and SY 2017-18?; 4) Are all High Schools ready to absorb the deluge of excess students during these two school years in terms of capability to produce the quality graduates DepEd expects?; 5) Is the preparation of DepEd enough to produce a new breed of Filipino graduates who can all think critically and creatively, instead of being of the same kind as the country produces now but only with two extra years of schooling?; and, 6) How does the Philippines ensure that it executes K-12 in a way that is correct, effective, efficient, national-life altering, and successful internationally when measured?

Absent concrete answers to all the above questions, the nation will probably be shocked after the product of the K-12 starts graduating by March 2018. K-12 could just be the legacy of success or failure of Aquino in our nation’s history.

HOLISTIC AND INFORMED

Reform has to be holistic and informed of the factors that can undermine it. Indeed, the act of reforming education is an explosive political act. However, the essence of reform which is genuine learning of Filipino children ought not to suffer from the politics of haste, insensitivities and un-historicity. Indeed, reforming Philippine education is one of the most difficult to undertake because it cannot depend only on one man, one party or one Department. Reform has to be made in the context of Philippine politics and culture – sensitive to the weaknesses and strengths of the both ordinary and powerful people, and perceptive as well of the way we value and waste educational opportunities as a people.

Reforming Philippine education should be radical, indeed. But its unfolding has to be inevitably incremental: crossing one island to another at a speed effective enough to take root; its pantheon served by one government to the next without fail and without betrayal; its absorption by the Filipino soul undertaken by one generation to the next until such time we are ready to once more overhaul it not because the Filipino soul is changing but because that soul has to thrive and win in an ever-changing world.

  

An alumnus and former faculty member of UP Diliman, PROF. ROLANDO S. DELA CRUZ is President of the Darwin International School System. He studied in Osaka University (Japan), the University of Cambridge (England) and at the University of Leiden (the Netherlands).

(SOURCE: MANILA BULLETIN, April 26, 2012)

IMPLEMENTING THE NEW BY OLD GUARDS

Implementing The New By Old Guards

Educating A Nation

By PROF. ROLANDO S. DELA CRUZ

April 12, 2012, 2:05pm

INTERNAL LOGIC AND ILLOGIC

The lack of quality in the educational system is the target problem to be solved by the Department of Education’s (DepEd) new K+12 system, which adds three years to basic education.

Yet, this problem could also be the very Achilles heel of K+12.

Policy crashes are not all functions of haphazard implementation or lack of planning, but also of failure to directly address salient factors that are systemic. Sometimes, policy makers focus only on the internal logic of a solution (e.g., There is so much to discuss in class, therefore, additional three years will solve the problem.), unmindful of the illogic (i.e., The teachers do not teach well with a shorter period, therefore the teachers will teach better with a longer period.) within which a new policy operates.

Consequently, we could just be repeating the litany of missteps in Philippine education. There is a policy instance when the government solved the quality dilemma by improving the wrong solution even better! This is the case of the Makabayan subject, which is part of the new Basic Education Curriculum (BEC).

MAKABAYAN AS EMPTY PROMISE

The BEC reform started in the early 2000s which included the streamlining of subjects lumped together under the nomenclature Makabayan. Such subjects include Civics and Culture, Geography, History, Arts, Music, Physical Education and Health.

Makabayan is supposed to be “the laboratory to train students in life.” Recognizing the clutter in the curriculum, education experts and policy makers thought that recombining and adjusting the ingredients of a recipe will create a pièce de résistance that would alter the nature of a party.

But revelry participants realized late that it was the same recipe that was just made half-baked; it was the same party that remained dull as ever. In short, the areas of Makabayan remained mini-subjects within a subject.

One decade later, no clear proof could be presented that those who underwent the Makabayan training were prepared to reach the top of the world.

Curiously, the same congestion argument used to justify the BEC reform is being utilized as argument for the K+12 system. It now remains to be seen if the K+12 innovation will solve the congestion problem and bring out the best in the Filipino student.

REHASH OF THE OLD

Real and effective reforms take a long time to bear fruits. A single reform may take generations to become a way of life.

And then there are reforms that look massive but cannot radically alter the system because it is merely a rehash of the old. Such is the nature of the Makabayan solution.

Makabayan suffered from the fear to let go of everything in the old curriculum. It sought to be better at doing what was not working.

The problem of the BEC is its being too rigid, instead of simply being a framework for schools and teachers to freely explore and lead students. This rigidity does not solve the bigger problem of teachers, with low level of content and skill,  to harness students’ critical and creative thought.

ROOTED MISTAKES

The Aquino administration must be so careful in implementing the country’s greatest educational experiment to date. It ought to repeat and propagate no more the mistakes.

The K+12 program definitely deserves a chance. It seems to be radical in nature and shows promise; but one should never assume that mere radicalism will automatically benefit the people.

Vital questions remain: How does the government seek to radically improve the educational system through K+12, when this system will be implemented by the same teachers who are products of the same educational system? Will students become better if we continue teaching the wrong way - for three additional years?

This sounds like BEC 101 all over again.

An alumnus and former faculty member of UP Diliman, the author is president of the Darwin International School System. He studied in Osaka University (Japan), the University of Cambridge (England) and the University of Leiden (the Netherlands).

(SOURCE: http://mb.com.ph/node/356848/implementing-the-new-by-old-guard#.URKVzI6Gndk)

NOTE: THIS IS A REPOSTING OF AN ARTICLE PUBLISHED IN THE MANILA BULLETIN ON 12 APRIL 2012.