REVISITING MY YOUTH AT U.P. DILIMAN

Revisiting my Youth at U.P. Diliman

By

PROF. ROLANDO S. DELA CRUZ
Educating a Nation


RETURNING TO MY ALMA MATER

As the buses entered the University Avenue from Philcoa, memories of the 1980s flowed like rivers in my consciousness.

Those were the turbulent ‘80s. Often, classes were boycotted by the Student Council and other student organizations. Radical and sympathetic students, and even some professors, held classes and staged plays on the streets.

Back then, students were politicized by the socio-economic and politico-military tensions. Many students did not only have to contend with “distractions” to traditional learning, but rather combined both street and classroom learning.

It was common then for the lower and middle classes to moan about Philippine underdevelopment. The decade started with the 1981 presidential elections anomaly, followed by the deafening 1983 gun fires at the tarmac, climaxed with the 1986 EDSA Revolution, and ended with a denouement of disappointments. It was an era of intertwined politics and emotion emulating a roller coaster ride.


CHANGES, CHANGES
I recently visited the University of the Philippines in Diliman with my Basic Education students. Security was noticeably heightened, given the recent reports of rape, theft, and other forms of crimes. I reckoned that it was a more tolerant atmosphere way back. The U-Av before, as people would call the main road to the UP administration building, was not strictly guarded all the time. Anyone and any vehicle can pass through it. Yet, we thought then that the period was already the most dangerous days of our post-war life. The 1980s UP Police force can usually be seen only during fraternity rumbles, amiably tolerant.

Today, UP seems to ape the martial law years with the extensive presence of guards in key entrances and exits which, admittedly, is better than risking the lives of its community members to unscrupulous elements. The crimes today on campus, perhaps, are nothing but symptoms of the overall economic as well as moral decay in society.


THE UNIVERSITY IN NATIONAL LIFE
Indeed, the country has changed a lot, for better and for worse. But there are things that do not seem to change, like the attachment on things one experienced as a teenager.

Entering UP, two and a half decades after I first set foot on it, is indeed a homecoming. There are more buildings, one-way street signs, plants lining up the roads, plenty of space for joggers, academic courses, and a lot more freedom for students to choose subjects for their General Education requirement.

But despite these changes, the essence of UP life seems embedded in the consciousness of its graduates. Thus, the effervescent saying: once a maroon, always a maroon. The pride is in the heart. With this pride runs the tradition of alumni who have become important players, again for better and for worse, in national life.

It was in UP where I personally met people whom I only read in my High School books or in newspapers. Many are members of the UP community, while others came to UP since they cannot afford not to be there. Some have become Presidents of the Republic, Senators and Representatives of the Legislature, Justices of the Supreme Court, National Artists, or giants in the world of science and business.

UP is a very dynamic place where one participates in the dialogue between the past and the future, between the impossible and the possible, and between preservation and change. It is so vibrant that it is quite unlikely not to be infected; so forceful that one is inevitably confronted by the challenge to leave a footprint, one way or the other, through deeds that can have an effect on the lives of others. That is what being Iskolar ng Bayan is all about.


A HOMECOMING
I went back to the fold of my alma mater that cultivated me in my earlier years, the university that is nestled in a 493-hectare prime land - with my Pre-school up to High School students from Bulacan. I brought them there not only for them to see the campus of my youth but also for them to feel the UP spirit as I narrate to them the history of struggles in the minds of its constituents.

But more than anything, I brought them there to dream of entering this top school, or any other high-standard university for that matter, when they reach college. Being in such a place will challenge their capacity to imagine not only their own future, but the possible future of a beautiful, united and progressive society.

One day, I want them to have a homecoming of their own: a time when they would have realized that, like children capable of molding clays into incipient sculptures, they are also capable of molding the institutions of their incipient nation.



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, May 10, 2012)

(Source: http://www.mb.com.ph/articles/359233/revisiting-my-youth-up-diliman)

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. 

THE TEACHER AS INTERVIEWEE

It was a great experience to be interviewed by one of the country’s foremost columnists, Ms. Rina Jimenez-David of the Philippine Daily Inquirer last Friday, February 4, 2011.



She was very nice, but very incisive than anything else. She was friendly, but she spoke with solid integrity. I will be a hypocrite if I do not admit that I am big a fan of the writer for decades now, who has become very well known not only because of her columns but also for her appearances on TV shows as panelist or social critic, and for her causes relating to women’s concerns and community development.



Judging from the many columns that she has written which I have read previously, I really thought that her lengthy interview of me will be featured primarily as one of her four- to five-section column. To be interviewed by her was, indeed, honor enough. That she even spoke lengthily about what Darwin International School has been doing in educating the youth, devoting her whole column today on Darwin – its goals, dreams, activities, challenges and results – honors the school, its parents, its personnel and, most especially, its students no end.



To thank Ms. Jimenez-David is in order. But the best way, perhaps, of thanking her is to continue what I love doing, and to do it even more with faith for the youth and passion for educating the nation – teaching Filipino students well, with the solution of current educational problems in mind. And I say this with one objective truth in mind: no school can accomplish its goals in a vacuum. Society, culture, institutions, policies and the whole educational system all enhance or impinge on the effectiveness of a school to contribute to the community. Surely, teaching alone is no guarantee of contributing to social development; it could even aggravate problems if educating people is not seen as a prime tool in social engineering. But engineering social development is something that is easier said than done.



It takes a penetrating writer to delve into the heart of her interviewee. An ordinary writer uses words to ask, write about her topic and make a point. But a good writer uses her heart to feel the pounding of another heart; she uses her mind to talk to society at large. Words are mere slaves of her beliefs; she is the master of her piece. A writer is not just a commentator but a human who is capable of feeling trends and reading social forces. She is a social actor of her milieu. She co-writes with the rest of the people the history of freedom and progress we all hope to attain.



The title Ms. Jimenez-David gave her piece, “The Little School That Could”, speaks precisely of what I have always believed all along: that quality education is not just about big campuses but about big hearts for the learner’s yearnings; that teaching is not about perfect teachers but near-perfect love of teachers for teaching; not just about gargantuan facilities (though, there is nothing wrong with vast facilities per se) but about grand visions for the students’ future. It is not just about the process of working hard but of raising standards and working hard to achieve these for the benefit of the students.



Teaching well is working with disparate resources like musical instruments which, nonetheless, are capable of creating a harmonious melody. I thank Ms. Jimenez-David for giving Darwin a space to sing its song of hope amidst deafening despondency plaguing our nation at this juncture of our history.









8 February 2011

11:50 pm







FRIENDS:

You may follow this link to read the piece written by Ms. Rina Jimenez-David titled “THE LITTLE SCHOOL THAT COULD”.

http://opinion.inquirer.net/inquireropinion/columns/view/20110208-319077/The-little-school-that-could

FULFILLING OUR LIFE’S MISSIONS

By

Prof. Rolando S. Dela Cruz


(Speech delivered before the graduating students of Darwin International School, Batch 2010. 28 March 2010, Sta. Maria, Bulacan)


Our distinguished Commencement Speaker, Dr. Elizabeth M. Perfecto; beloved parents; the officers, faculty and staff of Darwin International School; my dear students of 4th year and Grade 6 who will be graduating today; friends, guests, ladies and gentlemen; Good afternoon. Happy graduation day to all parents and students!



Before the establishment of Darwin, it is not a popular idea in Bulacan to enter the top universities, namely UP, Ateneo, La Salle, UST, San Beda and Mapua. Thus, was born the MISSION of Darwin of Darwin International School. This mission is to encourage students to dream big and to help them enter the top universities of the country. It is my honour to tell you the results of this mission, so far.



In 2007, 93% of our first batch of graduates passed in the top universities. In 2008, it became 96%. In 2009, placement improved at 97%. This year, 2010, we have finally attained the highest results of our mission: 100% of our students passed the top universities!



How are we able to do this at Darwin? We send our graduating students to the top schools through our enhanced curriculum. This means that we implement the Department of Education’s curriculum, but with added topics as well as added subjects. In this sense, Darwin’s curriculum is unique. To our graduating students, however, do not think that your having graduated from Darwin automatically makes you the best students of the best universities. It is not automatic. You need to work hard for that. You need to further develop your study habits.



Darwin is able to produce the best in you, because we innovate the Darwin system every year. We believe that change must always be constant. To name a few, these changes included instituting new subjects, implementing the centralized two-exam system, revising the honours program, requiring a high mastery grade, innovating the tutorial system, implementing the English Police system, providing free Summer Review for 3rd and 4th year students, offering free review for the Mock UPCAT exam handled by UP academics, institutionalizing new methods of teaching like the e-learning program, strict Code of Conduct, etcetera. More of such improvements and changes shall be implemented in the coming months and years.



Every year, Darwin improves its standards. But these changes are only slowly and incrementally being implemented because students in the higher levels, especially the 2007, 2008, 2009 and 2010 batches of Darwin, are absolutely all transferees from other schools. These batches had to catch up on Darwin standards because of their deficient earlier foundations. For example, most, if not all, of them were not English-speaking when they entered Darwin. Most also didn’t have good study habits. Gladly, there is constant improvement, batch after batch of graduates – based on the Deped’s National Career Assessment Examination (NCAE) and the annual college entrance exams. It is because the later batches, like this graduating batch, had more years of exposure to Darwin’s educational program and innovations.



While I talk about the accomplishments of our graduates, let this occasion be a venue for me to remind our beloved graduating students. Do not assume, for instance, that you, Gelo Buluran and Carmela Reyes, being the Valedictorian and Salutatorian of this batch, respectively, already know everything that every high school student in the Philippines must know. I admire, respect, and believe you and your intelligence, but you must be prepared to encounter the other Gelo Bulurans and Carmela Reyeses of this country when you go to the top universities this June. This goes true also to all members of this graduating batch, BATCH PAGBABAGO, who must not think that your being graduates of the number 1 school in Bulacan has given you the license in college to waste your time. Do not waste your golden opportunities! If you do, you will be the greatest loser of your own negligence.



In the NCAE, this year is the first time that the graduating students of Darwin have received all line of 9 grades, the lowest is 94% while the highest is 99+%. This means that you belong to the upper 6% to upper 1% of the whole country’s graduating students, based on the NCAE. Congratulations to all of you! You are able to defend the Darwin tradition of being Top 1 in the whole Bulacan and being one of the best in Region 3. But I need to remind you: more than ever, you need to be serious with your studies in order to sustain your momentum. There is a saying that goes: “Ang kutsilyo, kapag di hinahasa – pumupurol.” Darwin taught you to embrace suffering in order to succeed. Now, I add: Embrace the blessings you have already received. If you don’t, it will leave you – and it will leave you forever!



Darwin has given you a strong foundation to enter the country’s best universities. Be cautioned, though, that the goal of these elite schools is not simply to collect your tuition, but to give you the most difficult lessons and kick out those who will not meet their standards. Therefore, anticipate very demanding programs in college, focus, and be disciplined.



Ngayon na tinulungan na kayo ng Darwin para makapasok sa pinangarap nyong mga tanyag at pinakamahuhusay na unibersidad, nasa inyong mga kamay na ngayon ang inyong ikatatagumpay o ikabibigo. Di nyo kailangang mainggit sa kakayanan o kaalaman ng ibang mahuhusay na estudyante, ang dapat ay itanim nyo sa inyong puso at isipan na dapat nyong alamin at unawain ang bawat pahina ng libro na ipababasa sa inyo.



Sa oras ng mga pagsubok, di kailangang manghina ang inyong paniniwala sa sarili, sapagkat tinuruan kayo sa Darwin na magkaroon ng malaking pangarap at positibong pananaw sa buhay. Kung kayo ay magiging negatibo, negatibo din ang epekto. Kung kayo ay magiging positibo, positibo din ang aanihin ninyo.



Di dapat tumakas sa mga problema at isisi ang kabiguan sa iba, ang nararapat ay kilalanin ang mga kahinaan at mga pagkakamali, at bumangon kung saan kayo madarapa. (Si Manny Pacquiao nga na pinakamagaling ngayong boksingero sa mundo, tinatamaan ang mukha at katawan kapag sinutsuntok.) Di dapat lumaki ang inyong mga ulo at maging mayabang dahil sa angking talino; sa halip ay manatiling mapagkumbaba, bilangin ang inyong mga biyaya at matutong magpasalamat sa mga tumulong sa inyo – kabilang ang inyong mga mahal na magulang, kaibigan, guro, paaralan, komunidad at bayan. Dapat na lalo kayong matutong magtiwala at magmahal sa Diyos na nagbibigay ng awa, subalit huwag puro awa ang hingin, sa halip ay ialay sa Diyos ang busilak na gawa.



I expect you to win in many of your battles in life. But in order to win, always remember the saying: “Ang di marunong lumingon sa pinangglingan, di makararating sa paroroonan.” A very powerful Filipino value that you can use all throughout your journey in fulfilling your own mission in life.



Binabati ko kayong lahat na mga magulang at mga magsisipagtapos.



Maraming salamat sa inyong lahat. Patnubayan nawa tayo ng Maykapal.

THE TRAGEDY OF EDUCATIONAL STRATIFICATION IN THE PHILIPPINES

There are many Filipinos who take education as their course in college. Many schools of higher education offer it as one of its majors. Even the newly established ones are offering the education course, peddling it as if it is so easy to train or produce good teachers. Why is it that many teachers are needed in the country? Why are so many schools offering education degrees mushrooming?


The population of the country is burgeoning. It is one of the fastest growing populations in the world. The government has failed to curb it because of a vocal church that is against family planning methods such as the use of contraceptives – plus the fact that government programs normally and traditionally go nowhere because of, what else but, corruption. But even then, the predominantly Catholic country is populated with Catholic Christians who do not necessarily follow church teachings when it comes to planning the family. All these result in poverty as having many children in an underdeveloped setting means more mouths to feed.


It has been a worldwide sociological phenomenon that in poor countries, those coming from the lower classes usually have more children than their richer counterparts. One theory is that they need more hands to feed the whole family, as in the feudal setting of rural areas or in squatter colonies of urban centers. But the other view is that poverty leads to lack of education, and lack of education leads to ignorance regarding the socio-economic consequences of having more children. The opposite is also noticeable: those belonging to the upper strata of society have less number of children. The theory posed is that the richer couples are busier with economic activities, and that their being more educated makes them plan their family with economic, health, and educational priorities in mind, not to mention individualistic or social pursuits such as acquiring skills in certain arts or traveling, respectively.

With the rising population of the Philippines, the country is unable to effectively absorb people in its workforce. Thus, the government since the time of President Ferdinand Marcos up to the present has made it official state policy to export labor. The waves during the 1970s included engineers and manual laborers sent to the Middle East. Later, this was followed by doctors and more manual laborers during the 1980s, not only in Arab countries but also in the United States. During the 1990s, Filipino entertainers went to Japan and other Asian countries. At the turn of the century, Filipino nurses and other health workers began to invade Western Europe and other countries of North America. All throughout these periods, Filipino seafarers have dominated shipping, providing cheap labor to the biggest shipping companies of the world. All these mean that both manual laborers and professionals were able to send their hard-earned money to their relatives in the Philippines. This also meant greater access to education, not only in public but phenomenally also in private schools, for those belonging to the lower classes of Philippine society.

The combined factors of population growth and the entry of dollars sent by Overseas Filipino Workers assured not only the survival but also the proliferation of educational institutions in the country. During the beginning until the half of the 20th century, the whole educational system developed under the rubric of the public school v. private school dichotomy. The public school system built by the United States during its colonization of the country was typified by quality that can be availed of by the ordinary Filipinos. But the system having been transferred into the hands of the Filipinos, especially after the Second World War, the quality of the system has deteriorated. In the meantime, the exclusive schools where the rich children enroll have improved relative to the public school system. The trend of the poor going to the public, and the rich going to the private schools, therefore, continued but with a twist: those who are not rich but can somehow afford to pay tuition because of OFW money started to prefer to send their children to private schools.

The private school system was initially dominated by Catholic educational institutions. Eventually, however, rich families started putting up their own private schools. As the population increases and demands from the lower and lower middle classes for quality but cheap education heightened, the Catholic schools have started to offer places in school at a cheaper rate, but with more students per classroom. There are only very few Catholic schools that have maintained its quality as supported by extremely high tuition. Meanwhile, large privately owned non-sectarian schools started to compete for the lower-income population. Thus, following the model of many Catholic schools offering classes at affordable rates, these non-sectarian private schools have increased also their class sizes to recoup their investments.

In the end, the country is now faced not only with the traditional dichotomy as to public and private ownership. More pronounced now, and very disturbing at that, is the dichotomy as to quality orientation v. the lack of quality among schools. Many Catholic educational institutions have become commercialized, too, together with huge privately-owned non-sectarian schools. Thus, their quality deteriorated along the way. In the meantime, the continuous neglect of various post-war administrations assured that the public school systems can no longer be mistaken to be the same quality-oriented public school system established by the Americans. The whole educational system, therefore, is now dominated by weak educational institutions. Quality schools are more of an exception, both in public and in private schools. In the public sector, only the Science High Schools and a handful of state colleges and universities can be considered excellent. In the private sector, only a handful, too, of Catholic schools and non-sectarian private schools are quality-oriented.


In the meantime, the forces for lack of quality continue to pressure the whole educational system: the escalating population; the aspiration of Overseas Filipino Workers remitting dollars to the country to provide their children with education; and the lack of real government action to solve the lack of funding, low quality of teachers, and lack of classrooms. Now, it has become a cycle: the lack of quality produces even more lack of quality. The remaining quality institutions have become, on the other hand, more elitist as the pressure to support quality rests on higher tuition and strict implementation of admissions policies to weed out students who are ill-trained in the earlier years of their education.


What has been happening in Philippine education is a tragedy. Needless to say, mainly the rich are able to get quality education, and only very few poor students from the Science High Schools are produced yearly. With this current educational systemic reality in place, one wonders if there will be real hope for the majority of the Filipinos.





Prof. Rolando S. Dela Cruz

16 March 2010, 1:06 am

CURRENT PROBLEMS IN EVALUATING BASIC EDUCATION TEACHERS IN PHILIPPINE SCHOOLS

    

      
Education in the Philippines has been lagging behind most of its Southeast Asian neighbors. Of late, it has already been overtaken by some poor African countries. The reason is obvious: it was never a genuine government priority! In the meantime, the situation worsens. The system keeps on producing graduates who are not skilled enough to get the best jobs. The unemployment and underemployment rates have been increasing yearly. But the problem is not only the lack of funds for education. One problem also is how teachers teach, and how these teachers are evaluated.


It has always been said that the quality of students depends so much on the quality of teachers. But if we push the analysis further back, then it needs to be pointed out that their training also in teacher colleges is lacking in rigour and quality. This is proven by the fact that many such teachers-to-be face difficulties passing the board exams. But of course, it is also wrong to conclude that merely passing the Philippine Regulatory Commission’s exams for teachers makes a great teacher. Otherwise, the country’s educational system, both in public and private, should be teeming with great teachers producing great students. In other words, the Philippine educational system should be great as well. But it is not!



Teachers are supposed to be observed by principals or their coordinators in schools. The idea is to give such teachers feedback on how they can improve. But I have met some teachers who spend so much time copying the previous’ years lesson plans, a tool to check if the teacher is prepared for her classes. In these cases that I know, the so called evaluation of teachers’ lesson plans is based more on handwriting and not on content, method, much less on the impact of such plans as the checkers only superficially read – or worse, do not read at all – such evaluation tool. Imagine reading the lesson plans for all the lessons in various subjects of dozens, if not hundreds, of teachers daily or weekly? The bottom line here, to make the long story short, is that teachers are left on their own to determine if what they are teaching is sufficient or not.


Aside from this, teachers are supposed to be observed in classrooms. During such evaluations, teachers are told that they will be evaluated. Thus, the teacher prepares her presentation for that day. It is not inconceivable that even the students of that particular teacher to be observed are rehearsed to answer particular questions. In short, the teacher being observed is there to “perform” before “an audience”. This theatrical approach does not serve to solve the problem of the educational system as the real weaknesses of classroom realities are momentarily masked by “prepared teaching” and great reviews of the shows.


Another way of evaluating teachers is to look at the performance of students in a subject. Accordingly, if the students do not get good grades in that subject, then they did not learn; if they obtained good grades, then they must have learned something. But who makes and checks the exams? The answer is: the teacher herself. Consequently, if the teacher finished only one half of the book, then she will write the examination covering merely the the pages of the book taught. The obvious dilemma here is that even if the students got 100% in that examination, they only know half of what they ought to learn especially in comparison with students of other schools which made sure that learners finished and mastered the whole book. Additionally, it must be mentioned that a teacher in a situation where she will be judged based on the grade of her students may write an examination with easy-to-answer questions in order to adjust to the demands of her superiors.


These are only three of the problems of teacher evaluation. The teacher may be interested in the real learning of her students. Yet, the practices in some, if not many, schools may be forcing her to adapt in such ways that do not help students in general. She may hate writing and rewriting lesson plans that will be graded based on handwriting, but will she resist it and risk her employment? She may be genuinely enthralled with the idea of excelling for her students, but what can she do if the rules of her school demand that she puts up a show before her so called critic? She may be sincerely concerned in making her students finish the whole book and write a challenging examination, but what can she do if her one-hour class is populated with 60 to 100 students that she won’t be able to attend to the needs of each and every one of them?


These are just some problems in evaluating Basic Education teachers in the Philippines. How do they get out of this cycle? How else could they better themselves in a situation where they ought to adjust to practices that by themselves do not seem to help mend the situation. The Philippine educational system should not be contented with teacher’s evaluation for evaluation’s sake. Part of the solution, apparently, is changing the very methods of evaluating teachers since the current methods perpetuate mediocrity not only in classroom teaching but also in student learning.







Prof. Rolando S. Dela Cruz

14 March 2010, 7:00 pm