Welcome to Scribd. Sign in or start your free trial to enjoy unlimited e-books, audiobooks & documents.Find out more
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
San Juan David Michael Full Paper Kto12

San Juan David Michael Full Paper Kto12

Ratings: (0)|Views: 39,758|Likes:
paper on the Philippine Kto12 Program
paper on the Philippine Kto12 Program

More info:

Categories:Types, Research
Published by: David Michael San Juan on Oct 24, 2011
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial


Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less





A Holistic Critique of the Philippine Government’s Kindergarten to 12 (K to 12) Program2
De La Salle University (DLSU) International Education CongressDe La Salle-College of St. Benilde Hotel, ManilaSeptember 29-October 1, 2011A Holistic Critique of the Philippine Government’s Kindergarten to 12 (K to 12) Program
 Name of Presenter: David Michael M. San JuanInstitutional Affiliation: Filipino Department, De La Salle University-ManilaKeywords: Curriculum Development, Educational theory, Higher Education and Adult Learning
The Philippine Department of Education started implementing the government’sKindergarten to 12 (K to 12) Program by establishing a system of compulsory and freekindergarten education nationwide. Citing the educational improvement of advanced countriessuch as the Netherlands, advocates of K to 12 claim that this is the only way to make Filipinostudents globally competitive. Big business organizations such as the Philippine Business for Education (PBED) consortium, Employers Confederation of the Philippines (ECOP), PhilippineChamber of Commerce and Industry, the Chamber of Commerce of the Philippines and manymore support the K to 12 program. Meanwhile, two of the largest umbrella organizations of teachers in the country, the Alliance of Concerned Teachers (ACT) and the Teachers’ DignityCoalition (TDC), at least two Upper House legislators, namely Senators Tito Sotto and AntonioTrillanes oppose it, along with a number of local executives. This paper will analyze the bones of contention in this much-touted government education plan as a springboard for crafting aworkable compromise plan.
A Holistic Critique of the Philippine Government’s Kindergarten to 12 (K to 12) Program
Education is the wealth of nations. Many top ranking countries in the 2010 HumanDevelopment Index (HDI) – a measuring tool of holistic human development (which coversliteracy rate) crafted by the United Nations such as Norway, Finland, Sweden, Canada,Australia and the Netherlands are known for excellence in education. The Philippines is ranked99
in the 2010 HDI (among 169 countries), way below socialist Cuba (ranked 53
) and slightly below its former “twin tiger cub” Thailand (ranked 92
). In 2000, the Philippines was ranked77
, and in 1990, placed at 66
. Such measurable decline of the quality of life in the Philippinesrelative to the quality of life in other countries mirrors the common perception that Philippineeducation is (or has become) substandard. Some recent indicators seem to suggest that the over-all quality of Philippine education at all levels is indeed at least subpar, as far as nationalstandards are concerned, or at worse, deteriorating, within the purview of international standards.Former Department of Education (DepEd) Secretary Jesli Lapus revealed that the resultsof the 2009 National Achievement Test (NAT) improved versus the 2006 outcomes in terms of Mean Percentage Score (MPS) from 54.66% to 66.33%. He claimed that percentage gains wereachieved in all subject areas, comparing 2006 and 2009 results. Unfortunately, it must beemphasized that 75% is the minimum level of mastery (the “passing mark”) set by DepEd. Thus,recent NAT results imply that the average Filipino elementary and high school student is unableto gain mastery of the required lessons. To illustrate this assertion, it is helpful to reproduce atable based on DepEd data (figures are in percentage) that originally appeared in a “Policy Brief”(June 2011) published by the Senate Economic Planning Office:
A Holistic Critique of the Philippine Government’s Kindergarten to 12 (K to 12) Program
In the NAT 2010-2011, majority of Philippine secondary schools (almost two-thirds)got poor results, in contrast with of the country’s elementary schools. Alarmed with such resultsDepEd Secretary Bro. Armin Luistro issued DepEd Order No. 72, Series of 2011 entreating bureau directors, regional directors, schools division/city superintendents, and schooladministrators to provide intensive supervisory support to improve the NAT performance of Philippine schools. The said document provided a percentage table of schools’ NAT scores inquartile distribution:Quartile DistributionPercent of Schools inEvery Quartile(NAT-Grade Six)Percent of Schools inEvery Quartile(NAT-Second Year)Superior (76-100%)36.28%1.13%Upper Average (51-75%)49.62%31.41%Lower Average (26-50%)14.04%67.10%Poor (0-25%).0.01%0.35%Such sad state of basic education in the Philippines is also observable when the country’s performance is contrasted with other countries. In the 1999 Trends in International Mathematicsand Science Study (TIMSS) which evaluated the performance of eighth graders, the Philippinesranked 36
among 38 participating countries, just above Morocco and South Africa. In the 2003

Activity (8)

You've already reviewed this. Edit your review.
1 hundred reads
1 thousand reads
Joseph Tabcao added this note
Tabcao How can people say that this is for the good of the nation???? Adding more years to education is not the answer to the current quality of education today!!! the answer is more classrooms, more quality teachers, Limit the students to 30 pupils for classroom so the teacher would have time to deal with his/her students/ raise the the salary of teachers so they would concentrate on teaching ins
Eman Nolasco liked this

You're Reading a Free Preview

/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->