Contract Number AID-492 -0-11-00057

Intem Project No. US-073111-01

July 2011

This publication was produced for review by the United States Agency for International
Development. It was prepared by International Technology Management Corporation (INTEM)
Philippine Education Sector
Assessment Project

Prepared for
States Agency for International Development, Philippines

Prepared by
Dr. Rizal Buendia, Dr. Julieta Gregorio, Ms. Regina A. Molera, Dr. Benjamina G. Flor,
Mr. Benjamin Vergel de Dios, Mr. Joel Wayne Ganibe, Mr. Arman G. Balonkita, Mr.
Carlone Dawang and Mr. Nestor Mirandilla

International Technology Management Corporation (INTEM)

U-407 AB Sandoval Building
Shaw Boulevard, corner Oranbo Drive
Pasig City, Metro Manila, Philippines

The author’s views expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of
the United States Agency for International Development or the United States
Government.
Acknowledgments
This study was conducted and the paper authored by Dr. Rizal Buendia, Dr. Julieta Gregorio,
Regina A. Molera, Dr. Benjamina G. Flor, Benjamin Vergel de Dios, Joel Wayne Ganibe, Arman
G. Balonkita, Carlone B. Dawang and Nestor Mirandilla. The document was edited by Dr.
Bernadette V. Gonzales and Dr. Eduardo Bolanos. The work was funded by USAID. The work
could not have been accomplished without the collaboration and dedicated efforts of Robert
Burch, Mirshariff Tillah, Aivan Leo Amit, Maritoni Oanes, and Shannon Stone of
USAID/Philippines. Equally important were the contributions of numerous officials of Philippine
government agencies who were generous with their time, candid and open in their discussions,
and amicable and hospitable in their interactions with the research team. Colleagues from
several development agencies and from nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) and education
projects based in Manila also provided vital help and information to the team.
Table of Contents

List of Acronyms iii

List of Tables vi
List of Figures vi
Executive Summary viii

1.0 Introduction and Context 1

1.1 Research Methodology 1

1.2 Context 2
1.3 Overview 3

2.0 Assessment by Sub-sector 11

2.1 Early Childhood Care and Development 11

2.2 Basic Education 20
2.3 Alternative Learning System 28
2.4 Technical and Vocational Education and Skills Development 33
2.5 Higher Education 40

3.0 Conclusion and Recommendation for USAID Support 50

Diagram 1. Updated Philippine Education System (K+12) 53

Glossary of Terms 54
List of Informants 57
Endnotes 61
References 64
List of Acronyms
ACE Adult Community Educator
ADB Asian Development Bank
ADMs Alternative Delivery Modes
A&E Accreditation and Equivalency
AFLEP Adolescent Friendly Literacy Enhancement Program
ALIVE Arabic Language and Islamic Values Education
ALS Alternative Learning System
ASEAN Association of Southeast Asian Nations
ARH Adolescent Reproductive Health
ARMM Autonomous Region of in Muslim Mindanao
ADMs Alternative Delivery Modes
AusAID Australian Agency for International Development
AY Academic Year
BALS Bureau of Alternative Learning System
BEAM Basic Education Assistance for Mindanao
BEIS Basic Education Information System
BESRA Basic Education Sector Reform Agenda
BLP Basic Literacy Program
BP-OSA Balik Paaralan Para Sa Out-of-School Adult Program
CAR Cordillera Autonomous Administrative Region
CCT Conditional Cash Transfer
CHED Commission on Higher Education
CICT Commission on Information and Communications Technology
CFS Child- Friendly School
CFSS Child- Friendly School System
CPC-6 Sixth Country Program for Children
CSIs CHED Supervised Institutions
CSR Cohort Survival Rate
CV Compliance Verification
CVS Compliance Verification System
CWC Council for the Welfare of Children
DALSC District Alternative Learning System Coordinator
DBM Department of Budget and Management
DCCs Day Care Centers
DCWs Day Care Workers
DDU Depressed, Deprived & Underserved
DECS Department of Education, Culture and Sports
DepED Department of Education
DILG Department of the Interior and Local Government
DORP Dropout Reduction Program
DOH Department of Health
DOLE Department of Labor and Employment
DSWD Department of Social Welfare and Development
ECCD Early Childhood Care and Development
ECD Early Child Development
ECE Early Childhood Education
EDCOM Congressional Commission on Education
EFA Education For All
e-IMPACT Enhanced Instructional Management by Parents, Community, and Teachers
EO Executive Order
ESM English, Science, Mathematics
EQUALLS Education Quality and Access for Learning and Livelihood Skills
FLEMMS Functional Literacy, Education and Mass Media Survey
FY Fiscal Year
GAA General Appropriations Act
GATSPE Government Assistance to Students and Teachers in Private Education
GDP Gross Domestic Product
GER Gross Enrollment Ratio
GOCCs Government-Owned and Controlled Corporations
GOP Government of the Philippines
GPI Gender Parity Index
HE Higher Education
HEIs Higher Education Institutions
ICT Information and Communications Technology
ILO International Labor Organization
IMs Instructional Managers
INSET In-Service Training Program for Teachers
IP Indigenous People
IRA Internal Revenue Allotments
KRTs Key Reform Thrusts
LCEs Local Chief Executives
LEP Ladderized Education Program
LGU Local Government Unit
LMIR Labor Market Intelligence Report
LSBs Local School Boards
LUCs Local Universities and Colleges
JBIC Japanese Bank for International Cooperation
MDG Millennium Development Goal
MDG2 Millennium Development Goal Number 2
MISOSA Modified In-School Off-School Approach
MLSD Middle-level Skills Development
MOA Memorandum of Agreement
MOOE Maintenance and Other Operating Expenses
MTBMLE Mother Tongue-Based-Multilingual Education
NAC National Advisory Committee
NAT National Achievement Test
NCBTS National Competency-based Teacher Standards
NCCE National Coordinating Council on Education
NCEE National College Entrance Examination
NCR National Capital Region
NHERA National Higher Education Research Agenda
NECCDCC National Early Childhood Care and Development Coordinating Council
NEDA National Economic and Development Authority
NEDCC National Economic Development Council for Children
NELF National Early Learning Framework
NER Net Enrollment Rate
NGOs Non- Government Organizations
NNC National Nutrition Council
NSO National Statistics Office
NSEC National Secondary Education Curriculum
ODA Overseas Official Development Assistance
OECF Overseas Economic Cooperation Fund
OGS Other Government Schools
OIC Officer- In-Charge
OPAE Office of the Presidential Assistant for Education
OSY Out-of-School Youth
ULAP Union of Local Authorities in the Philippines
PAGCOR Philippine Amusement and Gaming Corporation
PBE Professional Board Examinations
PCER Philippine Commission on Educational Reform
PELC Philippine Elementary Learning Competencies
PLFS Philippine Labor Force Survey
PMO Project Management Office
PESS Philippine Education Sector Study
PESA Philippine Education Sector Assessment
PNQF Philippine National Qualifications Framework
PRC Professional Regulation Commission
PTCAs Parent- Teacher--Community Associations
RA Republic Act
RAMSE Regional Assessment in Mathematics, Science, and in English
RBEC Restructured Basic Education Curriculum
RBI Radio-Based Instruction
SAT Student Achievement Test
SARDO Students at Risk of Dropping Out
SBM School-based Management
SFI School First Initiative
SEF Special Education Fund
SUCs State Universities and Colleges
SY School Year
STRIVE Strengthening the Implementation of Basic Education in the Visayas
SEDIP Secondary Education Development and Improvement Project
SOTAR State-of-the-Art Review of the Day Care Services Philippines
SReEA School Readiness Assessment
TEEP Third Elementary Education Project
TEDP Teacher Education and Development Program
TEIs Teacher Education Institutions
TESDA Technical Education and Skills Development Authority
TIMMS Third International Mathematics and Science Study
TPDF Teacher Performance Development Framework
TPDP Teacher Performance and Development Framework
TVET Technical Vocational Education and Training
UN United Nations
UNDP United Nations Development Program
UNICEF United Nations Children’s Fund
UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
USAID United States Agency for International Development
WB World Bank

List of Tables

Part III. Assessment by Sub-sector

Basic Education
Table 1 Disparity Across Regions in the Net Enrolment Rate
Table 2 Elementary Education School-leaver (drop-out) Rate (percent), SY 2008-2009
(public and private)
Table 3 Dropouts in Elementary and Secondary Schools
Table 4 Achievement Rate (MPS) SY 2009-2010 (NETRC)

Technical and Vocational Education and Skills Development

Table 5 TVET Institutions
Table 6 TVET Employment Rates
Table 7 TESDA Budget, 2005-2009

Higher Education
Table 8 Higher Education Indicators by Academic Year: 2000-2010

List of Figures

Part I. Introduction and Context

Figure 1 Public Expenditure on Education as Percent of GDP

Figure 2 Overseas Development Assistance - Loans
Figure 3 Overseas Development Assistance - Grants
Figure 4 Elementary Education NER and GER (%) SY 2002-2003 to 2009-2010
Figure 5 Dropout Pyramid
Figure 6 Total Dropout -Elementary Education
Figure 7 Total Dropout- Secondary Education
Figure 8 Comparative Unemployment Rates in Selected Asian Economies: 2006-2010

Part II. Assessment by Sub-sector

Early Childhood Care and Development Education

Figure 9 ECE in the Formal School System, 2002-2009
Figure 10 Dropout Rate by Grade Level, SY 2009-2010
Figure 11 Day-Care Center Coverage, 1998-2010
Figure 12 ECE Regional Performance
 Basic Education
Figure 13 Net Enrolment Rate: Elementary Level, 2002 – 2010
Figure 14 Net Enrolment Rate: Secondary Level, 2002-2010
Figure 15 Cohort Survival Rate: Elementary Level, 2002-2010
Figure 16 Cohort Survival Rate: Secondary Level, 2002-2010
Figure 17 Gender Disparity, Elementary Level SY 2009-2010
Figure 18 Gender Disparity, Secondary Level SY 2009-2010
Figure 19 Percentage of Education Budget Distribution by Sectors (2011)

Technical and Vocational Education and Skills Development

Figure 20 TVET Enrolment and Graduates, 1995-2009
Figure 21 Certification Rate, 1995-2009
Figure 22 TVET Funding by Source
Figure 23 Philippine National Qualifications Framework

Higher Education
Figure 24 Proportion of Higher Educational Institutions
Figure 25 Higher Education Graduates of Top Five Discipline Group and Academic Year
Figure 26 Proportion of HEI Faculty and Teaching Staff by Academic Qualification
Figure 27 Performance (% Passing) in Licensure Examination
Figure 28 Number of Schools Classified as Centers of Development and Centers of
Excellence by Type and Region
 Philippine Education Sector Assessment 2011
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1. The Philippine Education Sector Assessment (PESA) project is an attempt to capture in a

single sector-wide assessment the state of Philippine education. The assessment examines
the conditions of all education sub-sectors (early childhood education, basic education,
vocational-technical education, non-formal education/alternative learning system, and
higher/tertiary education) and identifies key challenges, issues, and concerns confronting
the government.

2. It also appraises in broad strokes the sector’s state of governance, management, and
financing after the educational system was tri-focalized in 1994. In line with the bilateral
assistance agreement between the US and Philippine government, the study serves to
guide the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) in its new
education sector priority-setting process.

3. The study used multiple research methodologies such as semi-structured questionnaires

for interviews with key informants (a total of 85 were interviewed from national and local
governments, donor agencies, non-governmental organizations/civil society
organizations, and program beneficiaries), focus group discussions, observations, review
of policies and strategic plans (medium-term development plans, publications of
international agencies like UNDP, UNICEF, WB, ADB, etc.), documentary analysis
(regulatory documents, implementing rules and regulations, programs/projects,
operational plans), content analysis of manuscripts and official records (assessment
reports, data and statistics from official sources like the National Statistics Office [NSO],
Basic Education Information System [BEIS], publications from credible Internet sources,
and review of relevant literature.

I. GENERAL FINDINGS

1. Tri-focalization of education has resulted in weak coordination among the three

education agencies. The tri-focalization of education in 1994 was borne out of the
recommendation of the Commission on Education (EDCOM) report in 1991. Tri-
focalization was aimed at improving policy making, planning, and programming at the
subsector level as each of the three lead agencies was given the principal responsibility
for its “undiluted and undivided attention” on its respective areas of concern. This
resulted in the establishment of the Commission on Higher Education (CHED) and the
Technical Education and Skills Development Authority (TESDA) in 1994, and allowed
the Department of Education and Sports (DECS), later renamed as the Department of
Education in 2001, to concentrate on basic education (primary and secondary education).
The National Coordinating Council for Education was also created, but has not met since
its creation. Thus, there is no mechanism to ensure that policies, programs, and projects
of each subsector are dovetailed to national development plans

2. There was an attempt to assess, plan, and monitor the entire education sector through the
creation of the Presidential Task Force for Education (PTFE) in 2007. It was ineffective
in harmonizing policies, programs, and reform initiatives of the three co-equal education
 agencies given the ad-hoc nature of its creation. The PTFE was established by a mere
Executive Order (EO 632) and it officially ceased to exist in 2010 following the change
in administrations.

3. Despite tri-focalization, there is overlap of mandates among the three agencies. For
instance, DepEd does not only administer, regulate, and supervise elementary and
secondary schools but also continues to operate some 300 specialized technical-
vocational schools even as it is engaged in non-formal education. Meanwhile, CHED
maintains its academic and administrative supervision over public secondary and post-
secondary institutions (usually agricultural or industrial arts and trades schools), and
laboratory schools of higher education institutions, classified by CHED under the “other
government schools” (OGS) category. On the other hand, TESDA, an agency which
prepares and provides students with technical and craft skills, has not been engaged in the
delivery of technical-vocational education in high schools (which is primarily managed
by the DepEd).

4. Investments in the education sector are low compared to other countries in

Southeast Asia. Although the Philippine government has been allocating the largest
share of the national budget to education, the country continues to have the lowest
percentage in terms of allocation for education as a ratio to the Gross Domestic Product
(GDP) among five selected ASEAN countries. Still the country maintained a slow
upward trend over the five-year period (2004 to 2008) while other countries showed a
declining trend (except for Vietnam which only had 2008 data). It is noted that basic
education in the Philippines received an unprecedented 18% jump in budget allocations
for 2010.

5. The quality of basic education has deteriorated. The country ranks among the poorest
performers in East Asia and the rest of the world in terms of quality standards. In the
2003 Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) results for the
fourth graders, the Philippines ranked 23rd among 25 countries in both mathematics and
science; for the 8th graders (equivalent to second year high school), the Philippines
ranked 34th of 38 countries. In the 2008 TIMSS Advanced Mathematics category, the
Philippines placed last among 10 participating countries in mathematics overall. The
2010 National Achievement Test results showed a mean percentage score (MPS) of 68%
for the elementary levels, and for high school, the MPS was only around 45%.

6. The national trend shows that leaving or dropping out of school is more prevalent
during the entry years. In SY 2009-10, the (simple) dropout rate was 1.56% in Grade 1
and 7.68% in first year high school. There were more boys who dropped out from school
(1.80%) than girls (1.29%). There are many factors that can be attributed to the high
dropout rate in Grade 1. Children who have not had ECE experience prior to entering
Grade 1 are not ready - socially, psychologically, and cognitively. Their inability to
adjust to their transition from home to a structured learning environment and formal
schooling can lead to their dropping out of school. In addition, children with poor health
and nutrition are unable to focus and concentrate on their learning processes. A school
readiness assessment for Grade 1 entrants revealed that only 42% were ready for school
(SY 2009-2010).
7. Poverty remains a major reason for dropping out. Basic education, while free, is still
characterized by numerous costs to learners, parents, and local communities. Families
bear the full cost of school meals, (in spite of DepEd’s “School Feeding Program”)
transportation, shoes, and school supplies. This places education beyond the reach of
most of the disadvantaged sector, with many students dropping out mainly due to
poverty. The times they are out of school are spent in helping their families augment the
family income. 43% of children aged 0-14 belong to poor households. The number of
college and university drop outs is comparable to those in the elementary and secondary
levels. Students opt to drop out for a year or two then enroll again after some time.

8. Out-of-school children and youth remains a big issue. The 2008 Functional Literacy,
Education, and Mass Media Survey (FLEMMS) reveals that of the 39 million population
aged 6-24, 32 percent or 12.3 million are not attending school. Of this number, 24 percent
say that the prohibitive cost of education deters them from going to school, 22 percent are
either working or looking for work, and 20 percent lack interest in going to school. Data
on Philippine Labor Force Survey (PLFS) show that boys make up more than half of the
total number of working children, around 63 percent in 2009. Generally, six out of 10
working children did not attend school. As of April 2010, there are 2.4 million working
children in the country (PLFS, 2010).

9. Illiteracy remains a big challenge. The FLEMMS shows that 6.9% of the population
aged 10-64 cannot read and write (around 6 million people). The number of illiterates
and those who have not graduated elementary and high school is estimated at 45 million,
or 40% of the total population of 92 million in 2008.

10. Piecemeal reforms have yet to be institutionalized. The piecemeal reform interventions
of donor and development partners do not provide an avenue for concerted structural and
programmatic changes that would result in large-scale, integrated, and sustained
outcomes. Numerous pilot initiatives have already been introduced and tested in the areas
of student assessment, alternative service delivery, pedagogy, inclusiveness and
community participation in the subsector of basic education. Major pilot reform
initiatives such as TEEP, SEDIP, BEAM, EQUALLS-Project, STRIVE, and CFSS have
demonstrated significant successes changes in different areas, such as competency
standards for teachers; advancing the development of student assessment; enhancing
school-based management; championing the quality of Muslim education nationwide,
and changing the philosophies and mindsets of those within their reach (Philippine
Human Development Report, 2008-09:65-100). However, the mainstreaming or up-
scaling of these successful pilot-initiatives is a big challenge and there is no convergence
of strategies yet as to their national application.

11. Assistance from international development agencies made on basic education was
mostly loans rather than grants. Foreign assistance fund for the improvement of the
basic education sub-sector in the past 10 years amounted to around PhP45.9 billion, 77%
of which came from loans. The remaining 23% were grants to the recipient divisions
located in the 20 most impoverished provinces. Basic education (elementary and
secondary levels) received almost 82% of the total loans. The World Bank (WB) and
WB/Japan Bank for International Cooperation (JBIC) provided approximately 52% of
total loans for the past decade. For grants, the Australian Agency for International
 Development (AusAid) accounted for almost half (46%) of the total grants while USAID
accounted for 16% of the total. Most of the projects, both loans and grants, were focused
on improving access to and quality of basic education.

II. SUB-SECTOR KEY FINDINGS

EARLY CHILDHOOD DEVELOPMENT

12. Early childhood education (ECE) enrolment in the formal system has been low for
the past years. In SY 2009-2010, (a) only 19.98% of 3-4-year olds were in 50,172 day-
care centers; (b) the gross enrolment ratio (GER) in ECE for 5-year-old children was at
22.18%; and (c) 66.17% of 6-year-old children entering Grade 1 had ECE experience. A
school readiness assessment for Grade 1 entrants revealed that only 42% were ready for
school.

13. Lowest performing regions. Based on the combined data on attendance in day-care
centers, gross enrolment in ECE, and Grade 1 entrants with ECE experience, the lowest
performing regions were all in Mindanao: the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao
(ARMM), the Zamboanga Peninsula (Region IX), and the CARAGA Region (Region
XIII). The highest and better performing regions were Western Visayas (Region VI),
Central Visayas (Region VII), and Central Luzon (Region III).

14. DepEd is not ready to meet the resource requirements for universal preschool
education. While the DepEd budget for pre-primary education increased from P1.9B in
2010 to PhP2.3B in 2011, this is insufficient to make kindergarten truly universal as there
are about 2.5 million 6-year-old children who need to be accommodated. Shortages in
classrooms and teachers have to be addressed. There are 29,615 preschool teachers
nationwide and only 2,299 with permanent status. Funds for the more than 10,000
teachers that will be tapped through the service contracting scheme will have to be made
available.

BASIC EDUCATION
15. There is a downward trend in cohort survival rates. The downward trend in key
education indicators at the elementary and secondary levels in the past 10 years makes it
unlikely for the Philippines to achieve the Millennium Development Goal in 2015
(Philippines 2010 MDG Report). While cohort survival rate at the elementary level was
on an upward trend from 69.50% in SY 2002, it dropped to 64.66% in SY2009-2010. On
regional performance, ARMM has the lowest cohort survival rate.

16. Access remains a problem. The country’s difficulty in achieving universal primary
education is due mainly to the lack of access and the inequitable distribution of schools.
Between 2005-2010, the number of elementary schools increased by 2,651 bringing the
total to 38,168 public elementary schools and 7,017 secondary schools throughout the
country. However, these are still not enough. The additional schools constructed were
mostly in regions with high poverty incidence. For example, the ARMM had the highest
number of additional schools, a region where 69.3% of children below 15 years old live
in poverty. In addition, the ARMM suffers from a very high classroom-to-pupil ratio
 (1:53) compared to Regions I and II which have better ratios exceeding even the ideal
1:35 ratio, with 1:31 and 1:29 ratios respectively. Next to ARMM, the NCR is also faced
with a high classroom-pupil ratio of 1:49. It has to resort to classes with double or even
triple shifts, in order to accommodate the large number of students.

17. There are other factors that contribute to lack of access. There are pockets where
classroom shortages persist due to continued increase in enrolment, poor targeting of
resources, classroom damage due to calamities, and disparities in resources/funding
among schools in different areas. Other factors are due to geographic reasons such as
distance and remoteness of barangays (villages), mountainous terrain, or scattered
islands. Addressing disparities in classroom constructions was impeded by RA 7880 or
the “Fair and Equitable Allocation of the DECS Budget for Capital Outlay”.

ALTERNATIVE LEARNING SYSTEM (NON-FORMAL EDUCATION)

18. ALS coverage is limited due to budget constraints. Since ALS started certification in
1999, only 1,682,326 learners have been reached. With only 1,981 mobile teachers to
address the needs of 48,000 barangays in the Philippines (or an average of about one
teacher for 24 barangays), it seems easy to see the gaps between supply and demand.
Only 1% of DepEd’s budget goes to the Bureau of Alternative Learning Systems.

19. The passing rate in the accreditation and equivalency (A&E) test is comparable to
the promotion rate of formal basic education. From 2000-2010, a total of 1,682,326
learners were enrolled in ALS, of which 77% completed the programs. In the same time
frame, a total of 635,987 (65,196 elementary and 570,881 in secondary) took the
Accreditation and Equivalency Exam. The number of passers for elementary was 15,190
(22%) and 134,380 for secondary (26%).

20. ALS suffers from a perception of being inferior to the formal system. Despite its
possible key role in enabling the Philippines to attain MDG 2 by 2015 through a more
flexible and potentially innovative delivery system leveraging the now available
information and communications technologies, it suffers from a perception of being
inferior to its formal counterpart. This perception is common among all stakeholders,
even among DepEd personnel and the learners themselves. ALS is seen as the alternative
to basic education for out-of-school youth, illiterate adults, and the poorest of the poor.
This view, however, is generally held within the education sector of any country or any
culture: that non-formal sector is seen as a poor substitute for formal schooling, in spite
of the fact that it provides an option for the marginalized sectors.

21. The current organizational structure does not cover informal education although
this function is legislated by virtue of EO 356. The existing divisions of BALS
primarily address non-formal educational concerns. The current organization is focused
on accreditation and equivalency and has difficulty in providing access to educational
opportunities with more creative and innovative delivery schemes
TECHNICAL-VOCATIONAL EDUCATION AND TRAINING
22. Growth and development of TVET is contingent on how it is perceived by society
and the manner that it is managed. TVET’s growth is still limited due to society’s
poor perception of it. There is a notion that TVET is for those who cannot enter
university; that it is limited to technical-vocational trade areas, appropriate for males; and
a terminal option with limited upward mobility both in education and in the work place.
TVET’s development is also determined by the way the sub-sector is managed. TVET
suffers, too, when the entire education system is poorly coordinated.

23. TVET’s success hinges on its partnership with industry. TVET’s success depends on
the involvement of the private sector, employers or industry associations. The latest
impact evaluation study (2008) revealed a 55% employment rate for the sub-sector’s
graduates. However, results from BPAP-TWSP shows that training, coupled by
coordination with the private sector, results in higher employment rates of the graduates -
65.6% (TESDA, July 2010, p.49).

24. People’s expectations from the TVET sub-sector remain the same: more training
opportunities and better, stable jobs after that. The first expectation is within
TESDA’s control. Current enrolment stands at 1.9 million but can still grow considering
that TVET can and should attract those who stopped schooling after high school; those
who were not able to finish higher education; and the unemployed as well as the
employed wishing to upgrade their skills competencies. The second expectation is
beyond TESDA’s control and rests solely in the hands of the employers. However,
TESDA can increase employability by ensuring that training programs address industry
requirements as well provide employment facilitation services to TVET graduates, such
as organizing job fairs and internships.

25. TVET needs to encourage innovations. Donors are expected to support the “inclusive
growth” development goal of the new government. It aims to reduce poverty by giving
people sustainable productive employment. TVET becomes a necessary contributor to
this process because unemployed and newcomers to the labor market will need skills.
Four areas will be prioritized – agriculture, health, ICT and tourism – as they have the
potential to hire most the number of people. However, new things or ways must be
explored. There is a need to encourage innovation in the TVET sub-sector. Using
financial incentives, stakeholders can raise innovative proposals addressing the following
criteria: 1) must link TVET graduates to employment; 2) promotes partnerships among
stakeholders; 3) within the priority areas/industries.

HIGHER/TERTIARY EDUCATION
26. Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) are not generating innovative research. The
Philippine higher education system has deteriorated over the years. The programs offered
are less responsive to the emerging knowledge-based economy but more aligned with the
demand of overseas employment especially in the health care services, i.e., nurses,
caregivers, pharmacists, and other health care workers and professionals. Ten years after
CHED launched the National Higher Education Research Agenda (NHERA), an
evaluation made in 2008 revealed that an increase in research studies published in
international journals were concentrated among a small number of leading universities. It
 was also found out that these HEIs are only in six out of the 16 geographic regions, and
the total number of HEIs involved in producing all the international publications
represents only 4.27% of the 2060 HEIs that now operate in the Philippines. Moreover,
CHED’s 2010 record shows that, overall, private HEIs have dominated the Centers of
Development (CODs) and Centers of Excellence (COEs), constituting 62.5% of the total
232. In terms of geographic distribution, the NCR maintains the concentration of CODs
and COEs. The figures reveal the skewed distribution of CODs and COEs with the NCR
as sole center of academic excellence in the country. This contributed to the influx of
students in Metro Manila to gain better higher education and, consequently, left other
regions of the country to HEIs which have less capability to educate students at the
tertiary level.

27. Shortage of qualified and competent academics and teaching staff. The increase in
the number of HEIs in the country does not mean that there has been a considerable
increase in the number of qualified and competent academics and teaching staff. In 2010,
only 10% of faculty members of higher education institutions have doctoral degrees, and
only 36% have some graduate qualification (i.e., Master’s degree or equivalent
specialized training). Hence, more than half (54%) of all those handling higher education
courses only have Bachelor’s degrees. In private HEIs, the faculty profile is dismal: only
8% have doctoral degrees compared to 13% in public HEIs and 37% have graduate
degrees in private as against 34% in public institutions.

28. Poor performance in licensure examinations. One key measurement in determining the
quality is the performance of students in the professional board examinations (PBE)
conducted by the Professional Regulation Commission (PRC). Data show that
performance of graduates in the different licensure and board examinations has been
declining in the last ten years. The overall passing rates are quite low (around 36% on the
average). Private non-sectarian institutions show the poorest results in the professional
board examinations. While some “elite” institutions have consistent passing rates of over
90%, close to 300 HEIs have zero passing rates for some disciplines. However, in the
most recent available study of CHED (2008), it found that there was a big drop in passing
rates even among the top three universities (Ateneo de Manila University, De La Salle
University, University of the Philippines) in the country.

29. Rise of local universities and colleges (LUCs). There has been a considerable rise of
LUCs across the country; a 121% increase in nine (9) years, or an average of six LUCs
established every year. The quality of education in these LUCs is very low. Based on the
monitoring conducted by CHED in 2010, majority of the programs being offered by the
LUCs do not have CHED’s permit or recognition. Only 31 out of the 89 LUCs have
permit from CHED to offer degree programs. Out of the 89 LUCs, 58 have not complied
with or are deficient in the requirements set by CHED. In terms of professional
examinations, although majority of the LUCs with CHED’s subscribed courses have
attained passing marks above the national passing rate, these marks are not even above
50%. This means that more than half of LUC’s graduates who take the professional board
examinations fail. This poses a problem not only to LUCs and other public HEIs but also
to private HEIs.

30. Graduates of higher education lack basic skills. The 2009 World Bank Philippines
Skills Report reveals that university graduates have serious gaps in foundational skills,
 such as problem-solving, critical thinking, initiative, and creativity. To a lesser extent,
there are also gaps in job-specific technical skills.

III. CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES

31. K+12 challenge. The country is confronted with the K+12 challenge. It is aimed at
enhancing the quality of basic education as a matter of urgent policy action by
decongesting and enhancing the current curriculum. Basic education will be undergoing a
major transformation under the present administration’s 10-point agenda to “fix basic
education.” The K+12 program is the centerpiece of this transformation that will
basically expand basic education from 10 to 12 years, with kindergarten now mandatory
prior to entry in Grade 1. It aims to universalize kindergarten, and is expected to
substantially increase the gross enrolment ratio (GER) in early childhood education
(ECE).

32. In this regard, the education system needs to have sufficient classrooms ready at the
opening of school year 2011-2012 to pave the way for the universalization of
kindergarten. DepEd plans to pass on K+12 smoothly into the next administration in
2016 when the first batch of senior students enroll in senior high or Grades 11 to 12.
Through this program, DepEd will have to overhaul the curriculum and solve the
shortages of teachers, classrooms, textbooks, and other problems. While the government
is convinced that this is a necessary and a long-overdue step, notwithstanding its
obstacles mainly in the financing of education, some quarters believe otherwise. Hence,
there is a need for a continuous monitoring and evaluation of the program as it progresses
and casts the net as wide as possible in consulting key sectors as it is the biggest
education reform that will be undertaken.

33. Limiting effect of technical-vocational education and training. It should be no

surprise that in a country where post-elementary education is dominated by the private
sector, training for work overseas has become big business. With an unemployment rate
of 7.4% in 2011, the promise of high-paying jobs overseas for skilled labor with
minimum levels of education, the high cost of education at the tertiary level, and
difficulty in gaining productive and suitable jobs among university/college graduates,
Filipinos have less incentive to pursue higher education. However, as the world moves
away from industrial/factory-based to knowledge-based economy, the country has to
align its human resources and capital towards the production and development of highly-
skilled knowledge engineers and knowledge managers who are capable of producing and
distributing knowledge and information and creating jobs rather than manual and skilled
labor filling up limited jobs in industries, factories, and construction sites.
Communication is increasingly being seen as fundamental to knowledge flows. Changes
in technology are making educated and skilled labour more valuable, and unskilled
labour less so.
Early Childhood Development

34. Coverage is limited. Achieving 100% coverage for Grade 1 entrants with some forms of
organized ECE experience requires huge investments. The present number of ECE
venues and physical facilities can accommodate only half of the more than 7.5 million 3-
5-year-old children who need to have preschool education. In addition, day-care workers
and teachers have to be hired, trained, and equipped with the appropriate teaching guides,
manuals, and materials. Only 0.1% of the education sector budget or around P1.8 billion
is invested annually in ECE.

35. Improving access to marginalized children. Marginalized children, especially those

living in poor households or in far-flung communities and those from indigenous
populations, including Muslim children, need more focused interventions and equal
opportunities. The Day Care Service Program, both center-based and home-based, can be
supported as this is most viable and accessible to 3-4-year-old children in the
communities. The remaining 9,051 barangays without day-care centers can be prioritized
in the provision of access; home-based ECCD, as an alternative delivery mode and not
infrastructure driven, can be supported by equipping the service providers with adequate
skills and competence.

Basic Education

36. BESRA challenge. The MDG2 places great premium on the national implementation of
the Basic Education Sector Reform Agenda (BESRA 2005-2011) as the key to achieving
universal access to primary education by 2015. The potential of BESRA in addressing the
challenges in basic education primarily relies on the institutionalization of the six key
reform thrusts in all the 197 divisions in the 17 regional units of DepED. At present,
various DepEd technical working groups are actively engaged in the national
implementation, monitoring, and evaluation of the KRTs.

37. Continuity of School-Based Management (SBM) and Teacher Education and

Development (TED). SBM decentralizes the responsibility and accountability of basic
education to internal and external stakeholders in three major systems, namely: school
accountability, quality management, and governance structure. Teacher Education and
Development operationalizes competency-based systems for continuous professional
development inclusive of standards, hiring, deployment, performance, promotion, and
continuous training. It is imperative that these programs are patronized and sustained by
key leaders to be fully realized. Both are key elements of BESRA.

38. Supporting Quality Assurance and Accountability and Learning Support (QAALS).
The QAALS, together with SBM, sums up the quality management system on quality
planning, assurance, and control. The learning support systems include work on:
- National Achievement Framework to improve the operation of the National
Achievement Test
- the Mother Tongue-Based Multilingual Education Program that will change the
mediums or languages of instruction from the present bilingual system (Filipino and
English) to a trilingual system – mother tongue, Filipino, and English;
 - the Alternative Delivery Modes for large classes, students at risk of dropping out and
students in underserved depressed areas aim to mitigate the drop-out problem.

Alternative Learning System

39. ALS needs are very basic. These include the provision of physical facilities for BALS
for visibility, recognition, and identity (branding) and capacity building for Instructional
Designers who are currently not adequately trained and lack the resources to produce
high-quality instructional materials. Recruiting and training of instructional designers and
development of pedagogical materials and interactive instructional tools remain a
challenge to encourage adult learners to study and increase local demand and subscription
to ALS services.

Technical-Vocational Education and Training

40. TESDA needs institutional strengthening. TESDA needs to oversee all the private
providers of TVET training and regulate the quality of offerings for the 1.9 million
enrolled in these institutions. But this enrollment can still grow considering that TVET
can and should attract those who stopped schooling after high school; those who were not
able to finish higher education; the unemployed as well as employed wishing to upgrade
their skills competencies. It needs support to develop the Philippine National
Qualifications Framework, which will make transitions between higher education and
TVET smoother. TESDA can also increase employability by ensuring that training
programs address industry requirements as well as provide facilitation services to TVET
graduates such as organizing job fairs and internships. This requires a strong institutional
mechanism in partnership with industry.

Higher Education

41. Modernizing HEIs The main priorities for restructuring and modernizing higher
education for this programming period are:
i) Development and implementation of the national qualifications system and
quality assurance in higher education;
ii) Improvement of university management; and,
iii) Improvement of correlation with the labor market and knowledge-based society
through better study programs.

42. Therefore, the support and assistance for developing qualifications and tools for quality
assurance, evaluation, and accreditation (e.g. methodologies, procedures, standards,
benchmarks), studies and surveys envisaged at system level will require a
complementation of support from policy makers as well as political and education leaders
for their effective transposition at higher education institutions level (e.g. development of
internal standards, methodologies, and procedures for quality assurance and management;
adaptation of study programs to the National Qualification Framework in higher
education, including curriculum development with respect to it, etc.). The actions funded
under this area will also aim to expand learning opportunities (e.g., encouraging open
distance learning, mechanisms for increasing access to higher education for vulnerable
 groups, improved library and scientific documentation tools and access to it) and to
increase interaction of universities with business community and research.

IV. RECOMMENDATION FOR USAID SUPPORT

43. Contribute and support in the strategic reform program of the Philippine educational
system through policy research and development. The reason the EDCOM-created
National Coordinating Council for Education (NCCE) never got off the ground was
because by making CHED, DepEd, and TESDA equal partners in education, the NCCE
failed to take into account the hierarchical nature of Philippine government entities. The
tri-focalization of education which seemed like a good idea at the time of EDCOM may
have outlived its usefulness. There is a need to conduct a comprehensive assessment on
the benefits and shortcomings brought about by the trifocalization of education in 1994.
The Office of the Presidential Assistant for Education (OPAE) created under EO 632 that
was tasked to coordinate the work of DepEd, TESDA, and CHED was short lived given
the nature and character of its creation.

44. Support in upgrading human resources and capital by enhancing the knowledge
distribution power of the economy through student scholarship and faculty development
programs. Essentially, public research laboratories and institutes of higher education
carry out key functions in the knowledge-based economy, including knowledge
production, management, transmission, and transfer. However, HEIs fail to produce
graduates with: i) adequate skills; and, ii) suitable degrees that complement to national
development objectives because of historical and persistent market failures such as the
well-known obsession for diplomas.

45. The country’s science system also faces the challenge of reconciling its traditional
functions of producing new knowledge through basic research and educating new
generations of scientists and engineers with its newer role of collaborating with industry
in the transfer of knowledge and technology. Research institutes and academia are de-
linked or have weak linkages with key industrial partners for the purposes of research,
innovations, and finance. Scholarships and faculty development programs are limited and
those which are available are less inclined towards research and development thrust of
the country. Given this, there is a need to provide long-term scholarships, allocation of
soft loans, and provision of other forms of incentives and financial assistance to HEI
students that will ensure high quality education and technical expertise to deserving
students. There is a need to produce more computer scientists, engineers, mathematicians,
geographers, chemists and physicists, among others.

46. Sustained program in building capacities of leaders. The most important in the
education reform agenda is leadership - political leaders as well as our educational
leaders - who must confront the educational problems. Education stakeholders recognize
the need for improved sector-wide planning to address key deficiencies across the
education sector.
47. Programmatic assistance to education sub-sectors.
- There is a need to strengthen the early childhood education as the foundation of life
learning system of children.
- Because the needs are many, basic education support can be in any of the areas,
ranging from infrastructure, classroom furniture, professional development, and any
of BESRA’s KRTs.
- Support to the Alternative Learning System requires enhancement as it addresses the
basic learning needs of the various marginalized learners who have been deprived of
access to basic education.
- Technical and vocational education has to improve its efficiency and effectiveness to
match the demand for critical skills and high-level professions, tighten the industry-
academe links and better dissemination of labor market information, emphasize
education and training in generic competencies such as trainability, work ethic, ICT
literacy, critical thinking, problem solving, and communications skills.
- Universities and colleges have to be developed as centers of research and
development whose outputs serve the needs and demands of the industry which, in
turn, is responsible for producing better goods and services and absorbing the
qualified graduates of tertiary education.