MANIFESTO 1
Improperly Discarded Face Mask Finds Its Way On The Shores Of Manila
Bay
by Department of Environment and Natural Resources
The public health crisis brought about by COVID-19 has added a new item
on the types of waste that end up in Manila Bay: facemasks!
As with cigarette butts—the single most collected item on the world’s
beaches according to Ocean Conservancy—and disposable plastics, discarded medical
facemasks are slowly becoming a common sighting in the waters of Manila Bay,
posing an added danger to the people who rely on its aquatic resources for a living.
To further prevent the increase of COVID-19 cases in the country, DENR-NCR is
urging everyone to observe proper handling and responsible waste disposal of every
single-used Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) as a must practice for our
battle against COVID-19.
The DENR also advised that all must observe proper solid waste
management at home, as it is one of the top priority programs of the department. In
disposing of used face masks, face shields, gloves, and gowns, make sure to have
them separated to other solid waste. Experts suggest that it is possible to disinfect
disposable PPEs through soaking them first on a mixture solution of 1 tbsp bleach
and 1.5-liter of clean water for 30 minutes, before having them placed on a separate
plastic sealed bag for at least 72 hours before garbage collection and have it labeled
as `biomedical waste` or `infectious waste’.
As we continue to wear disposable PPEs such as face masks to protect
ourselves, let us all be aware that PPEs if improperly disposed can expose other
people to infection. Please dispose these properly and help in the cleanup,
rehabilitation, and protection of Manila Bay and its tributaries. Better yet, please
consider using washable facemasks instead.
Questions:
1. What is the issue taken up in this article?
2. What is the writer’s claim or thesis on the issue?
3. What are the evidences that support the reason/s?
4. Do you find this article convincing? Why or why not?
MANIFESTO 2
The “No Assignment Policy” is No Good
Sorsogon Representative Evelina Escudero’s House Bill No. 3611 and Quezon
City Representative Alfred Vargas’ HB No. 3883, both seeking for the removal of
homework assignments as a requirement to students, have been one of the most
burning issues these days. Students, teachers, parents and even some politicians
have already joined the bandwagon and expound their takes on the issue, yet, no
effort has been made to explore and weigh the pros and cons then eventually
formulate provisions so that all those who are for and against the bill may meet
halfway. DepEd Secretary Leonor Briones also expressed her support for the bill,
saying that it shall help the students to find balance between personal and academic
growth.
The arguments presented for this bill have evidently taken into account the
welfare of students, parents and teachers. Most students and parents concur that
prohibiting teacher from giving no homework assignments shall indeed be beneficial
to most Filipinos, as it will lessen the burden of students and will give them more
time to bond with their families socially. Furthermore, it can also help the parents to
downsize their expenses from the purchase of needed materials to complete projects
that students are expected to finish at home. Teachers, on the other hand, no longer
have to spend time in grading homework assignments and can spend more time in
preparing their everyday lessons and other paper works.
It may be true that the removal of homework, assignments and projects is the
answer to the problem of most students, but we also have to consider its effects in
the long run. Homework has been a vital part of education because it allows
application of the lessons learned inside the classroom and gives practice in
developing better studying habits and time management. And far from preventing
families from bonding, assignments encourage parents to become more involved in
their children’s educational activities. The concern for the welfare of the students is
appropriate; however, this bill may risk the students’ problem solving and creative
thinking skills. Consequently, they will be less prepared for higher education and the
workforce.
Furthermore, while this bill seeks to deliver more quality time for families to
bond, it may have overlooked a significant consideration – reality is often distant
from expectations. Rather than spending time with their families, there is a great
tendency that students will spend their time with their gadgets instead – browsing
the internet and playing mobile games. They will be wasting too much time which
could have been spent for improving educational content, or as expected by this bill
to be spent with their families.
The arguments presented shall be given careful consideration, but rather than
encouraging the implementation of the no-homework policy, our Department of
Education shall exert an effort for the review and modification of the existing policies
pertaining to home works. Homework has an advantageous educational objective; it
isn’t just so students can carry unnecessary physical and financial burden. These
goals can be achieved, however, without resorting to the entire banning of homework
assignments and by securing the readiness of the youth to take on the more
competitive challenges out the four corners of the school.
Questions:
1. What is the issue taken up in this article?
2. What are the writer’s arguments on the issue?
3. What are the reasons presented by the author in coming up with such arguments?
4. Did the author address the side or arguments of those opposed to his views?
5. Do you find this article convincing? Why or why not?

MANIFESTO 3
WHY BUSINESS SHOULD CARE ABOUT K-12
Chito B. Salazar
On May 15, 2013, President Aquino signed into law Republic Act No. 10533
or the Enhanced Basic Education Act of 2013. “Enhanced” is hardly the word as RA
10533, more commonly known as the K-to-12 Law, is arguably the most sweeping
and largest-scale reform of the Philippine education system since World War II.
The earlier signed Universal Kindergarten Law institutionalized compulsory
kindergarten and the K-to-12 Law increased the number of years of basic education
from 10 to 12, adding two more years to high school. These two laws added three
mandatory years of schooling before college—kindergarten plus Grades 11 and 12—
to the basic education of more than 20 million Filipino youth and children. On the
other hand, these two laws gave free access to these youth and children to much-
needed three additional years of schooling, an educational opportunity most of them
However, in recent months, certain lawmakers have threatened to repeal,
suspend, or postpone the K-to-12 Law. These threats were driven by first,
accusations that the Department of Education is not logistically ready to handle the
additional years (curriculum not yet set, not enough teachers and classrooms, etc.),
and second, the large number of college teachers to be displaced starting in 2016,
when there will be no entering freshmen due to the additional high school years.
Undeniably, there are obstacles that need to be hurdled and impacts that need to be
mitigated. However, these are not reason enough to even postpone a program that
seeks to benefit millions upon millions of our youth.
But why should the business community care about the K-to-12 Law? From
a purely self-interested perspective, it should care because the sustainable success of
our industries depends on how good our people are and will continue to be in the
future. This, in turn, is mostly dependent on the quality of our education system.
And just how good is our education system?
According to a 2010 survey conducted by the Philippine Management
Association of the Philippines, the top six deficiencies of companies’ new hires were
all general competencies, such as oral and written communications and critical
thinking. A general aptitude test administered by Phinma tertiary institutions to its
freshmen, mostly graduates of public schools, found that only 3 percent were ready
for college. A deeper analysis of the results showed that most were entering college
with only Grade IV to V reading and math competencies. The overall mean
percentage score of fourth year high school students in DepEd’s 2011-2012 National
Achievement Tests was 48.9, when the goal was a score of 75. The scores were
46.37 and 40.53 for mathematics and science, respectively. These are all evidences
of a weak basic education system.
There are key reasons for such low quality: the insufficient amount of public
resources invested in education, resulting in an inadequate provision facilities such as
classrooms, textbooks and toilets; not enough quality teachers or quality teacher
training opportunities; and the short, 10-year basic education cycle.
Our children are expected to learn the same competencies as every other
child in the world, but with not enough classrooms, from not enough quality teachers,
and in much less time. Even if we had good teachers armed with the best facilities,
the shorter basic education cycle would put our students at a disadvantage vis-à-vis
those of other countries. Others would simply have more time to learn what needed
to be learned in grade school and high school.
Consequently, to fix our system, we must address all these areas—
resources, teacher quality, and the basic education cycle—simultaneously.
So if companies are concerned about the quality of their human resources,
they must care about our country having the best possible basic education system.
This requires a 12-year cycle; thus, they must care about the fate of the K-to-12 Law.
It goes beyond just developing a pool of qualified employees. The business sector
should also care, for as a good corporate citizen, it should care about the welfare of
our people and our society.
Basic education is exactly that basic. It’s meant to provide our people with
the competencies, knowledge, and attitudes needed to live a productive and dignified
life. A good, solid education is likewise the best way for many of our people to rise
out of poverty. So whether our high school graduates choose to go to college, pursue
a job immediately after, or become actors, athletes, poets, carpenters, or plumbers,
they need the skills this education level provides. They need quality basic education.
We are fortunate that the Aquino administration, through the leadership of
Education Secretary Armin Luistro, has done much to improve education. It has
addressed resource deficiencies, hired more and better teachers, and successfully
worked for the K-to-12 Law.
The business sector must now do its part by throwing its support behind the
law and helping ensure its implementation. After all, it is to its own interests, as
business and as a citizen, to see the law work, for quality education is everyone’s
business.
Questions:
1. What is the issue taken up in this article?
2. What is the writer’s claim or thesis on the issue?
3. What are the evidences that support the reason/s?
4. Do you find this article convincing? Why or why not?
 Realistically, I know that when parents are shopping for CDs for their children and
they see warning labels, they turn away. Consequently, my sales are affected.
Decreased sales in my shop don’t only affect me; they affect the artists, my
employees, and their children. In my opinion, the placement of warning labels on CDs
is not only unnecessary, it is criminal!
MANIFESTO 4
When Music Offends
Questions:
Anonymous
1. What is the issue taken up in this article?
2. What is the writer’s claim or thesis on the issue?
Can you imagine going through the rest of your life being told what you can 3. What are the evidences that support the reason/s?
and cannot say? Music artists experience this type of anguish every time a Parental 4. Do you find this article convincing? Why or why not?
Advisory: Explicit Lyrics warning label is placed on one of their CDs. However, many
parents feel that these labels help them figure out which CDs their children should
listen to. As the proprietor of a music store, I have an extremely difficult decision to
make. Should the CDs sold in my store that may be considered offensive carry any
type of warning labels? The bottom line is that, like any other entrepreneur, I am in
the business of making money. Thus, I feel that it is in my best interest to keep
warning labels off of any CDs distributed in my shop.

First of all, many music artists are against the placement of warning labels
on any of their CDs. They feel that these labels will negatively affect album sales
because their work will essentially be marked as offensive or dangerous. In my
position, it is pertinent to maintain a good rapport with the artists. When popular
musicians such as Kanye West or Maroon 5 make in-store appearances at my shop,
my sales increase drastically! If these artists are upset with me over the fact that I
opted to place warning labels on their CDs, our business relationships will likely be
ruined. Therefore, my sales will diminish.

In 1984 a group of enraged parents and wives of politicians created the

Parents Music Resource Center (PMRC). This organization was responsible for
creating the Parental Advisory: Explicit Lyrics label. Political wife and PMRC member
Tipper Gore stated that the label was created in order to alert the public of “the
growing trend in music toward lyrics that are sexually explicit, excessively violent, or
glorify the use of alcohol and drugs.” However, as a parent, is it not your job to
research the music that your children are listening to before giving permission for
them to purchase it? Parents need to take the responsibility for what their children
are listening to instead of placing the onus on record store owners such as myself. If
parents research what their children are interested in listening to, then there
shouldn’t be a need for warning labels.

Regardless of your opinion on the controversial lyrics found on certain CDs,

the first amendment of the Bill of Rights gives every American citizen the freedom to
speak their mind. But do we really have the freedom of speech when what we say is
censored or labeled as dangerous? Warning labels inhibit the artists’ voices from
being heard, thus negating their freedom of speech. I am a music store owner for a
living but I am an American citizen first, and I strongly believe in upholding the laws
set forth by the U.S. Constitution. If there are penalties for breaking any other laws
then it should not be OK to take away one’s freedom of speech by placing warning
labels on their works of art.