(Excerpted from The Journal of The Jester-in-Exile and adapted for this blog.)

Here on Filipino Voices, our new colleague blackshama has posted two interesting articles: What’s really wrong with Philippine Science? and What is terribly wrong with the University of the Philippines?, in which he brings to the table a couple of timely and valuable discussions.

(I’m rather miffed at blackshama for not including the links that his posts refer to, but I’m sure that this, this, and this just might be among articles he was talking about.)

From his posts I have now a brainwave… and I’m going to go ahead and attempt a macro-level proposal towards the improvement of the Philippine educational system.

Here we go.

My belief is that the goal of education, insofar as the State is concerned, is “to foster patriotism and nationalism, accelerate social progress, and promote total human liberation and development” among the citizens of the Republic, as Article II, section 17 of the Constitution provides. In line with these concepts, I would suggest that the measure of this would be whether or not the educational system has resulted in a citizen being able to reach his full potential and become a fully functional member of society.

That said, here would be the goals of each level of education in the public school system:

Primary school (grades 1 to 6, ages 6 to 12): functional literacy; successfully completing primary school will imply that the citizen has the ability to read, write, perform basic “household” math, and an understanding of his rights, privileges, and responsibility as a member of Filipino society

Middle school (grades 7 and 8, ages 12 to 14): preparation for society at large; successfully completing middle school will imply that the citizen been provided basic “survival” skills and training, focused on instilling a work ethic

Secondary school (years 1 to 4, ages 14 to 18): readiness for adulthood responsibilities; successfully completing secondary school will provide the citizen skills to be qualify for entry-level position, subject to the competency needs of the company in question

Let’s leave tertiary education for the moment.

A direct effect of such a framework is to provide the citizen skills that are the minimum for entry-level positions, whether blue- or white-collar. To put it bluntly, a high school graduate will already have the skills to be ready to apply to a machine shop, an electronics factory, a call center, a department store sales counter, and whatnot… where it seems that the vast majority of companies require at minimum some college courses. In this way, the citizen will already have the capability to fend for himself with means that is already sustainable.

Consider the long-term effect of having no citizen need spend for tuition to reach a level of education that provides competency for an entry-level job. I am of the belief that this will end up being a good thing overall in terms of economics and political engagement, in the long run.

To be able to reach this level, I would propose that we make the following changes:

Semestral system: from primary school upwards, subjects and curricula are designed for a four-and-a-half month semester, instead of budgeting ten months; with such an approach subject matter coverage can be further granularized and remedial subjects and catch-up mechanisms will be easier and more immediate to deploy

School year: the school year begins in September, to minimize days missed due to inclement weather, and the first semester lasts up to February; after a two-week break, the second semester starts in March and ends in mid-June; remedial and off-academic year extra-credit classes can be provided during the school break of June to mid-August

Credit-type curricula: students, especially in middle school and high school, will be required to complete a set number of credits of required courses, and will have a number of credits available to them for selection as electives

Extra-credit classes: aside from the minimum level subjects, extra-credit subjects can be provided to students who are aiming for college degrees or careers; for instance, extra-credit subjects like Advanced Chemistry and Advanced Biology (over and above the minimum requirement Chemistry and Biology) could be useful for those going into health-related courses and careers, and similar

College-credit classes: high schools could also offer college-credit classes; those who take it will no longer need to be required to take the general education subjects in college that contain the same subject matter, if any

Practical classes: from middle school upwards, required courses should provide for basic, employment-related practical skills, such as driving, shop class, home economics and whatnot; further advantages to this would be to inculcate important concepts like abiding with traffic rules and regulations, awareness of laws that will be of impact after graduation, a work ethic, and similar

Industry-community-academic linkage: something that may result in the eventual slowdown of migration away from their provinces of origin, by allowing primary, middle, and secondary schools to tailor their part of their curricula to satisfy the economic and labor needs of their community and industries, there will need not be too much of the general mass migration of the populace towards urban centers; home-grown talent will then become the key to home-grown development

I would suppose that to do all this would also require major changes in the way we view economic and social development, as well as in the prioritization of social services. Perhaps there is merit in the idea of driving education directly to the immediate needs of grassroots communities; with such a concept, I would suppose that there would be a greater need to upgrade tertiary education in the provincial areas.

This now brings me to talking about state colleges and universities, of which the University of the Philippines is supposed to be the flagship, and of state-sponsored scholarships and grants. In a previous post on my personal blog called Service Contracts, I touched quite a bit on how I perceive the operational concept of these schools and scholarships should be in terms of admission vis-a-vis subsidy.

This time, let’s talk about what I would think should be included among the revamps in the state tertiary education system, and perhaps the tertiary education system at large:

Reduction of required general education courses: Mastery of these GE subjects — Algebra, Trigonometry, Calculus, English, and whatnot — should already have been accomplished at the secondary school level. With such a reduction of time spent on these basic subjects that should have already been mastered at the secondary school level, more time can be spent on research, highly-specialized training, and whatnot.

(I’ve given quite a bit of thought on this idea, ever since I saw that Boy Meets World episode entitled Fraternity Row where Shawn audits a college course, turns in a paper that gets an F, and then Mr. Feeny tells him that, essentially, high school provides the basics for college. Here I am therefore running with that statement, saying that university education should no longer cover these basics.)

Required courses and electives: To foster what is called interdisciplinarity and a holistic system of learning, I would propose that baccalaureate programs determine their core courses and encourage students to take electives. I would like to think that engineering students would benefit from taking a number of units of theater arts, as a means of broadening their horizons, as an example of that.

Greater emphasis on publication: In Flor Lacanilao’s speech to the UP Diliman Bio graduates last year, the noted scientist lamented the dearth of publication of research in the country, something I likewise believe to be contributory to the weak growth of our science education system, and perhaps even of other fields of study. With that, I would propose that the concept of “non-thesis” courses be scrapped entirely, as a one of the methods of returning quality back to the tertiary education system.

Industry-community-academic linkage: Already mentioned above, yes, but I would propose that the linkage at the tertiary level should be of even a higher degree; perhaps it cannot be true for all disciplines, but the linkage will very likely result in research being translated into useful technology, something that we need terribly in our country right now.

Why don’t we discuss practical frameworks? Speaking of practical frameworks, let me leave you with an anecdote from a long time ago that amused the heck out of me:

Leftist female sorta-kinda colleague (LFSC): We should work to make the Philippine educational system scientific, nationalist, and mass-based. This is part of the struggle.
The jester-in-exile (JEM): Okay, cool. How do we execute that?
LFSC: Well, part of our struggle is towards making our educational system scientific, nationalist, and mass-based.
JEM: Yes, but how? Do you plan six primary school grades, or do you want seven? Do you want a middle-school between elementary and high school? Will you make vocational subjects at the elementary and high school levels mandatory or elective, or will you encourage technical schools over university education? Stuff like that. What is the structure you want in place if your revolution wins?
LFSC: Simple — the educational system will be scientific, nationalist, and mass-based.
JEM: And the framework will be how?
LFSC: A scientific, nationalist, and mass-based educational system.
JEM: Okay. That was enlightening.

Shall we begin to brainstorm on concepts, then?

Fatal error: Call to undefined function p75HasVideo() in /homepages/39/d169067170/htdocs/voices/wp-content/themes/NewFV/single-default.php on line 57