School begins tomorrow; the more fortunate can afford a nine-day countdown. Soon, the news will report on even more shortages and excesses: too few classrooms, too many students. Then cue the pundits who decry politics and the academics who argue demographics. Finally, there will be the all too familiar picture of that education minister with his tail between his legs, chided by his queen for not doing enough, well enough. Often, this is the picture painted in the broadsheets and flashed on our screens. But for all they’re worth, they fail to describe the real problems to which Gian Dapul’s math teacher once said, “there is always a solution” to.

I have been invited to write here in Filipino Voices for quite some time now. I am in awe of my colleagues’ abilities to write on and on about the issues that matter to them and thus, I told Nick, I would hold off until the school year starts. As an educator, social scientist and aspiring student of public policy, I rather run my mouth on something that I not only know of, but matters to me personally. So in inviting everyone to think about the issues in Philippine education, let me start with a story.

The week just before classes is often the busiest for any teacher. Depending on where you are, those days are generally called “Pre-Opening Days”, a placid, unimaginative name that belies the painful truth that vacation time is over. We teachers are bombarded with meetings, plannings and the occasional guest speaker who dares to inspire. Yet this year, what caught most of our attention was a statistic during an otherwise bland presentation by the administration.

I teach in a government run school, though outside the Department of Education. We are a school for the gifted and all our students are government scholars. This honor is granted through a rigorous testing phase that includes two written tests three months apart (you take the second only if you pass the first), and a face-to-face interview. Considering the heavily standardized nature of the test, the school is able to collate a lot of information on our test-takers so that by the time the freshman batch is selected, we have a clear picture of who they are. And every year, there is a trend that only amplifies.

The number of private school students admitted into the system has increased steadily versus the number of those coming from the public education system. For the past five or six years now, the gap has only widened. Currently, it is almost 75% to 25%. Eligibility for admission is determined solely on a ranking of the test scores, and so far the private schools have had the wider share. Is our admissions system or even the test flawed? I haven’t dealt with that office enough to say. However, there are two other things to note.

The population of Ateneans, La Sallites, Claretians, Povedans and Assumptionistas, among others, in our school has ballooned over the past three years – just around the same time that an increasing number of college graduates from those schools end up as call center agents, marketing personnel or (gasp) high school teachers. I often ask them why they chose to leave the comfort of their schools for our humble accomodations. The standard answer, as we would expect, is that it wasn’t their choice. The underlying reasons are trickier to dig out. However, more and more have increasingly confided that the tuition is simply getting too expensive. And this from a student who gave me a Lacoste shirt for Christmas.

But even more surprising is what I’ve learned from those who came from the public schools. They could have actually been more, they would tell me, but there were some who didn’t enrol. That surprised me. Why would they pass on a scholarship that includes monthly stipends and free dormitory residence? Later we discovered that a significant number of public school students who pass our school don’t enrol because they are encouraged not to. Or worse, their top students are discouraged (or at least not encouraged) from taking our entrance test. The reason for that was never made explicit, but looking at a system that requires high test scores to secure budget allocations, keeping your top performing students in your school (however inadequate for the gifted child) only improves your bottomline.

After that sobering presentation, my friends and I went out for lunch. My buddies in school are actually English teachers (since I don’t have to work with them) and often we would just shoot the breeze about pop culture (arguing about what should be pop culture), history, politics, and work. An interesting point was raised during one faculty meeting about the Filipino curriculum. The Filipino teachers made a proud and powerful point that our students receive an exceptional, college-level course (just as all courses in our school are, actually) and that we must defend it from moves by the DepEd to overhaul the Filipino curriculum.

As it is, the standard DepEd curriculum is two years grammar, one year of Noli Me Tangere and their last year with El Filibusterismo. Now, there is a move to transform it: first year is grammar, second year is Philippine and African Lit, third year is Asian lit and fourth year is World lit. All in Filipino. My buddies whispered to me, “Martin, they’re making Filipino into English.” Lost in translation, much?

Specifically, that proposed change in the Filipino curriculum is the current curriculum for English. So what will happen to English now? Apparently, there will be greater emphasis on English literacy through more grammar courses. However, are we ready for what that means?

The issue of language education is a powerful, contentious, political issue that is at home here in Filipino Voices. For sure, a lot here have ideas as to why this policy is even pursued and what kind of forces our policymakers kowtow to. I am sure that there can be so many ways to slice the issue, but just let me leave this point with this thought: there are two components to literacy – fluency and proficiency.

Fluency is one’s mastery over the technical aspects of the language; you can speak and write it well. Proficiency is a matter of both personality and practice; one must confidently express ideas in that language. Just looking at it pragmatically, is this a policy we can pursue? Can we all really teach our kids to be fluent and proficient? Are we going for more ESU awards or more BPO investments? All I know is that my English teacher buddies – whose jobs depend on people speaking English – are not happy with any English First Policy. Lunch with them is always good.

Upon returning, we proceeded to the auditorium with the rest of the faculty to discuss the hot button issue of the year. Suffice to say, questions have been raised about failing our students and whether the school should begin offering remedial classes to help those who fail pick themselves up. See, when you get a 5.00 in this school, you are out with no questions asked. And when you’re about to graduate, that means you don’t. Lately, that policy has been put to question.

A large faction of the faculty argues that there should be no question at all. We can’t sacrifice our standards; our quality. We do enough to give our students chances to make up and it is their fault if they don’t make it. True enough. This view is difficult to contest in public. Often, the response from the administration is your usual bureaucratic speak – “We’ll forward your concerns to the right people.” But I was fortunate to catch one administrator during a more quiet moment. She’s one of the good ones and more of a mother to me. So, as a curious son, I asked her what she felt.

Her thought was simple: These students who make it to our school were valedictorians, salutatorians and at the least honor students when they were in grade school. And now that they’re with us, they’re about to drop out. We may do enough to help them get back up when they fail, but in the beginning do we do enough to help them achieve?

In thinking about Philippine education, I would like to leave us with that question. Are we helping our students achieve?

It is too easy to say that we don’t whenever we look at our headlines. The start of the school year is all about shortcomings and excesses: chairs, books, teachers; students, corruption and education policies done not in the long-term, but for political exigency. Are we teaching our students the right thing for them to be competitive? Language aside, are we teaching them enough math and science to participate in the knowledge economy? Are they knowledgeable enough of civics and history to become thoughtful, empowered and active citizens? With all our focus on shortcomings and excesses, let’s start with something that’s just about right: that is to admit that there is so much work left to be done and we owe it to our kids to get started.

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