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.
What does that say about the public education system, then? More to the point, what are the elite science high schools doing to help those other high schools?
Seriously, when I started reading Schola Brevis, that was the question I thought was going to be answered. Instead, I come across this:
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.
Basically a whine about how public schools try to keep their top performers from disappearing into the elite school system. And intrinsic to that whine is the implication that keeping students in those other public schools is to deprive those students of the best education possible. And intrinsic to that implication is the belief that those other high schools cannot be as good for a kid as the elite schools are.
Come ON.
There is no such thing as a ‘bottomline’ in a public school. It’s a non-profit, isn’t it? So, when schools fight tooth and nail for money, it’s not so the school can get rich – its so that the thousands who go there can have the basic things that elite science high schools take for granted.
The argument can be made, of course, that the public schools are holding one gifted student back. Fine. But think about it from another angle: holding one gifted student back benefits a thousand others (assuming first of all, that putting a student in one of those elite schools is actually better for that kid’s future – a non sequitur if you ask me – or that keeping one student back actually affects budget allocations). Besides, what would you have the ‘other’ public schools do? Give ‘em all up to elite schools? If, as Schola Brevis maintains, budget allocations are tied to performance, where would that leave the ‘other’ public schools?
I think the problem here is that too many people are enamored with the idea of elite public schools, and too many people – teachers included – take ‘other’ public schools for granted; maybe even hold them in contempt. It’s easy to disguise that contempt as concern for the welfare of individual students. But as even these elite high schools are still part of government, perhaps there can be a little more sensitivity to the plight of other, less privileged, public schools.
And if the concern for the welfare of gifted individuals is authentic – that is to say, not just a consequence of a mind-set that is biased against the ability of other public high schools to produce top-caliber graduates – then perhaps these elite public high schools can actually do something to ensure that those other public schools aren’t as worthless as people say or imply they are.
For instance, is it not possible for elite public schools to arrange to have their teachers do a one-month (or more) tour of duty in those other high schools, so that those other kids can have the benefit of powerpoint presentations and modern teaching techniques?
In exchange, those other public schools can send their teachers for a one-month (or more) tour of duty in those elite high schools where they can be exposed to what really excellent and motivated students can do, and how other teachers handle their elite classes.
But reading Schola Brevis, I fear that such an arrangement may not be received with favor.
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.
Defend? The wisdom of the DepEd’s policies is a question that is beyond me. But what makes me worry is the insular thinking that is implicit in the use of that word – defend. Apparently, the wider public education system is seen as an enemy. From that, I imagine it’ll be very easy to start forgetting that elite public schools are still part of the public education system. I guess when you’re getting Ateneans and Lasallians and what-not, it’s easy to think that you’re a private school too.
Popularity: 1% [?]
I think the private schools like Ateneo, La Salle, Assumption and ICA (at the Elementary and High School level) should be abolished and everyone sent to public schools. In that way, those who are in a position to complain (middle class parents) about quality can do so on behalf of those who are unable to. I’m still in favor of Secondary Schools for the gifted but they should only take from the ranks of public schools. Tertiary education can (and should ) have room for market competition.
Abolish private schools.
Nice brainwave there, cvj.
The private sector is a very resilient beast. You do that and all those elitist people you seem to hate will put up private tutoring centres to supplement what will probably ALWAYS be a generally substandard system. So people who could afford it will be warming precious seats in the public system AND paying money to attend the review/tutoring centres that then proliferate.
Double whammy kung baga.
You will be forcing rich people into a public system already struggling to serve its traditional clients. And here’s another scenario: rich people will probably start bribing public school officials to report their kids as present everyday even if they are not (because they are attending a private facility in parallel).
So what do we get out of this brainwave of yours? Phantom students in the public system and a new private industry to further increase commerce and cash flow in the world of beautiful people that you so revile.
Score so far: Pinoy Elite 1, Populist schmoes ZERO.
Tough luck!
Benign0, i’m sure the rich families will try to do that. They can also resort to home schooling or send their kids to International Schools (as is happening in Malaysia), but not all can afford to. The rest of the parents will have to focus on trying to improve the public school system.
Moreover, abolishing breeding grounds for elitism is, in itself, a worthwhile goal for our Society.
cvj,
People send their kids to private schools for a reason.
Clue: it’s not because they can afford it. In fact many of them hardly can afford those horrendous tuition fees, but they send their children there anyway.
Is it the private schools’ fault that they can afford to hire better academicians? Is it the private schools’ fault that they can provide better facilities? Is it the private schools’ fault that they have better curricula?
“Abolishing breeding grounds for elitism” — jeesh. You’re still stuck in the “rich people are evil” paradigm. One reason why many people don’t ever get rich.
Jon, that sort of dynamic where those who can afford to send their kids to private schools while those who have no choice content themselves with public school quality is not good for the educational system as a whole. I’ll try to explain it more fully later.
Just to be clear:
rich = good
elitism = bad
OK?
In an article I wrote about Philippine cinema way way back, I made the following observation regarding the primitive psychology behind hatred of rich people:
If we are quick to label as “elitists” people who appreciate the elegant beauty of the thinking processes that enable people to create and accumulate wealth then by all means, count me in as one of these “elitists”.
I’ll take elitism over populism any time. There’s a lot to be learned from the rich and not much to be learned from the poor other than a sobering realisation of how lucky we are to be able to think the way we do and self-rely ourselves out of any rut.
Such is the self-perpetuating mindset of the chronically poor.
Maybe somebody ought to tell them that buying lotto tickets is NOT an investment strategy. :D
Benign0, i don’t consider someone who, in your words…
…to be an elitist. Rather, i consider as an elitist someone who, in your words, believes that:
I’ve previously explained what i consider the elitist mindset here. I also observe that the ‘elite’ schools are responsible for inculcating such a mindset.
cvj,
And what dynamic do you expect when you abolish all the private schools?
When you do that, there will cease to be any real opportunities for intelligent academicians to find a real, paying job within the country. They will all go abroad, knowing that the government will never ever pay them the kind of pay grades they get on those darned schools that “breed elitism”.
Of course, just so it’s clear, I should reveal here that I am a product of those “elitist” systems — I finished elementary in Don Bosco, highschool in PSHS Diliman and college in DLSU. But I come from a middle class family who (yeah I’m recycling my lines) could hardly afford the education (at least the private part of it) that was given me.
Being able to enter PSHS was a big relief for their finances; I entered DLSU with a full scholarship as well (otherwise it wouldn’t have happened) although I lost it by the time I entered my third year. Fortunately by that time my mother’s pay grade has progressed enough to afford it — after 6 years of free schooling (she wasn’t eligible to avail of an employee’s benefit scholarship for their children).
My mother’s salary is another story. She was employed at DLSU, one of the highest paying universities in Manila, and I don’t think she would be able to afford my and my sisters’ schooling if not for her position there (she was with UST for 13 years before being “pirated” while taking her PhD, also with a scholarship grant).
The DLSU and Ateneo school systems have, at least in the past 8 years, organized programs to help enrich public school system teachers’ skills every summer. Teachers from around the country are go to La Salle or Ateneo campuses around the country to receive Masters/PhD units. My mother is one of those who teach education subjects for these public school teachers.
And so I think it’s quite unfair that it would be so easy for you to point an accusatory finger at these institutions. They’re doing what they can to help the public school system. Neither is it fair that you point an accusatory finger at parents who send their children to private schools because they work very, very hard to afford it.
It’s all in the name of a “better future” for their children, not in the name of “becoming elite” as you so conveniently sour grape it to be.
cvj, if there was indeed something to be learned from the poor, then maybe a book with the title Seven steps to a poorer life will be sitting on the bestseller list along with Donald Trump’s and Robert Kiyosaki’s work.
Then again, maybe you do know something I don’t. So humour me for a minute and cite specific examples of what exactly you think can be learned from the poor.
cvj,
Besides, if you really want to see genuine attempts at eliminating elitism, you need only to read your communist history. What has happened to Russia and China? Why did they, in the end, only fail in stamping out an elite class?
cvj,
I also beg to disagree with your post here:
http://cvjugo.blogspot.com/2007/05/philippine-society-and-elitist-mindset.html
I believe that if a person is really, really good, no amount of adversity will stop them from rising from the clutches of poverty. This isn’t wishful thinking: it’s plain fact. Anybody who didn’t get out simply isn’t good enough, or didn’t want to get out badly enough.
Jon (at 2:14pm), the Communists with their vanguard party approach are also elitists. (That’s why i don’t agree with the Transition Council idea of Nemenzo et.al.) Nevertheless, the USSR under the Communists succeeded for a time in industrializing their country. In fact, without them, the Allies would have lost World War II. (Stalin’s USSR were the Singapore of its time, something which caused the Free World to worry.) China, after the failed experiments of the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution eventually succeeded. (At least, so far they are a success.)
Just as we need to take a bath everyday, the tendency towards elitism is something that needs to be stamped out periodically for the good of Society as a whole.
Jon (at 2:02 pm), are you (1) denying that these schools breed elitism or (2) are you saying that it does not matter that they breed elitism?
I expect fuller attention to fixing the public school system from those who can afford to do so, but instead currently choose to opt out because they can. Incidentally, this does not preclude adjusting pay grades in order to attract excellent academicians. It becomes less of a vicarious topic.
With the examples of Mike Arroyo, Gloria Arroyo Ronnie Puno, Joc joc Bolante etc. etc. it becomes easier to do so. The Ateneo’s help to the public school system does not make up for the damage it has done with its flawed products. Maybe if they stopped churning out such kinds of members of society, then they wouldn’t have needed to help as much.
Just to emphasize, as i mentioned above, i did not recommend abolishing private tertiary institutions (vocational schools, colleges and universitites like DLSU or ADMU).
Like you, i’m also a product of the private school system so you can accuse me of kicking away the ladder, but you can’t accuse me of sour graping.
Now i get it! ‘Brevis and Butthead’, ha ha.
cvj,
Unfortunately even if you did abolish the private school system, the upper class won’t be able to pour money into the public school system directly because, well, it’s a public school system managed by the very middleman that we all acknowledge is a problem: the government.
So you want all of that money to pass through their hands? And trust THEM to use that money to improve educational institutions? Hello? Anybody up there?
Those-who-can-afford send their children to private schools because private schools provide higher quality education. In fact, private schools came about because there is a demand for higher quality education.
Your suggestion is tantamount to SM Supermarket removing all of the branded merchandise in its store shelves except for SM Bonus so that they could “improve SM Bonus’s quality through higher sales”. If SM did that the shoppers would just leave.
As for your question, the answer is number 2. It does not matter. Because if a person is really, really good, nothing can ever, ever stop them from working hard enough and becoming creative in finding ways to join the ranks of the elite sooner or later in their lives.
Take note that I am NOT talking about social climbing losers who pretend to be rich or are only rich because of their parents’ hard-earned money.
And if you haven’t noticed: the first world countries we look up to? They have very wealthy, very healthy and thriving elite classes.
Jon, your SM Bonus analogy is an accurate one. The thing is, shoppers cannot ‘leave’ if SM Bonus was the only available product. I undertand and accept that for most cases, competition improves product quality, but there are also cases when giving a choice results in reduced overall quality. In this instance, a monopoly is better.
It seems that you exhibit a can do attitude when it comes to private enterprise but are hopeless when it comes to improving government. Wny can’t you apply the same sort of positive thinking to helping fix our government?
Anyway, just like you, i’m also a positive thinker, but does that mean that failing meant that a person was not really really good? All i know is that in this world, shit happens and the only thing you can control is your outlook in life.
I realize that Gucci Gang types are universally reviled, but i can’t understand the mindset that says that they are *not* the ‘real elite’. They are just the most extreme specimens of the Elitist Mindset and to deny that they are not part of the ‘elite’ is to commit the No True scotsman fallacy.
Lastly, the first world countries became that way because enough of them cared for their country and countrymen. It wasn’t every person (or family) for themselves.
cvj,
Again, cvj, its not that the shoppers can’t leave: it’s the professionals who will. If I’m a meat producer and I won’t be able to sell to anybody else but to SM Bonus for a much, much lower price that only they can set, then I’ll just sell in other countries.
Same banana here: if you abolish the private school system and force all the teachers into public schools, most of them will move out of that industry en masse, either moving to other industries or going abroad, therefore compounding the problem. NO, I do not believe that your envisioned monopoly is healthy, and I do not know of any government that has ever greatly improved their educational institutions with that kind of system.
As for believing that the government can improve; no I don’t believe it will improve that easily because there is little imperative to improve. While for entrepreneurs and businesses improving one’s product is a matter of survival in a very volatile and demanding market, with customers that are very fickle and trends and fads that will make or break sales overnight, the government can sit its heels for a period of 2 or 5 years (local and national, respectively) and then just make a marketing spiel for 1 year, approaching the elections.
If that doesn’t work the voters can just be bought — unlike in business, where buying your customers defeats the purpose of profitability.
So the problem, it seems, is that there isn’t enough elite who care for their countrymen, as opposed to having an elite per se. Shouldn’t be the focus be to develop people who do care for their countrymen and have the ability to be propelled to the wealth of the elite so that they could affect real change from positions of genuine power?
Jon, granting your premise that the quality of the teacher is determined by the pay he or she receives, the reality is that the exodus of high quality teachers that you fear will happen if the private school system is abolished is already a reality for the vast majority of Filipino students who are in the public schools right at this very moment.
What our country then needs are people like you who can translate that genuine fear for the welfare of your children into action that would benefit those for whom what you fear is already a reality today.
If it was your kid who is going to attend the public school and you are worried about the exodus of qualified teachers, wouldn’t you then think it worthwhile to reorient the National Budget towards increasing public school teachers’ salaries? Would you think it worthwhile to pay a greater share of your taxes into education and wouldn’t you be more vigilant in ensuring that the taxes that you pay doesn’t go to corruption? Wouldn’t you also pay attention to the quality of the textbooks?
If the answer is what i think it is, then isn’t the Monopoly approach worth considering since if you do succeed in such advocacies, the benefit will go not only to your own children but to the rest of the children who attend the public school system?
Going by the SM bonus meat analogy, our society cannot prosper if only 10% have access to quality meat and the rest subsist on rotten meat. The issue has to be forced and you will be the one who could help make this happen, not out of altruism, but because of your own self-interest in your children’s welfare.
The government is the way it is because too few of those in the Upper and Middle class who ought to care about the common welfare don’t because they can always opt out. Giving the government a monopoly on primary and secondary issue is one way to make them care for the greater good.
cvj,
But how does the upper and middle class ensure that change will be effected? The motive will be there, sure, but will there be a means? If you want a mass exodus of the middle class where they will all really scream “anywhere but here”, go ahead.
The bottomline is, paying parents have a bigger say in private schools than they could ever have in public schools. The mere fact that they are willing to pay exorbitant tuition fees is in itself a vote of confidence that such institution will give their kids the education they deserve. If they don’t like their kid’s school, at least they can transfer their children to other schools.
In your proposed machiavellian monopoly, the only option to transfer schools will be either to ship the kids overseas for some real, non-mediocre education or to outright migrate out of the country.
I think even a nationalist like I would opt to just migrate rather than to be robbed of such a vital choice.
Are you then saying that even the Upper and Middle classes are powerless to influence government policy? In that case that problem is something that must be solved anyhow.
If we’re able to work through the problems of influencing government policy for this particular substantive issue of public education, then it gives a precedent for shaping government policy in other issues. In the world renowned Toyota Production system, there’s a practice called Jidoka. In a sense, this is what reconfiguring the education system as a monopoly accomplishes. We pull the lever so everyone pays attention.
Sorry, the specific practice i wanted to refer to was Andon which is part of the Jidoka method.
To answer your questions:
What are we doing to help other public high schools?
Firstly, we are not a policy-making body. Nor do we have the mandate to carry out reform in other schools. The most we could do, and we have done this, is to carry out math and science tutorials to the top public school students in order to make them more competitive in our entrance exam. Unfortunately, the project has been discontinued several years ago due to lack of funding (we don’t have the budget for it), and the insistence of the public school teachers to carry out their own tutorials.
For instance, is it not possible for elite public schools to arrange to have their teachers do a one-month (or more) tour of duty in those other high schools, so that those other kids can have the benefit of powerpoint presentations and modern teaching techniques?
We have done this. Our math and science teachers who have benefited from more advance educ training have gone out to teach teachers. However, efforts have been sporadic and isolated at best. We still currently lack the institutional mandate to sustain such a program.
Moreover, real world workload (superfluous committee assignments, additional classes) have made it more difficult for us to commit our own time beyond our own institution. For example, in most schools the Discipline Officer is an entirely new position. Other schools would hire a person just for that. Here, that is considered part of a teacher’s regular load so functions like those are carried over and above our teaching, advising and mentoring functions.
We would love to serve and reach out to other schools. That is a constantly strong sentiment in the faculty. However, we are overworked as we are underpaid, and there are too many reforms that we seek as well. It is possible, but just not in the current system.
Defend?
Yes. Though we have academic autonomy, our curriculum and our existence is something that we constantly have to defend. There have been musings by legislators to abolish our entire system since the DepEd has their own chain of science high schools. Some see us as redundant, and thus our stance of defense is not of adversity but of survival. We know we must deliver on our promise to be a school for the gifted and it is that vision we carry out each and every school year.
There is no such thing as a ‘bottomline’ in a public school. It’s a non-profit, isn’t it? So, when schools fight tooth and nail for money, it’s not so the school can get rich – its so that the thousands who go there can have the basic things that elite science high schools take for granted.
On the other side of the coin are the principals and teachers whose jobs are tied to test scores. It’s basic patronage politics from there. Students are taught to cheat in exams, and teachers keep mum as long as they all “pass” in effect reflecting teacher’s good performance. This is not some metafiction I say to demonize the public education system — and that is not my intentional at all. This is a common story from our own students, most of them the top graduates from public schools whose tests their classmates copied from.
It can definitely be said that we too are simply being selfish. We too are out to improve our bottomline, and I think I’ve made that clear with how I ended my last comment. Granted that is true, this is the side of the fence I’ve chosen. It’s not perfect, but it sure is good.