"K to 12", K or Not?

A good system of education is one of the important foundations of a progressive country. A literate populace provides strong manpower that is usually translated into a healthy economy. The Philippines, for the longest time, takes pride of being one of the most literate countries in the world.  This explains why our country is one of the largest providers of professionals and laborers around the globe.  But this does not mean that we do not have any problem on our education system.

Obviously, we have and there are lots of them. The lack of classrooms, chairs and books are just among them. Add the shortage in the number of teachers to that and you get the formula to having a steadily decreasing quality of education.

And to address these problems, the Department of Educationor DepEd , the government’s education arm introduces this system that they call “K to 12” which simply means Kindergarten plus 12 years of primary and secondary education. Before it was in place, there are only 10 years of combined years for elementary and high school. 

According to our DepEd officials, one of the main reasons that they decided to introduce K to 12 in our country is that we are the only country left especially in the Southeast Asia that has only 10 years of basic education. And with that, we are being left behind. They think that this will help improving the quality of education in our country.

K to 12 for them is meant to be an answer to the major problems in education. But if we check on the most obvious issues (i.e. shortage of teachers, lack of classrooms, chairs and books) isn’t it adding up 2 years just aggravates these problems?

I would not want to judge the system totally as I’m sure that there are a lot of other good reasons by the DepEd to put the K to 12 system in place. But I would like to share my analysis and suggestions that might help in improving this new system. And if some lawmaker or DepEd official might stumble upon this blog, I hope they can consider some suggestions from here.

I provided here some key issues that the DepEd is targeting thru K to 12.

  

           a.  Improving the competitiveness of students.

Advantages – With the added years, the curriculum and years of teaching will be lengthened. Teachers will have more time to teach and focus on their specific subjects. Additional subjects will also be introduced that will add value to the students even before they enter college. 

Disadvantages – Unless the lack of resources is addressed, the added 2 years will be a burden rather than a blessing both to the schools and the students. With classrooms already crowded, where will the schools conduct classes for the additional levels? And where would they get the teachers to do the job amidst the shortage? And let’s also remember that there are some numbers of students who cannot even finish the previous length of basic education which was only 10 years due to financial problems. Imagine what the added 2 years would do to them.

My suggestion – They should first focus on each issue one by one. More than the DepEd budget, our lawmakers should provide larger chunk of their pork barrel in building of classrooms and other facilities. The local government should also do their research and feasibility studies to address the problem in school resources. Then the output of this study will be the basis of a long term program targeting, for example a 50 student per classroom or 1 book per student status.

Then on the shortage of teachers, why can’t the government create a separate scholarship program for teachers just like what they do with the DOST SEI program, this time the DepEd being the stakeholder of the program. Thru this, the government will provide budget subsidizing education that includes tuition fees and necessary allowances for all aspiring teachers. With this program, it will encourage more of our students to take up education in college and will also address unemployment rate due to mismatches of skills with the needed manpower in our country.

Then lastly, increase the salary of our teachers.

          b.  Work will be available for our students after K+12 even without entering college.

Advantages – Having partnered with CHED and TESDA, the necessary knowledge and skills will be injected in the K to 12 curriculums. This can address shortage on manpower needed by some industries that do not require college degree. 

Disadvantages – As mentioned earlier, some students cannot even finish the current 10 years of basic education.  And also, we can’t say that the current program is not enough preparation for college as it still produces good graduates who performs well in their tertiary education and succeeds later in career. And by adding 2 more years, this will also add burden to those who seemed not in a need for the added years for their preparation to college.

My Suggestion – Provide options. Like for those who can’t afford going to college after the initial 10 years of basic education can have the +2 years to learn the skills and needed expertise to land them on those jobs that does not require a college degree. And if they want to pursue college education after that, they will be free to do so. 

Or, we can have assessment examinations on students in the fourth year high school regarding their preparedness of entry to college. Actually, we’re already doing it thru the NSAT and before with NCEE. It’s just a matter of customizing it to what this program needs. Those who will pass the exams can go to college and those who are not will be required to undergo this 2 years. Or it can be just a year and after that, another exam will be taken. And if still they are not able to pass, then another year will be added. And these added years required for them will not be wasted even if they are not able to reach college level as it will also include trainings on technical skills which will be suited for them to get jobs after school.

                To summarize it, it’s just like any national concern that we have. It does not necessarily mean that if the other countries are doing it, we should also do the same. We also need to check first if we have the same level of readiness with them for us to apply the same system that they are already using. The case for them may not be the same for us and we might need tailor-made programs to match what our country needs.  In the end, we know ourselves more than anybody else and we are the most capable persons to know what’s good for us and what is not.

If you find this article interesting, you may share this article on your Twitter, Facebook or other social network accounts via the the specified buttons below or the floating icons. Thanks for the visit and hope that you also like our Facebook page “The Ignored Genius”(see the like button on the mid-upper right part of this page) or follow me on Twitter @ignoredgenius. Thanks!