As students and teachers once again return to schools for a new academic year, it’s important that – in spite of (or maybe because of) everything else going on in our nation and in the world at large – that we not lose sight of the urgent and ongoing crisis faced by our educational system. We’ve known about the gravity of this since at least 2018, when we first joined the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) and were shocked when our country ranked last among 79 participating countries in reading, and second to last in science and mathematics. This was no mere blip, but a symptom of deep-seated problems, as proven by subsequent assessments.
In the 2019 Southeast Asia Primary Learning Metrics (SEA-PLM), only 10 percent of students in the Philippines met the minimum reading standard and 17 percent met the minimum mathematical standard expected at the end of primary education. In the 2022 iteration of the PISA, there was little improvement to show despite a battery of reforms, with our students ranking amongst the lowest in reading comprehension, mathematics, science and the new creative thinking assessment. In math/reading/science, the Philippines scored approximately 120 points less than the average, where every 20 points off from the average represented a year of learning, implying that our nation’s students were five-six years behind the average student.
The reports from the ongoing Second Congressional Commission on Education (EDCOM II), a national commission undertaking an assessment and evaluation of the performance of the Philippine education system, have also been eye-opening. The reports highlight specific issues that prevent our students and teachers from reaching their full potential. In its Year One Report, the EDCOM pointed out that our educational “system” was more like a “sector,” bereft of the coordination and interdependence that characterized a system. This was due to many factors, such as the sheer scale of the work (along with incomplete, late and non-interoperable data), a lack of accountability (oversight of education agencies was weak and there were no feedback loops to update policies) and a harmful internal culture. The Year One Report made it clear: the government had not invested in the manpower or the professionals needed in order for a system to function properly.
The Year Two Report, released earlier this year, identified 28 Priority Areas that reflect the structural roots of the problems plaguing our educational system. Given the title “Fixing the Foundations: A Matter of National Survival,” the report is forthright about the many challenges we face, along with the urgent necessity to overcome them anyway or risk irreparable damage to the future of our nation and people.
The fact that an attempt to focus on priority areas still resulted in a list of 28 should give readers an idea of the scope of the problems and how multifaceted the issues are. But we cannot afford to be paralyzed by the magnitude of the tasks ahead of us, for as the members of the EDCOM implied in the title chosen for the report, this is a matter of survival. We cannot afford to waste time – we must act, and act quickly.
But where to start? The key to prioritizing remedial action in matters of education is to realize that learning deficits compound over time. If you fall behind in learning in Kinder, the tendency is to fall further and further behind as you get older, even if you do manage to keep getting promoted through the grade levels. After all, the curriculums are designed so that you first learn the basic concepts you need to understand the more complicated lessons, and so on – if one misunderstands the basic concepts, they will be unable to learn the more complicated lessons, and will become all the more ‘lost’ as they move up.
So where we focus our attention must be on the very first years of education, on ensuring that our youngest students are placed in the best possible position – physically, mentally, emotionally – to learn. This is what the EDCOM refers to as the foundations, the basics: early childhood education, nutritional support during the first 1,000 days of life and literacy by the end of Grade 3.
Nutrition at the earliest stages of life is a cause that I have consistently been pushing for throughout my years of public service, whether it be through reproductive health, promoting breast feeding or the importance of the first 1000 days. Without proper nutrition and a healthy environment while their brains and bodies are rapidly developing, no amount of books, classrooms or teachers will matter. Prioritizing education does not only mean increasing the resources spent on classrooms, books and teachers’ salaries – it means more resources for nutrition campaigns, local health services and meals for hungry children.
Of course, better facilities, materials and teachers are also important – but the initial focus must be on improving these at the preschool and early grade school levels. As anyone who has observed a good preschool teacher will tell you, teaching at the early levels is a different kind of beast, and we must prioritize the proper allocation of resources not only to entice more capable persons to teach young children, but also to give them the proper support and training.
There are several worthy initiatives meant to improve the lot of teachers, such as the implementation of the expanded career progression for teachers, and measures to strengthen teacher professionalization (while at the same time allowing for flexibility with certain requirements, such as the Master’s degree). Again, while any initiative that benefits teachers as a whole will improve the quality of our education, if prioritization is required it should be focused on teaching in the early years first.
There is much to do, and the EDCOM has one more report to make to synthesize its earlier findings. But there can be no more waiting when it comes to improving our battered educational system. The time to act is now, and the place to begin is at the foundations. In this as in so many other things – first things first.