100%(18)100% found this document useful (18 votes)
4K views20 pages
Concept paper for MAED in Divine Word College of San Jose, Occidental Mindoro Philippines
This literature tackles the basic facts and opinions as regards to the state of science and mathematics education in the Philippines.
For comments, suggestions ad reactions please e-mail me at edu_peter2000@yahoo.com, your pertinent suggestions will be valued.
Original Title
Status and Prospects of Science and Mathematics Education in the Philippines
Concept paper for MAED in Divine Word College of San Jose, Occidental Mindoro Philippines
This literature tackles the basic facts and opinions as regards to the state of science and mathematics education in the Philippines.
For comments, suggestions ad reactions please e-mail me at edu_peter2000@yahoo.com, your pertinent suggestions will be valued.
Concept paper for MAED in Divine Word College of San Jose, Occidental Mindoro Philippines
This literature tackles the basic facts and opinions as regards to the state of science and mathematics education in the Philippines.
For comments, suggestions ad reactions please e-mail me at edu_peter2000@yahoo.com, your pertinent suggestions will be valued.
PETER PHILIP M. PEREZ MAED - Major in Administration and Supervision Divine Word College of San Jose
Science and mathematics, being the subjects usually correlated with the word difficult are said to be one of the most important subject there is due to its pragmatic importance in society. This, statement is true whether we take it in the local context and that also of the international; for instance, Antonio Isidro y Santos, 1968 who authored several books about the Philippine educational system and education per se states that The importance of Science to individuals and nations cannot be overemphasized, this statement can be attributed to the fact that the said subjects importance is in its superlative degree, thus; cannot be astounded by any other. Note that, this statement of Santos regarding the importance of science has been made in the year 1968, thus; even though archival and can be considered out of date by some who are very particular in the literatures date of publication; the same truth holds bearing up to this present days, which can be gauged from the literature of Sarah A. Roberts, 2009 quoting Moses and Cobb, 2001 which states that: Today the most urgent issue affecting poor people and people of color is economic access. In todays world, economic access and full citizenship depend crucially on science and math literacy (p.5). And, even furthers by saying that: In an increasingly technological economy, in order to participate, individuals have to be mathematically literate, which means they must have opportunities to learn mathematics. Note that, Sarah Roberts is referring to the worldwide or holistic view of the importance of science and mathematics education; and, if it is true internationally, it also has a bearing in the local setting. The general statement of about the state of education in the present context can be gauged from the words of the present secretary of the Department of Education itself who states that I do not think it will be a mistake or will be fairly easy to claim that the Philippine education is in crisis (Nilo A. Colinares, 2000); here, confession from the incumbent high ranking official himself, made mention about the difficulties and dilemmas that the Philippine Education sector is having. Thus, it is but safe to claim that science and mathematics education follows the same scenario, since the said subjects are just mere components of the Philippine education curriculum, and the Philippine curriculum is also a component of a macro system of the Philippine education scenario. Indeed, being pessimistic sometimes is but a logical, and; it includes situations such as describing the science and mathematics education in the country. Actually, these somewhat systemic and pressing issues as regards to the flop of Philippine Educational System can be explained by one literature alone which I quote: The persistence of these issues for much of the 20 th century and into the first decade of the 21st century highlights a distressing paradox. With its long tradition of critical assessments and reform-oriented planning, the DepEd actually incubated, tested, and proved the effectiveness of numerous reform initiatives, some of them ahead of the discourses of their time. Yet, at the start of every school year, the news media project without fail a perpetual education crisis that the mainstreaming of successful reform initiatives could have addressed. Why reforms have not transformed education on the ground or why the DepEd has found it difficult to translate structural reforms and programmatic changes into large- scale, integrated, and sustained outcomes is the focus of this chapter. It shares insights into the education reform process through the prism of two illustrative cases: One shows the DepEds partial implementation of the decentralized governance of basic education; the other demonstrates its inadequate policy formulation in the area of learning and pedagogy. The first case looks into the partial implementation of RA9155 through school based management (SBM) in 21 percent of the countrys schools divisions through the BEAM project funded by the Australian Agency for International Aid (AusAID) and the Third Elementary Education Project (TEEP) supported by the Japan Bank for International Cooperation (JBIC) and the World Bank (WB). The case demonstrates how the followinga policy change (i.e., the decentralization of education and the corresponding revision of functions and responsibilities at various levels of the bureaucracy); policy continuity across different administrations; effective leadership at all levels; the willful implementation of plans that targeted disadvantaged schools; and the encouragement of innovations throughout schools in the divisions coveredallowed a reform-oriented counterculture to begin taking root in the DepEd without a change in division and school personnel. In addition, this case reflects changes in processes and procedures at the central and local offices for the duration of the projects. The second case relates the story of the countrys language policy and why, despite a surfeit of international and national research supporting the use of the mother tongue in the early years of schooling, the DepEd has not revised its policy on the languages of learning and language acquisition. The story demonstrates the struggle within the DepEd and between the department and powerful segments in Philippine society of contending positions on a pedagogy-related policy with tremendous implications for learning, the preservation of local languages, and the survival of community cultures. Strengthening the capacity of the DepEd bureaucracy to manage education reform by addressing formal and informal institutional constraints is the objective of the Basic Education Sector Reform Agenda (BESRA). While BESRA maps the way forward, its implementation is vulnerable to the same factors that have limited the impact of previous reform efforts. This chapter concludes with BESRAs potential for catalyzing institutional change and outlines recommendations to help the DepEd succeed in translating another responsive, well-crafted, and comprehensive plan into reality. While this chapter examines institutional factors that have constrained the transformative effects of education reform, it recognizes that some reforms would not necessarily translate into desired outcomes when the intervening variables are not within the control of the DepEd. For instance, studies by the World Bank and the National Nutrition Council have shown that no amount of academic improvement projects will improve learning achievement when brain development and physical growth are stunted by the childs unfavorable health and nutrition status (Ma. Cynthia Rose B. Bautista, Allan B.I. Bernardo, Dina Ocampo, 2008). Thus, it can be gauged from the foregoing that, we are going into circles, practically solving nothing, and the deemed solution seemed to become more of a problem rather than a solution, since; it entails expenditure which will be charged against the taxes paid by the people of the republic of the Philippines. Science and Mathematics Education in the country, is not at par with the description of the state of education of the nation in general, there are reforms, moves and agenda which somewhat proves little pragmatically good result in the long run of every moves the higher ranking officials has pushed. However, it must be made clear that to decipher the rationale behind such; one must dig deeper into the context of the history of the Philippine education sector, along with the issues of leadership in the higher offices of Philippine education agencies as well as other less pertinent respects. To be particular, the perceived flaws of Mathematics and science education in the country can be attributed to numerous factors such as: Teachers factors, language issue in instruction, administrative issues, and financial issues among others. Teachers factors which have a connection to the state of science and mathematics education in the country can be further deciphered into several contexts such as: teacher preparation issues, teaching effectiveness issues. As regards to the teacher preparation issues, and teaching effectiveness issues on Philippine science and mathematics education, an archival literature written by Antonio Isidro y Santos, 1968 on Page 121 stipulated: The present knowledge and techniques of the present science and mathematics teachers must be upgraded. There should be a constant effort to upgrade the professional preparation of science and math teachers. Here, as early as the year 1968, mention has been made as regards to the low quality of teacher preparation; thus, needing to be improved, to effect quality learning among the students being catered in the schools. Gauging from this, we can say that, from late 1960s there has been problems in existence regarding teacher preparation; these same scenario can be seen even up to this present times as manifested in the present literatures such as that of Sylvia A. Ware, 1992 who said that the content of many science teacher preparation programs needs to be reevaluated to eliminate intellectually superficial courses from the curriculum, thus recommends that Teacher training institutions need to begin to take teacher preparation seriously enough to put more thought and imagination into program design and flexible course scheduling . We can see from the arguments of Sylvia A. Ware that a good teacher preparation is important, things which even the present secretary of education seems to be not taking into consideration; for instance, the news article of Queena N. Lee- Chua, 2012 quoting Bro Armin Luistro and DepEd Agenda states that: Luistro says DepEd is looking into the possibility of asking specialists to handle content-heavy subjects, particularly in the junior and senior high schools, even if they have not taken the Licensure Examination for Teachers (LET). They have to be properly qualified, of course, Luistro says. A BS Math graduate can be asked to teach high school math, even without doing the LET, but only on a part-time basis. We cannot hire them full-time, because the law requires elementary and high school teachers to have a license, he says. I have previously written about cases of accountants, engineers, and other professionals who want to and who can teach math and science, but were turned down because they did not take the LET. To critics who say these are not real teachers, Luistro says part-timers will be given seminars to learn the appropriate pedagogy and instructional methods. Things such as this can irritate those who have knowledge in pedagogy and learning, as well as those who really pursued education as a course knowing that what should have been their benefits for taking the course and being eligible thereof will be shared to those who are in one way or another, are not eligible to teach. Furthermore, knowing that learning (effective and efficient) may come as a result of good pedagogical style, we can say that the future of the students which will be handled by such non teachers has stronger chance to be in peril. What irritates me more is that fact that this issue is already archival in nature; Antonio Isidro y Santos, 1968 has already mentioned such scenario on teachers and teaching competence sixty years ago when said that teaching is a matter of luck than an indication of professional competence or adequate preparation for teaching; pity, but that is how things goes. Language issue are also said to be imbedded in the perceived failure of the science and mathematics education in the country and the teaching and learning scenario in general. In the words of Marina E. Balce, 2010 of the National Institute for Science and Mathematics Education Development of the University of the Philippines: One aspect of effective teaching that makes a significant difference to learning is the use of the mother tongue to communicate the nuances of any idea. This statement has come about due to the perceived failure of students to grasp the concepts of science and mathematics as it is taught in the second language or English. Note that, Understanding the relationship between language and mathematics learning is crucial to designing mathematics instruction for students (Judit Moschkovich, 1995), this is also true concerning science education as to the words of authors such as Mohamad Fadhili Bin Yahaya, Mohd Asri Bin Mohd Noor, Ahmad Azman Bin Mokhtar, Rafizah Binti Mohd Rawian, Mahmod Bin Othman, Kamaruzaman Jusoff, 2009. In some cases, there is a need to become bilingual to be able to impart the concepts of science and mathematics effectively s (for examples see Adler, 1998; Brenner, 1994; Khisty, McLeod, & Bertilson, 1990; Khisty, 1995; and Moschkovich, 1999). Gauging from the foregoing we can say that there is really a need to consider the implementation of vernacular instruction in the country for reason of better facilitation of knowledge in the said fields; also, as history itself states, there is a perceive language handicap on the part of Filipinos when taken English language into consideration, since it is just a second language in the country (Paul Monroe, 1925), and even nowadays, in which more than 40 percent of the Filipino citizens find it difficult to convey their thoughts in the English language. Actually, this should not be the case; we have our own language which should not be extinct in favor of English (Nettle, D. 2000) Administrative issues which leads to the downfall of the Philippine Science and Mathematics Education in the country is intertwined with many concerns or multifaceted. Way back in 1960s there is an administrative decision which fosters the decline of Filipino interest in mathematics science; that is giving higher salaries to English teachers more than that of other subjects as stated in the book of Bienvenido B Manuel, Juanita S. Guerrero, Minda C. Sutaria (1974). This, along with other administrative decision may in one way another triggered the fission of reactions leading to the uncontrollable failure as we see it now. Furthermore, funding can also be associated with administration (2013 Budget Message of President Aquino, 2013); thus, they are the ones who should be blamed for lack/s of needed supplies in the Philippine education setting (Philippine Education For All 2015; ) and although it is given that dis is due to underdevelopment of economy (Masafumi Nagao, John M. Rogan, Marcelita Coronel Magno, 2007) it is also given, gauging from the supreme law of the land itself that education, more particularly science and mathematics should be the priority of the state, gauging from the context of the law itself which quote: The State shall protect and promote the right of all citizens to quality education at all levels, and shall take appropriate steps to make such education accessible to all. The State shall: (1) Establish, maintain, and support a complete, adequate, and integrated system of education relevant to the needs of the people and society; The State shall take into account regional and sectorial needs and conditions and shall encourage local planning in the development of educational policies and programs. The State shall assign the highest budgetary priority to education and ensure that teaching will attract and retain its rightful share of the best available talents through adequate remuneration and other means of job satisfaction and fulfillment (Article XIV, Education, Science and Technology, Arts, Culture and Sports Education. Ricardo S. Lazo, 2009).
All the said factors, when taken into consideration, will inevitably fall into a single conclusion, that the future of the students in this country will not be in good shape because of the inequities of our so called leaders to transform the education sector of the country into a competitive one; this has been mentioned around sixty (60) years ago by Antonio Isidro y Santos, 1968 which goes: Under present offerings of science and mathematics in the elementary and secondary schools, our youth will be handicapped in competition with future leaders in other lands. A conclusion such as this has come to existence because of the standing culture of failure we have in the Philippine educational system. I just wish that this will be reversed sooner so that we can be competitive enough and will be able to keep up with the changes in the present times. Failure in this respect can be interpreted as mis-education of the Filipino (Constantino, 1959), this is not just phenomenal but systemic (Funtecha, H. & Padilla, M. (2004). Literature in philbasiceducation.blogspot.com entitled Science and Mathematics Education: What Is the Current Situation? provides that: In order to solve a problem, the first step is to understand it. Knowing the situation is a key to providing the appropriate solution. Again, this parallels good practice in medicine. A correct diagnosis is necessary to make the right prescription. It is important to have the data that inform and in both science and math education, without paying attention to evidence leads to solutions that are based on wild guesses, preconceived notions, and anecdotes. Note that, recommendation like this directly hits the scenario which is happening concerning the education sector in the land, thus; we need to adhere to this so that we can have a better shape of education for the sake of the students being catered in schools. The aforementioned conclusion is very serious; thus, needs to be resolved, using very wise decisions, diligently composed and implemented (Bernardo, A. B. I. 2008) and, these reforms should be done the soonest possible time in the country, before its too late (Capuno, 2008); these statements are also attuned to the words of Maria Linda C. Cabillan, who mentioned that we have to move in faster phase as regards to this due to the advent of globalization.
REFERENCES: I. BOOKS: 1. Nilo a. Colinares, 2000. 21 st Century Trends, issues and Challenges in Philippine Education. National Book Store, Mandaluyong City, Page 118. 2. Antonio Isidro y Santos, 1968. Trends and Issues in Philippine Education. Alemar-Phoenix Publications. Pages 119. 3. Bienvenido B Manuel, Juanita S. Guerrero, Minda C. Sutaria (1974). New thrusts in Philippine education. Current Events Digest. 4. Paul Monroe, 1925. A survey of the educational system of the Philippine Islands by the Board of educational surveys: created under acts 3162 and 3196 of the Philippine legislature. Philippines. Educational Survey Commission Bureau of Printing 5. Nettle, D. & Romaine, S. (2000) Vanishing Voices: The Extinction of the Worlds Languages. London, UK; Oxford University Press 6. Funtecha, H. & Padilla, M. (2004). Study Guide in Philippine History for Teachers and Students. Iloilo City: Mindset Publishing. 7. Bernardo, A. B. I. (2008). English in Philippine education: Solution or problem? Hong Kong University Press. 8. Masafumi Nagao, John M. Rogan, Marcelita Coronel Magno, 2007. Mathematics and Science Education in Developing Countries: Issues, Experiences, and Cooperation Prospects. University of the Philippines Press. 9. Ricardo S. Lazo, 2009. Philippine Governance and the 1987 Constitution. Rex Book Store Incorporated.
II. JOURNALS: 10. Sarah A. Roberts, 2009. Supporting English Language Learners Development of Mathematical Literacy. Democracy & Education 18 no. 3 Aug. 2009 Ma. Cynthia Rose B. Bautista, Allan B.I. Bernardo, Dina Ocampo, 2008. When Reforms Dont Transform: Reflections on institutional reforms in the Department of Education. http://hdn.org.ph/wp- content/uploads/2009/05/dp02_bautista_etal.pdf 11. Sylvia A. Ware, 1992. The Education of Secondary Science Teachers in Developing Countries. PHREE Background Paper Series, Published thru the aid of: The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development The World Bank 1992 12. Adler, J. (1998). A language of teaching dilemmas: Unlocking the complex multilingual secondary mathematics classroom. FLM Publishing Association. pages 24-33. 13. Brenner, M. (1994). A communication framework for mathematics: Exemplary instruction for culturally and linguistically diverse students. SUNY Press. 14. Khisty, L. L. (1995). Making inequality: Issues of language and meanings in mathematics teaching with Hispanic students. In W. G. Secada, E. Fennema, & L. B. Adajian (Eds.), New directions for equity in mathematics education (pp. 279-297). New York: Cambridge University Press. 15. Moschkovich, J. N. (1999). Supporting the participation of English language learners in mathematical discussions. FLM Publishing Association. 16. Constantino, Renato (1959). The Miseducation of the Filipino, Weekly Graphics. 17. Capuno, Joseph (2008). A Case Study of the Decentralization of Health and Education Services in the Philippines. Background paper for the 2008 Philippine Human Development Report.
III. ONLINE SOURCES: 18. Queena N. Lee-Chua, 2012. Preparing teachers for the big reform. Philippine Daily Inquirer. Retrieved April 4, 2014.http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/170691/preparing- teachers-for-the-big-reform 19. Science and Mathematics Education: What Is the Current Situation? Retrieved April 4, 2014. http://philbasiceducation.blogspot.com/2013/03/science-and- mathematics-education-what.html 20. Khisty, L. L., McLeod, D., & Bertilson, K. (1990). Speaking mathematically in bilingual classrooms: An exploratory study of teacher discourse. Proceedings of the Fourteenth International Conference for the Psychology of Mathematics Educator, 3, 105-112. Mexico City: CONACYT. Retrieved April 4, 2014. http://uri- englishlanguagearts.wikispaces.com/file/view/Supporting%20E LLs%20Math.pdf/222842538/Supporting%20ELLs%20Math.pdf 21. Mohamad Fadhili Bin Yahaya et.al. 2009. Teaching of Mathematics and Science in English: The Teachers' Voices. English Language Teaching. Retrieved April 4, 2014. http://www.ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/elt/article/view/2 380 22. Marina E. Balce, 2010. Teaching Quality Science Education in Filipino. Retrieved April 4, 2014. http://mlephil.wordpress.com/2010/02/26/teaching-quality- science-education-in-filipino/ 23. Maria Linda C. Cabillan. Changing Landscape of Mathematics Education in the Philippines: Lessons from Globalization. Retrieved April 4, 2014. http://vlir- piuc.slu.edu.ph/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=8 0&Itemid=76 24. 2013 Budget Message of President Aquino, 2013. Retrieved April 4, 2014. http://www.gov.ph/2012/07/24/2013- budget-message-of-president-aquino/ 25. Philippine Education For All 2015: Implementation and Challenges. Retrieved April 4, 2014.http://planipolis.iiep.unesco.org/upload/Philippines/P hilippines_EFA_MDA.pdf