K to 12 is another innovation bound to fail

WHEN THE Aquino administration came to power in 2010, the Department of Education announced a plan to introduce a new scheme into the Philippine educational system. Called the K to 12 program, its implementation started this school year.

K to 12 makes it mandatory for pupils to undergo kindergarten before they can be enrolled in Grade 1. But what makes K to 12 so new and different is the additional two years in the secondary education. This makes me conclude that in the past one-and-a-half years, education planners, curriculum writers, school “experts” and selected subject area supervisors worked feverishly on the contents, time allotment and other related aspects of the additional two years. “[No] more time is left for our family,” one subject area supervisor e-mailed me, referring to their work vis-à-vis the K to 12 program.

It may be recalled that as far back as 2004, the DepEd already had a plan to implement a new high school curriculum in school year 2005-2006. But the plan was nipped in the bud when several government leaders and teachers’ organizations opposed it. For one, former Sen. Raul S. Roco, a former education secretary, slammed the idea because its requirements were “fantastic.”

The National Organization of Professional Teachers led the opposition to the plan, citing the major problems facing the educational system, which he said must be addressed first. Among the problems cited were the lack of teachers, classrooms, textbooks and other instructional materials, as well as chairs, desks and school supplies.

The Kapisanan ng mga Gurong Retirado hopes that K to 12, apparently patterned after the K to 12 system of the United States, will succeed in the Philippines. It is sadly noted, though, that many innovations have been introduced into the country’s educational system, but they only resulted in confusion and disillusionment among teachers, pupils/students and their parents or guardians, not to mention the public funds wasted. In this regard, we are reminded of the Continuous Progression Scheme (no failing grade policy), the frequent changing of the grading system, the overemphasis on English as the medium of instruction, the abolition of Values Education as a separate and independent subject, and the much heralded Program for Decentralized Educational Development (Proded).

A joint enterprise of the then Ministry of Education and the Development Academy of the Philippines, Proded was funded with a $100million loan from the World Bank. No matter how laudable the objectives of Proded were, it was doomed to fail from the start as the problems in education that existed then—and still existing now—had not been solved.

In the case of K to 12, its goals are commendable, but with the present problems confronting the country’s educational system, how can a new educational thrust succeed?