Are We Ready for K-12?

Everybody seems to talk about the latest buzz about K-12. What is this program of the government and how will it impact me as a parent of a child that would be affected by this? What good will it do to my kid? 

I did a little research online about this matter in order to achieve a better understanding of this program. 

Simplifying K-12 

(Courtesy of http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/146869/k-12-takes-effect-this-june%E2%80%94deped)

The K-12 model involves Kindergarten, six years of elementary education, four years of junior high school (Grades 7 to 10) and two years of senior high school (Grades 11 to 12). The two years of senior high school intend to provide students time to consolidate acquired academic skills and competencies relevant to the job market.

Through two additional years in senior high, DepEd aims to provide students with specialized training in their area of interest, whether they hope to work after high school or pursue college or vocational training.

The K-12 program seeks to level Philippine education with the rest of the world, with 12 years of basic schooling a global standard. Only the Philippines, Angola and Djibouti continue to have a 10-year basic education cycle.

Although K-12 is yet to be given the passage of legislation, DepEd Assistant Secretary for Programs and Projects Elena Ruiz is quite confident that this will be implemented. (It just means "It's A Go Sago!)

Now, what else do we need to think about. I saw an article by Isagani Cruz discussing the pros and cons of this program. (See http://mlephil.wordpress.com/2010/10/14/pros-cons-of-the-k12-debate/)

The PROS (which is basically the side of the government, well-heeled and articulate leaders from the academe, the business community and the media):

1. “Enhancing the quality of basic education in the Philippines is urgent and critical.”
2. “The poor quality of basic education is reflected in the low achievement scores of Filipino students. One reason is that students do not get adequate instructional time or time on task.”
3. International test results consistently show Filipino students lagging way behind practically everybody else in the world. In the 2008 mathematics exam, for example, we came in dead last.
4. “The congested curriculum partly explains the present state of education.” Twelve years of content are crammed into ten years.
5. “This quality of education is reflected in the inadequate preparation of high school graduates for the world of work or entrepreneurship or higher education.” If ten years were adequate, how come employers do not hire fresh high school graduates? How come most high school graduates flunk the UPCAT?
6. “Most graduates are too young to enter the labor force.” Since most children start Grade 1 when they are 6 years old, they do not reach the legal employable age of 18 when they graduate from high school today.
7. “The current system also reinforces the misperception that basic education is just a preparatory step for higher education.” Why prioritize the minority of high school graduates that go to college?
8. “The short duration of the basic education program also puts the millions of overseas Filipino workers (OFWs), especially the professionals, and those who intend to study abroad, at a disadvantage. Our graduates are not automatically recognized as professionals abroad.” The best examples are our engineering graduates, who are condemned to international jobs not befitting their professional status due to our not having a 12-year basic education cycle.
9. “The short basic education program affects the human development of the Filipino children.” If we believe that 17-year-old high school graduates are emotionally, psychologically, and intellectually mature, why do we require them to get parental consent before they get married?

The CONS (which are basically the madlang people whose pocketbooks would be adversely impacted by the proposed additional 2 years of basic education):

1. Parents have to shell out more money (for transportation and food) for the education of their children.
2. The government does not have the money to pay for two more years of free education, since it does not even have the money to fully support today’s ten years. DepEd must first solve the lack of classrooms, furniture and equipment, qualified teachers, and error-free textbooks.
3. We can do in ten years what everyone else in the world takes 12 years to do. Why do we have to follow what the rest of the world is doing? We are better than all of them. Filipinos right now are accepted in prestigious graduate schools in the world, even with only ten years of basic education.
4. As far as the curriculum is concerned, DepEd should fix the current subjects instead of adding new ones. The problem is the content, not the length, of basic education. As an editorial put it, we need to have better education, not more education.
5. A high school diploma will not get anybody anywhere, because business firms will not hire fresh high school graduates.
6. Every family dreams of having a child graduate from college.
7. While students are stuck in Grades 11 and 12, colleges and universities will have no freshmen for two years. This will spell financial disaster for many private Higher Education Institutions (HEIs).
8. The drop-out rate will increase because of the two extra years.

Both seem to present issues worth discussing but the way I see it, as a parent who does not have much of a choice once this law is passed, I will have to see what I can do for my child's smooth transition.

 K-12 promises better quality education coupled with high tech error-free tablets to replace textbooks in order to ensure accuracy of information to be disseminated to the students. (I think this will motivate our students not because of the correct information thing but rather the fact that at last, they can use high tech gadgets without having to buy them. I would imagine them being so overjoyed because "Tigas na ang school materials ba, high tech!) I am not sure however as to how these children can take care of these tablets, long enough to maximize its shelf life.

With the 10 year basic education, we already lack classrooms and worse, more or less 20%-30% of the existing classrooms in every public school are dilapidated that during PTA meetings, we are constantly  being pleaded by the advisers to do something to keep the roof from falling. Frankly speaking (as a law-abiding, tax-paying citizen), it's not our job, it's the government's. If they can hardly maintain these fixtures, how can they add more rooms, etc to accommodate more students? (I believe we've always had the budget but we are just dominated by crocs. Sad but true.) 

The government believes that with K-12, graduates will  have better chances of landing jobs. I could still see a high rate of unemployed college graduates who continue to search for work while others have jobs that are completely unrelated to their courses.  I hope this promise is not wishful thinking.