Things haven't changed after all, dirt-poor, people and garbage still combine.

Claims of progress and change fly out the window in the face of these hard realities of our people.  Thanks to progressive thinking media persons like this reporter and biting reality can still make it to the mainstream news.




will a social deluge happen soon? how will it be led?

Better than news on TV :)

mEnabling mLearning (how are we catching up or lagging behind?)

NGLC (next generation learning challenges) 

http://nextgenlearning.org/next-gen-tools

http://www.upsidelearning.com/free-elearning-ebooks.asp

Designing eLearning For iPads from Upside Learning

What Motivates Teachers? (Motivation 3.0)

(Motivating the motivators toward extra-ordinary performance and commitment)

A critical paper submitted to the class on School Administration and Management: Theory & Practice under Prof. Gin Yap-Aizon (ED 221).

“If you have to ask me the keys why Singapore system is successful – we have very good teachers, we have very good school leaders!”  These are the words of Lee Sing Kong, dean of the National Institute of Education who speaks passionately about Singapore education.  Springboarding from these words, I ask the question of how we can replicate the same outcomes in terms of teaching commitment and performance among our own teachers.  Apparently, teachers anywhere as part of mankind are governed by the same universal theories of motivation.  Although, an important particularity I remember though is cultural inclination of Filipino teachers to prefer the positive-affective-negative-cognitive approach as far as receiving feedback is concerned which could be a factor for motivating teachers. (Prof. Aizon, ED 221 class)

Theories of Motivation

Abrahom Maslow categorized motivation drivers according to needs categories that fall into an hierarchy.  The baser needs include physiological and safety and security then moves up to belonging and esteem to the higher order needs of self-actualization.    Only when the basic lower level needs are satisfied can higher order needs be pursued. Hence, if any of these needs are not met then the person gets demotivated.  In the following table, I have applied this Maslownian hierarchy to how I perceived they are satisfied at SHS-AdC.

(Table 1. Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs in SHS-AdC Context)

MOTIVATIONAL NEEDS
Needs	Provided or not provided in schools through
SELF-ACTUALIZATION	Professional Development opportunities – trainings, masteral studies, benchmarking and educational tours Promotion Goal Achievement Spiritual Development Programs – Spex, recollections & retreats, Spiritual Direction
ESTEEM	Loyalty Awards Position Titles and Labels Office/Space assignments Merit recognitions/ Status symbols Parking Space allocations (Autonomy-influence, authority, decision-making), EIP – tablet, MacPro
BELONGING	Subject Area Assignment/Work Teams Mentoring Group Friends, Colleagues Informal Affiliations – Prayer groups, Cliques/Barkada, Ceremony sponsorships – ninong/ninang
SAFETY & SECURITY	Tenure Housing Occupational Health & Safety Medical Insurance & Benefits – Principal & Dependents Sick Leave PERAA Due Process
PHYSIOLOGICAL	Salary 13th month Allowances Uniform Tuition benefit for dependents SSS, Medical Insurance	Coop membership & savings Availability of Transportation Service Merit pay/increases/Christmas bonus Honoraria Vacation Leaves Flexi Schedules
MA-EdAd                                                                                                                                                                Loyola Schools Graduate Education Program                                                                                            Ateneo de Manila University (AdMU)

In one of the gatherings of Principals in a conference sponsored by a publishing company in Mactan last February 19 this year, the question was raised as to what motivates educators and their leaders.  Recurrent in the discussion is the issue of pay as something good and satisfying if principals have more of it.  However, in our small group composed of mostly sister of the Society of St. Paul, running a chain of St. Paul schools, they were saying that beyond monetary motivation for teaching, the greater goal of mission and finding personal meaning on the mission drives the passion of people to continue the work.  Teaching for several years, sister Norma, SPC, a nun on her 60s and assigned in Sibugay, Zamboanga del Sur, narrates that she has been in the work for more than 20 years, at salary way below the scrimping private schools in the city or in the public school system, is getting.  The same sentiment is echoed by the whole group that indeed, sometimes if the pay is never really enough, many serve in mission schools or in causes that matter to society, causes that are in the main service or civic oriented.  Clearly, a sense of commitment to the mission propels the motivation of many teachers and administrators in the Catholic schools.

Maslow’s theory does not fully explain the condition such as Sr. Norma portray where a sense of mission seem to be her greater driver in persisting in teaching and leading in a remote town in Zamboanga where pay definitely is not economically competitive compared to what we are getting in our school.  In the same way as, the motivation that drive our Jesuit partners to take on mission-schools’ work in areas such as Culion in Palawan or Zamboangaita in Bukidnon.

Herberg’s two factor theory, which moves forward Maslow’s hierarchy of needs can better explain probably this.  Herberg considers two major category’s of needs – maintenance and satisfiers.  Maintenance or hygiene factors are needs that are requisite to the work, these are the baseline requisites so to say, and in Maslow’s theory these are the physiological, safety, belonging and esteem needs.  These are not the motivators but are necessary to even let a teacher buy-in into the job.  What gives motivation to persevere are the satisfiers, the self-actualization needs.  When present, these increase teachers’ drives and passion to teach.  I think McGregor’s concept of regression in this theory of Existence-Relatadedness-Growth, where when teachers are not provided needs that are in one category tend to regress into the needs in another category as the more powerful driver helps to explain conditions where some needs are not met but teachers preserver in the job of teaching explaining why teachers in some schools chose to stay longer even if the pay is not as good as those in other schools.

(Figure 1. Summary of Motivation Theories)

Drive – The Motivation Paradigm

Dan Pink has so geniusly simplified past researches on motivation and summarized the science of motivation into these three drivers - Mastery, Autonomy and a sense of Purpose is the new motivation paradigm.  How will this look like for teachers?

Dan Pink’’s work of looking further into these needs and understanding perceptions and value people ascribe to what they do, I feel, offers even more update into the question of teacher motivation.  He says that we mainly have two drivers, extrinsic and intrinsic. 

Extrinsic motivators are things or acts done to the person – in the past, this has been extensively used in the form of rewards and punishments. To encourage a behavior, something desirable is given while to avoid or deter a particular behavior a consequence should follow or attached to it.

The whole concept of extrinsic motivators revolve around the idea and practice to B.F. Skinner’s conditioning which reinforces what you want people to do, not just punish what you want people to stop doing. (Coppola, 2004)

Rewards and punishment in a sense work for a while but only under certain conditions.  Rewards cannot be relied to sustain motivation, in fact Dan Pink says it is harmful to it as it narrows focus and creates a sense of addiction to a receiver (the same neural networks in the brain are activated when one receives a reward and when one satisfies a dopamine inducing addiction).  Punishment on the other hand is short lived. 

According to Hope Leyson, punishment only works well if it is given by contiguity to the violation or behavior you want avoided or if there is logical connection between punishment and behavior.  In a sense, punishments should be used to target a behavior then use gradually “expanding” reward for every step toward achievement of a desired behavior.  It still goes back to training to get or conditioning people to act in the way you would want them to.

To avoid the harms of reward and punishment (the proverbial “carrot and stick”), there should be fading too where the prompts or cues are gradually removed such that the behavior becomes a habit of choice even without the attendant reward.  If the association is permanent between the kind of behavior expected and the reward accompanying, a sense of attachment or expectation sets in such that behavior then becomes dependent on the reward, a sort of “addiction”. (Leyson, 2014).

Intrinsic motivation, on the other hand, obtains drive or passion from the job of teaching itself.  Teaching in itself and the fulfillment it brings is the motivator.  Intrinsic motivation finds fulfillment in the work of teaching itself as satisfying (all activities involved in the work of teaching both the routine and challenging, its details and the big picture, in the bottom-line is motivating), so we should make the job interesting to raise or enhance teachers’ motivation.  I feel this is correct for as long as Herbergz maintenance factors, especially dignified salary and working conditions are present, lest you really loose good teachers. (Sergiovanni, 2007, Coppola, 2004 & Corrigan, 2011).

As a case in point, many sacrificing and passionate teachers are preserving in the public schools despite the problems that persist in the public school system, they believe that they can make so much difference.  And they commit themselves to the faith that the Filipino children can achieve and they get involve not only in the learning but in the lives of their students.  Many young teachers believe that it is alright to give their idealism to a worthy cause say educating students in the public school to help build the nation. (Ongkiko, 2013)

“Education is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world”- Nelson Mandela

Teachers are the heart of education and how we develop and motivate teachers is therefore the heart of motivating learning. (NIE, 2014)  The country of Singapore understands this very well such that teacher training is really focused on by the National Institute of Education under its Ministry of Education.  Teachers do not worry anymore about basic needs, neither do they feel burdened by finding opportunities to grow as these are made available by the institute to teachers in their preparation and in their professional practice.  Teaching in Singapore, as in Finland, Shanghai, and Australia among the leading countries in PISA (Program for International Student Assessment, 2009 rankings) is accorded prestige and provided generous intrinsic motivators, conditions where the best teachers can thrive.

According to Bill Gates, in a study of American teachers, better teachers are not based on MA degrees (Master of Arts) or seniority.  Accordingly, after 3 years of teaching (the usual probationary years), teacher ability does not significantly change anymore.  It is in the first three years of teaching that determines a teachers’ level of ability and from thereon, that kind of ability and passion does not significantly change, the variation, Gates insists, is very small.  Having an MA does not make a better teacher.  What affects teachers to be better though is past performance.  Gates insists that feedback on teachers’ performance if used well to make teachers see how they are doing – where they are good at or where they falter and to move effectively towards things that work for the teacher, that’s where ability and skill prosper significantly.

Key to making education better is having great teachers. (Gates, Bill 2009).

Key to motivating teachers also is leadership style of school leaders. If a leader’s mood and accompanying behaviors are indeed such potent drivers of an organization’s success, then a leader’s premier task—we would even say his primal task—is emotional leadership. A leader needs to make sure that not only is he regularly in an optimistic, authentic, high-energy mood, but also that, through the actions he chooses, his followers will feel and act that way, too.  A leader who uses reflective analysis and sees how his emotional leadership drives the moods and actions of the organization, and then, with equal discipline, adjusts his behavior accordingly will be contributive to enhancing motivation of teachers.

Managing for effective results in teaching, then, begins with the leader managing his inner life so that the right emotional and behavioral chain reaction occurs. (Goleman, et al., 2001)

The emotional contagion

Research conducted by Alice Isen at Cornell in 1999, for example, found that an upbeat or happy environment fosters mental efficiency, making people better at taking in and understanding information, at using decision rules in complex judgments, and at being flexible in their thinking.  It is the same point I presented in class during my report that happiness leads to success, and then cycles.  (Soulpancake, 2013)

Taken as a whole, the message sent by neurological, psychological, and organizational research is startling in its clarity, emotional leadership is the spark that ignites a school’s performance, creating a fire of success or an arid place of ashes. In motivating others, the leaders’ moods matter that much. (Goleman, et al., 2001)

The kind of leadership that provides for collegial norms in particular fosters intrinsic motivation in teachers.

Intrinsic motivation insists that the work is motivation itself.  Believing in Herbergz’s two-factor theory and maintenance factors are provided, motivating teachers should then be primarily enhancing intrinsic motivation through leadership efforts in creating collegiality, a context enhancing greater interest of teachers in their trade.  Collegiality is not congeniality although it may include the latter.  Collegiality entails sharing, helping, learning and working together as part of the school’s professional culture.  This entails communication expectations for cooperation, setting the example for collegiality for teachers in improving the school, providing incentives, support resources and recognition for expressions of collegiality (here extrinsic rewards work well) and protecting teachers going against privatism (“kanya-kanya”) and isolation. (Sergiovanni, 2007).  Collegial principals are supportive and consider school-wide problems as concerns providing opportunities for collective problem-solving and learning.

Instrinsic motivation can also be enhanced if teachers have opportunity – the perception of future prospects for advancement, increased responsibility, status, prestige, increase challenge in work with increased knowledge, skills and rewards  (the self-actualization needs of Maslow).  Intrinsic motivation is further enhanced if teachers develop capacity or feel empowered – the ability to get things done, mobilize resources or to get and use whatever is needed to accomplish a result.  As in a classroom where effective teaching occurs, a school leader manages by differentiation, bringing different works together.

As opposed to extrinsic motivation, intrinsic motivation that should be enhanced in teachers is based on the value received from the work itself of teaching.  These are feelings of competence, achievement, excitement, meaning and significance, enjoyment and moral contentment.  For Dan Pink, these are summarize into three categories – provide teachers opportunity and capacity for mastery of their work of teaching, autonomy or the academic freedom that schools should exercise say in their level that space to design and create their learning designs and style, and a sense of purpose – a sense of ownership that they are part of a bigger and noble cause or mission.

As in all groups, levels of maturity of teachers will be uneven, hence there will still be a need of extrinsic motivators (the constant prodding or rewards and the fear of punishment) to keep people in line.  But to move teachers from just giving a “fair day’s work for a fair day’s pay” to individuals with extra-ordinary commitment and performance, a strong, inspiring and effective heart of education, leaders have to rely more and effectively on intrinsic motivation.

More than just being “nice” to teachers to avoid problems, Sergiovanni suggests that when we allow teachers to discover, explore, experience variety and challenge, to actively participate or provide involvement in tasks and high identity with task-enabling-work to be considered important or significant, or when we encourage feelings of competence and control and enhance feelings of efficacy, we build on teachers sense of mastery.  When we allow teachers to exercise autonomy and be self-determined we let them develop intrinsic motivation also.  When we allow teachers to experience a sense of emphasis on agreement with broad purposes and values that bond people together at work or  when we permit outcomes within broad purposes (or what we commonly call our vision-missions) that are determined by teachers themselves or allow them to that feeling of being origins of their own behavior rather than pawns manipulated or a high sense of being trusted, we provide the platform for teachers to be intrinsically driven by purpose.

Teachers with high intrinsic motivation fostered by efficacy and collegiality that builds on their mastery, and, who experience autonomy or academic-freedom, and have bought into the institutional or beyond-the-self purpose of education, will most likely exhibit extra-ordinary commitment and performance.  They in turn are the drivers of high student achievement.

April 14, 2015

-end-

REFERENCES

Sergiovanni, Thomas J., Getting Practical, “Enhancing Collegiality and Intrinsic Motivation”. pp. 12-133. 2007.

Coppola, Albert J., Scricca, Dianne B. & Connors, Gerard E., Supportive Supervision, “Becoming a teacher of teachers.”, 2004,

Corrigan, Michael W., Groove, Doug & Vincent, Phillip F., Multi-Dimensional Education, “ A common sense approach to Data-driven Thinking”, 2011.

Boyatzis, Richard, McKee, Annie & Johnston, Francis, Becoming a Resonant Leader, “ Develop your emotional intelligence, renew your relationships, sustain your effectiveness.”

Goleman, Daniel, Boyatzis, Richard E. and Mckee, Annie, Primal Leadership: The Hidden Driver of Great Performance - Harvard Business Review, December 2001.

Soulpancake, www.youtube.com/watch?v=IkMHZ7mchVo, retrieved April 14, 2015

National Institute of Education, (NIE) Singapore, 2014 www.youtube.com/watch?v=eqZdxQKgvd0, NIE, 2014,  retrieved April 13, 2015.

Gates, Bill, 2014,  How to make great teachers, www.youtube.com/watch?v=OnfzZEREfQs, part 1 & 2, retrieved December 25, 2014.

Ongkiko, Sabrina, Our return on Investment: TEDx Dilliman, 2013, www.youtube.com/watch?v=FgOi4ZR57fA, retrieved April 13, 2015.

Leyson, Hope. Educational Psychology class (Ed 235), October 2014, Mandaue City.

Pink, Daniel H. Drive, The Surprising Truth About What Motivates Us, Penguin Group, USA, 2009.

Owens, Robert, 2011, Organizational Behavior in Education.

Letting her go

despite prodding to train her, she insists to have it her way...




Age 5, accomplished March 26, 2015 in front of a crowd.  both parents during their time were just mending the store or playing hide & seek at her same age.

Is Philippine Education Commercialized?

Is Philippine Education Commercialized?
 “The Law and Philippine Schools” (Ed 235)

The 1987 Constitution states in article 14 that “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.” (Constitution, 1987)

Section 2 of the constitution specifically provides that “a system of free public education in the elementary and high school levels”. Education to be effective vehicle for development should not be limited to basic (elementary and high school) as basic education may importantly provide the foundation to the kind of citizens a society moulds but should be extended to the tertiary education will determine how a society’s important resource, its people, will be of use, contributive or functionally responsive to the economy.

Unfortunately, in terms of resource allocation, government’s sense of priority for education is not nearly enough given United Nations standards. To date, the Philippines is yet to comply with the UN-prescribed 6% share of education spending vis-a-vis national GDP.

The current education expenditure to GDP ratio is at 2.45%, based on the official computation of the Department of Education (DepEd) Finance and Administration office. It is higher than last year’s reported 2.10% share, but a far cry from 1997 when education spending accounted for a 3.8% share in the country’s GDP. (rappler.com/March 18, 2013)

If we compare resource allocation of the Philippines to that of our neighbor Singapore, which ranks high on educational benchmarks, Singapore spends 20% of its GDP equivalent to education. Not only does it provide elementary and secondary education accessibly to its citizens, it also makes tertiary education within reach. Education in Singapore asks citizens to shell out personal monthly amounts but these are affordable to its citizens, understandably though the purchasing power of its citizens is also higher such that they can afford to pay minimal counterparts of their children’s education. However, even in the tertiatry level several subsidies or publicly funded degrees are offered. Here the point as well highlights the fact that education is one of Singapore’s well used vehicle to enhance its economy and its peoples lives.

The Landscape of the Philippine Educational System

There are currently 21.7M elementary (14,509,690) and secondary students (7,110,994) (2013, DepEd data sets. Annual increase in enrolment is at 1.5% (2009 - 2013). (DepEd, datasets)

In 2014, The Department of Education (DepEd) approved the tuition increase in 1,299 private elementary and high schools in the Philippines.

The majority of these schools (311) are located in Western Visayas. The lowest increase granted is 1.35% while the highest increase is 35% of their existing fees.

From DepEd data, there are a total of 46, 404 elementary schools in the country of which 7,745 (17% of total) are private schools while the public elementary schools number to 38,659 (consisting 83%). While all High Schools total 12, 878 where 5,130 (40%) are privately owned and 7,748 (60%) are public high schools. The number of private school significantly increases as the grade levels increase. The landscape further changes in the tertiary level in favor of private ownership.

In the 1990s, only about 6 percent of elementary students were in private schools, but the proportion rose sharply to about 63 percent at the secondary level and approximately 85 percent at the tertiary level. About a third of the private school tertiary-level enrollment was in religiously affiliated schools. Catholic and Protestant churches sponsored schools, and privately-owned-nonsectarian schools comprised what is known as private education. In the 90’s, neither the private-sectarian nor the religious schools received state aid except for occasional subsidies for special programs. (Dolan,1991)

Private Education and the Law

The context of the predominance of private education in the Philippines is exacerbated by the fact that political policy works to the advantage of private educators. Ownership of private educational institution has moved along way from the mainly religious organization ownership to increased ownerships in the hands of private individuals. Many rich families have stakes now in private education especially in the tertiary level.

Our historical experiences with education point to its use as a tool of pacification rather than of liberating people for genuine human development. In the time of the Spaniards, education was an adjunct of religion, instruments in the main to pacify the natives. The public education that the Americans brought paved the way for colonial mentality and for the most part diminished the beauty of Filipino heritage and the strength of our patriots in pushing out Spain from our soils.

In keeping the tradition of education as a pacifying tool, Marcos maximized the role of education to smoothen his iron-rule. A few days after Martial Law was declared in September 21, 1972, Presidential Decree 6-A, known as the Educational Development Decree of 1972, was announced. (www.lawphil.net)

Hidden in the legalese of ”improving curricular programs, upgrading academic standards through accreditation, democratization of access, responsiveness to national development, training of manpower and shifting of funding responsibility of primary and secondary education to local government” is Marcos’s design to make education work for Martial law and his personal plans specifically to funnel funds into his own coffer. This is apparent in section 7, the authority to borrow which vests in the sole hands of the president. Although limited to loans not exceeding 100M dollars and not beyond ten years. These loans are intended supposedly under the proclamation to improve education (“financing of educational development projects”).

Despite the seemingly enormous allocations and financial support to education since 1972, nothing much has changed, instead the maladies of poor quality, inadequate access and underpaid teachers specifically persisted. Education after Marcos’s 10-year educational development program remained irrelevant to the people’s needs. (www.lawphil.net)

When Martial Law was lifted in 1981, the Education Act of 1982 (Batas Pambansa blg. 232) was promulgated.

With the lifting of Martial Law, then President Marcos needed a law that would circumscribe all his past decrees pertaining to education, as with all his Martial Law legislations, the Education Act of 1982 proclaimed itself as landmark law that would democratize access in education. However, BP 232 further reoriented the Philippine education system from playing an integral role in national development, pursuit of knowledge, and flowering of culture and the arts towards being profit-oriented and producing graduates that would feed the global need for cheap labor.

When Ed Act 82 came into the picture, the already solidified position of government providing inadequate education to its citizens was gaping. The neglect created a vacuum that private educators especially in the tertiary level filled in willingly.

More than three decades hence, the Philippine education system has clearly drowned in the murky waters of commercialization, murky for the Filipino youth and their parents but not for the few private education owners.

Commercialization they say fosters competition that is healthy to the buyer, but not in the case of education which is a basic service paid for already by taxes imposed on citizens hence governments are obliged to provide. (bukisisa.com)

Due to the Education Act, according to Angel de Dios, the government has failed to regulate tuition increases in the country, rendering both the Department of Education (DepEd) and the Commission on Higher Education (CHED) – agencies that have been borne out of later revisions to BP 232 – useless paper tigers, especially in curbing annual tuition hikes.

(philbasiceducation.blogspot.com/2012)

This is why the Ed Act of 1982 serves well the advantage of commercializing education.

Legislated Tuition Deregulation

One of the most pernicious provisions of the Education Act is Section 42, which pertains to tuition and other fees. It states, “Each private school shall determine its rate of tuition and other school fees or charges. The rates and charges adopted by schools pursuant to this provision shall be collectible, and their application or use authorized, subject to rules and regulations promulgated by the Ministry of Education, Culture and Sports.” (now the DepEd and Ched).

The said provision effectively granted school owners the unlimited authority to raise tuition fees, and even repealed an earlier law – Presidential Decree 451 – which states that 60 percent of tuition fee hikes be allotted to teachers’ salaries and benefits. (philbasiceducation.blogspot.com)

Based on DepEd's 2010 Manual of Regulations, 70% of the increase should go to the teachers' salaries, and at least 20% for the improvement of the school's facilities and equipment. (Rappler.com, May 20, 2014)

Due to the deregulated nature of tuition under the Education Act, tuition in private schools has risen to skyrocketing levels. NUSP, the National Union of Students of the Philippines) one of student conglomeration of student councils in higher education, claims that national average of tuition and other fees in private higher educational institutions has increased from P257.41 in 2001 to P501.22 in 2010. (philbasiceducation.blogspot.com/2012)

Relatedly, from a 2009 study by the Philippine Institute for Development Studies, for every 100 pupils who enter Grade 1, only 86 will continue to Grade 2. By Grade 4, 76 will remain, while only 65 will graduate from elementary. Of this number, only 58 will enter high school, and 42 of them would graduate basic education. The survival rate of 100 pupils entering Grade 1 and finishing College is 14%.

Profitability of Higher Education

Tertiary education has become a lucrative business for many corporate individuals and interests, not for their motives in promoting development through research, science and technology that their businesses promote but for selfish profits.

In the country’s list of top 1000 corporations, there are nine HEIs who made it with profits ranging from 20M to 297M in 2003. (Top Moneymakers, Graphic, December 2003 issue)

Among these profitable schools are Centro Escolar University (CEU) at 198th of top 1000 corporations is owned by Emilio Yap of Phil. Trust Co., Manila Bulletin and Manila Hotel. The University of the East (UE) at 517th is owned by Lucio Tan who controls Fortune Tobacco, Asia Brewery, Allied Bank and PAL. The Mapua Institute of Technology (MIT) at 218th is under the Yuchengco group which owns Malayan Insurance and RCBC. In 2009, Henry Sy of the SM group acquired National University (NU) adding its influence over education on top of ownership of Asia Pacific College. The other private schools in top 1000 are FEU at 272nd, FEATI at 364th, Manila Central University at 785th, Cebu Doctors College at 845th and Velez College also in Cebu at 987th.

It is no wonder that the last to suffer is profit in an educational context like this, as CHED has itself found out, tuition increases in the NCR during a 5-year period from SY 1999-2000 to 2003-2004 rose by 64.14%. (Top Moneymakers)

Private Higher Education Institutions in the NCR charge the highest average tuition per unit. In 2003, it stands at 614.54/unit (approximately 12,000.00 of tuition per semester). On top of this though, there is greater leeway for private schools to charge on miscellaneous fees or other fees as CHED exempts this from the need to consult with students or parents. Miscellaneous fees are charged for use of facilities like laboratories, clinic, library, AVR, athletics, etc. The variety of nomenclature for other fees include such things as insurance, energy, power plant development, land-infrastructure-maintenance-acquisition development, accreditation or copier fees.

Profitability of private HEIs is seen here in the 2012 Census of Business and Industries, higher education institution earned 18.4B pesos after deducting all expenses incurred.

In the last 14 years, the number of High Ed Institutions rose to 1,231 from 595 (1990 – 2004). Yet in the face of increased number of schools, one of the most serious problems in the Philippines in the 1980s, the early 1990s and at present concerns with the large number of students who completed college but then could not find a job commensurate with their educational skills. If properly utilized, these trained personnel could facilitate economic development, but when left idle or forced to take jobs beneath their qualifications, this group could be a major source of discontent. (Dolan, 1991).

The case of Singapore is a novel good example of education as vehicle for national development and heavily subsidized by government.

Government Role and a Regulatory Framework Model for Private Education

Instead of abandoning responsibility to education especially in the higher education to the hands of the private sector, greater and better government regulation should be exercised. An example in point is Singapore through its Ministry of Education (MOE). With higher budgetary allocation to education, the MOE, seeing in 1997 – 2007 that private education has significantly increased its foothold in education, began to initiate measures to ensure the following: raise corporate and academic governance standards; enhance student protection measures; compel disclosure of key information by private educational institutions (PEI); and require PEIs to seek, on a regular basis, fresh approval to renew their registration.

The MOE created the Council for Private Education (CPE) which has extensive regulatory and punitive powers over private education including foreign schools operating online or directly in Singapore. Foreign education companies operating or have programs in Singapore are also made to assure that programs offered by foreign schools are recognized in their home countries or get the degrees equivalent to the home universities.

The CPE made criminal offenses of such acts as failure of private school managers to do their responsibilities which “include the keeping of proper records; providing for students affected by the PEI’s closure to complete their enrolled course or a similar one in another PEI; and furnishing information requested by the CPE within the stipulated duration. The failure of a manager to fulfill his responsibilities without any justifiable reason will constitute a criminal offence. The CPE will also have the power to direct any PEI to suspend or remove any of its managers if they are found to be inadequate in carrying out the responsibilities of managing the school or are unable to discharge their prescribed duties” (MOE Singapore)

Private educators offering courses without CPE registration and approval were also made criminally liable. If a program is closed or a school is, it is the responsibility of the PEI to ensure that the student can continue and finish his studies in another PEI or through government support.

In Singapore’s enhanced regulatory framework through its Private Education Act, PEIs are allowed to operate under stringent accreditation measures using period of validity of registration as incentive for best performing PEIs. If the school performs well based on corporate and academic governance standards, a longer registration period is provided. Singapore’s private education act also stipulates maximum amount of fees PEIs can collect from students upfront as well as compel PEIs to disclose key information on its premises, courses and teachers to enable students to make informed choices. (Parliamentary-Replies2009)

If Singapore has made private education truly a partner for its national and social advance, the same can be done in our country where PEI managers under the new regulatory regime internalize their obligations as responsible education service providers.  The authority of CPE not only centers on intensified efforts to monitor the PEIs but also include, where necessary, undertaking of enforcement or punitive action. An appropriate regulatory authority necessarily includes investigative and enforcement powers to conduct regular audit checks and to investigate complaints against PEIs.

Singapore’s model of excellent public education and a strong complementary private education is the way to go for the Philippines as well. Instead of making our state colleges and universities income generating and catering only to the rich through STFAP (the socialized tuition fee program of UP which earns more income for the school than grants access to the poor), government can provide a suite of financing schemes to students to obtain university degrees like Singapore does through an extensive Publicly-funded degree programs.

It is understandable for our leaders trained in the American way to probably stop to looking at the west but draw sight to a fellow Asian country for examples in forging educational frameworks and policies in order to put an end to commercialized and profit-oriented private education and end neglect or disarray in the public school system.

Adding two years in basic education will serve only as palliative for as long as the structure and policies of our educational system proliferate deregulation of private education and perpetuate the same limited government foothold in public education.

An overhaul of the educational system is needed and can be done with enough political will. No reinventing of the wheel, so to say is needed, Singapore, an Asian neighbor, is an appropriate model to follow. Its educational institutions are not as aged as ours yet it ranks highest in the world. Its universities are recognized and the outcomes manifested through its students and citizens are acknowledged in the both educational and economic fields. To me this is proof that age-old institutions and traditions in education alone are not guarantees of correctness in line of development but good-effective educational policy does.

Instead of a commercialized education, a publicly-funded, vision-led, regulated and Asian-benchmarked educational system should be aimed for.

April 8, 2015

-end-

REFERENCES
1. Art. XIV, The Philippine Constitution, 1987.
2. Rappler.com/March 18, 2013.
3. Ronald E. Dolan, ed. Philippines: A Country Study. Washington: GPO for the Library of Congress, 1991.
4. Jee Geronimo/Rappler.com, May 20, 2014.
5. philbasiceducation.blogspot.com/2012/09/the-philippine-education-system-three.html#ixzz3W7uEbylk
6. philbasiceducation.blogspot.com/2012/09/the-philippine-education-system-three.html#ixzz3W7wdXuc2
7. census.gov.ph/content/2012-census-philippine-business-and-industry-private-education-establishment-all-employment
8. Top Moneymakers, Graphic, December 2003 issue
9. census.gov.ph/content/2012-census-philippine-business-and-industry-private-education-establishment-all-employment
10. bulatlat.com/news/4-23/4-23-education.html
11. www.deped.gov.ph/datasets?page=1
12. www.lawphil.net/statutes/presdecs/pd1972/pd_6_a_1972.html
13. www.bukisa.com/articles/536174_commercialization-of-education
14. philbasiceducation.blogspot.com/2012/09/the-philippine-education-system-three.html#ixzz3WVunTMJU
15. www.moe.gov.sg/media/parliamentary-replies/2009/09/second-reading-speech-on-the-p.php
16. www.ched.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/11-05/ASEA%20Higher%20Education.pdf
17. Prof. Flora C. Arellano, Philippine Education: Roadmap and Challenges, Department of Psychology, Polytechnic University of the Philippines, http://philrights.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/Philippine-Education.pdf
18. www.moe.gov.sg/media/press/files/2012/08/cuep-report-greater-diversity-more-opportunities.pdf