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

#BlueReport

I should share what this kid does... with help.



#bluereportshsateneodecebu3borgia from bong galvan on Vimeo.

Teaching and Learning - my take of it

I have found Erikson’s Psychosocial Development and Piaget’s Cognitive development approach as most meaningful in my understanding of how children learn and develop.  Erikson anchors a child’s moral judgment in his growth in resolving basic crisis during certain periods of his biological development.  

A “normal” child goes through stages below, set along with Piaget’s Cognitive Development approach sees growth of a person as both an event happening outside and inside the child.  As his biology or physique grows, the relationships and the mind also develop.  Recently, there have been studies about the development of generations, from the baby boomers to generation Z.  Looking at the different generations of humanity right now, I am often overwhelmed and perplexed at the generational differences brought about by the dynamic change in our culture, more specifically, the influence of technology in our growth and learning.   Much of the generational differences though would, I believe, redound to how our brains process information, our exposure to technology and how it impacts our lives.

Despite the generational differences, which I believe are real and varied, the fundamental stages still should serve as framework for understanding growth of persons and teaching developmentally.  The generational differences do not alter the stages of psychosocial and cognitive development which makes, more than ever, Erikson and Piaget, as relevant, and to me, more appealing in their learning theories.   The newest generation, despite its disparity in characteristics to, say, the baby boomers, will definitely follow the same stages proposed by Erickson and Piaget.

Developmental/ Biological age	Erikson’s Stages of Psychosocial Development	Piaget’s Stages of Cognitive development	Connections/Insights on the present generations
0 – 18 mos. Infancy	Trust vs. Mistrust	Sensorimotor 0 – 2yrs	Gen ?.  The next generations growing in the middle of the 21st century will certainly have a different world and education.  A glimpse of their world now points to technology such as Augmented Reality and String Theory.  I wonder what this gen’s learning style would be like.  Certainly their brains are wired differently.  Security and confidence for this generation could only be enhanced by technology integration in their learning.
	-sense of security and assurance is important
18mos./2yrs – 3yrs Early Childhood	Autonomy vs. Shame/ Doubt
	-sense of confidence and independence in functional skills
3 – 5 yrs Preschool	Initiative vs. Guilt	Preoperational 2 – 7 yrs Concrete Operational 7 – 11 yrs	Gen Z.  Born after 1990 and introduced to the graphical web.  Amateurs internet searchers lacking skills in evaluating web content. These kids were the first born with the Internet and are suspected to be the most individualistic and technology-dependent generation. Sometimes referred to as the iGeneration. These pre- and elementary schoolers at present do miss out on concrete learning if all exposures are virtual.
	-exploration and sense of control of factors in environment to accomplish tasks
5 – 11 yrs School age	Industry vs. Inferiority
	-sense of competence to accomplish is important, e.i. to make things and make things together
12 – 18 yrs. Adoslescence	Identity vs. Confusion	Formal Operational (Adolescence – Adulthood) 11 yrs up	Gen Y.  Millennials.  Born 1980-2000 (Age 14-34).   They experienced the rise of the Internet, 9/11 and the wars that followed.   Because of their dependence on technology, they are said to be entitled and narcissistic.
	-sense of individual identity in the midst of a group (fitting-in) as primarily important
19 – 40 yrs Young Adulthood	Intimacy vs. Isolation		Gen X.  Born 1965-1979 (Age 35-49) They were originally called the baby busters because fertility rates fell after the boomers. As teenagers, they experienced the AIDs epidemic and the fall of the Berlin Wall. Sometimes called the MTV Generation, the "X" in their name refers to this generation's desire not to be defined.
	-value for relationships
40 – 65 yrs Middle Adulthood	Generativity vs. Stagnation		Baby Boomers.  Born 1943-1964, the boomers were born during an economic and baby boom following World War II. These hippie kids protested against the Vietnam War and participated in the civil rights movement in the west, all with rock 'n' roll music blaring in the background.  In our society, they are now the main force of leadership in our institutions – business, politics, culture and education.  Most of them have the resources and influence over others.
	-a sense of legacy
65 yrs – death Maturity	Ego Integrity vs. Despair
	-sense of fulfillment

I belong to Gen X and within the later phase of Piaget’s Formal-Operational Cognitive development period and currently dealing with issues of Intimacy if by Erikson’s Psychosocial development yet I deal with different generations in their varying periods.  I deal with students who are Gen Ys working on their psychosocial Identity who are in their early phase of Formal-Operational Cognition.  For the most part though, I deal with teachers who are either Gen Xs (majority of them) or Baby Boomers (our veterans and guardians). Reflective administration entails understanding well the contexts of the people I work with, work for and those I lead.

On a sidelight, at home, I have Gen Zs who demand attention and wit too.

Genuine learning, I believe, happens when there is understanding, the ultimate objective of teaching.  Understanding however has to be manifest on the side of the learners, this has to be seen or evident.  When I see students demonstrating mastery of (a) skill/s, demonstrate confidence in delivery of this skill or ability, execute accurately a concept, skill or task, I can say there is learning that takes place.  However, not all learnings can be exhibited immediately, some learned skills or concepts come later in the year or even later in life.

I had a privilege of working as a prefect of discipline in the past before becoming an administrator.  From my observations, learning a value is not immediate.  The change I hope for in the student or students come later in either a similar situation he is faced with again or even after school, I mean, after high school when they come back and tell me, sir, I realized, learned or appreciated this from you or from what you taught, albeit the teaching happened informally and not in the formal setting of the classroom.

Psychology plays a crucial role for education. By analogy, psychology is to teaching as anatomy is to medicine.

An approach cannot work for a long term unless anchored on a principle of how children learn.

People have a natural disposition to learn, it is in our nature to explore.  Human babies are born with an innate desire to know the world around them and are relentless with curiosity to explore them.  The need to know is like a drive, an urge like hunger or thirst that need to be satisfied.  According to Dr. Medina, which most recent researches also assert, babies are preloaded with software that upon birth activates to satisfy the need to know.  It’s not anymore the tabula rassa view of a learner.

 All throughout life, we do not seem to outgrow the thirst for knowledge.  According to Dr. John Medina, researchers have already shown that even the adult brain stays malleable like a baby’s brain, and so, as adults, we can grow new connections, strengthen existing ones and even create new neurons allowing us all to be lifelong learners.  If children are allowed to remain curious, they will continue to deploy the natural tendencies to discover and explore.

Piaget’s approach of schema and disequilibrium are important concepts for me.  That as persons, as learners, we categorize our sensory information in order for us to attain a sense of equilibrium, a sort of sense of stable-zone in our brains.  But when an issue or doubt is set in, we find ways to adapt the information into our schema if not, change schemas to adapt to the change of equilibrium.

It seems to me that it connects to this inherent desire in us to be curious.  Curiosity stems from this sense of urge to seek equilibrium in our schemas.  But because the real world is dynamic, always interplaying, our exposure to the real world – real people, relations and animate and inanimate surroundings - always shakes our schema which prompts us to seek answers to attain an equilibrium.

In the classroom, the importance of the art of questioning which triggers curiosity of students or “shakes” or in a sense intrigues their schema is very important such that knowledge or subject content facilitated to them is dealt like thirst being quenched. 

A healthy learner has to have a flexible schema, which is attained through varied exposures.  In this way, the fixed schema disposition of a child or learner is avoided where parang bigot, or at worst, contented or stagnating mind na tayo.  A student or child who does not learn falls into a fixed schema condition.

I think here in this Piagetian concept, it underlies as well the importance of theory testing among high school students.  For Piaget, this is the formal stage of cognitive development where students can tackle less concrete information, the abstract knowledge or the possibilities given the realities.  Meaningful learning especially for students at this stage need testing in real experience and not just in theoretical contexts.   In the context of Vygotsky saying that the learners must individually transform complex information to make it their own, the need to interact with people and the world becomes even more important.

Implications to learning would be that children should be consistently exposed to the real world or should be consistently exposed to people who operate the real-world.

TEACHERS and TEACHING

However, on teachers naman, they are not homogeneous in their interest to learn and in fact are not always wanting to learn even if the students they teach are dynamic individuals produced by their dynamic times.

Developmentally appropriate teaching means that the teachers’ method adapts to the developmental period of the students, catering to needs appropriate during the period of the child and that the teachers understands what it takes to do so.

Working in a Jesuit school, I have come to understand that we proceed from a certain charism, if you call it, in our way of facilitating learning.  This way of proceeding is called the Ignatian Pedagogical Paradigm or the IPP, a way of teaching and formation patterned after the Spiritual Exercises of St. Ignatius of Loyola.  In the IPP, as in the Spiritual Exercises, the importance of reflection is central.  Because “Jesuit spirituality is a spirituality of choice, and it is natural for Jesuits to be both non-coercive and nondirective in assisting the young with their decision-making challenges without in any way just leaving the decision-maker to his or her own inexperience, fears, and impulses” (Ignatian Pedagogy).

The framework in the next page, to me, presents in brief the relation ship of the learning core (teacher-student-content) as akin to the relationship between the retreatant-retreat director and God.  What nourishes learning in this triangle of the learning core is the interplay of the process of Experience-Reflection-Action.

  

             In this paradigm, the students are supposedly engaged not just cognitively but affectively.  Not just the intellect or mind but also the heart is involved in the learning process for effective learning to take place.

            To me, there are certain aspects of the paradigm that sound like abstract, but I come to realize that much of its aspects are now confirmed or affirmed by research and educational practice.

The emphasis on Experience and Reflection, for instance, parallels with Information Processing Model where it posits that a strength of a lesson is on how much of it goes into the long term memory.   From stimulus, all lessons do not however proceed directly to long term memory, as much of it will be lost to either decay or some going into the short-term and working memory.  Some “experience” about the lesson should be undergone by the learner for the lesson to be more effectively committed to long term memory.  Repetitions, which I believe, is essentially the cycle of the Ignatian Pedagogical Paradigm - the Experience-Reflection-Action process - helps to commit lessons or content or truth for that matter, into the long term memory of the learner.

I am a believer of the Ignatian Paradigm.  Albeit at the moment, I struggle very much with it, but my readings in neuroscience, learning processes and the brain as well as on assessments further affirm my faith in the importance of the interplay of Experience-Reflection-Action in the learning process.

Most of the classrooms I visit and the teachers I see now in school do a lot of front-loading, e.i., the traditional  input & “download” via, mainly, the lecture  or “banking” (depositing information into the students head) then testing or assessment in the traditional way.

I pretty much want to enhance the E-R-A cycles in our teachers and in our teaching but I don’t seem to be able to do so.  I get lost often and end up continuing what has been continually done by our teachers.  I grope for an effective approach on raising the level of impact our teachers make on our students through their lessons.

In our curriculum frameworks, we have articulated that it should be along Ignatian Paradigm albeit UBDized (based on the 3-stage lesson format starting with goals & evidence of learning as the first step), as we usually call it, but I don’t seem to concretely see this unfolding in the many teaching sessions I observe.

            Another difficulty I encounter in the IPP is that we currently do not have an instrument to evaluate its implementation, for us to know exactly the degree if it is implemented and what are its concrete results in the growth of the students (the effectiveness of it).   I feel that these are difficult to measure since assessments schemes we have focus mainly on the content that our students earn but the change of a student or students from point A to point B of their learning seems abstract for measuring. 

The evaluation of the implementation of the IPP is an area of interest for me to research about.  However, I am honestly facing more blank walls now than answers as to the hows and means of proceeding with this study.  The topic seems too broad but I believe that Erikson, Piaget and St. Ignatius have much in common in their understanding of how effective learning takes place or is achieved.

REFLECTIVE ADMINISTRATOR

Essential to the work of a school leader is the crafting of decisions on three general matters of the school – school leadership which involves the creation, essentially, of structures and directions; instructional leadership which is the core of an administrator’s work and school management, the daily operations which often bites the bulk of the leader’s time and tasks.

Reflectiveness which stands on the skill of discernment, e.i., being able to read the patterns, the connections, “the movement of the spirit” so to say in the events, activities, movements and flow of the school, to make it in tune to its raison d ‘etre (vision and mission), when embraced and exercised well by an administrator will  direct his or her decisions on how to interplay well the three functions of structure, instruction and management. 

My own weakness is that I get so engrossed with matters of management most of the time and the work of creatively setting up or supporting or reexamining structures to foster growth for our students and teachers, I fail to work on well.  Instruction is a core competence I grope so much about, and it does not help my exercise of leadership as acting principal.

 

Add this situation to the barb of people-handling, mostly reforming naggers and complainers in our team, that I need to do, administration becomes a huge burden.

Nonetheless, it is a relief to understand that part of the beauty of reflection and discernment is that I am able to see myself in the midst of the tasks I do and read the patterns or movements as-I-go to find out where these lead me.  This is a discipline, I admit, so difficult to sustain such that I, so often, don't observe it.  When I discern on matters that need my decision, I consider an activity or a matter whether it belongs to the cluster of school leadership, instructional leadership or management, from which, depending on the priority by importance, I weigh the dilemma then make a stand.  More often though, school management issues or tasks which often require less visioning, grab the most attention.

If I am only better able to look at the choices I make and align these with the goals of my role as leader, as acting principal, as lay-formator working with the Jesuits – I could confidently say that I have done the core of my leadership discernment.  If I am better able as well to articulate my choices, enjoin many to support it and foster growth-mindset in our team, I could probably say I am doing okay in leadership.

However, these are my continuing struggles.  My assurance though is that the result that challenging experiences and reflection produce is a better individual in the end.

Some References I used:

Medina, John, Brain Rules, Pear Press 2008.

Geck, Caroline, The Newest Net Generation, 2014.

http://www.ignatianspirituality.com/ignatian-voices/education-arts-and-sciences/why-jesuits-are-in-secondary-education/#sthash.UjGBKvmy.dpuf

Ignatian Pedagogy, A Practical Approach.

-30-

Genuine Learning

Post by Edutopia.

Travel Logs - wonder how secondary school students can use this as well.

School Year 2014-2015

Hope the links work...