K to 12 Integrated Report by DepEd Philippines

Analysis of the Basic Education of the Philippines:

Implications for the K to 12 Education Program

Analysis of the Basic Education of the Philippines: Implications for the K to 12 Education Program A joint study by AusAid-University of Melbourne and SEAMEO INNOTECH

FOREWORD This report integrates findings of two studies undertaken by SEAMEO INNOTECH and AUSAID The

findings are presented in order to inform stakeholders concerning differences and similarities between the primary and secondary education systems of the Philippines and those of comparator countries.

The original reports are available and include detailed analyses which inform this integrated report. The original AUSAID report was prepared under the guidance of Esther Care and Patrick Griffin of the

University of Melbourne. The original SEAMEO INNOTECH report was prepared by Senior Specialist, Ethel Agnes Valenzuela under the general guidance of the Center Director, Ramon C Bacani, and Manager

of Educational Research and Innovation Office, Philip J Purnell. This report was produced through close collaboration between SEAMEO INNOTECH, AUSAID, and the University of Melbourne.

Esther Care

Ramon C. Bacani

Assessment Research Centre

SEAMEO INNOTECH

Director

Melbourne Graduate School

The University of Melbourne

Director

INTRODUCTION 1. In the context of the Philippines moving to a K to 12 Basic Education Curriculum, this report provides an integration of recommendations presented by two studies1. One study was completed by SEAMEO INNOTECH and the other by University of Melbourne (Care & Griffin, 2011)

for AUSAID. Each study provides a review of aspects of education systems relevant to the Philippines. The contextual areas of review across these systems include aims of education, access and progression, teacher-pupil ratio, medium of instruction, and curriculum logistics; curriculum comparisons describe structure, framework, design, content, alignment, and assessment. These studies inform possible enhancements for the Philippines that could be addressed through the K to 12 initiatives.

2. In general, recommendations need to be based on understandings of what is regarded as good practice, and what makes sense given the specific context. In other words, there is no absolute

about what a good education system looks like. The evaluation of a system will be based on the degree to which it fulfils its aims.

3. We have three major reference points for recommendations – the stated educational goals of the

Philippines; characteristics of the twelve -year internationally-recognised education comparator systems which the Philippines might value; and international perspectives on what characterises

effective learning approaches for 21st century students and graduates. Given this organising

structure, we present our recommendations from the two studies2, linking these across the three reference points.

4. Given the different perspectives taken by the two studies – one a review of inputs to curricula as well as structural, content, organisation and adequacy aspects of the curricula, and the other a review of the content of the curricula – different sets of recommendations might be a logical

outcome. Where, however, similar recommendations have emanated from the two studies, greater

weight might be attached to them. Recommendations from the two studies provide the focus of this report. The recommendations are situated in the methods used to arrive at them, and are linked

with their justifications so that the reader can understand the source of the recommendations and evaluate their substance.

SEAMEO INNOTECH and AUSAID gratefully acknowledge the contribution of Dr Carlo Magno, Associate Professor of De La Salle University to this integrated report.

The SEAMEO INNOTECH study will be referred to as SEAMEO INNOTECH and the AUSAID University of Melbourne study as AUSAID UniMelb. This nomenclature should not be seen as implying that the views reflect official perspectives of these organizations.

Analysis of the Basic Education of the Philippines: Implications for the K to 12 Education Program

METHODS 5. Both studies used a consultative model to collect and evaluate data, to draw conclusions, and to make recommendations. The independent but parallel processes support the validity of the recommendations drawn from the analyses.

6. The SEAMEO INNOTECH study gathered information from the education ministries of

Brunei Darussalam, Malaysia, Singapore, and the Philippines using a series of validation meetings

with key curriculum officials from March 2011. Comparative research was specifically undertaken

through review of secondary data from reports, education statistics databases, curriculum reform studies, and UNESCO education reports examining Brunei Darussalam, Malaysia, Singapore, and

the Philippines. A curriculum survey was guided by the stated objectives of this research and was disseminated to education ministry officials. These officials also presented country papers relevant

to the major issues during regional consultations conducted in April 2011. Data collected through

these primary collection processes contributed to synthesis of findings. Comparisons were made on input conditions (aims of education, access and progression, teacher-pupil ratio, and medium

of instruction) and curriculum content (structure, curriculum framework, curriculum design, duration/time allotment, alignment, and assessment).

7. The three South East Asian comparators of the SEAMEO INNOTECH study were selected

based on the knowledge that each has recently reformed their education systems by aligning them

with international standards in pursuit of developing in their students twenty-first century skills. Their education systems are also performing well. In fact, Singapore placed first in terms of having a quality education system (Global Competitiveness Report, 2010–2011) and ranked among the top

placers in reading, mathematics, and science in PISA in 2009 and in TIMSS in 2007. Additional insights were taken from a review of Hong Kong’s New Secondary Education Curriculum. Hong

Kong, like the three aforementioned Southeast Asian countries, also boasts of a high-performing education system, according to the Global Competitiveness Report (2010–2011) and has one of the world’s best-performing school systems like Singapore, according to the McKinsey Report (November 2010).

8. The initial step taken for the AUSAID UniMelb study included multiple interviews of relevant

stakeholders in the Philippines from March 2011. Those consulted include representatives from

the National Educational Testing Research Center, Department of Education’s (DepEd) Bureau of Alternative Learning System (BALS), University of the Philippines (UP)- National Institute

of Science and Math Education Department (NISMED), SEAMEO INNOTECH, Ateneo de

Manila University (AdMU), League of Corporate Foundations (LCF), Philippine Business for Education (PBEd), Civil Society Network for Education Reform, DepEd’s Bureau of Primary

Education, Centre for Educational Measurement (CEM), and DepEd’s Bureau of Secondary

Education. This step was followed by desk analyses of formal curriculum documentation for English, mathematics, and science across Thailand, Vietnam, and the state of New South Wales (NSW)

Analysis of the Basic Education of the Philippines: Implications for the K to 12 Education Program

in Australia. Analysis of the Information Communications Technology (ICT) curriculum was also completed. Comparisons included content, sequence, and assessment. The three comparison countries were selected based on their geographic, developmental, and economic relevance to

Philippines. Australia was chosen because it is a developed country in the Asia Pacific region with

an education system that enjoys a high international reputation for quality. Thailand and Vietnam are South East Asian developing countries that in recent years have rapidly transformed their school education systems. Not coincidentally, Thailand and Vietnam have exhibited impressive

and sustained economic growth over the last two decades. All three comparator countries have K

to 12 systems that enjoy international recognition. It is understood that the Philippines aspires to securing such accreditation.

9. Initial results from the comparisons were subjected to an iterative process of consultation in order to

check validity of results, ensure contextual understanding by academics involved in the comparison

work, and optimise input by major stakeholders. Feedback through this process primarily from DepEd was central to the generation of the thematic organisation of findings.

AIMS 10. The aim of SEAMEO INNOTECH’s study was to describe the current condition of basic

education in Brunei Darussalam, Malaysia, Singapore, and the Philippines in order to identify

policy and curriculum options with regard to adding two years of secondary education to the country’s current system. Recommendations for K to 12 educational reforms were to be based on chosen benchmarks aligned with the country’s national development priorities. Guiding questions were:

A. How does the Philippine preschool, primary, and secondary education system compare with those of the benchmark countries in terms of: •

Input conditions, including aims of education; access, diversification, and progression;

•

Curriculum, including structure (duration and time allocation); organization (content,

•

Assessment

governance; teacher-student ratio; school calendar;

scope, sequence, and type); and design (framework and articulation); and

B. What are the policy and curriculum options to align Philippine basic education with regional standards?

11. The aims of the AUSAID UniMelb report were to inform the discussion concerning curriculum in the K to 12 education reforms through reference to relevant comparators. Focus of the study

was on the curriculum content, structure, sequence and assessment in the core studies of English, mathematics and science in the context of learning theories which underpin the curricula. Guiding questions were:

Analysis of the Basic Education of the Philippines: Implications for the K to 12 Education Program

A. To what extent do the four sets of curricula cover the same content? • •

Do they cover the same content at similar rates?

What are the main differences in content coverage?

B. Do the four sets of curricula take the same teaching and learning approach? •

Is there a focus on surface learning or on deep learning?

•

Are the outcome understandings and competencies specified?

•

Is there a focus on application of skills?

C. To what extent is it likely that students from each curriculum set will graduate with the same understandings and competencies? • •

Based on the curriculum documents? Based on assessment outcomes?

RATIONALE FOR RECOMMENDATIONS 12. The rationale for the SEAMEO INNOTECH recommendations lies in the educational characteristics of comparator systems in the Southeast Asian region in which the Philippines has

interest. This interest is based on the Philippines stated educational goals and the perception of

internationally accredited standards of these comparator systems. The National Education for All

Committee, chaired by the Department of Education (DepEd) engaged SEAMEO INNOTECH

to conduct the comparative analysis with selected Southeast Asian countries, Brunei Darussalam, Malaysia and Singapore that follow a 12-year basic education cycle. Moreover, these countries have

undergone review and modification of their curriculum to align them with the requirements of the

twenty-first century. Since 1949, several changes in the Philippine education structure, content, cycle, curriculum, and medium of instruction (MOI) have been suggested. The calls for extension of the

Philippine basic education duration as early as the post-World War II days are outlined in Table 1.The

cumulative clamour of these recommendations has contributed to the current K to 12 proposed reform.

Analysis of the Basic Education of the Philippines: Implications for the K to 12 Education Program

TABLE I

HISTORICAL BASES OF THE ADDITIONAL YEARS OF EDUCATION

(SEAMEO INNOTECH, 2011)

Year

Source

Recommendation

1949

UNESCO Mission Survey

Restore Grade VII in primary education

1953

Education Act

Revise the primary school system by adding one year (Grade VII)

1960

Swanson Survey

Restore grade 7 in primary education

1970

PCSPE

Extend secondary education by one year to better prepare students who have no plans to take up university education

1991

EDCOM Report

Retain the 10-year basic education phase while institutionalizing career counseling in primary and secondary schools in preparation for higher education

1998

Philippines Education Sector Study (World Bank and ADB)

Prioritize student learning through curricular reforms, the provision of textbooks, the use of the vernacular in lower primary grades, and the institution of a longer basic education cycle

2000

PCER

Implement a compulsory one-year pre-baccalaureate stage as prerequisite for students interested in enrolling in higher education degree programs

2006

Philippine EFA 2015 National Action Plan

Lengthen the educational cycle by adding two years to formal basic education (one each for primary and high school)

2008

Presidential Task Force on Education

Extend pre-university education to a total of 12 years, benchmarking the content of the eleventh and twelfth years with international programs

13. The Philippines aims to learn from the high-performing education systems and policies of its neighbours in Southeast Asia. Conducting a regional comparison thus assists the country in

identifying the appropriate structure, organization, duration, content, and alignment of basic

education. According to the 2001 Governance of Basic Education Act (GOBEA), basic education encompasses early childhood, primary, and secondary school education as well as alternative learning pathways for special needs and adult learners. The K to 12 reform proposal will focus on

reforming the basic education structure, curricula, and assessment at each level in order to optimise progression to the next level.

Analysis of the Basic Education of the Philippines: Implications for the K to 12 Education Program

14. The rationale for the AUSAID UniMelb recommendations lies within four themes, which were

derived from analysing the empirical differences across the four comparators, and situating these

differences in contemporary perspectives on learning theory relevant to 21st century education. The four themes are: •

Approaches to learning and teaching

•

Continuity between main stages of education

• •

Sequence of learning within subjects

Alignment of assessment with curriculum

15. Collectively these themes address the perception of a congested curriculum and the confusion

concerning equivalence of the Philippines current ten-year curriculum with a twelve-year

curriculum. The analyses demonstrate clearly that the system is not delivering the equivalent of a twelve year curriculum. The current Philippines curriculum provides multiple opportunities for students to learn very similar processes several times at the same conceptual level. If, instead, the

Philippines takes a developmental approach to learning and teaching, builds complexity in content

and concept within subjects over successive years and over the different main phases of education, and ensures that the curriculum is linked clearly with its assessable goals; then, together with the

extension of the education cycle to twelve years, the Philippines will have a real twelve-year system through which students will take twelve years to move and to achieve.

16. These four themes also provide an excellent framework within which to interpret the similarities

and differences between the curricula of the comparator countries. The themes are firmly ensconced in the research literature on curriculum studies.

CONTEXT 17. The quality of education in a country contributes to its economic development. The management of human capital is an investment that a country undertakes in order to sustain and improve economic

outcomes. By optimizing human skills, national outcomes are automatically optimized. This

perspective presumes that through education of its people, a country attains progress. The quality of education depends on the clear directions set in the national curriculum, an empowered teaching force manned by excellent teachers, and an environment that includes materials, technology, and

learning resources to foster learning among students. Specific indicators of implementing a high

quality and relevant national curriculum include subject-specific outcomes (for example, English, science, mathematics, etc.) which characterise skilled and competent graduates. The quality of graduates produced by educational institutions is measured through academic, vocational, and employment outcomes which lead to economic improvements.

Analysis of the Basic Education of the Philippines: Implications for the K to 12 Education Program

FIGURE 1

CURRICULUM AND OUTCOMES.

ADAPTED FROM CARE AND GRIFFIN (2011), AUSAID UNIMELB REPORT.

18. The basic education program information of the Philippines upon which the two studies report

rest draws on the 2002 Basic Education Curriculum (BEC) and the 2010 Philippine Secondary Curriculum.

19. The overarching organisational framework for the recommendations of both studies lie in affirmation of the proposed K to 12 reform. The basic education program information of the

Philippines upon which this report rests draws on the 2002 Basic Education Curriculum (BEC) and the 2010 Philippine Secondary Curriculum. Both primary and secondary curricula act as data for the two studies.

20. The current educational goals are bent on developing functionally literate Filipinos by 2015. Given the realities of the knowledge society, these goals need to be re-focussed in response to the development of students with twenty-first century competencies. The secondary education’s

end goals and its stages need to be clearly articulated in terms of workforce development, and pathways from high school to postsecondary competency certification must be seamless and

flawless. This articulation needs to be communicated in a common language that ensures common understandings.

21. In order to communicate goals clearly, the language used must not be subject to interpretation

but must be sufficiently evidence-based to ensure that the same message is understood by all. To this end, it is recommended that the goal of “functional literacy” needs to be replaced by a statement that more clearly communicates the nature of the skills and competencies that a twentyfirst century graduate from the Philippines basic education experience will possess. It is assumed that there will be a common core of skills and capacities required to live within, contribute to, and

benefit from, membership of the Filipino society. Beyond this common core will be specific skills Analysis of the Basic Education of the Philippines: Implications for the K to 12 Education Program

and competencies required for contribution in different parts of Filipino society, and which will be

acquired through following different pathways in the senior secondary years and in post-secondary education and work. All educational goals need to be defined and linked to learning pathways and learning outcomes.

22. Lengthening the cycle of secondary education, while maintaining the current six years of primary education, is the defining initiative of K to 12. In order to improve graduating studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; skills and

competencies, substantive changes in content and sequencing of teaching and learning must occur

from the Kindergarten year through Year 12. Accordingly, as part of K to 12, it is recommended that preschool education, kindergarten, should be made mandatory for all children aged five, in

order to provide them with a solid basis with which to enter Year 1 of a 12-year curriculum. Once

a student has embarked on the 12-year cycle, he or she needs an education system which has as its focus an emphasis on understanding rather than rote learning, understanding which leads to skills and competencies and to the broad application of these.

23. The Philippines currently has the least number of years spent studying for basic education. Although there is mixed evidence concerning the links between length of time in training and

achievement outcomes, the time in study inequity between the Philippines and the comparator

countries can be assumed to contribute to the differential educational outcomes. Without doubt, the lack of a 12-year system in the Philippines is regarded internationally as evidence of lower educational outcomes for Filipino students graduating from basic education. See Table 2.

Analysis of the Basic Education of the Philippines: Implications for the K to 12 Education Program

Singapore Playgroup

Preschool K

Elementary

Primary

Elementary

Y3 P5

Pr1

Pr2

Pr3

Pr5

D5 Pr4

Pr5

Primary

Pr4

Primary

G1 G2 G3 G4 G5

Primary

G1 G2 G3 G4 G5

Elementary

G1 G2 G3 G4 G5

Preschool

Pre-school

Prep

Malaysia

Pre-primary

Preschool

Playgroup

Nursery

Early Programs

Brunei Darrusalam

Vietnam

Thailand

Australia-NSW

Philippines (Proposed)

Philippines

Country

AUSAID UniMelb and SEAMEO INNOTECH, 2011

Age

AGES AND STAGES ACROSS COMPARATOR COUNTRIES

TABLE 2

Pr6

3YR G9

Secondary

G9 S1

Y11

G12

G11

G10

Secondary

Upper Secondary

G11

G12

M6 (Vocational)

M4 M5 (Vocational) (Vocational) Secondary

M6 (Academic)

M5 (Academic)

Y12

Secondary

G12

G11

Senior High

Upper Secondary M4 (Academic)

Y10

G10

4YR

Lower Secondary

Secondary

Junior High School

2YR

High School

Intermediate

1YR

24. Although the Philippines does not consistently participate in international studies of educational

achievement, the evidence available demonstrates that Filipino students rank lowest of the

countries within this comparator group that do participate in the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS), for example. Figure 2 displays the relative achievement

levels in mathematics and science from 1995-2007 for Australia, from 1995-1999 for Thailand, and from 1999-2003 for the Philippines. Both Australia and Thailand have far higher levels of achievement in these areas, based on TIMSS. Given the strong correlations between performance on TIMSS and the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), it might reasonably be inferred that the relatively weak performance of Filipino students in mathematics and science

areas would be replicated in other areas measured by PISA such as literacy and problem solving. Note that the mandate of PISA is that every three years, it assesses to what extent students near

the end of compulsory education have acquired some of the knowledge and skills essential for full participation in society. On the evidence available, the current Philippines education system is not delivering this outcome.

FIGURE 2

TIMSS RESULTS FOR THE PHILIPPINES, AUSTRALIA, AND THAILAND

25. At a local level, The National Achievement Test (NAT) administered to Year 6 students shows

a pass rate of approximately 70% over the past few years; the NAT for the secondary level given

to Year 2 has a pass rate of about 47%. These results may not be indicators of poor achievement because there may be a mis-match between the aspirations for educational outcomes and the

set examinations. Given the paucity of information concerning Filipino studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; educational

outcomes at an international level, it is essential that the local education assessment system be

firmly integrated with the goals of the education system and firmly connected with the curriculum, in order to evaluate the degree to which students are able to benefit from that system

Analysis of the Basic Education of the Philippines: Implications for the K to 12 Education Program

KEY FINDINGS How does the Philippines preschool, primary, and secondary education system compare with those of the benchmark countries in terms of selected input conditions such as teacher-pupil ratio and medium of instruction and in terms of curriculum?

26. The aim of education in the Philippines currently emphasizes functional literacy. The major indicators of functional literacy according to the Literacy Coordinating Council (LCC) includes

(1) communication skills, (2) critical thinking and problem solving, (3) sustainable use of resources

and productivity, (4) development of self and a sense of community, and (5) expanding one’s

world vision. These indicators are not within the scope of the common understanding of the term “functional literacy” among experts. The comparator countries education plans and goals are anchored on twenty-first century competencies, hence it would be good to align the new education goals as targeting 21st century literacies.

27. Teacher-pupil ratio. The teacher-pupil ratios in preschool are typically smaller than at any other education level in all comparator countries. Some countries, such as Brunei Darussalam

and Malaysia also have teaching assistants. There is wide variation in ratios across schools within countries. At primary and secondary school levels the Philippines has the highest average number of students per teacher in comparison with the other countries.

28. Medium of Instruction. The medium of instruction in the countries studied is bilingual or multilingual except for Australia and Thailand. Both English and mother tongue are used

as the medium of instruction in Brunei Darussalam, Singapore, Philippines, and Vietnam. Notwithstanding this apparent similarity in use of English and mother tongue, there are significant

differences in how these are used for instruction. The four macroskills of listening, speaking, reading, and writing are not equally advanced across the language of instruction either within

or across the comparator countries but are varied according to the role played by that language in the country. Connections need to be made between learning of a language to be used for local

communication and teaching of a language to be used for the learning in other curriculum areas. For example, the Thai curriculum includes preparation for intercultural interactions in English, taking into consideration the vocational significance of the language. In particular at the secondary

level, where English becomes the main language of instruction, the degree to which English is the predominant language in daily use has implications for learning and teaching through this medium.

29. Progression. In terms of progression from one education level to another, most countries at the primary level implement automatic promotion. At secondary level, differences emerge. Singapore

streams students in the first year while Malaysia and Brunei Darussalam, stream students into various programs in the upper secondary level. Brunei Darussalam offers two general pathways in Year 9. Malaysia implements four streams for year 10 students – arts, sciences, technical, and religious streams with all students taking the same core. This is somewhat analogous to the Analysis of the Basic Education of the Philippines: Implications for the K to 12 Education Program

Philippines introduction through the 2010 Secondary Education Curriculum of special programs

for two hours daily in the arts, journalism, engineering, science and foreign language. Australia NSW permits students in Year 10 to select subjects, while maintaining core subject areas such as English, and Thailand and Vietnam offer differentiated programs in the final two years of secondary education.

30. Preschool. In Brunei Darussalam, Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore, Vietnam, Thailand, and NSW Australia, preschool education is offered before students start to study in Year 1. The programs

offered prior to Year 1 vary both within and across countries, and depending on age of children

provide engagement from 8 hours to 20 hours per week. The countries share in common their aim for holistic development (cognitive, physical, emotional, and social development) and preparedness to enter the primary years. Consequently, there is a strong core of similar skills in all countries, with some variations according to values, religion, physical and creative activities.

31. Primary education. Primary education in the Philippines, Brunei Darussalam, Malaysia, and Singapore all focus on fundamental skills needed by learners to advance their learning. These skills

include basic scientific and mathematical concepts, language, and life skills. Goals in the Philippines tend to be content driven with emphasis on the acquisition of knowledge over process-related

learning to learn skills. The time spent on primary education in Brunei Darussalam, Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, Vietnam, and NSW Australia varies greatly. There are also major

differences in the proportion of time devoted to different subject areas across the comparators. The Philippines allocates most time to English, mother tongue, and mathematics in the primary years. Malaysia devotes its greatest time to mother tongue and English; Brunei to mathematics

and mother tongue; Singapore to English, mother tongue and mathematics; Australia NSW to

literacy and numeracy. The similarities reflect the common valuing of literacy and numeracy skills. 32. Secondary education. The goals in secondary education in the Philippines, Brunei Darussalam, Malaysia, Singapore, Vietnam, Thailand and Australia NSW vary in the outcomes and skills

emphasized. In the Philippines, the BEC focuses on use of Filipino and English for communication, numeracy skills for practical application, and a wide range of scientific and social concepts, while the 2010 Secondary Education Curriculum identifies developing functional literacy. Brunei

Darussalam aims to provide students with all-round development as individuals; Malaysia outlines objectives across communications, science and technology literacy, physical and aesthetic and personal development, humanistic and spiritual attitude and values. In Singapore, the thrust in the lower secondary is to develop national identity. In Thailand, the focus is on full development of the

learner in all respects; in Vietnam, the goal is to develop individual personality and capacity for the

building and protection of the country; and in Australia NSW the focus is on the knowledge, skills

and understandings, both generic and subject-specific, required as a basic preparation for civic life, work, and lifelong learning.

Analysis of the Basic Education of the Philippines: Implications for the K to 12 Education Program

To what extent do the Philippines and comparator country curricula cover the same content? â&#x20AC;˘ â&#x20AC;˘

Do they cover the same content at similar rates?

What are the main differences in content coverage?

33. Curriculum Organization. The four sets of curricula do not cover the same content, although there are marked similarities. In particular, in the study of the English language, the Philippine

curriculum does not cover written expression, argumentation, and daily use of language to the same degree as found in NSW curriculum. The Philippine curriculum does not consider cross-

cultural communication in comparison with comparator countries. The Philippines is most similar in curriculum to Vietnam, which focuses primarily on linguistic structures, rather than

communication (favoured in Thailand) or the social context of language (a major focus in NSW). The English curricula of the four systems are organised in very different ways. Notably, the

Philippine curriculum is disjointed in its transition from primary to secondary English education. 34. Coverage. The Philippine mathematics curriculum does not cover a number of topics included

in that of NSW: for example, three-dimensional shapes, using map skills, financial mathematics, data analysis, correlation, and normal distribution. Moreover, very little material on probability or

graphing is included in the Philippine curriculum. Otherwise, mathematics content is covered in a reasonably similar way in the four systems examined. However, the pace of content delivery in

the Philippines is very fast, implying a focus on surface level learning rather than understanding, whereas a system such as that of NSW spreads topics over more grades. In the Philippines, more

than in the other systems, progression is based on topic rather than conceptual complexity, meaning that most mathematical concepts are introduced in early grades and then repeated.

35. Science Content. The specification of science topics in the Philippines is consistent with that of the comparison countries. However, the approach taken of concentrating on one branch of

science only in each of Grades 8-10 restricts inclusion of some branches of science due to students

not having covered the multiple bases required for their acquisition. This limits the capacity of students to develop conceptual understanding of some topics. The Philippine system is the only one investigated that focuses solely on one branch of science per grade.

36. Information and Communications Technologies (ICT) in education. There is no formal ICT

subject in the mainstream Philippines Basic Education Curriculum. Information technology content is mostly integrated with Technology and Livelihood Education (TLE). It is inadequate compared with direct teaching of ICT in Brunei Darussalam, Malaysia, and Singapore.

See Table 3, excerpt from SEAMEO INNOTECH (Table 46).

Analysis of the Basic Education of the Philippines: Implications for the K to 12 Education Program

TABLE 3

ICT LEARNING STRANDS IN THE SECONDARY EDUCATION CURRICULUM

Topics/Learning Areas

Brunei Darussalam

Commercial & general data processing

Malaysia

Computer Networks & Communications

Singapore

Philippines

Computer operations

Computer software

Computer Systems

Computers in Everyday Life

Programming

/ /

Process, Production & Delivery of ICT Product

37. In comparison with the direct instruction approach characterised in particular by the Brunei Darussalam curriculum, the curricula of Australia NSW and Thailand demonstrate an integrated approach.

38. ICT. The use of ICT in schools for teaching and learning is relatively new, and because ICT use is

completely dependent on the availability of infrastructure such as a reliable electricity supply, there

are major differences between the levels of ICT use within each of the countries being compared in the two studies. For example, in the curriculum-specific comparisons of the AUSAID UniMelb

study, only the NSW curriculum has specific details regarding ICT content within other subject domains, although there is some mention of it in Grade 7 in Vietnam. This is characteristic of

education systems where there are major differences between the hardware, software, and teacher expertise available to schools, and where different societies have differing attitudes to, and levels of use of, ICT in government, business, and commerce.

Do the compared curricula take the same teaching and learning approach? •

Is there a focus on surface learning or on deep learning?

•

Are the outcome understandings and competencies specified?

•

Is there a focus on application of skills?

Analysis of the Basic Education of the Philippines: Implications for the K to 12 Education Program

39. The Philippine approach to teaching and learning in the English curriculum is more content-based than the other systems investigated, although the 2010 curriculum has moved more towards the style of a native-speaking English curriculum, with deeper learning goals. The Thailand curriculum

promotes communication with other non-native English speakers and cultural awareness more than does the Philippine curriculum. Additionally, the NSW curriculum places stronger cognitive

demands on students than does that of the Philippines. In all systems analysed, progress is measured

by the accumulation of skills. Vietnam and the Philippines focus on linguistic structures. Thailand concentrates on communication skills. NSW focuses on the connections between language and its social contexts.

40. In the Philippine mathematics curriculum, no guidance is provided to teachers regarding how

teaching approaches should be implemented in classes, in contrast with the other curricula. The Philippine system also uses more formal mathematical language in its curriculum approach. The

focus on formal mathematical principles and their mastery in the Philippine curriculum contrasts with the other systems, which instead emphasise skills as outcomes.

41. Both the Thailand and NSW science curricula specify how scientific investigation and communication skills should be developed at each grade. These two systems in particular

emphasise to teachers the importance of these skills. Such guidance and emphasis is not found in

the Philippine science curriculum. While the 2010 Philippine curriculum indicates which skills

and content should be taught in Grades 7 and 8, no framework for their development over time is present. Moreover, the Philippines has a comparatively large content load to be covered, leaving less time for practical work and development of understanding.

To what extent is it likely that students from each curriculum set will graduate with the same understandings and competencies? â&#x20AC;˘ â&#x20AC;˘

Based on the curriculum documents? Based on assessment outcomes?

42. There is little information regarding expectations of student graduate attributes at a general level across the curriculum documents investigated. The available information suggests the Philippines is the most focused on literacy, and less so on numeracy and scientific and social knowledge. Thailand

graduate expectations centre on national and cultural values. Vietnam and NSW statements are minimal, but suggest their primary education aim is to prepare students for citizenship.

43. Even less information on graduate outcomes can be obtained from examination of assessment

outcomes. In all systems, the English curricula show insufficient links between assessment

practice and curriculum specifications. For mathematics and science in the Philippine curriculum, assessment expectations vary widely.

Analysis of the Basic Education of the Philippines: Implications for the K to 12 Education Program

44. Given the emphasis placed on content rather than practical skills and development of conceptual understanding, it is unlikely that Philippines students will graduate with the same competencies as students from the comparator countries, and NSW and Thailand systems in particular.

45. The two studies analysed practices across the countries in terms of classroom assessment, national examinations, national surveys of achievement, and large scale surveys of student achievement. Of

importance is the degree to which each of these types of assessment informs classroom practice, provides information relevant to students’ progression, and identifies the degree to which goals have been attained. Analyses across the Philippines, Vietnam, Thailand and Australia NSW were undertaken to identify the structure, alignment, nature, and goals of assessment implemented as part of the curriculum. All comparator systems implement classroom assessment, but the form of

which varies widely. The classroom-based assessment data are used primarily for summative rather

than formative purposes. In other words, the data are not used to help identify where a teacher can best intervene to maximise a student’s learning.

46. Although a majority of education systems will provide statements to the effect that curriculum content (or in some cases textbook content) should be assessed, the curriculum content vary widely in specificity and form. The Philippines 2002 Basic Education Curriculum states that all

the content provided in the textbooks should be covered, while the 2010 Secondary Education Curriculum states that assessment is designed to align with contents of the curriculum. In both these cases, the focus on content automatically implies the valuing of memorisation. In the 2010

assessment guidelines, skills and expected learning products are explicitly stated, but instructions on how to assess these skills are not uniformly constructive or realistic. The same template is applied to all subjects and quarters within years, which therefore does not provide for intrinsic differences in learning areas or across levels.

47. Across the AUSAID UniMelb comparators, the Philippines, Thailand and Vietnam all primarily

use numeric grades for recording and reporting assessment results (with Vietnam shifting to letter or word grading “Excellent, Good, Weak, Poor” etc.), while NSW Australia encourages the use

of criterion referencing so that students receive descriptive information concerning their level of achievement, which is linked to the standards frameworks.

48. Across the SEAMEO INNOTECH and AUSAID UniMelb comparators, all countries apart from NSW Australia and Vietnam implement national assessments at Grade 6; several re-assess at

Grade 8 or 9. All countries except Philippines assess in Years 11 or 12, either through implementing

Cambridge GCE examinations or through national examinations, which are benchmarked on international standards (with the exception of Vietnam), and which permit recognition for graduates to apply for entry to universities internationally.

49. NSW Australia implements national surveys of student achievement in Years 3, 5, 7 and 9, primarily for benchmarking purposes. The national examinations implemented by the other comparators

Analysis of the Basic Education of the Philippines: Implications for the K to 12 Education Program

tend to be used both for benchmarking and progression purposes. Where countries have a policy

of progressing the majority of their students, it is not clear what function national examinations, in comparison with national surveys, serve. Where a majority of students do not progress or do not progress automatically, national examinations can provide useful certification purposes.

50. The Philippines is the only country that does not administer a national end-of-level assessment

test at end of secondary education, notwithstanding that for the Philippines this would currently be at end of the tenth year of education rather than twelfth year.

SUBSTANTIVE RECOMMENDATIONS 51. The main recommendations from the UniMelb studies, with subordinate recommendations, are

made in the light of that goal, and in light of findings from the studies. All countries specify

that students should Know, Apply, Understand, apart from the Philippines where emphasis is

on “knowing” and “applying.” Australia, Thailand and Vietnam place much more emphasis on ‘understanding” than does the Philippines. This difference is reflected in the different curricula and

in different classroom practices, especially through repetitive versus explorative and constructive

processes. In comparison with Australia, Vietnam, and Thailand, the Philippines emphasizes

learning of content but not learning to learn and does not encourage meta-cognitive processes (reflection on learning, deriving meaning, non-procedural problem-solving).Hence, a restricted

range of higher order thinking skills is developed, many of which are 21st century skills, in the Philippines. This limits the capacity of Philippines students to develop the skills and understandings required for them to be recognized internationally as reaching the same levels of skills as students from the comparator countries.

Recommendations based on approaches to learning and teaching Approaches to learning and teaching refer to whether the curriculum is focussed on: •

the content through which learning is delivered;

•

the skills that might emanate from those understandings; or

• •

the concepts regarded as valuable to ensure student understanding; some combination of these.

Rationale Why develop curricula that place emphasis on student evidence of understanding and skills development rather than accumulation of content?

Analysis of the Basic Education of the Philippines: Implications for the K to 12 Education Program

Because if students are taught with a view to understanding concepts, they do not need to be taught what is basically the same process multiple times for every new content area. If taught with a view to

understanding, students can apply concepts more broadly and don’t need to be engaged in surface level, repetitive teaching, and learning cycles! Consequences of taking a content or surface approach to learning

are that students are not able to generalise their learning or apply it to new contexts. Both SEAMEO INNOTECH and AUSAID UniMelb studies revealed that subjects in the Philippines are presented in such a way that repeated applications of similar content are required, leading to a curriculum that is crowded merely by virtue of multiple applications of similar strategies, not by virtue of breadth or depth of content or concept. Example In the Philippines primary science curriculum, students are required to classify things (plants, animals, soil, objects, household products, etc) on 11 different occasions. It is not specified within the curriculum that at

any of these times are they to be taught about classification systems, ways of classifying accurately, or given the opportunity to develop their own rules for classification. At Grade 3, the curriculum requires students to classify, on separate occasions, food, animals, plants (twice), objects, and soil. At Grade 4 no classification

activites are required. At Grade 5, there are four separate requirements – to do with animals, vertebrates, invertebrates, and plans; and at Grade 6 there is one requirement, to classify household products. This approach leaves the development of general classification skills up to the discretion of individual teachers and may result in very different outcomes for students in different classes/schools.

If the curriculum includes as a goal, the understanding of the nature and function of classification systems, of how to go about identifying accurate classification methods, and exploring the rules for so doing, then

students will not need to be taught essentially the same process multiple times. What is the consequence of this “understanding” approach? Efficiency in learning and getting rid of the unnecessary repetitive

activities which involve rote learning and which fill the current Philippines primary curriculum. There is a choice: we can teach students lots of classifications, but they will only be able to classify those things; or we can teach them one thing (classification rules) and they will be able to classify anything.

According to the current Philippines elementary curriculum, students are taught how to classify every different group:

Analysis of the Basic Education of the Philippines: Implications for the K to 12 Education Program

But if we teach students how to classify, then they can apply those rules to any set of things:

Analysis of the Basic Education of the Philippines: Implications for the K to 12 Education Program

Recommendation Set 1 It is recommended that the Philippines develop curricula that place emphasis on student evidence of understanding and skills development rather than accumulation of content. For English specifically, it is recommended that the Philippines: 1.1 Specify skills relevant to the way English is used for literary and creative purposes and for expressing social and personal needs

1.2 Identify language skills related to the expected use of English across applied contexts and as a medium of instruction especially in subjects such as science and mathematics

For Mathematics and Science specifically, it is recommended that the Philippines: 1.3 Ensure pace of delivery allows for development of student understanding and skill rather than mere content coverage

1.4 Ensure that use of technology in mathematics and science be in tune with 21st century demands For primary level subjects mathematics, sciences, social studies, and EPP specifically, it is recommended that the Philippines:

1.5 Revise curricula in order to minimise unnecessary repetition of surface level of learning and to maximise understanding of core concepts

Recommendations based on sequence of learning within subjects Sequence of learning within subjects refers to whether there is a logical and developmental progression of

content, concepts, and skills within a subject across the years of a curriculum. In any learning progression, different elements of that progression will have greater or lesser importance at particular points across the

years of education. This will have consequences for what must be emphasised at different points within the curriculum. Rationale Why is it important to sequence content and concept within subjects? What are the consequences of not doing so?

Consequences of compartmentalised and segmented approaches to curriculum are that students are not

able to build growing sophistication of concepts and learning in order to acquire advanced understandings. The K to 12 curriculum must be aligned with international practice in offering an integrated science and

technology approach, integrated mathematics, and civics education which is not devoted solely to history. The SEAMEO INNOTECH and AUSAID UniMelb studies identified that all six comparator countries

have adopted a spiral approach to mathematics and science curricula. At secondary level, their curricula drive continuous skill development across topics.

Analysis of the Basic Education of the Philippines: Implications for the K to 12 Education Program

Example For students to be able to convert units of mass, they need to be able to do two things: â&#x20AC;˘ â&#x20AC;˘

use units of mass

multiply and divide by 10, 100, 1000, etc.

In the current Philippines curriculum, they learn how to convert units of mass (Grade 2) before they learn to multiply and divide by 10, 100, 1000 (Grade 3). Therefore the only way they can learn to convert is by rote.

If skills were developed in a different order and the pace of the curriculum allowed it, the teacher could show students how the pieces of the puzzle fit together and they would be able to understand how and why metric conversion, of all types of units, works.

Analysis of the Basic Education of the Philippines: Implications for the K to 12 Education Program

This approach would remove the need to re-teach the same concept for each different unit of measurement, would save time, and would enhance student skills!

Recommendation Set 2 It is recommended that basic skills be strengthened at the primary level. It is recommended that a spiral progressive curriculum be promoted at the secondary level. For ICT specifically, it is recommended that the Philippines: 2.1 Introduce ICT at the primary level to develop 21st century skills For MAPEH specifically, it is recommended that the Philippines: 2.2 Strengthen MAPEH through the primary level For English specifically, it is recommended that the Philippines: 2.3 State clear progressions of the skills by year level For mathematics and science specifically, it is recommended that the Philippines: 2.4 Have a discipline base across and within each grade with topics developed in sophistication each year where this is relevant, without discontinuity

2.5 Demonstrate the potential to emphasise how mathematical and scientific problems relate to the real world, increasing their relevance

Recommendations based on continuity between main stages of education Continuity between main stages of education refers to the degree to which there is similarity of curriculum

and pedagogical approach between the end of one phase in the curriculum and the beginning of another, for example between the end of primary and the beginning of secondary. Rationale What is the benefit of maintaining continuity of curriculum across the main phases and stages of curriculum?

Continuity within the teaching and learning environment enables students to progress smoothly from one phase of education to another. They are able to apply the learning from the earlier stage seamlessly to the

greater cognitive demands of the more advanced stage. This continuity reflects the natural physical, mental, and cognitive development of students.

Analysis of the Basic Education of the Philippines: Implications for the K to 12 Education Program

Discontinuity can be reflected in a lack of attention to progressions within subjects, to planning and implementation by different sections of a department responsible for education, by differential focus on

content versus outcomes, and by different learning and teaching approaches. Consequences of discontinuity include the confusion and alienation of students moving from one level of education to another, taking form in plateaus in educational achievement, particularly in the early years of secondary education.

It is important that primary and secondary levels provide a unified framework to ensure smooth progression

for K to 12 learners. Whereas in the Philippines, the primary level currently adheres to the 2002 BEC, the Secondary Education Curriculum (2010) has a curriculum designed to teach for understanding. Example A unified conceptual framework for identifying development in English language learning is needed. This should be common across other languages such as Filipino and mother tongue. A coherent curriculum

moves smoothly from one level to the next especially at the transition points between different stages of the school system. There is therefore a current need to manage the transition of students from the 2002 Primary English curriculum to the 2010 Secondary English Curriculum due to the different orientations of these curricula. The 2010 Secondary English Curriculum is based on the Understanding by Design approach to

curriculum development in which results or desired outcomes are specified, which provide standards for content and performance as well as essential understandings and essential questions. Assessment is then

concerned with the product or performance standard and lists appropriate evidence for this, followed by development of learning plans that provide suggested instructional activities and resources.

In this example, the graphics identify the main points of emphasis in the two curricula at primary and secondary phases. There is a need to strike a balance between language form and language function. As can

be seen, there is spiralling development of specific skills within each stage but with no continuity between

the stages. This discontinuity reflects lack of appreciation of the relevance of the component, or macroskills,

of English at primary level, to the sophistication required for development of the secondary level skills. Equally in the reverse direction, students at the primary level are not prepared with some of the skills that would help them progress seamlessly to achieving the current literary goals at the secondary level.

Analysis of the Basic Education of the Philippines: Implications for the K to 12 Education Program

Recommendation Set 3 It is recommended that the primary and secondary curricula cohere to the same teaching and learning

approach to ensure continuity between the main stages of education. If the current 2010 curriculum design model at secondary level, based on an Understanding by Design approach, is to be maintained, this will necessitate the same design model to be implemented across the primary subjects.

It is recommended that the goals of the Philippines education system be revised in line with 21st century

learning needs, beyond current stated aims of functional literacy. The revised goals will then require the re-alignment of primary and secondary education curricula.

It is recommended that upper secondary curricula (Grades 11 and 12) be designed which are consistent with student exposure to early learning experiences, to strengthen studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; abilities in core subjects, and provide different higher education and technical and vocational pathways.

It is recommended that introduction of electives at the proposed new upper secondary level be supported

by a comprehensive career guidance program to assist students in appropriate elective selection anchored on career goals.

It is recommended that alternative delivery modes such as open high school, distance, and correspondence

education be investigated to ensure that delivery of education across K to 12 will provide equal opportunity for all.

For English specifically, it is recommended that the Philippines: 3.1 Develop a unified conceptual framework integrating the learning and development of English language skills and understanding across primary and secondary levels

Recommendations based on alignment of assessment with curriculum Alignment of assessment with curriculum refers to the extent to which students are able to take advantage of the learning opportunities available to them, as demonstrated through assessable learning outcomes, and

the learning with which they are ready to engage. In order to ensure this alignment, the curriculum must

be written in such a way that the outcome competencies students are expected to demonstrate are clearly

delineated, clearly linked to the content being taught (which has been designed to ensure understanding), and measurable.

Analysis of the Basic Education of the Philippines: Implications for the K to 12 Education Program

Rationale Why do we need to link assessment so strongly with curriculum? How will this enhance the skills and competencies of our students?

Consequences of lack of alignment include loss of direction in the delivery of the curriculum such that students are not taught the essential concepts, skills, and information required for them to demonstrate expected outcomes. Assessment needs to be fully aligned with standards-referenced frameworks to define

outcomes, to specify content to be learned, and to describe levels of achievement. This alignment provides all stakeholders with clear indications concerning expectations of learning outcomes. It is particularly

important to provide information for external stakeholders such as employers and vocational and higher education providers concerning expected outcomes and standards. Assessment results will be important for certification purposes for graduates from the education system, given that a large proportion of Filipino

students currently exit formal education at several points. Evidence of academic qualifications and record of performance in school will facilitate entry to employment or further studies. What are the enabling conditions for alignment of assessment and curriculum? In order for curriculum writers and teachers to be aware fully of the learning expected of students, it

is essential that they have common understandings of performance objectives. Assessment experts can

help to provide this common language while simultaneously ensuring that assessment tasks will generate information that is measurable and consistent with learning objectives. It is the teachers’ responsibility to

provide input concerning the practicalities of tasks, and the curriculum writers’ responsibility to describe how a task might indicate achievement of learning objectives. Example The following statement is drawn from the Philippines English Outcomes, Grade 8 (DepEd, 2009); “The learner demonstrates literary and communicative competence through his/her understanding of the

different genres of Afro-Asian Literature (including Philippine Literature) and other text types for a deeper appreciation of Philippine culture and those of other countries.”

Across the five strands of English language learning, Table 4 lists the activities assessed by items in the

Grade 8 National Achievement Test (2009). There are many more activities not sampled than those listed. As can be seen, there are no items on the NAT that sample the Listening or Speaking macroskills, and

none of the topics are clearly linked to the stated English outcomes. Words, phrases and clauses in italics represent an original topic area listed in the curriculum but which the NAT items do not sample. Of

interest is that these italicized, not sampled activities typically represent higher order thinking or skills. To

the degree that assessment signals the value of what is taught, this is an unfortunate omission since it is precisely this level of skill that could reflect depth of understanding.

Analysis of the Basic Education of the Philippines: Implications for the K to 12 Education Program

TABLE 4

ACTIVITIES SAMPLED BY GR 8 NATIONAL ACHIEVEMENT TEST (NAT)

ENGLISH (2009) EXCERPT FROM AUSAID UNIMELB REPORT 3, P. 207

Strand

Test Items

Listening

None

Speaking

None

Reading

Use the periodical index to locate information in periodicals Interpret and compare orally or in writing information presented in tables, charts, graphs, etc Distinguish between facts and opinion and note expressions that signal opinions Guess the meaning of idiomatic expressions

Writing

Fill out personal data sheets (school forms, bank forms, etc) Expand ideas using a varity of and cohesive devices to make the flow of thought from one sentence to another smooth and effortless Use writing conventions to indicate acknowledgement of resources

Literature

Note the values underscored by the writer in literary pieces Single out and explain figurative language used Point out and express appreciation of sensory images in literary forms Draw conclusions and make inferences based on details/specific ideas Determine the authorâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s tone and purpose for writing a literary selection

Recommendation Set 4 It is recommended that end-of-cycle assessments be implemented at Year 6, Year 10 and Year 12. It is recommended that assessment specialists be involved in the writing of curricula in order to ensure alignment of assessment with curriculum.

It is recommended that support be provided to teachers to strengthen assessment practices in basic education.

It is recommended that explicit statements about the nature of higher order thinking skills within each topic at each year level be developed and linked to assessment to ensure these skills have been both taught and monitored in their development.

It is recommended that explicit statements of competency outcomes and graduate attributes be developed for the main education exit points which can be used to guide curriculum writers. For assessment strategies specifically, it is recommended that the Philippines:

Analysis of the Basic Education of the Philippines: Implications for the K to 12 Education Program

4.1 Replace assessment emphasising summative tests with formative assessment approaches

4.2 Modify national assessment program to include a combination of item types, including objective, closed type questions such as short answer and multiple-choice as well as open-ended tasks that mirror the curriculum and its desired outcomes

4.3 Train teachers in the use of a wider range of evidence of student learning than just test scores

4.4 Develop assessment techniques and strategies for mathematics and science that offer the opportunity to assess enabling skills in the sequence of the subject

4.5 Pay considerable attention to the development of rubrics for assessment needs during curriculum

writing to illustrate the nature of rubrics and to identify the kinds of learning outcomes and quality learning expected of students

4.6 Subject criteria for performance-based assessment tasks to skills audits in order to ensure that tasks are realistic, well-specified, and measurable

4.7 Involve written performance-based assessment tasks in mathematics and science that mix both traditional and authentic assessment

KEY RECOMMENDATIONS 52. The list of key recommendations from SEAMEO INNOTECH and AUSAID UniMelb is based on the key findings on the basic education in the Philippines through benchmarking with comparator countries. (See Table 5)

TABLE 5

SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS

FROM SEAMEO INNOTECH AND AUSAID UNIMELB REPORTS

Recommendation 1. Revise the current Philippine education goals to make them clear, focused and relevant attuned to the development of 21st century skills. The revised goals will then require re-alignment of primary and secondary education curricula. 2.

Ensure that lengthening the cycle of schooling makes a drastic improvement in studentâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s skills and competence.

3. Revise curriculum frameworks to maintain continuity of curricula across the main phases and stages of schooling.

Analysis of the Basic Education of the Philippines: Implications for the K to 12 Education Program

SEAMEO AUSAID INNOTECH UniMelb

Recommendation

SEAMEO AUSAID INNOTECH UniMelb

4. Revise the curriculum to decongest it, remove repetition, give more emphasis to development of student understanding, and emphasise learning how to learn. Both studies revealed that subjects in the Philippines are presented in such a way that repeated applications of similar content are required, leading to a curriculum that is crowded merely by virtue of multiple applications of similar strategies, not by virtue of breadth or depth of content or concept.

5. Strengthen ICT integration in the basic education curriculum in order to meet the 21st century skills required by employers. Integrate ICT in different subject areas in the primary and secondary education.

Align the learner assessment certification system with the k to 12 curriculum, expanding the range of assessment methods used, and strengthening the role of formative assessment as an important component of the teaching learning process.

7. Align the K to 12 curriculum with international practice by offering an integrated science and technology approach, integrated mathematics, and civics education which should not be devoted solely to history. The studies identified that all six comparator countries have adopted a spiral approach to mathematics and science curricula. At secondary level, their curricula drive continuous skill development across topics. 8. Ensure progression from one phase of education to the next so that students can apply the learning from the earlier stage seamlessly to the greater cognitive demands of the more advanced stage. This continuity reflects the biological and cognitive development of students. 9. Enhance the development of alternative delivery modes such as open high school, distance, and correspondence education to ensure that delivery of education across K to 12 will provide equal opportunity for all.

x x

10. Align assessment with standards-referenced frameworks to define outcomes, to specify content to be learned, and to describe levels of achievement. This alignment should provide all stakeholders with clear indications concerning expectations of learning outcomes.

11. Build assessment strategies and associated analytical, reporting and dissemination processes by carrying out the following major activities.

12. Develop multiple pathways for upper secondary education. The study recommends 3 tracks of upper secondary schooling, where there is an option for a six-year general education, an applied secondary education composed of core subjects and elective career-oriented studies, and an Integrated Programme which is similar to a two-year junior college.

Analysis of the Basic Education of the Philippines: Implications for the K to 12 Education Program

SUMMARY 66.The major differences across the comparators in terms of goals for their students become evident in

primary education with the Philippinesâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; greater focus on knowledge and content than skill, and in

secondary education with comparator countries identifying individual development and lifelong skills relevant to functioning constructively within their societies. The differences in approach

implied by the Basic Education Curriculum (2002) and the Secondary Education Curriculum (2010) in the Philippines have the outcome of some apparent inconsistencies between the goals of education across these phases.

67. There is little information regarding expectations of student graduate attributes at a general level across the curriculum documents investigated. The available information suggests the Philippines is

the most focused on literacy and less so on numeracy and scientific and social knowledge. Thailand graduate expectations centre on national and cultural values. Vietnam and NSW statements are minimal but suggest their primary education aim is to prepare students for citizenship. Even less

information on graduate outcomes can be obtained from examination of assessment outcomes. In all systems, the English curricula show insufficient links between assessment practice and curriculum specifications. For mathematics and science in the Philippine curriculum, assessment

expectations vary widely. Given the emphasis placed on content rather than practical skills and development of conceptual understanding, it is unlikely that Philippine students will graduate

with the same competencies as students from the comparator countries, and NSW and Thailand systems in particular.

68. The two studies analysed practices across the countries in terms of classroom assessment, national

examinations, national surveys of achievement, and large scale surveys of student achievement. Of

importance is the degree to which each of these types of assessment informs classroom practice, provides information relevant to studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; progression, and identify the degree to which goals have been attained.

69. The Philippines is the only country that does not administer a national end-of-level assessment

test at end of secondary education, notwithstanding that for the Philippines this would currently be at end of the tenth year of education rather than twelfth year. The new structure is divided into

three stagesâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;the elementary level, which will end with an assessment; the lower secondary level, which will lead to the awarding of a lower high school diploma based on the results of a national

examination; and the upper secondary level, which will have core, compulsory, and elective subjects. The upper secondary level should ensure that students follow a coordinated study program leading

to advanced or higher polytechnic or university courses. At the end of year 12, they will undergo

standards-based assessment, which will lead to the awarding of an advanced high school diploma.

Analysis of the Basic Education of the Philippines: Implications for the K to 12 Education Program

IMPLICATION OF TAKING UP RECOMMENDATIONS 70. The interdependence of the recommendations of this integrated SEAMEO INNOTECH and

AUSAID UniMelb report requires that innovative reform of the Philippines education system to

K to12 may best be undertaken through a coordinated organisational structure which over-arches current separation between primary and secondary education levels, between curriculum writers and assessment experts, and between subject specialists. In order for the Philippines to use this

opportunity to implement an internationally-recognised twelve year education system which will

equip Filipino students with skills for the future, it is essential that these groups work together. It is proposed that a Taskforce with executive responsibility across these sectors be established in

order to facilitate this major reform. SEAMEO INNOTECH and AUSAID are committed to continue to support the Philippine government as it undertakes this education reform.

Analysis of the Basic Education of the Philippines: Implications for the K to 12 Education Program