“2 more years in Basic Education”, is it really a solution?
Adding another year level to both primary and secondary education is NOT the answer to increase the quality of education in our country. Why? Simply because it doesn’t guarantee anything.
No offense, but people who graduated in college nowadays doesn’t go far in the level of those people who just reached high school when it comes to JOB. NOT ALL BUT “MOSTLY”.
What we need to do is to strengthen its quality by PRIORITIZING it!!
The Alliance of Concerned Teachers (ACT) earlier said the country needs an additional 61,343 classrooms to accommodate the more than 21 million students this year. The country has a 1:45 ratio of classrooms to students, which is below the 1:35 international standard. Updating school materials and equipment, diversifying teaching styles to meet the needs of all learners would also help innovation move faster.
I sympathize the teachers who aren’t aware of using technologies as an aid for teaching.
Studying… Learning… it doesn’t require age! They are more willing to learn, willing to accept and adopt.
Let us help them so they can advance to another level. And please do not belittle them by saying “matatanda na sila para matuto gumamit ng computer”.
Stop blaming the teachers for the poor education. They had given so much for their students. Admit it, we too, also played a huge part on this failure.
The original thrust is very interesting, especially if we consider that 34.2 percent of the Philippine population is living below the poverty line (NSO, 2000). Also, according to a survey conducted in September 2007, about nine million Filipino families (52%) consider themselves “mahirap” or poor. If the population is 88.57 million in August 2007, with a projected population of 90.46 million by 2008, then the high level of poverty is certainly a problem. There is no debate about that. The debate is on the cause of such poverty and equally on the solutions.
“Teach a nation how to fish, feed the nation many lifetimes.”
Our past administration focused more on TEMPORARY SOLUTIONS. Like building bridges and highways which would only benefit those who have cars. Connecting one city to another. Promoting tourism and negotiating with other companies abroad for investments, and then they’ll tell us that business is the answer to poverty.
The logic appears to be simple. Successful business generates employment, reducing unemployment rate. Work for more people is a good sign of progress, although this may be too simplistic considering that economic gains have not trickled down to the poor.
We explored that path for a while, then we realized that it would be presumptuous for us to try to identify the root causes, something which experts have been debating for years. To discuss a solution, we must know the root/s of the problem.
We have solutions and options… but none of them really suits the problem.