HIGH-QUALITY LOCAL TEXTBOOKS FOR FILIPINO SCHOOLCHILDREN: WHERE ARE THEY P-NOY?

Hey, I must say the National Conference on Research in Teacher Education (19-21 Oct.) was a successful gathering of educationists from different regions of the country and other parts of the world. I was part of the panel discussion this morning and Philippine basic education was the center of everyone's academic curiosity. Well, it's obvious that the country's basic education suffer from many "diseases." It's kind of awkward to be saying this in the presence of our foreign guests, but it's just difficult to talk about solutions when we don't honestly articulate our problems. We have many problems in education, all right, but I'll identify only three in this post and these are the following: (1) outdated or questionable curriculum; (2) poor teacher preparation; and (3) lack of high-quality (or model) textbooks from K to 10/12. Of these three problems, the easiest to fix is the curriculum, but then, a beautiful curriculum would amount to nothing if teacher preparation program in the country remains wanting in form and substance. This means, of course, that professors of teacher education and training should actively help in addressing the teacher prep problem. Now, of the three problems that I have identified, common sense tells us, and we know this already since the day Moses was born, that the most difficult problem to solve is teacher prep. It will take years before we could solve this problem as it takes time before a nation could produce highly competent teachers. Read how highly competent teachers are made in Finland, and we shall be on the same page on this matter. Because a beautiful curriculum is just a bunch of words in the wind without a huge army of good schoolteachers, I'm currently more interested in the production of high-quality local textbooks from K to 12. I'll take the risk of saying that we have none of these yet. Having good textbooks could help us lessen the impact of teacher prep problem on the learning and education of young Filipinos. Sad to say, we can't seem to pull out, at this point, any one basic education textbook that could withstand rigorous criticism. Ok, but if you know one exists, show it first to me.

I'd turn green with envy each time I open a ministry-accredited Singapore math textbook because, indeed, any student who could read, write, and think could effectively learn from it even when the teacher is not around. We don't have anything like those Singapore textbooks, both in math and in other areas of study. It's really disappointing to see that in our country one government administration after another did not seem to use the taxpayer's money to finance the writing and printing of high-quality (i.e., model) textbooks in various areas of education (i.e., science, math, values education, art education, physical education, etc.). Of course, highly-educated parents, private tutors, and other stakeholders should likewise be consulted before proposed textbooks are printed or distributed. For these stakeholders, especially parents, have many legitimate issues over the way textbooks are written. For example, a six-page reading text on people of Luzon, Visayas, and Mindanao is too long for a grade 2 to process everything that he/she is expected to learn in one sitting. Also, some books in values education would instruct students to indicate whether "Honesty is the best policy" is true or false when this statement is neither true nor false, i.e., it's a non-cognitive statement. I need not go to any school of book writing in order to know that this is not the way to write books for little children whom we expect to develop a passion for reading and learning. If books are written this way from grades 1 to 6, most of our elementary school graduates will, probably, never find it fun to read. Badly written textbooks, that is to say, would just burn our young ones out long before they enter college. I haven't done any study on this, but I'm tempted to think that badly written books could be one of the reasons why many Filipino teenagers do not seem to have a passion for reading, much less writing.

My recent advocacy is the production of high-quality textbooks for the young Filipinos because if we have good textbooks to offer in public and private schools, a huge part of our problem could be solved even if our teacher prep and basic education curriculum, at this point, are far from ideal.

Let's not forget that financing, using the taxpayer's money, the writing and printing of badly written textbooks is reprehensible as these textbooks will be distributed to millions of public schoolchildren whom, we know, are not yet fully equipped to sanitize or question what the badly written textbooks will preach and many ill-equipped teachers will unwittingly teach. I therefore suggest that all textbooks for public schoolchildren should be subjected to rigorous public scrutiny before WE, THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, THE GOVERNMENT, i.e., not just the select few, decide whether such books are worth using in elementary and high school. By public scrutiny, I mean, parents, even students, columnists, university professors, tutors, school administrators, and other stakeholders in education should be GENUINELY consulted by the administration running the government before textbooks are purchased using the taxpayers' money.

A dangerous Gabay sa Pagpapakatao (January 2013 draft)

This is just an outline of my critical comments on the "Gabay sa Kurrikulum: Edukasyon sa Pagpapakatao (January 2013)." I'm posting here my thoughts on the Gabay under the assumption that it has not been revised significantly during the August 2013 workshop in Tagaytay. Such is my assumption because I still hear from its proponents the exact same things that I question about it (i.e., problematic substance and form). I hope I'm wrong.

Why is this so important? Well, because the current draft of the Gabay is untenable, yet it could be institutionalized in its current substance and form. And what does that imply? Textbooks--and they will be likewise so flawed--will be written according to the standards of a seriously problematic curriculum guide using the taxpayers' money. So? Seriously flawed textbooks will be studied by little children (i.e., your future children or younger siblings in the coming years) who, more often than not, have no mental capacity to critique what their textbooks and teachers are saying. Consider then my observations. They are raw, but I think there are good reasons to believe they are true.

1. There is a disturbing discord between the bases of the expected outcome of Philippine public schooling and the proposed contents of Edukasyong Pagpapakatao from K to 10. While the opening part of the curriculum suggests that EsP promotes the use of intellectual values in order for the youth to meet the requirements of being a good person (i.e., productive citizen and good individual), the proposed contents of the curriculum, in general, will not do to ensure the acquisition of skills that are necessary to produce moral agents who are capable of higher order thinking and effective problem solving.

The bases of the desired end result of public schooling are the following: (1) may kakayahang makipagtalastasan; (b) nag-iisip nang mapanuri at may kakayahang lumutas ng suliranin; (c) ginagamit ang mga likas na yaman nang mapanagutan para sa susunod na salinlahi at; (d) produktibo, napauunlad ang sarili at ang pakikipagkapwa, at (e) may malawak na pananaw sa daigdig (p. 2). Obviously, all of these suggest that the student of EsP shall be trained to be a good thinker and problem solver. It is thus not surprising that the Gabay requires that one must likewise be capable of (1) pagunawa, (2) pagninilay,(3) pagsangguni, (4) pagpapasya at (5) pagkilos (pp. 2-3) in order for the product of the EsP curriculum to qualify as a good person (i.e., productive citizen and good individual). Up to this point I have no significant quarrel with the Gabay.

The real culprits, I am fully convinced, could be found in the proposed contents. For instance, K to 3 students shall be taught instead the following: (1) under the theme Pagpapakatao at Pagiging Kasapi ng Pamilya, (a) konsensya (conscience), (b) kalusugan (health), (c) pangangalaga sa sarili (care for oneself), (d) pagpipigil sa sarili (self-control), and pagiging tapat (honesty) (p. 7). How should these subject matters be taught is an issue that finds no answer in the Gabay. This makes teaching and book writing in EsP a difficult, and even dangerous, task. For, again, these contents do not jibe with the intellectual values (i.e., problem solving skills) that EsP claims to promote (pp. 2-3). My comments on the said theme apply to other themes at the next higher levels of basic education.

2. The Gabay is not consistent with the principle of spiral curriculum. Though there is a claim that it is an expanding spiral curriculum, the specific contents for different levels of schooling (i.e., K to 3, 4 to 6, 7 to 10) under each theme are actually loosely connected. Worse, these contents do not necessarily ensure that the students of EsP shall be able to master the relevant skills for (1) pagunawa (comprehension), (2) pagninilay (reflective thinking) ,(3) pagsangguni (consultation), at (4) pagpapasya (decision-making--leave the pagkilos (making a move) to the students).

3. How can we teach the concept of “conscience” to K to 3 students? Gabay should be clear about this and other similar concepts if its framers would insist that these concepts should be taught as though they are universal values. (I use my reason--not my conscience--when I solve moral problems.) Also, the proposed contents of Gabay should be age appropriate.

4. The proposed EsP Gabay content should be made faithful to the intellectual values it promotes (pp. 2-3 of EsP Gabay). Note that the existing themes in the current draft are not in keeping with the principle of spiral curriculum. What need to be spiraled are the intellectual values (i.e., pagunawa, pagninilay, pagsangguni, at pagpapasya), their subjects are moral or value concepts, moral principles, moral and practical issues, moral theories, etc. This means that some of the proposed contents in the EsP Gabay may be retained for as along as they are age appropriate. The intellectual exercises from one grade level to another should become progressively more challenging, while the objects (i.e., not the means which are intellectual) of inquiry may vary as students advance with their learning.

5. The Gabay should also define clearly and precisely all the intellectual values teachers are expected to teach and textbook authors must write about.

6. I tried to examine the Gabay very carefully and imagined myself writing a book on the basis of its proposed contents. And hitherto I cannot think of any way to defend a Gabay-based book should smart parents, teachers, and administrators subject it to rigorous criticism, especially if the criticism is something like millions of taxpayers’ money shall be spent to finance the printing of a book whose questionable contents shall be delivered to little children who do not have the mental capacity to question the books they read and whose contents are being endorsed/taught by their god-like teachers.

7. I think we should not call the subject "Edukasyon sa Pagpapakatao." The subject should be called Values Education.

8. I'll say more later.