The Crisis of Public Education in the Philippines

By Ronald Meinardus

According to the human capital theory, the economic development of a nation is a function of the quality of
its education. In other words: the more and better educated a people, the greater the chances of economic
development.
The modern world in which we live is often termed a "knowledge society"; education and information have
become production factors potentially more valuable than labor and capital. Thus, in a globalized setting,
investment in human capital has become a condition for international competitiveness.
In the Philippines, I often hear harsh criticism against the politics of globalization. At the same time,
regarding the labor markets, I can hardly think of another nation that is so much a part of a globalized
economy than the Philippines with nearly ten per cent of the overall population working beyond the shores
of the native land.
Brain drain. Apart from the much debated political, social and psychological aspects, this ongoing mass
emigration constitutes an unparalleled brain drain with serious economic implications.
Arguably, the phenomenon also has an educational dimension, as the Philippine society is footing the bill for
the education of millions of people, who then spend the better part of their productive years abroad. In
effect, the poor Philippine educational system is indirectly subsidizing the affluent economies hosting the
OFWs.
With 95 per cent of all elementary students attending public schools, the educational crisis in the Philippines
is basically a crisis of public education. The wealthy can easily send their offspring to private schools, many
of which offer first-class education to the privileged class of pupils.
Social divide. Still, the distinct social cleavage regarding educational opportunities remains problematic for
more than one reason. Historically, in most modern societies, education has had an equalizing effect. In
Germany, for instance, the educational system has helped overcome the gender gap, and later also the
social divide. Today, the major challenge confronting the educational system in the country I come from is
the integration of millions of mostly non-European, in most cases Muslim, immigrants. Importantly, this
leveling out in the context of schooling has not occurred in this part of the world. On the contrary, as one
Filipino columnist wrote a while ago, "Education has become part of the institutional mechanism that divides
the poor and the rich."
Let me add an ideological note to the educational debate: Liberals are often accused of standing in the way
of reforms that help overcome social inequalities. While, indeed, liberals value personal freedom higher than
social equality, they actively promote equality of opportunities in two distinct policy areas: education and
basic heath care.
For this reason, educational reform tends to have a high ranking on the agenda of most liberal political
parties in many parts of the world.
This said, it is probably no coincidence that the National Institute for Policy Studies (NIPS), liberal think-tank
of the Philippines, invited me the other day to a public forum on the "Challenges on Educational Reform."
With the school year having just started and the media filled with reports on the all but happy state of public
education in the country, this was a very timely and welcome event. I was impressed by the inputs from
Representative Edmundo O. Reyes, Jr, the Chairman of the Committee on Education of the House of

Representatives, and DepEd Undersecretary Juan Miguel Luz. Both gave imposing presentations on the state
of Philippine education.
Although I have been in this country for over a year now, I am still astonished again and again by the
frankness and directness with which people here address problems in public debates. "The quality of
Philippine education has been declining continuously for roughly 25 years," said the Undersecretary -- and
no one in the audience disagreed. This, I may add, is a devastating report card for the politicians who
governed this nation in the said period. From a liberal and democratic angle, it is particularly depressing as
this has been the period that coincides with democratic rule that was so triumphantly and impressively
reinstalled after the dark years of dictatorship in 1986! Describing the quality of Philippine school education
today, the senior DepEd official stated the following: "Our schools are failing to teach the competence the
average citizen needs to become responsible, productive and self-fulfilling. We are graduating people who
are learning less and less."
While at the said forum, more than one speaker observed that the educational problems are structural in
nature, I missed propositions for reform that are so far-reaching to merit the attribute structural.
Gargantuan problems. While the Undersecretary very patiently and impressively charted out the four
policy directions of the political leadership of his ministry (taking teachers out of elections, establishing a
nationwide testing system, preserving private schools, raising subsidies for a voucher system), to me -- as a
foreign observer -- these remedies sound technocratic considering, what one writer in this paper has
recently termed, "the gargantuan magnitude of the problems besetting Philippine basic education."
Let me highlight two figures: Reportedly, at last count more than 17 million students are enrolled in this
country's public schools.
At an annual population growth rate of 2.3 per cent, some 1.7 million babies are born every year. In a short
time, these individuals will claim their share of the limited educational provisions.
"We can't build classrooms fast enough to accommodate" all these people, said the DepEd Undersecretary,
who also recalled the much lamented lack of teachers, furniture and teaching materials.
In short, there are too little resources for too many students.
Two alternatives. In this situation, logically, there exist only two strategic alternatives: either, one
increases the resources, which is easier said than done considering the dramatic state of public finances, or
one reduces the number of students.
This second alternative presupposes a systematic population policy, aimed at reducing the number of births
considerably.
But this, too, is easier said than done, considering the politics in this country -- or to quote Congressman
Reyes: "Given the very aggressive and active intervention of the Church addressing the population problem
is very hard to tackle."

Literacy rate in the Philippines has improved a lot over the last few years- from
72 percent in 1960 to 94 percent in 1990. This is attributed to the increase in
both the number of schools built and the level of enrollment in these schools.
The number of schools grew rapidly in all three levels - elementary, secondary,

and tertiary. From the mid-1960s up to the early 1990, there was an increase of
58 percent in the elementary schools and 362 percent in the tertiary schools. For
the same period, enrollment in all three levels also rose by 120 percent. More
than 90 percent of the elementary schools and 60 percent of the secondary
schools are publicly owned. However, only 28 percent of the tertiary schools
are publicly owned.
A big percentage of tertiary-level students enroll in and finish commerce and
business management courses. Table 1 shows the distribution of courses taken,
based on School Year 1990-1991. Note that the difference between the number
of enrollees in the commerce and business courses and in the engineering and
technology courses may be small - 29.2 percent for commerce and business and
20.3 percent for engineering and technology. However, the gap widens in terms
of the number of graduates for the said courses.
TABLE 1: TERTIARY ENROLLMENT AND
GRADUATION BY FIELD OF STUDY. SY 1990-1991
FIELD OF STUDY

ENROLLMENT GRADUATION
No.
%
No.
%

Arts and Sciences

196,711

14.6

29,961

13.6

Teacher Training &

Education

242,828

18.0

34,279

15.5

Engineering &
Technology

273,408

20.3

32,402

14.7

Medical and Health related Programs

176,252

13.1

34,868

15.8

Commerce/Business
Management

392,958

29.2

79,827

36.1

Agriculture, Forestry,
Fishery,
and Veterinary Medicine

43,458

3.2

7,390

3.3

Law

20,405

1.5

2,111

1.0

Religion / Theology

1,695

0.1

209

0.1

TOTAL

1,347,715 100.0 221,047

100.0

On gender distribution, female students have very high representation in all

three levels. At the elementary level, male and female students are almost
equally represented. But female enrollment exceeds that of the male at the
secondary and tertiary levels . Also, boys have higher rates of failures,
dropouts, and repetition in both elementary and secondary levels.
Aside from the numbers presented above, which are impressive, there is also a

1.

2.

3.

4.

need to look closely and resolve the following important issues: 1) quality of
education 2) affordability of education 3) goverment budget for education;
and 4) education mismatch.
Quality - There was a decline in the quality of the Philippine
education, especially at the elementary and secondary levels. For
example, the results of standard tests conducted among elementary
and high school students, as well as in the National College of
Entrance Examination for college students, were way below the target
mean score.
Affordability - There is also a big disparity in educational
achievements across social groups. For example, the
socioeconomically disadvantaged students have higher dropout rates,
especially in the elementary level. And most of the freshmen students
at the tertiary level come from relatively well-off families.
Budget - The Philippine Constitution has mandated the goverment to
allocate the highest proportion of its budget to education. However,
the Philippines still has one of the lowest budget allocations to
education among the ASEAN countries.
Mismatch - There is a large proportion of "mismatch" between
training and actual jobs. This is the major problem at the tertiary level
and it is also the cause of the existence of a large group of educated
unemployed or underemployed.
The following are some of the reforms proposed:

1. Upgrade the teachers' salary scale. Teachers have been underpaid;

thus there is very little incentive for most of them to take up advanced
trainings.
2. Amend the current system of budgeting for education across regions,
which is based on participation rates and units costs. This clearly
favors the more developed regions. There is a need to provide more
allocation to lagging regions to narrow the disparity across regions.
3. Stop the current practice of subsidizing state universities and colleges
to enhance access. This may not be the best way to promote equity.
An expanded scholarship program, giving more focus and priority to
the poor, maybe more equitable.
4. Get all the leaders in business and industry to become actively
involved in higher education; this is aimed at addressing the mismatch
problem. In addition, carry out a selective admission policy, i.e.,
installing mechanisms to reduce enrollment in oversubscribed courses
and promoting enrollment in undersubscribed ones.
5. Develop a rationalized apprenticeship program with heavy inputs
from the private sector. Furthermore, transfer the control of technical
training to industry groups which are more attuned to the needs of
business and industry.

1.our educational structural ladder 6+4+4, 6years in elemetary, 4 in secondary and typically 4 years in tertairy
level to gain a bachelor's degree is not enough to suffice our theoretical proficiency and technical knowhow
2. the government only spends 12percent of the national budget for education, that is far from the suggested
cut of the WORLd Bank which is 20%. our finance to education is very far from other Asian countirs like
Malaysia and Thailand.
3. lack of well-trained teachers and classrooms to cut down number of students.
4. low salaries of teachers.
5. the government is very slow in giving quality and standardized education to provinces. they rather give
much time to schools near in Manila.
6. Instructional materials for teachers are not enough.
BIG MONEYS USUALLY GO TO DEFENSE AND CORRUPTION!!
explain how a failure in one of the organ system affects the function of other organ system.