Panel Discussion on K+12 in Phil

Moderator: Good Morning Ma,am Lasalita, Good Morning classmates. The Dept. of education has proposed to overhaul the basic and secondary education curriculum by adding 2 more years to the system. Our group will present a panel discussion on the merit of this proposal. May I present to you the members of my panel. To my right areR1,R2, and R3. They will be presenting the side of the Dep. Of Education. While on my left side are L1, L2 and L3. This group is ready to present the critical group of youths, students, parents and academic community. Our group had conducted thorough research from the internet and had interviewed various groups. The result is some very interesting insights which we hope to present to you this morning. Please be attentive as you will be given a chance to ask questions or give additional information after our discussion. The proposal, better known as K-12 had been met with criticism from various groups. But despite the negative reactions, DepEd seemed determined to enact the program arguing that the K-12 program will address the deteriorating quality of education in our country. Do you agree on this argument?
R1 : Let me cite a school in the Mt. province named St. Mary’s of Sagada. This school had successfully implemented K-12 and as a result had been topping the National Achievement Test in the Mt. Province. What better proof do we need that K-12 will improve our present educational system?
R2 : And may I add that the K-12 model had been patterned in the most advanced countries like the USA, Canada and Australia? No less than our Pres. PNoy had advocated this program to keep up with global standards and to make even high school graduates employable and to enable students to have more time to choose which careers best suit their abilities among other reasons.
R3 : Let me just quote Sen. Edgardo Angara who chairs the Senate Committee on Education. He said, “We’ve got to equalize our years… everybody else has 12 years.” He even said that this program wasn’t “anti-poor” because this program is going to help the poor by giving them a fighting chance in quality education.
Chairman : Well, I could see that my fellows at my right are truly convinced on the merit of K-12 but I am also sure that they on my left are equally prepared to present its negative aspect. Am I right Mr L1?
L1 : Indeed, you are Mr. Chairman. Mr. R1 said that K2 will solve the deteriorating quality of education in our country. But our educational system deteriorated not for lack of hours or time but for lack of enough facilities, lack of qualified teachers, lack of textbooks and updated technology. Our friend here even cited the St. Mary’s of Sagada as a concrete example of his argument noting that this school implemented K-12 and now is topping the National Achievement Test. But he failed to mention that this school has a 1:20 teacher to student ratio and is not suffering from any shortage in faculty or facility. How about those schools who had a poor showing in the National Achievement Test? Isn’t it that most of these regular public schools has a 1:70 ratio and that most of its students doesn’t have a chance to handle computers and other laboratory equipments?
L2 : Yes. To be globally competitive as our Pres. PNoy has envisioned, our students does not need longer hours in school. They need the latest technology and the most qualified educators. It is sad to note that our good teachers are now employed abroad as domestic helpers and caregivers.
L3 : And I would like to agree with my Idol Sen. Angara that we must give the poor a fighting chance. But this chance will not materialize by “gaya-gaya”. (Although we Filipinos are known to be ‘great imitators’). Not because the US and the rest of the world has 12 years of basic education, we should also be like them. Remember that most of our great men, even the famous Senator has not undergone K-12. While the government resources allotted for education is not enough to fund a 10 yr program, how will it be able to fund a 12 yr. cycle? If the govt. educational fund is not enough, how will our people fare? Two more years for basic education would inevitably translate to higher drop out rate.
Chairman : Ladies and Gentlemen, you have heard the positive and negative side of our discussion on K-12. Undoubtedly, we had presented its possible effects in our deteriorating educational system, the necessity for our country to be globally competitive, and the effects of budgetary constraints in our system. You may now raise your questions to any member of the panel. I assure you that we are ready for an open forum…
.