1st Option: Eradicate and impede the implementation of the policy. It is remarkable and inspiring to see that Philippines is now progressing economically and as such, to sustain and possibly prolong this stream, targeting the Education sector of the country is a must. But, unpreparedness, poor educational participation and development will surely yield to negative outcomes. The biggest issues the K-12 Education System must address are its requirement educational inputs and processes. If these are not given solution, the K-12 Education System policy is already ruined from the very start.
In view of Sarah Katrina Maramag’s idea, the crisis of the Philippine education system, in all levels, is stemmed not on the superficial, in this case the number of schooling years, but rather on the conditions and foundation on which it subsists. Unless the government addresses in earnest poor public spending, high costs of schooling, the predominance of a colonial curriculum, lack of transparency and accountability amid widespread corruption within the sector and the development of the country’s science and technology for domestic development, all efforts will remain on the surface and neither 10 nor 12 years would make much of difference. To relate with the statement of President PNOY “to achieve something out of this move to K-12, we need to have a realistic set of plans” and reality check, the plan doesn’t coincide as to the current situation.
Need essay sample on "K12 Debate" ? We will write a custom essay sample specifically for you for only $12.90/page
Though implementing K-12 would be possible, these paradigm changes would be harder for the public system for them to cope up with the rapid changes. Why? Let us settle to the article of Junifen F. Gauuan, firstly, the budget for the education sector of the Philippines is, compared to other Newly Industrialized Countries (NICs), relatively low (for example, difference of almost 5% GDP with Malaysia and Brunei – 3. % GDP Philippines). Secondly, the infrastructure of the state schools are not conducive enough to admit more students (picture students taking double-shifted school time i. e. 7am-1pm + 1pm-7pm – is that good for students to not meet in a one-off-one-time schedule? OR even cram 50students in one class? To correlate demand and supply, more demand = more supply. With the current shortage of teachers, as claimed by ACT (Alliance of Concerned Teachers) there is no capacity for the public system to admit more students, even more to prolong the year of study.
Finally, financial constraints, millions of people in the Philippines (to be exact 23 million under the Asia-Pacific poverty line) are still living below the poverty line. Are those parents belonging to that line can really afford another 2 years extra in education? Ideally, the long term goal which can be brought by the policy is good, but reality wise, the road in reaching the target is under construction, not yet completed thus so far behind.