The Department of Education (DepEd) announced, Oct. 5, the administration’s plan to implement a 12-year basic education cycle, the Kinder plus twelve (K+12) program.
According to the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), the Philippines is the only country with a 10-year cycle. Hence, the K+12 program will keep the Philippine education consistent with international standards.
The main aim of the K+12 program is to produce 18-year-old high school graduates who have already acquired enough skills to be employed. The new curriculum will include optional specializations in science and technology, music and arts, agriculture and fisheries, sports and business and entrepreneurship, among others.
However, the path to launch the K+12 program will be an obstacle course. DepEd will have to go through a needle’s eye to have budget proposals approved. The implementation of the K+12 program also entails constitutional amendment, and we all well know how legal processes go in this country.
Despite this, the benefits of the K+12 program, simply put, will be worth it. While the problems that the country will face because of the program are immediate, the rewards will be long-term.
The mean score of the elementary students who took the latest National Achievement Test (NAT) is 64—very far below the passing standard of DepEd. Furthermore, in high school, the mean score is even more alarming: 46. This reflects how much the students are missing from their 10-year education system.
With the K+12 program, teachers will be able to pace course work better. Students with varying intellectual capabilities will not be compelled to cope with the lessons in a short span of time.
The K+12 program will also respond to the lack of preparation of Filipino high school graduates compared with their international counterparts because of the former’s two-year deficiency. College students will no longer need to study general education courses again, as they will be thoroughly tackled in the basic education. High school graduates will also have enough insights and maturity about their career path.
Probably one of the strongest arguments against the K+12 program is the monetary problems it poses. Parents already have a hard time making ends meet—feeding the children, spending for their transportation to school, buying school materials, among others. This ongoing expenditure routine is difficult enough to keep up for 10 years; what more with 12?
The longer they stay in basic education, the harder it will be to financially sustain them. There may also be a tendency for parents of families under the poverty line to ask their children to help earn a living.
Also, the government will definitely have difficulties in looking for funds for the K+12 program. New infrastructure, more teachers and more books will incur costs far higher than the amount budgeted for education, even if DepEd has the highest budget allocation from the government.
In the long run, however, the K+12 program may be one of the means to alleviate poverty in the country.
The time and money the students and their parents invest in basic education will already be enough for graduates to easily land a good-paying job. Since the K+12 program already includes technical and vocational subjects, the additional two years that the students will dedicate for studying can only mean more opportunity for them to acquire the skills they need to be part of the working force.
Some establishments may already not require for enrollment a college degree, since the employers know that the basic education has already taught the students enough.
It also makes sense that the government fund basic education more than the state colleges because students who go on to actually study college can afford education more than those students who are currently in elementary or high school and are under the poverty line.
On the macro-economic level, graduates of the K+12 program will help improve the rigidity of the labor force. As they enter higher education and the labor force at a more mature and prepared state, the higher the income they can receive. This, in turn, will result to higher taxes rendered to the government.
Education is an investment. We are yet to realize that there is truth in the saying that education is expensive but ignorance is much more costly.
