Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
A Study on whether 12 years of Basic Education is Needed for the Philippine Education System By: Marisa Rosauro-WinklerA graduate student at the University of the Philippines Open University taking Master of Public Management major in Local Government and Regional Administration
Citation preview
Research Report:A Study on whether 12 years of Basic Education is needed for the Philippine
Education System
By: Marisa Rosauro-WinklerMaster of Public Management major in Local Government and Regional
AdministrationStudent No: 99-78015
University of the Philippines- Open University
A requirement in PM 299.2 (Research Methods in Public Management)
September 30, 2010
Prof. Teofilo Gaius M. Sison, Jr.Faculty-in-Charge
Foreword
My study seeks to find out whether there is a need for the Philippines to add two more years in basic education to be competitive with other countries especially our Asian neighbors and to improve the quality of Philippine Education.
In addition, my study will show the differences in terms of academic performance, English proficiency, entrepreneurship skill, creativity, maturity, morality and good citizenship between students with 12 and 10 years of basic education. Moreover, it will show the factors that cause such differences. These factors would be one of the bases whether we need to have 12 years of basic education or just fix the problems of the current system and stay with 10 years of basic education.
Finally, my study will show the impact of 12 years of basic education to all the stakeholders involved. This is a very important factor in deciding whether we need to have 12 years of basic education.
Acknowledgment
In the preparation of this research report, I would like to acknowledge the contribution of many people especially my respondents. This paper would not be realized without their participation. First, I would like to express my deepest gratitude to the principals for allowing me to conduct a study at their school. They are Mr. Benedik Warren of Tinago National High School, Mrs. Dennie B. Capito of San Jose National High School, Mrs. Rellyn A. Solante of Puertobello National High School Ext., and Ms. Marietta Gorgonio of Luciano B. Rama Sr. Memorial National High School.
And to my contacts in China (Xie Li and Xie Yusong of No. 1 High School in Tongling County, China and Julia of Shang Tushi Senior High School in Anhui, China) who helped me despite of their busy schedules. Thank you so much.
To all the volunteer graduating students who took part in my study even though some questions were quite difficult to answer, my sincerest thank you to all of you.
I also wish to thank the other respondents- the parents; teachers; managers/owners/HR Officers of some companies; the third year students of Tinago National High School and Luciano B. Rama Sr. Memorial National High School; and the grade 5 students of Dao Elementary School in Bohol.
To Cindy, my former student at Tongling University China, who is currently working as International Sales Officer at Wuxi WangSheng Electronic
Company in Ningbo, China. Thank you for translating the questionnaires into Chinese. A special thanks also to my UPOU classmates namely: Michel Basister, Nashra Tulawie, Raul Sarmiento, Dick Abletes, Maria Cristina Ramos and Kaye Lacanlale for being part or helping me in my study. In addition, I would like to express my appreciation to my classmate Al Abubakar and the respondents from Southern Philippines Baptist Theological Seminary in Davao City even though their responses are not included in this study since they returned the questionnaires very late but I will still use them in my future studies. I want you to know that your effort will not be in vain.
I would like to say thank you also to my Faculty-In-Charge in this course, Prof. Teofilo Gaius M. Sison, Jr. for making us experience doing a quantitative research like this. Thank you for your unwavering guidance.
And to Dr. Merlyne Paunlagui, my professor in PM 299.1 (Quantitative Methods in Public Policy & Administration, thank you so much for all the encouragement and advices especially with regards to matters related to Inferential Statistics.
Finally, I would like to take this opportunity to thank my husband for all the support. Thank you also for enlightening me about the American Education System which offers 12 years of basic education.
Contents
BackgroundThe Philippine Education SystemStudents’ Performance under the Current SystemProblems/Issues in the Philippine Education SystemSome of the existing policies or proposals related to the Philippine Education System
Research Problems
The Variables and its Operational DefinitionsVariablesLevel of MeasurementOperational Definitions
Theoretical Arguments/Hypotheses
Theoretical Framework in Diagrammatic Form
Research MethodologyResearch DesignSampling StrategiesData Analysis ToolsData Collection Plan with DatesThe Research InstrumentsLimitations of the StudyParticipants
Statistical Analysis and Results
Conclusions
Recommendations
Appendices
References
Background
The Philippine Education System
The Philippine education system is composed of pre-school (day care and kindergarten), basic education, technical or vocational education and higher education.
The Department of Education (DepEd) is mandated to supervise and govern the basic education; the Technical Education and Skills Development Authority (TESDA) for technical or vocational education; the Commission on Higher Education (CHED) for the higher education. These three governing bodies cover both private and public schools.
The focus of this study is the Philippine Basic Education which is only 10 years – six years of elementary and four years of secondary education.
The media of instruction at school are Filipino and English.
Students’ Performance under the current system
Based on the most recent data (School Year 2008-2009), the participation rate in the elementary level is 85.12% and the completion rate is 73.28%. As shown in Appendix 4, the participation rate is declining. According to the DepEd Factsheet 2009, the drop-out rate for SY 2008-2009 is 6.02% and the enrollment for both public and private elementary schools is 13, 686,643. So, there are about 1 million students in elementary who dropped out in the SY 2008-2009.
For secondary education, the most recent participation rate or net enrollment ratio is 60.74% and completion rate is 75.24%. The drop-out rate in secondary education for SY 2008-2009 is 7.45% and the total enrollments for both public and private is 6,763,858 (see Appendix 5)
The results of the National Achievement Test (NAT) conducted from SY 2004-2005 to SY 2007-2008 showed that the performance of the students in both elementary and high school level is very poor. It is even below the reduced NAT passing grade which is 66% for elementary students (DepEd as cited in de los Santos, 2009 as cited in Winkler, 2009). The normal passing grade was 75%. The latest NAT result (SY 2007-2008) is 64.81% for elementary and 49.26% for secondary level (see Appendix 6).
Problems or Issues in the Philippine Education System
The following are some of the problems/issues in the Philippine Education System:
1. Lack of instructional materials (textbooks and teachers’ manuals)2. Inadequate facilities and equipments (see Appendix 7)3. Unqualified and poorly trained teachers4. Many students in the classroom. The average student to teacher ratio
is 45:1 but some schools in the Philippines have 90 students or more to 1 teacher. (see Appendix 8)
5. Lack of teachers (see Appendix 9)6. Poor Quality textbooks7. Basic Education Curriculum8. Other problems that affect our education system are poverty, low
educational attainment and illiteracy of parents and poor health and nutrition of the students.
Some of the existing policies or proposals related to the Philippine Education System
1. Bilingual Policy
In consonance with the 1987 constitutional mandate and the National Board of Education declared policy on bilingual education, the Department of Education, Culture and Sports (DECS now called DepEd) promulgated its language policy.
Under this policy, Filipino and English are the media of instruction at schools.
2. Executive Order 210
On May 17, 2003, the President of the Philippines, Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo issued an Executive Order (Exec. Order 210) entitled “ESTABLISHING THE POLICY TO STRENGTHEN THE USE OF THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE AS A MEDIUM OF INSTRUCTION IN THE EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM”
3. Mother Tongue-Based Multilingual Education (MLE)
The Department of Education (DepEd) under the leadership of Secretary Jesli Lapus issued an order of institutionalizing the “Mother Tongue-Based Multilingual Education (MLE)”. This new policy mandated the use of the
students’ local dialect as the medium of instruction from pre-school to Grade VI.
4. Revised Basic Education Curriculum
The DepEd implemented the new Basic Education Curriculum in 2002. The scope of the new curriculum is reduced to five core learning areas- science, mathematics, Filipino, English and Makabayan or civic education. The purpose of reducing the learning areas is to allow greater contact time for each learning area (DepEd, 2002 as cited in Bernardo and Garcia, 2006 as cited in Winkler, 2009). The new Basic Education Curriculum focuses also on the development of lifelong learning skills in the students and the use of integrative, practical, and problem-oriented pedagogical strategies.
5. CHED is planning to add an additional one year in some courses in college that need international accreditation.
6. BESRA (Basic Education Sector Reform Agenda) is a program of the Department of Education. It aims to attain and sustain better performance in basic education of public schools. Its specific objectives are universal adult functional literacy; universal school participation and elimination of drop-outs and repetition in first three grades; universal completion of the full cycle of basic education schooling with satisfactory achievement levels by all at every grade or year; and total community commitment to attainment of basic education competencies for all.
7. 12 Years of Basic Education
The newly elected Philippine President Benigno Simeon “Noynoy” Aquino III has proposed of changing the basic education cycle in the Philippines from 10 years to 12 years. The Department of Education has been very supportive of this proposal. They are planning to add 1 year in both elementary and high school.
The aforementioned are just some of the factors that need to be considered in deciding whether Philippines should adopt 12 years of basic education.
Research Problems
1. Are students with 12 years of basic education performing better in college entrance exams than those who have 10 years of basic education?
2. Is there any relationship between number of years of basic education and the degree of English Proficiency?
3. Is there any relationship between the number of years of basic education and entrepreneurship; better employment opportunities; creativity; maturity in life and society; moral values and good citizenship?
4. What is the impact of 12 years of basic education to the students, parents, teachers, government, business sectors and other stakeholders?
The Variables and its Operational Definitions
Variables
Age, Sex, Income, Education, Type of School, Type of student, Test score(College Entrance Exam), entrepreneurship skill, better employment opportunities, creativity, maturity, moral values, good citizenship and Degree of English Proficiency, other factors such as country, curriculum, quality of teachers, school facilities, teaching materials, class size, etc.
Level of Measurement
1. Age - interval2. Sex - nominal3. Income - interval4. Education - interval5. Type of school- nominal6. Type of student - ordinal7. Test Score (College Entrance Exam) - interval8. Entrepreneurship skill – ordinal/interval9. Better employment opportunities- ordinal10. Creativity – ordinal/interval
11. Maturity- ordinal/interval12. Moral values- ordinal/interval13. Good citizenship- ordinal/interval14. English Proficiency level- interval
Operational Definitions
The key variables for the study will be operationally defined as follows:
1. Age is the age of the respondents (students with 12 and 10 years of basic education) and is measured in terms of number of years.
2. Sex (Male or Female) is the gender of the respondents.
3. Income is measured in terms of the estimated total household income in the last year. To be able to have a standardized currency since some of the respondents are from China which uses a different currency (Renminbi), the currency that is going to be used in the study is US dollars.
4. Education is measured in terms of the number of years of basic education the respondent has. The respondents are still in their last year in high school but the researcher considers those in Grade 12 as having 12 years of basic education and those in the fourth year high school in the Philippines as having 10 years of basic education.
5. Type of school is classified as public and private.
6. Type of student is classified as below average, average, good, very good and excellent. Since schools have different standard in classifying students or they have different grading system the classification should be done by their respective teachers.
7. Test score is the college entrance exam score and is measured as the number of correct answers over the total number of items/questions. The questions to be used will be taken from UPCAT (University of the Philippines College Admission Test), SAT (Scholastic Aptitude Test, an American College Entrance Exam), and Chinese College Entrance Exam.
8. Entrepreneurship skill is defined as having the following major characteristics: self-confident and multi-skilled, confident, innovative, results-oriented, risk-taker and totally committed. It will be assessed using an Entrepreneurial test developed by Brigham Young University Marriott School, Utah, USA.
9. Better employment opportunities will be assessed by interviewing companies if they think jobs that are currently offered to college level applicants can be offered also to those applicants with 12 years of basic education. I am planning to interview some hotels, restaurants, and manufacturing companies in Cebu. Many of them put at least high school graduate, college level or college graduate as one of their requirements. But I think the high school graduate will have lesser chance to be hired if they received many applications from college level or college graduate applicants. In addition, they will only hire those who are at least 18 years old but our high school graduates are only 16 or 17 years old so with these requirements our high school graduates will have a hard time getting a good job after high school. In fact our labor law requires a person to be 18 years or older to work in any hazardous or dangerous job, so manufacturing and construction jobs are almost off limits for so many recent graduates because they are too young to work in these fields which to many are the highest paying areas they can work in. So, I think it is better they will just stay in school for 2 more years to gain more knowledge and be more mature.
10. Creativity is the ability to generate enormous, innovative, imaginative, original and quality ideas. It will be assessed using a Creativity test by www.increasebrainpower.com.
11. Maturity will be assessed using a maturity test recently developed by Harvard School of Psychiatry. Maturity according to Wikipedia “is a psychological term used to indicate that a person responds to the circumstances or environment in an appropriate or adaptive manner. This response is generally learned rather than instinctual, and is not determined by one’s age.”
12. Moral values will be assessed using a morality test/ moral values test. Each country has different definitions on morality so the test would be based on the common definitions of morality in China and Philippines since the respondents are from both countries.
13. Good citizenship will be assessed using good citizenship test. Each country has different definitions on what is a good citizen so the researcher would use the definitions that are common to both China and Philippines. According to the DepEd order of the Department of Education of the Republic of the Philippines issued on August 26, 2005 entitled “Revised Implementing Guidelines of the Implementation of Citizenship Advancement Training (CAT) in both Public and Private Secondary Schools” a good Filipino citizen demonstrates the following attitudes and characteristics: respect and reverence, punctuality and promptness, obedience, cooperation, patriotism and loyalty-respect of the National Flag and National Anthem, courage and bravery, honesty and integrity, and obedience to the duties and obligations of a citizen as required by the Constitution. These characteristics are
basically the same as those of a good Chinese citizen as defined in their Constitution and according to the teachings of Confucius, who has great influence on many Asian countries especially China, Japan and Korea. The researcher will develop questions based on the above definitions and the questions will be developed in such a way as to validate that the students possess good citizenship skills. These questions must follow the guidelines as mentioned but developed as not to be obvious to the student as to the subject matter being tested. An example could be a question like: We all know that there are terrorists in Mindanao, if they begin to win their battle would you forgo going to college or working a job and volunteer for the army or for other work that would be beneficial to the effort to bring the terrorists to bay. The questions will be answered by Yes or No. For Chinese students I would substitute Tibet for Mindanao as the only difference to the question.
14. English Proficiency is measured as the number of correct answers over the number of items/questions in the TOEFL, IELTS as well as English test in the College Entrance Exam.
Theoretical Arguments/Hypotheses
The study hypothesizes that there is a direct relationship between the number of years of basic education and test score; entrepreneurship skill; creativity; maturity; morality; good citizenship; and English Proficiency level for students with 12 years of basic education have gained more knowledge and are more experienced in life than those with 10 years only.
Students with 12 years of basic education will have better employment opportunities in both government and business–oriented companies than those with 10 years only since they are more knowledgeable in both academic and life skills and qualified in many kinds of jobs such as mechanical, administrative, clerical, janitorial, restaurant and factory worker jobs.
Furthermore, there is a relationship between Age, Sex, Income, Type of School and Type of student and academic performance; English proficiency, Entrepreneurship; Creativity; Maturity; moral values and better employment opportunities.
Other factors such as the country, curriculum, quality of teachers, school facilities, teaching materials, and class size influence the results of the tests.
In addition, understanding the impact of 12 years of basic education to all stakeholders can help in deciding whether we need to have 12 years of basic education.
Theoretical Framework in Diagrammatic Form
The study is guided by the following framework showing the interrelationships of the different factors of the study.
Figure 1. The Framework of the Study
Independent Dependent Variables Variables
Test score Findings Recommendations
Entrepreneurship skill Creativity
Maturity Moral Values
Good Citizenship English Proficiency Better Employment
Opportunities
Impact of 12 years of Basic Education to all Stakeholders
AgeSexIncomeType of school
Education
Type of student
Other factorsSuch as country, Curriculum,Quality of teachers,School facilities,Teaching materialsEtc.
Research Methodology
Research Design
I am going to use survey as my research design specifically relational design in finding out the answers of Research problems no. 1, 2, and 3. I will also use case study for the qualitative part of my research.
I chose survey over experiments and quasi-experiments for many reasons. First, I would like to make generalizations in my study but I cannot do this in experiments and quasi-experiments. In surveys, I can include many respondents thus I have the capacity to generalize. Second, surveys and case studies can recall past events. In my study, I will talk about the Philippine Education System, students’ performance under the current system (10 years of basic education), problems/issues in the Philippine Education System and the existing policies/proposals. These events happened before my study. Third, surveys can also anticipate what may happen based on a prospective assessment of target respondents in a given situation. So, finding out the academic performance, English proficiency level, qualities, skills and abilities of the respondents may be helpful in determining what is needed to be done to improve the academic performance, skills and abilities, and English proficiency of the students like maybe changing the curriculum or adding two more years in high school or solving the existing problems, etc. In addition, surveys allow for the study of many variables whereas in experiments and quasi-experiments, it is limited. In my study aside from the key variables, I will look at other variables/factors that may affect the test results such as the country, curriculum, quality of teachers, teaching materials, class size, student’s motivation and others.
I will use case study in narrating, describing or discussing the students’ performance under our current system, problems/issues in the Philippine Education System, existing policies or proposal to improve our education system. The information will be based from documents, records and interviews. A case study will be used also in finding out the impact of 12
years of basic education to all the stakeholders involved and the information will be based from interviews and documents.
I will use relational design because my study seeks to find out the relationships of the variables in my study. I would like to find out if the independent variables have an effect/influence on the dependent variables. For example, as shown in my hypotheses, my study hypothesizes that there is a direct relationship between the number of years of basic education and test score; entrepreneurship skill; creativity; maturity; morality; good citizenship; and English Proficiency level for students with 12 years of basic education have gained more knowledge and are more experienced in life than those with 10 years only. Moreover, my study seeks to find out if there is a relationship between Age, Sex, Income, Type of School and Type of student and academic performance; English proficiency, Entrepreneurship; Creativity; Maturity; moral values and better employment opportunities.
Sampling Strategies
My units of analysis are the graduating students, other students, teachers, parents, and recruitment officers/managers of some hotels, restaurants and manufacturing companies.
The volunteer graduating students will be my respondents in comparing the academic performance, English proficiency, Entrepreneurship skill, Creativity and other skills/qualities I would like to test in my study. And the parents, graduating students, other students, teachers, and recruitment officers/managers are my respondents for the impact of 12 years of basic education to all the stakeholders involved.
I will be applying sampling strategies. I believe this is necessary to cut down cost and also it is impossible to do a study of all high schools in the Philippines and China. In fact, I will only have one or two high schools in China to participate in my study. I will be applying both probability and non-probability sampling strategies. I will use non-probability sampling strategy in choosing the schools since it is hard to randomly select them and get their participation. It is through contacts/friends. But to get the final respondents I will use probability sampling.
I will use purposive sampling in choosing schools. I will choose them according to whether they are with 10/12 years of basic education, public/private and by location. For the Philippine high schools, I have one representative for 12 years of basic education (an international school), one or two public/private school in Luzon, one public/private school in Mindanao, three public schools in Camotes Island, Cebu, and one public/private school
in Cebu City. In China, they are all public schools and have 12 years of basic education.
To get my final respondents, first I only need the graduating students so I do not need to worry the whole population of the school but I cannot guarantee that if I randomly select my respondents from all the graduating students the ones that are selected will participate. In addition, if I do so, it will be very costly and time consuming for me to have that many respondents. In China alone maybe all the graduating students in one high school are at least 2,000. So, I am planning to ask first for 20 volunteers from each high school. I am hoping I can get participation from both males and females. But the number would not be equal because some schools have less boys/girls. And then I will do a simple random sampling using a lottery method from those volunteers. Using the Lynch et al. Formula (1974) with a desired reliability of 95% and 10% sampling error my sample size would be 16 students each school. So, there will be 160 respondents in all if I can get participation from 10 schools.
For my respondents in finding out the impact of 12 years of basic education, I will use convenience and purposive sampling. For the parents and students, I will use convenience sampling. But for the companies (hotels, restaurants, and manufacturing) I will use purposive sampling since they must be companies that will hire high school graduates and college level applicants.
Data Analysis Tools
The Z-test for a Difference of Means Test will be applied to find out if graduating students with 12 years of basic education are performing better in College Entrance Exam and are more proficient in English than those graduating students with 10 years of basic education.
Pearson’s Product Moment Correlation Coefficient Test will be adopted to find out if an increase of one variable leads to a concomitant increase in another variable. For example: an increase in number of years of basic education will result to an increase in test score and English proficiency.
Chi- square tests for nominal variables will be applied.
The measures of central tendency, measures of dispersion and coefficient of variability of the variables age, income, College Entrance Exam score, English score, Entrepreneurship, Creativity, Maturity, Morality and Good Citizenship scores will be used to briefly characterize the respondents (12 and 10 year graduating students)
Percentages will be used to characterize the respondents for the impact of 12 years of basic education.
Data Collection Plan with Dates
For the College Entrance Exam, English Proficiency Test, Entrepreneurial, Creativity, Maturity, Morality and Good Citizenship Tests questionnaires will be given to the respondents for them to answer.
The Mathematics and Science parts of the College Entrance Exam will be translated to Chinese for the Chinese students. Entrepreneurial, Creativity, Maturity, Morality and Good Citizenship Tests will be translated also if needed. I will ask my contact/s in China to review the questionnaires and see if they need to be translated.
I will administer the tests personally for the respondents from Camotes Island (my hometown) and Cebu City. In Luzon, Mindanao and China, I will ask my friends there to help me.
Interview Guide will be prepared and appropriate language/dialect will be used during the interview to obtain data/information/opinions from the respondents (graduating students, other students, parents, teachers and recruitment officers/managers of some hotels, restaurants and manufacturing companies) regarding the impact of 12 years of basic education to them. In addition, the respondents who will take the IELTS are asked to write their opinion on having 12 years of basic education.
To get information on the students’ performance under the current system, problems/issues in the Philippine Education System and existing policies or proposals, secondary techniques of data collection will be used.
The following are the tentative schedules for data gathering/field implementation:
August 2-6: Mail the request to conduct a study with the Research Proposal to the prospect schools.
August 9 – 11: Mail the questionnaires to the respondents in Luzon, Mindanao and China.
August 12- 14: Mail the request to conduct interview with the Research Proposal to the prospect companies.
August 17-19: Administer the tests to the respondents in Camotes Island.
August 20: Conduct interviews to the sample respondents in Camotes Island.
August 24-27: Administer the tests to the respondents in Cebu City.
August 28 – September 3: Interview companies and other respondents for the impact of 12 years of basic education.
September 10: Deadline of questionnaires to be returned back to me
September 11-24: Data processing and preparation of the Research Report
September 25: Submission of the Final Report
The Research Instruments
1. College Entrance Exam- the questions are taken from SAT (Scholastic Aptitude Test, an American College Entrance Exam), Chinese College Entrance Exam and UPCAT (University of the Philippines College Admission Test). For this study, there are only three subjects to be tested. They are English, Mathematics and Science.
2. TOEFL and IELTS
TOEFL (Test of English as a Foreign Language) is used to evaluate the ability of an individual to use and understand English in an academic setting. In many English-speaking colleges and universities, it is used as one of the admission requirements for non-native speakers. In addition, institutions such as government agencies, licensing bodies, businesses, scholarship programs may require this test. A TOEFL score is valid for two years only. Some colleges or universities require the most recent TOEFL score. TOEFL consist of four parts: Listening, Structure and Written Expression, Reading Comprehension and Writing. But in my study it only includes Structure and Written Expression and Reading Comprehension.
IELTS (International English Language System) is the world’s leading English test for higher education, immigration and employment. IELTS includes four parts: Listening, Speaking, Reading and Writing. In my study, it only includes two parts- Reading and Writing.
3. Entrepreneurial Test- developed by Brigham Young University Marriott School, Utah, USA.
Scoring:
If you scored +35 or more, you have everything going for you. You ought to achieve spectacular entrepreneurial success (barring acts of God or other variables beyond your control).
lf you scored +15 to +34, your background, skills and talents give you excellent chances for success in your own business. You should go far.
If you scored 0 to +15, you have a head start of ability and/or experience in running a business and ought to be successful in opening an enterprise of your own if you apply yourself and learn the necessary skills to make it happen.
If you scores 0 to -15, you might be able to make a go of it if you ventured on your own, but you would have to work extra hard to compensate for a lack of built-in advantages and skills that give others a leg up in beginning their own business.
If you scored -15 to -43, your talents probably lie elsewhere. You ought to consider whether building your own business is what you really want to do, because you may find yourself swimming against the tide if you make the attempt. Another work arrangement—working for a company or for someone else, or developing a career in a profession or an area of technical expertise—may be far more congenial to you and allow you to enjoy a lifestyle appropriate to your abilities and interests.
4. Creativity Test - by www.increasebrainpower.com.Categories: <50 Not Creative; 51-90 Creative; 91-100 Very Creative
5. Maturity Test- developed by Harvard School of Psychiatry. Scoring: 6--no worries--incredibly mature5.1-5.9 - mature4-5--slightly immature--need work2-3--social nerd (a.k.a dolt, bozo, oaf, galoot, nebbish, dickhead, etc.)0-1--pitiful, pathetic bottom feeder (borderline sociopath)
6. Good Citizenship Test – Questions are developed by the researcher herself.Categories: <33 Bad Citizenship; 34-60 Good Citizenship; 61-66 Very Good Citizenship
7. Morality Test – Questions are developed by the researcher herself.Categories: <18 Bad Moral; 19-30 Good Moral; 31-36 Very Good Moral
8. Interview Guide – for the qualitative part of my study. The respondents will be asked on their extent of agreement or disagreement on a scale of 1-5 wherein 1 is Strongly Disagree; 2 is Disagree; 3 is Neutral; 4 is Agree; and 5 is Strongly Agree.
Limitations of the Study
I was planning to ask participation from Cebu International School to represent the 12 years of basic education along with the two Chinese high schools. They are offering 12 years of basic education and adopting the American Curriculum. On my first correspondence with the principal, he did not say “no”. He said he will talk with the other Administration Staff first but after that I never heard from him again. It would be nice if they could participate since the students at their school are mostly Filipinos. I think the comparison would have been fairer unlike with Chinese students that language barrier and culture need to be taken into account.
My study focused only on interviewing the business-oriented companies; However, I did not get much participation from the companies I was planning to interview. Originally, I was going to interview companies (hotels, restaurants and manufacturing) in Cebu only but I found it so hard to ask their participation. So, I tried to contact my friends in Luzon and Mindanao to help me find some companies to interview. Luckily, I got one participant from Mindanao and three from Luzon. And I have one from Cebu City.
In my hypotheses, I said the type of school (private/public) affects the academic performance, English proficiency, skills and qualities of the students but my only private school respondent from Davao City returned to me the questionnaires so late. The package was delivered by LBC just hours before my deadline to submit this research report. So, I will not be able to compare if there is any difference between private and public schools.
Not all of the respondents answered all the tests. That’s why I have different N (total number of students) in my computations.
Finally, I have to change the level of measurement of the ordinal variables to ordinal/interval so I can use Pearson’s Moment Correlation Coefficient Test.
Participants
The main respondents were the volunteer graduating students of Tinago National High School in Naga City Luzon; San Jose National High School in
Poro, Camotes, Cebu; Puertobello National High School Extension in Tudela, Camotes, Cebu; Luciano B. Rama Sr. Memorial National High School in Poro, Camotes, Cebu; No.1 High School in Tongling County, China; and Shang Tushi Senior High School in Anhui, China. They took College Entrance Exam, TOEFL, IELTS, Entrepreneurship, Creativity, Maturity, Morality and Good Citizenship Tests.
For the opinion of other students on having 12 years of basic education, two classes of third year high school students were asked to write their opinion and their reason/s. They are from Tinago National High School and Luciano B. Rama Sr. Memorial National High School. A Grade 5 class from Dao Elementary School in Bohol was also asked about their opinion on 12 years of basic education.
In addition, a sample of parents; teachers; managers of business-oriented companies; managers/owners of a restaurant; and HR Officers of manufacturing companies were also interviewed.
Statistical Analysis and Results
According to the statistical results using the measures of central tendency (mean, median and mode); measures of dispersion (range and standard deviation); and coefficient of variability, the volunteer graduating students in the Philippines on average are 16 years of age with an estimated annual income of $1,142 US, have a head start ability and or experience in running a business and have very good morals. In addition, have qualities of a good citizen but slightly immature, and not creative. In terms of their homogeneity by looking at their Coefficient of Variability (cov) aside from being homogenous in the number of years of education the respondents are more homogenous with regards to age since it has the 2nd lowest cov which is 7%.
Whereas, its counterpart in China are on average 18 years of age with an estimated annual income of $5,419 US, have a head start ability and or experience in running a business and have very good morals. Also have qualities of a good citizen and slightly immature but creative. They are also more homogenous with regards to their ages.
The graphs below show the frequency distribution of Age and Income of the respondents from Philippines and China.
Figure 2
Figure 3
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
frequency
13-14 15-16 17-18 19-20
Ages
Frequency Distribution of Age (Philippines)
frequency
Frequency Distribution of Income (Philippines)
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
201-1000 1001-1800 1801-2600 2601-3400 3401-4200 4201-5000 5001-5800
Income
frequency
Figure 4
0
5
10
15
20
25
16-17 18-19 20-21Ages
Frequency Distribution of Age (China)
frequency
Figure 5
Frequency Distribution of Income (China)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
1001-3000 3001-5000 5001-7000 7001-9000 9001-11000 11001-13000 13001-15000
Income (US Dollars)
frequency
Table 1 shows the computations for the Z-test for a difference of means test. The results show that there is a significant difference between graduating students with 12 and 10 years of basic education as far as College Entrance Exam and English scores are concerned. Based on the results, it can be concluded that students with 12 years of basic education are performing better in the College Entrance Exam and are more proficient in English than those with 10 years.
Table 1The Z-test for a difference of means test
College Entrance Exam
1. Formulate Hypotheses: Ho: 12=10 Ha: 12>102. Statistical Model
_ _Z = x1 – x2
√s12 + √s2
2
N1 N2
3. Criteria: α = .01, reject Ho if Z > 2.33
4. Analysis: _ _N1 = 40 N2= 61 s1= 16.3 S2= 8 x 1= 55 x2 = 28
Answer: Z= 9
5. Conclusion: Reject Ho; Accept Ha conclusively.
English score
1. Formulate Hypotheses: Ho: 12=10 Ha: 12>102. Statistical Model
_ _Z = x1 – x2
√s12 + √s2
2
N1 N2
3. Criteria: α = .01, reject Ho if Z > 2.33
4. Analysis: _ _N1 = 40 N2= 61 s1= 14.2 S2= 13 x 1= 49 x2 = 41
Answer: Z= 2.67
5. Conclusion: Reject Ho; Accept Ha conclusively.
The tables that follow show the College Entrance Exam and English Mean Percentage Scores by schools. Using UPCAT’s passing grade which is 60%, there is only one school that passed the College Entrance Exam. It is No. 1 High School in Tongling, China. Even though the other Chinese high school
did not pass the College Entrance Exam but its MPS is still higher compared to the Philippine high schools. The results show also that both Chinese high schools are better in Math and Science than the Philippine high schools. However, all the schools did not pass the English Tests (SAT, TOEFL & IELTS) but still the No. 1 High School in China ranks number 1. Auspiciously, one of the Philippine schools ranks number 2. It is Luciano B. Rama Sr. Memorial National High School.
Table 2. College Entrance Exam Mean Percentage Scores (MPS) by schoolsName of School
English(35)
Mathematics(50)
Science(15)
Total(100)
Tinago National High School
10 11 4 25
San Jose National High
School
9 13 5 27
Puertobello National High
School Ext
9.6 12.6 4.8 27
Luciano B. Rama High School
13 13 7 33
No. 1 High School, Tongling, China (12 years)
19.4 36.45 12.8 68.65
Shang Tushi Senior High
School, China (12 years)
12 22 8 41
Table 3. English Mean Percentage Scores by schoolsName of School
English (College Entrance
Exam)35
TOEFL
60
IELTS
40
Total
135
%
Tinago National High School
10 18.5 17 45.5 34
San Jose National High
School
9 22 19 50 37
Puertobello National High
School Ext
9.6 22.8 17.8 50.2 37
Luciano B. Rama High
School
13 33 24 70 52
No. 1 High School,
Tongling, China
19 36.6 22 77.6 57
Shang Tushi Senior High
School
12 22 20 54 40
But by calculating all the 12 year graduating students’ College Entrance Exam and English Scores together and the same with the 10 year students, the results show that both their MPS are below the passing grade. However, the results show that the 12 years of basic education has much higher MPS especially in the College Entrance Exam compared to the 10 years.
Table 4. Comparing 12 and 10 year graduating students- College Entrance Exam and English Mean Percentage Scores
Graduating Students College Entrance Exam English12 year( Chinese High
Schools)55 49
10 year(Philippine High Schools)
28 41
The Pearson’s Product Moment Correlation Coefficient (R) tests whether two variables are correlated which means an increase in one variable leads to a concomitant increase in another variable. The absolute value of R will always lie between 0 and 1. An absolute /R/ value equal to 0 means no relationship and 1 means perfect relationship. The nearer /R/ is to 1, the greater the probability of a relationship. The statistical results below show that there is a direct relationship between Education and College Entrance Exam, English Score and Creativity as hypothesized above. It means the higher the number of years of basic education the higher the College Entrance Exam, English and Creativity scores. However, the results of Education vs. Maturity, Morality and Good Citizenship are different from the hypotheses. Although they have a relationship but the direction is inverse (- R) that is an increase in one variable leads to a concomitant decrease in the other and vice versa. Another variation from the hypotheses is the Pearson’s R result of Education vs. Entrepreneurship. It was hypothesized that Education has a direct relationship with Entrepreneurship but according to the result there is not enough evidence to show that they have a relationship.
It is interesting to know that Age and College Entrance Exam Score has a relationship. Older students tended to have higher scores in the College Entrance Exam. But there is not enough evidence to show the relationship between Age and English score.
In addition, the results below show that there is a direct relationship between Income and College Entrance Exam and English Score.
Table 5. Pearson’s Product Moment Correlation Test ResultsPearson’s R Conclusion
Education vs College Entrance Exam Score
/R/ = .74
Criteria: At α = .05, df=95; Reject H0 if the
Reject H0 (null hypothesis that there is no relationship between education and college entrance exam);
absolute value of the computed R is greater than the table R, or if /R/ >.200
Accept Ha (alternative hypothesis). There is a direct relationship between number of years of education and College Entrance Exam Score
Education vs English Score /R/ = .29
Same Criteria (/R/ >.200)
Reject H0 (null hypothesis that there is no relationship between education and English score);
Accept Ha (alternative hypothesis). There is a direct relationship between number of years of education and English Score
Education vs. Entrepreneurship
/R/ = .11
Criteria: At α = .05, df=75; Reject H0 if the absolute value of the computed R is greater
than the table R, or if /R/ >.224
Since the R computed value (.11) is less than R table value (.224), we cannot reject the null hypothesis. There is not enough evidence to show the relationship between education and entrepreneurship.
Education vs. Creativity /R/ = .233
Same Criteria
Reject H0 (null hypothesis that there is no relationship between education and creativity);
Accept Ha (alternative hypothesis). There is a direct relationship between number of years of education and creativity.
Education vs. Maturity R = -0.5/R/ = 0.5
Same Criteria
Reject H0 (null hypothesis that there is no relationship between education and maturity);
Accept Ha (alternative hypothesis). There is an inverse relationship between number of years of education and maturity.
Education vs. Morality R = -.35/R/ = .35
Same Criteria
Reject H0 (null hypothesis that there is no relationship between education and morality);
Accept Ha (alternative hypothesis). There is an inverse relationship between number of years of education and morality.
Education vs. Good Citizenship
R= -.66/R/ = .66
Same Criteria
Reject H0 (null hypothesis that there is no relationship between education and Good citizenship);
Accept Ha (alternative hypothesis). There is an inverse relationship between number of years of education and Good citizenship.
Age vs. College Entrance Exam Score
/R/= .58
Same Criteria
Reject H0 (null hypothesis that there is no relationship between age and college entrance exam);
Accept Ha (alternative hypothesis). There is a direct relationship between age and College Entrance Exam Score
Age vs. English Score /R/ = .19
Same Criteria
At α = .05 and df=75; R= .19, computed value of R is less than the table value of R = .224. Therefore, we cannot reject the null hypothesis. There is not enough evidence to show the relationship between Age and English Score
Income vs. College Entrance Score
/R/= .66
Same Criteria
Reject H0 (null hypothesis that there is no relationship between income and college entrance exam);
Accept Ha (alternative hypothesis). There is a direct relationship between income and College Entrance Exam Score
Income vs. English Score /R/ = .35
Same Criteria
Reject H0 (null hypothesis that there is no relationship between income and English score);
Accept Ha (alternative hypothesis). There is a direct relationship between income and English Score
The Chi-Square Test is a technique for testing the level of statistical significance obtained by a bivariate relationship in a cross tabulation. The results show that there is not enough evidence to show the relationship between Sex and College Entrance Exam, English Score, Maturity, Morality and Good Citizenship but there is a relationship between Sex and Entrepreneurship and Creativity. The study shows that males tended to have more entrepreneurial skills than the females. But females are more creative than the males.
The results below show also that there is not enough evidence to show the relationship between Income and Entrepreneurship, Creativity, Maturity and Morality but there is a relationship between Income and Good citizenship. Low income students tended to have more qualities of a good citizen.
Table 6. Chi-Square Test ResultsChi-Square (χ2) Conclusion
Sex vs. College Entrance Exam Score
.41 Chi Square (χ2) test
χ2 = ∑ (O – E) 2 ECriteria for making decisionAt α = .05, df = 1, reject Ho if χ2 > 3.84
Therefore, can’t reject Ho. There is not enough evidence to show the relationship between sex vs. college entrance exam.
Sex vs. English Score 1 Therefore, can’t reject Ho. There is not enough evidence to show the relationship between sex vs. English Score
Sex vs. Entrepreneurship 4.37 Reject Ho and Accept Ha conclusively. There is a relationship between sex and entrepreneurship. Males tended to have more entrepreneurial skills than the females.
Sex vs. Creativity 11.6 Reject Ho and Accept Ha conclusively. There is a relationship between sex and creativity. Females tended to be more creative than the males.
Sex vs. Maturity 0 Therefore, can’t reject Ho. There is not enough evidence to show the relationship between sex vs. maturity
Sex vs. Morality .26 Therefore, can’t reject Ho. There is not enough evidence to show the relationship between sex vs. morality
Sex vs. Good Citizenship .2 Therefore, can’t reject Ho. There is not enough evidence to show the relationship between sex
vs. good citizenship
Income vs. Entrepreneurship
1.99 Therefore, can’t reject Ho. There is not enough evidence to show the relationship between income vs. Entrepreneurship
Income vs. Creativity 2.97 Therefore, can’t reject Ho. There is not enough evidence to show the relationship between income vs. creativity
Income vs. Maturity 1.45 Therefore, can’t reject Ho. There is not enough evidence to show the relationship between income vs. maturity
Income vs. Morality 0 Therefore, can’t reject Ho. There is not enough evidence to show the relationship between income vs. morality
Income vs. Good Citizenship
5.3 Reject Ho and Accept Ha conclusively. There is a relationship between income and good citizenship. Low income students tended to be Good citizens than high income ones.
Table 7. Responses of the Respondents on the impact of 12 years of basic education to all the stakeholders involved (in Percentages)
Extent of Agreement/Disagreement
Parents Graduating students (10 years)
Other students
Teachers Managers/Owners/ HR Officers
1- Strongly Disagree 0 0 34.7 0 02 - Disagree 20 35 41.3 25 803 - Neutral 50 15 5.0 25 04- Agree 30 50 18.2 50 205 – Strongly Agree 0 0 .8 0 0
The preceding table shows the details of the responses of the respondents on the impact of 12 years of basic education to them. There were 170 respondents in all – 10 parents, 26 graduating students, 121 other students, 8 teachers and 5 Managers/Owners/HR officers. All the respondents are from Philippines.
To summarize, 24.7 % of the 170 respondents strongly disagree the idea of having 12 years of basic education; 39.4% disagree; 10% neutral; 25.3% agree; and .6 % strongly agree.
The main reason of those respondents who strongly disagree/disagree is financial. Both the graduating and other students said their parents already have a very difficult time in sending them to school with the current basic education cycle (10 years) how much more when two more years is added into it. In addition, they feel it is not the number of years that matter. It is the curriculum, quality of education and students’ age. For the last few years, children in public schools go to Grade 1 so early. Majority of them are 6 years old. That is why when they graduate in high school they are still very young and not of a legal age. They believed that if they go to Grade 1 at 7 years old they do better at school. They said it is based on their experiences. In addition, they said 12 years of basic education is too long. The students would get tired and bored. They also think our government needs to solve the perennial problems in our education system first. Our country lacks school buildings, teachers, books etc.
Those who are neutral, they think 12 years of basic education has both advantages and disadvantages. Although it is a burden to the parents financially but it will allow the students to learn more knowledge and it will create many jobs not only for the unemployed teachers.
And the reasons for those who agree and strongly agree are: the students will have broader knowledge, when they go to college they will be able to adjust easily since they are familiar with the lessons; 12 years of basic education will make them more mature and old enough to find a job after graduation from high school; finally, adding two more years in our basic education will make the quality of our education better.
On whether 12 years of basic education will have better employment opportunities?
Of the three managers I interviewed, two believe that those with 12 years of basic education will have better employment opportunities than those with only 10 because employers would most likely prefer those with better education background and especially if the last two years were spent specializing and training. But one manager (working at Jollibee) said that perhaps it will not matter since their company will only hire at least college level applicants. However, she said it is just her own opinion especially she cannot decide on who to hire. It is the Human Resources Development Office of Jollibee who will decide on this matter.
The two recruitment officers (both from manufacturing companies) I interviewed have the same answer on whether those with 12 years of basic education will have better employment opportunities than those with 10 years. They both said that in their company as long as they pass their written and medical exams they would consider them hired regardless of their educational attainment.
Ms. Lacanlale of JBC Corporation said that “working in a manufacturing company, plant employees usually should be at least high school grads although we still consider those with lower educational attainment as long as they pass our written and medical exams. Surprisingly, there are already quite a growing number of college levels and even college grads who apply as plant employees and sadly would get same written exam results or sometimes even lower compared to applicants who have lower educational attainment”.
According to the present DepEd Secretary Bro. Armin Luistro, 12 year of basic education will make high school graduates qualify for jobs without obtaining a college degree. “One of the basic deficiencies of [the current] basic education program is that in the country, a high school diploma is really not respected as a passport to a respectable employment,” Luistro said. (Candice Montenegro, GMANews.TV, 2010)
Conclusions
Using the Z-test for a difference of means test, it can be concluded that students with 12 years of basic education are performing better in college entrance exams and are more proficient in English than those with 10 years only. I agree with the results. I firmly believe that two more years in basic education will give the students enough time to learn and understand well the academic subjects. In addition, they have more time to practice their English. It is quite sad that based on my study, on average Chinese students are more proficient in written English than the Philippine students since English is our official language and one of the media of instructions at
schools whereas in China it is just their second language. However, for the last 30 years the Chinese government has been very aggressive in promoting English at schools starting from kindergarten up to college level.
I especially found this true in my four years as a University teacher in China. China as well as Japan, Taiwan, and other Asian countries have developed and exceptionally high level of English Education for all levels of public education. They realized that to be an economic power in this global world English must be emphasized, and of course the world of international business, science and trade is English. The Philippines forty years ago was recognized as an English speaking country but sadly that is not true anymore. Our government is dependent on overseas Filipino workers whose English must be very good, but those that apply for these jobs must take English classes before they are hired. If we are to compete in this global world we need to get back to some of our basics and that is we are an English speaking country. In other words, English is very important because I believe it is a key for a better future both for our country and us. If one is very proficient in English he/she will have enormous job opportunities here and abroad. And I also believe it is easier to take achievement tests or any tests that use English as the language if one is proficient in English. And all this will lead to a higher economic and development position for a better Philippines.
As for research problem no. 3, if there is any relationship between the number of years of basic education and entrepreneurship; better employment opportunities; creativity; maturity in life and society; moral values and good citizenship. The results of the study show that there is not much difference. The only difference is on creativity. Those with 12 years of basic education tend to be more creative than those with 10. The rest they are similar.
As hypothesized, Pearson’s Moment Correlation Coefficient Test proves that education has a direct relationship with College Entrance Exam, English Scores and Creativity. But the tests rejected the hypothesis that education has a direct relationship with entrepreneurship; maturity; morality; and good citizenship. The results show that there is not enough evidence to show the relationship between education and entrepreneurship. And education has an inverse relationship with maturity, morality and good citizenship. I agree with the first two conclusions but the third one although statistically conclusive but it still needs further analysis. There are other factors that affect this such as culture and laws of the country. Because of Chinas’ one child policy most of the children in China are very pampered by their parents since they are the only child. They are not used to responsibilities thus perhaps making them less mature. Also in China the students have to study very hard to make sure they will pass the College Entrance Exam so they don’t normally participate in community work. In my good citizenship test, getting involved
in community work is one of the qualities of a good citizen but most Chinese students answered “No” in this question. Below is another question that majority of them answered “No”:
Your teacher who is very strict about deadline that if you are late it will not be accepted anymore asked you to submit your assignment right after the flag ceremony but you are still at the gate of your school and if you stop to attend the flag ceremony you will surely be late. Will you stop or not?
Chinese students are very afraid of their teachers so they rather not attend the flag ceremony in situation like this.
Another thing that affects the results of the study is the Chinese law on divorce. In China, divorce is legal. Even though it is morally wrong according to the teachings of Confucius but the new generation thinks divorce is fine. In my morality test, I asked the respondents whether they say Yes or No to divorce. About ninety percent of the Chinese respondents said “Yes”.
So, that is why I said in my limitations of the study that it would be nice if I was able to get participation from an International School here in the Philippines that offer 12 years of basic education so the results would be more conclusive.
I also hypothesized that there is a relationship between Age, Sex, income, Type of School, Type of student and academic performance; English proficiency; entrepreneurship; creativity; maturity; moral values and better employment opportunities. Using Pearson’s Moment Correlation Coefficient and Chi-Square Tests, the results show that Age and College Entrance Exam has a direct relationship as well as Income vs College Entrance Exam; English Score; and Good Citizenship. Sex vs Entrepreneurship and Creativity have a relationship also. The other variables do not have enough evidence to show the relationship.
According to my survey on the impact of 12 years of basic education to all the stakeholders involved, more than 60% of the respondents opposed to this proposal.
Recommendations
General Recommendations
I have three general recommendations to improve the academic performance and English skills of our students:
1. Based on the results of my study, I strongly recommend that Philippines should adopt the 12 years of basic education for three main reasons:
First, the statistical results clearly show that our graduating high school students lack the necessary knowledge to go to College. The mean percentage score, 28%, in the College Entrance Exam is way too low. The study shows that our graduating students are not only poor in English but in Mathematics and Science as well. Majority of the respondents cannot write a good composition. They did badly also in reading comprehension and vocabulary. Although they score higher in the grammar test but they still need to improve their grammar skills. Improving all these need enough time. In fact, two more years of learning English, Math and Science well is not enough. But I am confident their performance will surely improve if the students can get more practice by staying two more years in basic education. Even though not all of them can study in college but those who will go to work still need to be equipped with a right amount of knowledge since they have to take written exams also when they apply for jobs. I found out in my interviews with some managers and HR Officers that many college level and college graduate applicants do very poorly in written exams and interviews how much more a high school graduate applicant that has very limited academic knowledge and life experiences.
Second, on average or 90% of our high school graduates are below the legal age which is 18 years old. Majority of the companies will only hire those applicants who are at least 18 years old. So, our graduates will just end up working as house helpers or low paying workers. What’s worse many will end up jobless and become a burden to their family. Some will think that it is fine to temporarily work as housemaid because once they turn 18 which is 2 years away from graduation they can apply for decent jobs in the companies but the problem is within that two years waiting time they almost forget what they learned in high school so when they take written exams when they apply for jobs they will fail whereas if they stay at school until they are 18 the probability of passing company exams is high since the lessons are still very fresh in their mind.
Finally, is to be globally competitive. According to the Presidential Task Force for Education as cited in Cruz (2009), the Philippines has the shortest education cycle in the world. All the other countries in the world have 15 or 16 years of education from Grade 1 to undergraduate graduation. It is very important to catch up with the rest of the world for mutual recognition of qualifications and degrees will be undertaken by ASEAN countries and the rest of the Asia-Pacific region on or before 2020 (CHED Chair Emmanuel Angeles as cited in Cruz, 2009). The CHED Chairman further said that there are no other alternatives but to align our degree programs with those of other countries. He also said that the qualifications of our graduates must be improved to meet our development goals.
According to Cruz (2009), it is likely that in the near future certain professional courses will have their own international standards like nursing for purposes of mutual recognition. He said in simpler terms, it means if we go to school for the same number of years as students in other countries we do not have to take foreign exams in medicine, nursing, education, engineering, accounting and other professions to work abroad. It also means that our doctors, nurses, teachers, accountants, engineers, and other professionals can be hired immediately in other countries without the need for additional trainings or exams.Examples of international agreements are Washington Accord and Bologna Accord. The Washington Accord specifies that a professional engineer must have gone to school for at least 16 years if he or she wants to practice in another country. And the Bologna Accord specifies that professional accountants, pharmacists, physical therapists and other professionals should have at least 3 years of undergraduate education in addition of 12 years of basic education. With our current basic education which is 10 years our professionals with degrees mentioned above will not qualify to practice abroad.
2. Before implementing this 12-year basic education program, the Philippine government should first solve the current problems that the education system is facing for decades such as lack of teachers, classrooms, books and other teaching facilities and materials. Other problems are poor quality teachers and textbooks. In addition, there is a mismatch in the subjects that the teacher teaches to his/her major. Some teachers will teach English even it is not their major as a result they were not able to deliver quality teaching.
The teachers I have interviewed agreed with me that these problems affect the academic performance of our students.
One of the reasons why we lack quality teachers is many of them have left to work overseas because the salary they receive in our country is much lower than what they will get abroad even if some of them just work as a domestic helper in a foreign country. (see Appendix 10 for Teacher’s Salary Comparison). So, our government should ensure that the salary of our teachers is attractive but reasonable. Or they have to find other ways in attracting quality teachers to stay in our country and teach our students. I always believe that quality teachers will produce quality students so our government should take measures on this problem.
3. The schools should follow the bilingual policy strictly that states:“Pilipino (changed to Filipino in 1987) “shall be used as medium of instruction in social studies/social sciences, music, arts, physical education, home economics, practical arts and character education. English, on the other hand, is allocated to science, mathematics and
technology subjects. The same subject allocation is provided in the 1987 Policy on Bilingual Education which is disseminated through Department Order No. 52, s.1987” (Clemencia Espiritu, Ph.D., as cited in Winkler, 2009).
We all know that many of the teachers do not follow this mandate. There are even teachers who teach English in local dialect. I understand that sometimes, teachers have to use the local dialect to ensure that the students understand what the teacher says but the Executive Order 210 should be followed sternly which states:
“The English language shall be used as the primary medium of instruction in all public and private institutions of learning in the secondary level, including those established as laboratory and/or experimental schools, and non-formal and vocational or technical educational institutions. As the primary medium of instruction, the percentage of time allotment for learning areas conducted in the English language is expected to be not less than seventy percent (70%) of the total time allotment for all learning areas in the secondary level.”
I believe that high degree of English proficiency will result to better scores in Mathematics and Science for the very simple reason that if they do not understand the Math or Science questions since their English is poor they do not know how to answer the questions. So, their Math and Science scores will be low.
Specific Recommendations
1. The main reason why majority of the respondents I interviewed opposed on the proposal of having 12 years of basic education is financial. Our country has a very high prevalence of absolute poverty. These people already have difficulty in sending their children to school with the current basic education cycle. The government should have a program that will help the poor people especially those in absolute poverty so that they can at least finish 12 years of basic education.
2. For this program to be widely accepted by the stakeholders involved, the government should inform the public the benefits they will receive from it.
3. For the 12-year basic education program to be meaningful, it should offer not only advanced academic subjects like Calculus, Statistics, etc. but it should also offer life skills courses such as cooking, dressmaking, carpentry, cosmetology, motherhood and entrepreneurship skills among others so that if they could not afford to go to college after graduation from high school they can find jobs easily or can do their own small business out of the life skills they have learned. And also they will be able
to take care of their own families when they get married. For the last 10 years, we have more and more irresponsible parents. Their irresponsibility causes also the decline of our morals and quality of education. In addition, it is one of the causes of poverty. So, we need to teach our high school students these life skills.
4. I found out from the principal of San Jose National High School that the current English curriculum for high school focuses on Reading Comprehension. There is no more emphasis on Grammar. So, I would like to suggest that all aspects of English (Grammar, Writing, Reading Comprehension, Vocabulary as well as Speaking and Listening) should be emphasized in both elementary and high schools because most of the English examinations are not only about Reading Comprehension. I know with the current basic education system, there is not enough time to teach all these. So, if 12 years of basic education will be implemented they should do this to improve our students’ English skills.
Appendices
Appendix 1: 10 year graduating students’ data worksheet
Variable 1 – AgeVariable 2 – SexVariable 3 – Income (in US Dollars)Variable 4 – EducationVariable 5 – Type of SchoolVariable 6 – Type of StudentVariable 7 – Test Score (College Entrance Exam)Variable 8 – EntrepreneurshipVariable 9 – CreativityVariable 10 – MaturityVariable 11 – MoralityVariable 12- Good CitizenshipVariable 13 - English Score
No
Name 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
1 Ommar 16 M 2,667 10 public
Average 18 16 20 5.5 32 53 27
2 Jel 15 F 1,333 10 public
Good 22 8 60 5 36 50 29
3 Wendell 18 M 1,333 10 public
Average 18 16 20 5.5 25 57 22
4 Francis 17 M 2,667 10 public
Good 26 18 36 4.5 33 42 26
5 Sharmaine
15 F 1,333 10 public
Average 30 20 20 6 36 48 35
6 Michelle 17 F 1,333 10 public
VeryGood
28 12 44 5.5 34 46 52
7 Chona 15 F 1,600 10 public
Good 16 4 32 5.5 35 56 39
8 Jessa 15 F 2,667 10 public
Good 23 3 100 5 31 38 36
9 Ronald 16 M 2,667 10 public
Average 14 14 20 4 36 61 24
10 Ralph 15 M 1,333 10 public
Good 32 -2 80 4.5 36 38 47
11 John 15 M 5,333 10 public
Average 34 -6 36 5.5 34 61 36
12 Jefferson 15 M 2,667 10 public
Good 30 13 20 5 36 62 18
13 Aldrin 16 M 2,667 10 public
BelowAve
26 20 28 5.5 28 53 32
14 Dennis 17 M 1,333 10 public
BelowAve
24 22 47 6 35 66 39
15 Jasmin 16 F 2,667 10 public
VeryGood
34 0 80 4.5 29 48 53
16 Ederlinda
17 F 1,333 10 public
Good 28 8 0 5.5 31 54 30
17 Jerome 18 M 533 10 public
Average 28 17 36 5.5 34 53 27
18 Laila 16 F 533 10 public
VeryGood
25 -2 84 5.5 36 61 55
19 Lee Ann 18 F 1,067 10 public
Average 22 13 40 4 25 57 27
20 Catherine
16 F 533 10 public
Good 26 11 48 6 30 61 35
21 Khemly 16 F 800 10 public
VeryGood
28 -18 44 5 34 48 51
22 Giselle 16 F 533 10 public
Average 19 9 48 5 30 61 34
23 Lynie 16 F 533 10 public
Average 37 9 52 5 32 57 50
24 Marnie 16 F 1,333 10 public
VeryGood
26 10 52 5 32 52 47
25 Manilyn 18 F 533 10 public
Average 28 3 68 5 36 56 37
26 Jessa 15 F 1,067 10 public
VeryGood
35 4 80 5 36 50 54
27 Sheila 16 F 533 10 public
Average 28 17 36 5.5 34 53 21
28 Mary Rose
15 F 533 10 public
Average 35 12 48 5.5 36 63 42
29 Cheryl 16 F 800 10 public
Average 25 14 36 5.5 36 58 38
30 Gemalie 15 F 213 10 public
VeryGood
16 12 52 5.5 36 61 37
31 Sarah 15 F 533 10 public
VeryGood
26 21 52 5.5 36 66 37
32 MerryRose
15 F 800 10 public
Average 29 16 48 5 36 57 50
33 Renah 15 F 1,333 10 public
Average 29 17 32 4 34 65 32
34 Rocil 16 M 1,067 10 public
Average 25 13 24 1.5 35 62 52
35 Christian 15 M 533 10 public
Average 29 30 32 5.5 31 55 27
36 Mitchel 16 F 533 10 public
Average 24 8 36 4.5 33 61 42
37 Riza 15 F 533 10 public
VeryGood
33 -2 52 5 34 66 57
38 Bobong 15 M 800 10 public
BelowAve
20 22 20 4 33 53 30
39 Jesille 15 F 1,333 10 public
Average 22 14 52 5.5 31 41 31
40 Gea 15 F 533 10 public
BelowAve
11 18 44 5.5 36 62 19
41 Maricel 15 F 267 10 public
Average 50 6 20 4.5 31 65 41
42 Angelyn 16 F 800 10 public
BelowAve
19 12 36 5.5 36 58 24
43 Abel 15 M 1,067 10 publi VeryGo 37 16 24 5 29 52 33
c od44 Kheven 15 M 445 10 publi
cGood 55 -2 44 5.5 36 52 59
45 Clarven 16 M 4,445 10 public
Good 25 14 48 5 35 47 59
46 Avegail 16 F 333 10 public
Good 23 20 44 5.5 35 66 38
47 Christine 15 F 667 10 public
VeryGood
45 23 100 6 31 57 68
48 Naneth 16 F 667 10 public
VeryGood
36 12 36 5 34 52 65
49 Christian 15 M 1,111 10 public
Good 25 17 20 4.5 33 66 45
50 Genesis 20 M 400 10 public
BelowAve
31 9 36 5 33 58 33
51 Janrey 15 M 667 10 public
VeryGood
28 -3 32 6 34 60 60
52 Gualberto
14 M 889 10 public
Good 28 -4 20 5.5 35 61 48
53 LyzaMarie
15 F 311 10 public
Good 34 18 70 6 32 49 41
54 Roxanne 15 F 667 10 public
Good 25 20 100 4.5 36 62 56
55 Myrla 15 F 267 10 public
Good 32 14 24 5.5 32 62 38
56 Bethlehem
15 F 333 10 public
Good 26 14 56 4.5 35 56 49
57 Geneza 15 F 556 10 public
Good 32 12 36 4.5 33 57 64
58 Jazriel 16 F 556 10 public
Good 46 12 48 6 36 57 48
59 Divie 15 F 1,067 10 public
Good 35 22 32 5.5 35 56 56
60 Jayson 17 M 533 10 public
Average 26 21
61 Jonathan 17 M 10 public
Average 23 55
∑x
∑ x²__ X
Md
Mo
R
s
cov
Sum
Mean
Median
Mode
Range
Standard deviation
Coefficient of variability
962
15,240
16
15
15
6
1.1
7%
68,523
136,474,659
1,142
800
533
4,232
993
87%
610
6,100
10
10
10
0
0
0
1,710
51,832
28
28
28
44
8
29%
666
11,908
11
13
12
48
9
82%
2,585
140,245
44
40
36
100
22
50%
301.5
1571.25
5
5.5
5.5
4.5
.73
15%
1,974
66,468
33
34
36
11
3
9%
3,305
187,939
56
57
61
28
7
13%
2,478
110,456
41
38.5
27
50
13
32%
Appendix 2: 12 year graduating students’ data worksheetNo
Name 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
1 Pan Huan 18 M 2,941 12 public
72 16 36 4 31 45 54
2 Chen Qing 17 M 2,200 12 public
73 4 80 3 36 41 67
3 Tang Hui 18 F 2,941 12 public
67 5 100 6 30 41 64
4 Xu Yun 18 F 7,353 12 public
51 8 100 3 76
5 Pan Yuan 18 F 7,353 12 public
71 24 36 3 24 41 58
6 Liu Li 17 F 4,411 12 public
68 12 100 4 28 51 61
7 Wang Jian 18 M 5,882 12 public
81 -4 40 4 29 43 67
8 Su Chao 19 M 7,353 12 public
68 8 50 4 36 37 36
9 Li Lei 18 M 5,882 12 public
75 12 60 4 30 51 46
10 Liu Dong 19 M 2,941 12 public
72 7 28 5 35 51 69
11 Ma Li 17 F 7,353 12 public
77 8 80 2 36 41 62
12 Cheng Qi 18 M 4,412 12 public
76 26 24 3 36 49 56
13 Li Mei 19 F 7,353 12 public
69 5 100 6 30 41 65
14 ChengTao 20 M 8,088 12 public
63 7 40 5 30 37 46
15 Huang Li 17 M 1,471 12 public
71 7 32 3 24 30 40
16 ChenShao 18 F 8,824 12 public
66 21 28 4 29 42 48
17 Lu Zechao 17 M 14,706 12 public
66 -3 36 4 21 25 59
18 Zhu Miao 17 F 2,941 12 public
66 -3 100 2 36 42 62
19 Mao Wen 17 M 5,882 12 public
51 8 36 3 42
20 TangChao 17 M 7,353 12 public
70 68
21 YangRukuan
M 12 public
47 33 55 48
22 Geng Man 12 public
48 36 51 19
23 Wang Juan 18 F 2.941 12 public
41 36 36 44
24 Zhu Changli 18 M 2,941 12 public
45 35 42 40
25 Chen Chao 17 M 12 public
45 29 32 44
26 Xia Chen 17 F 4,412 12 public
46 35 51 50
27 Li Qiong 18 F 12 public
28 35 35 47
28 Wang Qi 18 F 12 public
43 33 59 33
29 Liu Xia 18 F 12 public
24 35 28 39
30 He Jin 17 M 12 public
42 35 60 35
31 Reng Chuan
18 M 12 public
42 35 60 31
32 Huang Yan 12 public
26 36 52 20
33 HuangLiping
18 F 2,941 12 public
28 33 56 39
34 Xie Xiang 18 M 5,147 12 publi 48 29 45 44
c35 WanXiaomi
ng19 F 12 publi
c55 36 34 59
36 Chen Yaqin 17 F 12 public
46 32 42 58
37 Bao Ju 18 F 12 public
51 35 51 38
38 Shu Xue 18 M 7,353 12 public
54 26 36 53
39 He Shengfu 18 M 2,941 12 public
26 25 27 41
40 Wan Lijun 19 F 12 public
40 33 51 19
∑x
∑ x²__ X
Md
Mo
R
s
cov
Sum
Mean
Median
Mode
Range
Standard deviation
Coefficient of variability
661
11,829
18
18
18
3
.8
4%
146,316
1,002,884,898
5,419
5,417
2,941
13,235
2,842
52%
480
5,760
12
12
12
0
0
0
2,198
131,102
55
52.5
51
57
16.3
30%
168
2,740
9
8
8
30
8
89%
1,106
80,452
58
40
100
76
30
52%
72
296
4
4
4
4
1
25%
1183
38,447
32
33
36
15
4.2
13%
1,611
73,287
44
42
51
35
9
20%
1,947
102,601
49
47.5
44
57
14.2
29%
Appendix 3a: Pearson’s data
Education vs. College Entrance Exam
N= 99∑X = 1,070∑Y = 3,859∑ x² = 11,660∑ Y² = 181,729∑XY = 42,986∑X∑Y = 4,129,130(∑ x)² = 1,144,900(∑ Y)² = 14,891,881
Education vs. English Score
N= 99∑X = 1,070∑Y = 4,349∑ x² = 11,660∑ Y² = 209,591∑XY = 47,384∑X∑Y = 4,653,430(∑ x)² = 1,144,900(∑ Y)² = 18,913,801
Education vs. Entrepreneurship
N= 76∑X = 794∑Y = 818∑ x² = 8,348∑ Y² = 14,520∑XY = 8,484∑X∑Y = 649, 492(∑ x)² = 630, 436(∑ Y)² = 669, 124
Education vs. Creativity
N= 76∑X = 794∑Y = 3,555∑ x² = 8,348∑ Y²= 209,401∑XY = 37,490∑X∑Y= 2,822,670(∑ x)² = 630,436(∑ Y)²= 12,638,025
Education vs. Maturity
N= 76∑X = 794∑Y = 367.5∑ x² = 8,348∑ Y²= 1,849.25∑XY = 3,807∑X∑Y= 291,795(∑ x)²= 630,436(∑ Y)²= 135,056.25
Education vs. Morality
N= 76∑X =794∑Y = 2,495∑ x²=8,348∑ Y²= 82,793∑XY= 25,992∑X∑Y=1,981,030(∑ x)²= 630,436(∑ Y)² = 6,225,025
Education vs. Good Citizenship Age vs. College Entrance Exam Age vs. English Score
N= 76∑X =794∑Y =4,013∑ x² = 8,343∑ Y² = 218,213∑XY = 41,546∑X∑Y =3,186,322(∑ x)² = 630,436(∑ Y)² = 16,104,169
N= 79∑X = 1,285∑Y = 3,034∑ x² = 21,049∑ Y² = 145,934∑XY = 50,553∑X∑Y = 3,898,690(∑ x)² = 1,651,225(∑ Y)²= 9,205,156
N= 79∑X = 1,285∑Y = 3,548∑ x² = 21,049∑ Y²= 174,952∑XY = 58,004∑X∑Y = 4,559,180(∑ x)² = 1,651,225(∑ Y)² = 12,588,304
Income vs. College Entrance Exam
N= 79∑X = 185,630∑Y = 3,034∑ x² = 1,004,453,582∑ Y² = 145,934∑XY = 9,821,341∑X∑Y = 563,201,420(∑ x)² = 34,458,496,900(∑ Y)² = 9,205,156
Income vs. English Score
N= 79∑X = 185,630∑Y = 3,548∑ x² = 1,004,453,582∑ Y² = 174,952∑XY = 9,371,314∑X∑Y = 658,615,240(∑ x)² = 34,458,496,900(∑ Y)² = 12,588,304
Notes:
There are 99 respondents with complete data for Education vs. College Entrance Exam and English Score.
And 76 respondents for Education vs. Entrepreneurship, Creativity, Maturity, Morality and Good Citizenship.
There are 79 respondents for Age and Income vs. College Entrance Exam and English Score
Appendix 3b: Pearson’s Sample Computation
Education vs College Entrance Exam1. Formulate Hypotheses
Ho: R = 0 Ha: R > 0
2. Statistical model to be used
R = N∑XY -∑X∑Y √N∑X2 –(∑X) 2 (√N∑Y2 – (∑Y) 2
3. Criteria for Making Decision
At α = .05, df= 75, reject H0 if the absolute value of the computed R is greater than the table R, or if /R/ >.224
4. Analysis
R = N∑XY -∑X∑Y √N∑X2 – (∑X) 2 (√N∑Y2 – (∑Y) 2
= 99(42,986) – 4,129,130 √99 (11,660) – 1,144,900 (√99 (181,729) – 14,891,881)
= 4,255,614 – 4,129,130 √1,154,340- 1,144,900 (√17,991,171- 14,891,881)
= 126,484 √9,440 (√3,099,290)
= 126,484 97(1,760.5)
= 126,484 170,768.5 R = .74
Appendix 4. Elementary Participation, cohort survival and completion rates
2000-2009
ELEMENTARY PARTICIPATION RATE COHORT SURVIVAL RATE COMPLETION RATE
2000-2001 96.77% 69.46% 68.68%
2001-2002 90.10% 75.90% 74.94%
2002-2003 90.29% 72.44% 71.55%
2003-2004 88.74% 71.84% 70.24%
2004-2005 87.11% 71.32% 69.06%
2005-2006 84.44% 70.02% 67.99%
2006-2007 83.22% 73.43% 71.72%
2007-2008 84.84% 75.26% 73.06%
2008-2009 85.12% 75.39% 73.28%
Sources: NEDA, UNDP, DepEd
Source: cited in GMA News Research, August 2009 as cited in Winkler, Marisa’s research entitled “Poor Quality of Philippine Education and the Vanishing of English Proficiency of the Filipinos: Causes and Solutions”
Appendix 5. Net Enrolment Ratio (NER) in Secondary Education SY 2004-2005 to SY 2008-2009
SECONDARY PARTICIPATION RATE COHORT SURVIVAL RATE COMPLETION RATE
2004-2005 59.97% 78.09% 72.38%
2005-2006 58.54% 67.32% 61.66%
2006-2007 58.59% 77.33% 72.14%
2007-2008 60.26% 79.91% 75.37%
2008-2009 60.74% 79.73% 75.24%
Source: DepEd Factsheet 2009
Appendix 6. Mean Percentage Scores in the National Achievement Test (NAT)in Elementary and Secondary Education: SY 2004-2005 to SY 2007-2008
School Year (SY) Mean Percentage Scores (Elementary)
Mean Percentage Scores (Secondary)
2004-2005 58.73% 46.80%2005-2006 54.66% 44.33%2006-2007 59.94% 46.64%2007-2008 64.81% 49.26%
Source: DepEd Factsheet 2009
Appendix 7. Inadequate Facilities and EquipmentsShortages 2001-2002 2002-2003 2003-2004 2004-2005 2005-2006
Classrooms 8,443 12,470 44,716 51,947 57,930Seats 2,108,173 1,886,499 4.87M 4.56M 3.48M
Source: DepEd Briefing Materials, 2002-2005 Budget Hearing as cited in Jobo, 2009
Appendix 8. Students: Teacher Ratio(Selected Asian Country Comparison)
Country Elementary Lower SecondaryIndonesia 24:1 17.6:1
Japan 23:1 17:1Laos Less than 20:1 17:1
Malaysia 21:1 21:1Philippines 45:1 45:1
South Korea 27:1 27:1Thailand 21.5:1 21.5:1Vietnam 30.1:1 30.1:1
Source: Education for All- 2000 Assessment Country Report as cited in Jobo, 2009
Appendix 9. Lack of teachersShortages 2001-2002 2002-2003 2003-2004 2004-2005 2005-2006
Teachers 37,932 35,818 46,356 38,535 49,699Source: DepEd Briefing Materials, 2002-2005 Budget Hearing as cited in Jobo, 2009
Appendix 10. 2005 Teacher’s salary comparison with selected countries
Country Average Net Income($US )/month
Weekly hours
United States 4,055 36.6United Kingdom 3,568 42.5
Australia 2,742 39.1Canada 2,236 31.1Japan 2,961 No data
South Korea 2,096 39.7Thailand 388 38.0
Philippines 237 40.0Germany 3,309 40.0France 1,950 No dataKuwait 1,506 36.0
Source: http://www.worldsalaries.org/teacher.shtm as cited in Winkler, 2009
References
1. Ager, Maila2008 “12 year basic education program in public schools pushed”, INQUIRER.net.
2. Alferez, Merle S. 2009 MSA Simulated College Admission Test. Quezon City, Philippines: MSA Publishing House.
3. Bautista, Victoria A.1998 Research and Public Management. Diliman, Quezon City: UP Open University Office of Academic Support and Instructional Services.
4. Bautista, Victoria A.“An Evaluation of the Comprehensive and Integrated Delivery of Social Services”. In PM 299.2 Research and Public Management: Reader Volume. University of the Philippines Open University.
5. Brownstein, Samuel C., Weiner, Mitchel and Green, Sharon W.1991 SAT*: Barron’s How to Prepare for the Scholastic Aptitude Test. 16th edition. Barron’s Educational Series, Inc. Reprinted by: global publishing. Manila, Philippines
6. Cruz, Isagani R. 2009 “Education Reforms in the Philippines: Why CHED is
rushing”
7. Herrera, Ernesto F.2010 “Do we really need two more years of basic education?”, The Manila Times.net.
8. Jobo, Jovito R. Jr.2009 “Challenges in the Philippine Basic Education System”, Graduate School student- Master in Public Affairs, University of the Philippines Los Banos.
9. Kenny, David A. 2003 “Unit of Analysis” http://davidakenny.net/u_o_a.htm
10. Kim, Weeny2008 “Role of the Youth in Moral Recovery of the Philippines- Unification Perspective”
http://www.tparents.org/Library/Unification/Talks/Cayme/Kim-080504.htm11. Montenegro, Candice2010 “DepEd: 12-year program will make HS students employable”GMANews.TV
12. Palaubsanon, Mitchelle L.2010 “Education secretary pushes for additional years in school”The Freeman
13. Quismundo, Tarra2010 “Education sector split on 12-year basic ed”Philippine Daily Inquirer
14. Ramirez, Efren Sr.1992 The Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines: with Brief and Explanatory Notes. Cebu City: Visayan Educational Supply Corporation.
15. Reforma, Mila A.1998 Quantitative Methods in Public Policy and Administration. Diliman, Quezon City: UP Open University Office of Academic Support and Instructional Services.
16. Tapales, PD, Enriquez, VG, and Trinidad, OS1995 “Value Profile and Corruption Propensity: Correlates Among Employees in Two Types of Government Agencies”. In PM 299.2 Research and Public Management: Reader Volume. University of the Philippines Open University.
17. Winkler, Marisa2009 “Poor Quality of Philippine Education and the Vanishing of English Proficiency of the Filipinos: Causes and Solutions”, a research paper submitted in PM 201 class
18. “Creativity Test” by www.increasebrainpower.com
19. “Entrepreneurial Test” developed by Brigham Young University Marriott School, Utah, USA.
20. “Maturity Test” developed by Harvard School of Psychiatry.
21. 2008 “CHED Chair favors 12 years of basic education” from Philippines News Agency: www.highbeam.com.
22. 2008 “Govt. needs P30-B to add 2 more years to basic education curriculum-Lapus” from Philippines News Agency: www.highbeam.com.
23. Constitution of the People’s Republic of China Adopted on December 4, 1982,
http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/constitution/constitution.html
24. “Confucius”, Wikipedia.
25. DepEd Order No. 50 s. 20052005 “Revised Implementing Guidelines on the Implementation of Citizenship Advancement Training (CAT) in both Public and Private Secondary Schools”,http://www2.ohchr.org/english/bodies/crc/docs/AdvanceVersions/annex1DepEdorder.pdf
26. “Unit of Analysis”http://www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/unitanal.php
27. “Unit of Analysis”http://www.jerrydallal.com/LHSP/units.htm
28. “TOEFL Sample Test” http://www.testwise.com/review.html
29. “Sample TOEFL Exam”http://www.emse.fr/~yukna/ENG/lessons/toefl40a.htm
30. “TOEFL”, Wikipedia
31. “IELTS Exams”http://www.world-english.org/ielts_free_tests.htm
32. “IELTS”, Wikipedia
33. “The Morals of Confucius” 1691 First English Editionhttp://hua.umf.maine.edu/Reading_Revolutions/Confucius.html
34. “Why Does China Have a Morality Crisis?”http://www.insideoutchina.com/2008/09/why-does-china-have-morality-crisis.html
35. “Legalized prostitution crosses critical moral line” http://bbs.chinadaily.com.cn/viewthread.php?gid=2&tid=654233
36. “The natural way is to rule by morals”http://bbs.chinadaily.com.cn/viewthread.php?gid=2&tid=659496
37. “Crime Against Public Morals, Chapter two: Offenses Against Decency and Good Customs”1930 Act No. 3815 The Revised Penal Code of the Philippines, An Act Revising the Penal Code and Other Penal Laws., CHAN ROBLES Virtual Law Libraryhttp://www.chanrobles.com/revisedpenalcodeofthephilippinesbook2.htm
38. “Loose morality in the Philippines” 2009http://www.luwaran.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=744:loose-morality-in-the-philippines&catid=editorial&Itemid=274
39. “Our Filipino Norm of Morality (Revisited)” 2008http://thefilipinomind.blogspot.com/2008/01/our-filipino-norm-of-morality-revisited.html
40. “Dr. Jose Rozal’s Ethical Philosophy”http://www.joserizal.ph/ph01.html
41. “Secular Morality and the University”2008, The UP Centennial 1908-2008http://centennial.up.edu.ph/?p=85
42. Department of Education Factsheet 2009www.deped.gov.ph
43. “University of the Philippines College Admission Test”Wikipedia
44. “Senators back proposed 12-year education cycle”2010, Cebu Daily News
45. “12-year basic education gains support”2010, Sun.Star Cebu
46. “What is BESRA in Frequently Asked Questions EFA 2015 Plan”http://efa2015.110mb.com/FREQUENTLY_ASKS_QUESTIONS.htm
Interviews:
1. Mrs. Dennie B. Capito, principal of San Jose National High School2. Mrs. Laarni L. Lucero, an English teacher at Luciano B. Rama Sr.
Memorial National High School3. Mrs. Maricel G. Crusado, a Math and Chemistry teacher at
Luciano B. Rama Sr. Memorial National High School4. Ms. Victoria A. Suralta, a Science teacher at Dao Elementary
School in Bohol5. Mrs. Analou M. Gaite, a store manager at Jollibee 138 Mall.6. Mr. Eduardo P. Rodriguez, Barneys Burger Proprietor and GuaGua
Water District General Manager7. Ms. Nashra Tulawie, Administrator of Family Farm Business and
soon-to-be owner of a gourmet coffee shop which will open in November
8. Ms. Kaye Lacanlale, HR-Recruitment and Training Clerk of JBC Corporation
9. Ms. Grace Mendoza, HR Officer of REBISCO Corporation10. Some of my high school classmates at Luciano B. Rama Sr.
Memorial National High School who are parents now.11. My neighbors and family in Camotes12. Some of my UPOU classmates who are parents
