The Crisis of Public Education in the Philippines
The modern world in which we live is often termed a “knowledge society”; education and
information have become production factors potentially more valuable than labor and capital.
Thus, in a globalized setting, investment in human capital has become a condition for
international competitiveness.
In the Philippines, I often hear harsh criticism against the politics of globalization. At the same
time, regarding the labor markets, I can hardly think of another nation that is so much a part of a
globalized economy than the Philippines with nearly ten per cent of the overall population
working beyond the shores of the native land.
Brain drain. Apart from the much debated political, social and psychological aspects, this
ongoing mass emigration constitutes an unparalleled brain drain with serious economic
implications.
Arguably, the phenomenon also has an educational dimension, as the Philippine society is
footing the bill for the education of millions of people, who then spend the better part of their
productive years abroad. In effect, the poor Philippine educational system is indirectly
subsidizing the affluent economies hosting the OFWs.
With 95 per cent of all elementary students attending public schools, the educational crisis in the
Philippines is basically a crisis of public education. The wealthy can easily send their offspring
to private schools, many of which offer first-class education to the privileged class of pupils.
Social divide. Still, the distinct social cleavage regarding educational opportunities remains
problematic for more than one reason. Historically, in most modern societies, education has had
an equalizing effect. In Germany, for instance, the educational system has helped overcome the
gender gap, and later also the social divide. Today, the major challenge confronting the
educational system in the country, in most cases Muslim, immigrants. Importantly, this leveling
out in the context of schooling has not occurred in this part of the world. On the contrary, as one
Filipino columnist wrote, “Education has become part of the institutional mechanism that divides
the poor and the rich.”
Let me add an ideological note to the educational debate: Liberals are often accused of standing
in the way of reforms that help overcome social inequalities. While, indeed, liberals value
personal freedom higher than social equality, they actively promote equality of opportunities in
two distinct policy areas: education and basic heath care.
For this reason, educational reform tends to have a high ranking on the agenda of most liberal
political parties in many parts of the world.
Although I live to this country for over 30 years now, I am still astonished again and again by the
frankness and directness with which people here address problems in public debates. “The
quality of Philippine education has been declining continuously for roughly 25 years,” said the
Undersecretary — and no one in the audience disagreed. This, I may add, is a devastating report
card for the politicians who governed this nation in the said period. From a liberal and
democratic angle, it is particularly depressing as this has been the period that coincides with
democratic rule that was so triumphantly and impressively reinstalled after the dark years of
dictatorship in 1986! Describing the quality of Philippine school education today, the senior
DepEd official stated the following: “Our schools are failing to teach the competence the average
citizen needs to become responsible, productive and self-fulfilling. We are graduating people
who are learning less and less.”
Let me highlight two figures: Reportedly, at last count more than 17 million students are enrolled
in this country’s public schools.
At an annual population growth rate of 2.3 per cent, some 1.7 million babies are born every year.
In a short time, these individuals will claim their share of the limited educational provisions.
“We can’t build classrooms fast enough to accommodate” statement from a DepEd
Undersecretary, who also recalled the much lamented lack of teachers, furniture and teaching
materials.
In short, there are too little resources for too many students.
Two alternatives. In this situation, logically, there exist only two strategic alternatives: either,
one increases the resources, which is easier said than done considering the dramatic state of
public finances, or one reduces the number of students.
This second alternative presupposes a systematic population policy, aimed at reducing the
number of births considerably.
But this, too, is easier said than done, considering the politics in this country — or to quote
Congressman Reyes: “Given the very aggressive and active intervention of the Church
addressing the population problem is very hard to tackle.”
