DepEd proposes 12 year basic education - are you in favor?

Hello HippieMom, First, this is an old story already, which i believed rejected by some groups or students due to lack of funding, as we are in tight budget for education. frankly, i never agreed to this thing because there was no legitimate platform adding the budget including the salary of the teachers. so, the interpretation there is that it's more expense, specially to the Parents. there's already MUSIC subject in highschool, why just expand it with something else than the usual "Note", Alto, or something. Entrepreneurship? they should have that kind of introduction in HOME ECONOMICS. i think during the election GIBO originally proposed this, but it seem Pnoy continued it. Protest?! Boo! they should have protested it during the election period..who the heck these people vote for

What they need to do is improve the teaching methods and there won't be a need for additional school years. A student could spend an eternity at school and still not learn if the process itself is at fault. Parents will have to spend more money for tuition fees yet there is no guaranty that their children will benefit from it. Now if our current education system is up to standards, then at least there's that guaranty. The system is in shambles, fix it first rather than adding to the pile of ruble.

Look at other countries that already have this and you'll see how beneficial it is to everyone. We already have kindergarten to grade 12, we used to have grade 13 until they decided to remove it. More education means more skills to transfer to the workforce, it really helps. Those who don't finish high school aren't always worse off, I never finished high school, but I've had a steady job for over 3 years and my job requires high school and even college education for certain aspects of it. But I'm learning through hands on teaching with my job, so I didn't necessarily need to finish school. However, I'm an exception to the typical rule that education is extremely beneficial to job seekers, true, it does look good on your resume, however, job skills are important as well. But, if you were to immigrate from where you are and come here, having the education that they propose there will help you in the long run in getting work here. The more education you have, the more likely you will be to get work here. They are right in making that decision.

I beg to disagree to the government's initiative. What our country needs are proper trained teachers, well mannered students, quality facilities and educational system, and strong will for learning for teachers, students and also parents. Another 2 years will not justify the increasing unemployment rate in the country. Much more it will be a burden for all 3 parties concern (teachers, students and parents). Government should provide quality education not just for primary and secondary but more most importantly for the tertiary level.

What country are you from? In Canada we already have grades 1-12 (we had grade 13 a few years ago but it was cut out) and junior and senior kindergarten before grade one. Most people actually put their kids into preschool before that, so many kids get 15-16 years of education before university.

This is all a bunch of stupidity, if you notice, some students from our top schools, when transfered to another country they are said to be on top of the class. The problem here is, adding years would mean adding more expenses, our country lacks workers and by putting them in school for a longer time then how would we obtain workers? In fact, we should even take away two years from us. First and second year college is useless and expensive, they just teach you things that you learned in high school. Those subjects should be optional and the students should just focus on things that relates to their course. I bet if you ask your boss to do math problems I'm sure that your promotion would be harder to obtain.

I think they just need to add the years to the practical application of whatever they want, like a 2 year period where they can go and search for whereever they think they like to build their career into... adding 2 years to the normal classroom curriculum is only a waste of time if these children don't know where to go right after highschool - if they ahve not decided what they want to take in college, for example so we can give them another year for this, perhaps... to "know" and "feel" what their calling is...

Its odd that they think adding more years in studying would help the students prepare for the future. Yeah, I guess it works but, comparing the environment of the students before who are now working in offices and the students now who have just finished and are starting to look for jobs, why is it that the former are capable while the latter seems to be unequipped? Seems like the increase of the student population while classrooms still remain the same in amount, made schools decide to change the schedule of their classes, making some classes happen at different days of the week. Comparing that to how it was before, everyday had the same number of subjects which made it consistent for students to learn their lessons. If schools can just maintain that kind of aspect of consistency, perhaps they just need to have more rooms to teach more students and hire more teachers for those rooms that they make. When you add years into the program, would the students easily adapt to it? Perhaps most of them would still have to adjust. That'll take a long time. Yeah, it works for others but, it doesn't necessarily mean it would work the same way as easily to a system that has been doing their routine for a long time. Just look at it this way, if the generation of those who studied before can be competitive now, why not make the same learning environment for the generation today? Improve what has already been working and not entirely change everything without conditioning those who would get affected.

not at the moment. they have to fix the classrooms and all the facilities first and improve the curriculum.

I don't think it is realistic considering the big amount involved in implementing the program. What the govt should do is strenghten the existing curriculum and improve the facilities. The teachers should also be updated in terms of technology. There should be balance, not just pure science. practical arts or basic training should not be removed. what i meant by basic training are baking, dress making, cooking and carpentry and gardening. these are basic applications in life and should be given importance in the learning process of students. The govt should also consider the added expenses the parents would be having if this will be implemented. especially, the marginalized family wont be able to sustain the allowances of their children considering the minimal monthly income they have.

Though there are a lot of countries which have the proposed education system, I believe that it's not in the number of years in school. It's in the quality of education and teaching that is really important. If you'll be spending a lot of years and school, and the teaching and education isn't improving, I think you'll just be wasting your time since you still can't learn anything. The government should focus on improving the quality of education not the length of school years an individual should attend. Also, I also think that they need to continue with the feeding programs in schools. It's because kids can't understand anything in an empty stomach and poor nutrition to help with their brain activity.

I think im not in favor of another two years of schooling in basic education. Its another expenses for the family.

Ideally it is good but realistically not. Most of the parents can not even support the education of their child. what more if there are additional years in school. It means more money for the books, for the school things etc. I also have a friend who had this kind of education but he said that there is no difference. When he got to college he still not ready for it. He is intelligent but He believes that he had no edge with his college classmates who took up the regular school.

I think education depends on the student. Even if more years is added to the curriculum and the student is not willing to learn, additional year will be wasted... meaning more money will be wasted. The government will have to put up more budget for education and build more school but then the students are not into it. What is the point? I believe that what the DepEd should do is strengthen the education quality. Create more effective way to teach. Give more good books. Because I have seen in different public schools that the book's ratio is 1:4 or even more. The classrooms are crowded... there is no learning with a room packed with students... How can the teacher focus on each and every students need?

the proposal is at its best but the government should be aware of the different problems the department is currently facing...

If you look at a huge perspective its really difficult to solve the problem in education here in our country. If we go to K-12, the problem that surely will arise are the following: there will be not enough number of classroom to accommodate another year level, we need a higher budget for the salary of the teachers since there will be additional subjects. With this vision, not only the public schools but also the private schools (which the tuition fee never cease to rise). If parents can no longer catch up with the tuition fee hike of the private school, they will surely opt to send their kids to public, so that will increase the number of students in public schools again. So its not really a good idea...