Values Education: Corruption in Education
Early this week I was blown away by the news that the Food for School program of the DepEd purchased a pack of noodles for Php18 last year and would be distributing improved packs next year at a staggering Php54 per pack of noodles. Whoa! There are much better instant noodles in the market and more nutritious at that. This is blatant corruption, so well in good that some Senators are now investigating this uneducated blunder. Unfortunately, the DepEd is very myopic when they came up with this program. Indeed poor health and malnutrition contribute to poor school performance. However, in Philippine education there are far more devastating reasons why students fare poorly in school and it is not primarily because of malnutrition. When the government allocated Php500 million for the program, it was all for good intentions, but unfortunately the department is one of the most corrupt in the country. I can just imagine how many pesos were wasted and stolen for a program that did not serve any purpose at all.
For learning to take place, three things are considered: the learner, the teacher and the instruction. Students arrive in school for formal education bringing with them unstructured learning only. This may include first hand experiences while growing up and exploring the surrounding and those taught by adults other than a school teacher. The importance of the teacher cannot be underestimated. The most important factor for better learning in fact is the teacher. It is nice to remember that one cannot give what one does not have. If the teacher does not know the content of the subject matter, then there will be nothing to teach. Of course, the teacher must also be well-equipped with the tools of the trade – instruction. He must have been trained and equipped with the various fundamental teaching strategies. All these three must come into a complex interplay to make learning successful and produce educated students.
The Food for School program addresses the students. A lot of school age children in the country are, sadly, malnourished. Studies conducted here and abroad have proven how adverse the effect of malnutrition is in knowledge acquisition. The poorer the health status of the learner, the poorer is his academic performance. This is the fact that pushes the DepEd to launch the program. How was the program implemented? To my knowledge, last year, the first graders were given two kilos of rice. I don’t know if all the elementary schools nationwide did something else than just distribute rice. Obviously, a couple kilos of carbohydrates cannot change the nutritional status of the child. This is thinking the first grader child alone consumed every grain of the two kilo rice which I think is impossible to happen. Most of these children have brothers and sisters too that need to be fed. The DepEd does not even know whether the rice was really cooked or was even sold to buy something else. Was there any follow up done? Was the program of distributing rice continued?
If besides the distribution of rice the department also distributed packs of instant noodles, then this is good news only, not better. According to one of the Senators investigating the anomalous noodles, each pack “contains fresh egg”. How can it contain fresh egg when it is packed? Should the label be “enriched with egg” not the former one? However, a fresh egg costs only Php5 at the most, so the good senator was surprised why each pack of instant noodles costs the government Php18 when the same costs only about Php10 in the market. For next year, the department has awarded the same project to the same bidder but this time each pack will cost Php54 already. According to some foolish DepEd officials, each pack costs more because the noodles do not need boiling anymore. The students just have to pour hot water and wallah! There is the cup of hot noodles like magic. How pathetic! First, the rice and now enriched noodles. Both are carbohydrates and Filipino children have never been lacking of carbohydrates. What they need are essential amino acids – protein, protein and protein. Well, the egg might have been the answer.
The Department of Education, however, does not see the bigger picture. The students are not primarily the problem. The problem lies on the teachers and instruction. There are just so many teachers, who are actually teaching, that are not at all competent. In order for a teacher to be competent, one must be good in both instruction and evaluation. Sadly, because most teachers do not know how to teach, they are afraid to fail students lest parents will complain. Most incompetent teachers do not know how to evaluate learning. They just pass students even if the latter are not really able to master the competences that prepare them to the next higher level. There is also the problem of overcrowding. How can a teacher teach well if he has 60 to 70 students to contend with inside a classroom that can only accommodate 45 students maximum? Another problem is the lack of textbooks. The student to textbook ratio is not one to one. How will a student study for his lessons? No wonder when they get to high school, they do not even have a trace amount of study habit? There are more pressing problems in the department and the students are not the major ones. Should the DepEd officials be eating too the fortified noodles to make them more intelligent decision makers?
Early this week I was blown away by the news that the Food for School program of the DepEd purchased a pack of noodles for Php18 last year and would be distributing improved packs next year at a staggering Php54 per pack of noodles. Whoa! There are much better instant noodles in the market and more nutritious at that. This is blatant corruption, so well in good that some Senators are now investigating this uneducated blunder. Unfortunately, the DepEd is very myopic when they came up with this program. Indeed poor health and malnutrition contribute to poor school performance. However, in Philippine education there are far more devastating reasons why students fare poorly in school and it is not primarily because of malnutrition. When the government allocated Php500 million for the program, it was all for good intentions, but unfortunately the department is one of the most corrupt in the country. I can just imagine how many pesos were wasted and stolen for a program that did not serve any purpose at all.
For learning to take place, three things are considered: the learner, the teacher and the instruction. Students arrive in school for formal education bringing with them unstructured learning only. This may include first hand experiences while growing up and exploring the surrounding and those taught by adults other than a school teacher. The importance of the teacher cannot be underestimated. The most important factor for better learning in fact is the teacher. It is nice to remember that one cannot give what one does not have. If the teacher does not know the content of the subject matter, then there will be nothing to teach. Of course, the teacher must also be well-equipped with the tools of the trade – instruction. He must have been trained and equipped with the various fundamental teaching strategies. All these three must come into a complex interplay to make learning successful and produce educated students.
The Food for School program addresses the students. A lot of school age children in the country are, sadly, malnourished. Studies conducted here and abroad have proven how adverse the effect of malnutrition is in knowledge acquisition. The poorer the health status of the learner, the poorer is his academic performance. This is the fact that pushes the DepEd to launch the program. How was the program implemented? To my knowledge, last year, the first graders were given two kilos of rice. I don’t know if all the elementary schools nationwide did something else than just distribute rice. Obviously, a couple kilos of carbohydrates cannot change the nutritional status of the child. This is thinking the first grader child alone consumed every grain of the two kilo rice which I think is impossible to happen. Most of these children have brothers and sisters too that need to be fed. The DepEd does not even know whether the rice was really cooked or was even sold to buy something else. Was there any follow up done? Was the program of distributing rice continued?
If besides the distribution of rice the department also distributed packs of instant noodles, then this is good news only, not better. According to one of the Senators investigating the anomalous noodles, each pack “contains fresh egg”. How can it contain fresh egg when it is packed? Should the label be “enriched with egg” not the former one? However, a fresh egg costs only Php5 at the most, so the good senator was surprised why each pack of instant noodles costs the government Php18 when the same costs only about Php10 in the market. For next year, the department has awarded the same project to the same bidder but this time each pack will cost Php54 already. According to some foolish DepEd officials, each pack costs more because the noodles do not need boiling anymore. The students just have to pour hot water and wallah! There is the cup of hot noodles like magic. How pathetic! First, the rice and now enriched noodles. Both are carbohydrates and Filipino children have never been lacking of carbohydrates. What they need are essential amino acids – protein, protein and protein. Well, the egg might have been the answer.
The Department of Education, however, does not see the bigger picture. The students are not primarily the problem. The problem lies on the teachers and instruction. There are just so many teachers, who are actually teaching, that are not at all competent. In order for a teacher to be competent, one must be good in both instruction and evaluation. Sadly, because most teachers do not know how to teach, they are afraid to fail students lest parents will complain. Most incompetent teachers do not know how to evaluate learning. They just pass students even if the latter are not really able to master the competences that prepare them to the next higher level. There is also the problem of overcrowding. How can a teacher teach well if he has 60 to 70 students to contend with inside a classroom that can only accommodate 45 students maximum? Another problem is the lack of textbooks. The student to textbook ratio is not one to one. How will a student study for his lessons? No wonder when they get to high school, they do not even have a trace amount of study habit? There are more pressing problems in the department and the students are not the major ones. Should the DepEd officials be eating too the fortified noodles to make them more intelligent decision makers?
No comments:
Post a Comment