Let’s do an ostrich this time!

The news about the ridiculously low scores of young Filipinos in reading comprehension, mathematics, and science administered by PISA is indeed disturbing.

PISA is OECD’s Programme for International Student Assessment established in 1997 for the purpose of comparing educational performance across countries. The latest round of tests was done in 2018 involving 79 countries with the basic intention of ascertaining “15-year-olds’ ability to use their reading, mathematics, and science knowledge and skills to meet real– life challenges.”

What are the main findings? First, on what students know and can do, results show students in four cities of China plus Singapore scored significantly higher in reading than all other countries, including the US, Japan, UK, and other developed economies.

Second, in mathematics, one in six in the four Chinese cities and about one in seven in Singapore scored the highest level in math proficiency. These students can do advanced mathematical thinking and reasoning. Very few in other countries equaled this performance.

Third, in science, 90 percent or higher of students in the four Chinese cities as well as in Macao, Estonia, and Singapore achieved highest scores, clearly indicative of the students’ ability to recognize the reasons for familiar scientific phenomena. This indicates that these students can tell the validity of a conclusion based on evidence.

PISA also compared the results of 2015 and 2018 tests. Between those two years, there were improvements in mathematics for some countries, including Albania, Jordan, and Peru. UK demonstrated that even if developed, there is still room for further improvement. There was some decline in Malta, Romania, and yes, even Chinese Taipei.

In a number of countries, PISA testing has benefitted public policy. “Between 2003 and 2018, Brazil, Indonesia, Mexico, Turkey, and Uruguay enrolled many more 15year-olds in secondary education without sacrificing the quality of the education provided.” What about the Philippines? The Philippines is at the bottom of the heap, so much lower than the average OECD scores of nearly 500 in the three areas. There is no basis for comparing the Philippines against its previous performance because it is a first timer.

First timer or not, taken at face value, the news is enough for one to be compelled to bury one’s head in the sand. Should we just ignore the results, hoping the issue will disappear?

It is good to hear Education Secretary Leonor Briones quickly ordering a fundamental review of the Philippines’ education curriculum. This is imperative. By this, the DepEd is fulfilling the main objective of PISA tests to help in policy formulation, planning, and programming.

Perhaps our education leaders and public officials can mount a summit of various stakeholders other than the DepEd and CHED to prepare an Omnibus Magna Carta of Education. We need the inputs of engineers, scientists, economists, and representatives of other social and natural sciences to imbue our young generation with all the skills they need to be able to compete in this volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous world.

Issues about teachers’ appropriate training, compensation, and perspectives have to be addressed. Textbooks have to be redone. Priorities and specific timetables have to be set. Easy wins are desirable. Specific accountabilities should be established.

Public policy response is called for, but panic is not justified.

PISA tests do not necessarily focus on rote learning that is synonymous with memorization techniques by repetition. What is more utilitarian is honing the students’ skills in deploying learning to practical use. This can be done through meaningful, associative, or active learning. The world has become more challenging and thriving in it demands creative skills.

PISA itself recognizes the practical limitations in conducting its tests in various countries with varying learning milieu and languages. It is cognizant that students come from different social backgrounds, with schools having dissimilar structures and using various curricula and diverse teaching emphasis and instructional methods.

Rather, the leveling factor is the common standards of measurement used. In the global context, what distinguishes one student from another is not his performance against locally established benchmarks, but against benchmarks of universal relevance and application.

For instance, it sounds misplaced to blame English proficiency particularly in science and mathematics. I don’t think the Chinese topnotchers took the two-hour tests in English. Neither did their Korean and Japanese counterparts test in English. Those Latin American performers must have also tested in Spanish in which they are most conversant.

The goal of the tests is not mainly to measure what the students know but what the students are capable of thinking and doing. The issue is critical thinking, practical application of one’s knowledge, and the ability to face real-life challenges. This is the educational basis of good economic performance.

It is also misplaced to question the effectiveness of the K-12 program. Those who took the tests are not yet covered and therefore the benefits of the additional years of schooling have yet to accrue in the system. A revamp is necessary to combine in 12 years teaching knowledge with skills in using such knowledge in figuring out the dynamics of things and events. The jury is still out.

Finally, our real challenge is to actualize the one important finding of PISA that poverty is not destiny. Equity and excellence can be jointly achieved as shown by some economies whose students scored high despite their relatively lower economic status. All countries have excellent students but the results also reveal that very few countries have succeeded in enabling their students to excel and fulfill their potential to do so.

Creative and critical thinking is what we need today. For public policy, it is criminal to face this reality by pretending the problem does not exist. But like the ostrich, we should rather bury our eggs, the future generations, in the sands to protect them. We can do the same with K-12 and the Universal Access to Quality Tertiary Education Act until they hatch into great results.