Science and K+12
LAST week, news reports carried the announcement of Education Secretary Armin Luistro that Science would be dropped from the subjects being taught at the Grade 1 level. This decision of the Department of Education (Deped) is based on the design of the K+12 curriculum and the department’s efforts to decongest the Basic Education Curriculum. Instead of Science, the Grade 1 curriculum will focus on “oral fluency” and include learning areas on the Mother Tongue, Filipino, Edukasyon sa Pagpapakatao, MAPEH (Music, Art, Physical Education and Health), Mathematics, Araling Panlipunan (Social Studies) and English. Science will be introduced as a subject only when the student comes in at Grade 3.
This move to limit the contact hours for science is worrisome, especially since the purported target of the shift to 12 years of basic education curriculum is to improve students’ competencies in English, Math and Science and prepare them for college. One reason often cited for moving into K+12 is that the increased number of years will keep the curriculum relatively light and thus make learning more enjoyable to young learners. This move to delay the introduction to science in the curriculum seems to be too much for some.
In a related move, the Deped will be providing financial sub- sidy to about half or our special science high schools to improve teachers’ competencies and mentoring in Science. Instead of introducing scientific thinking early on, the department would rather put its money in improving scientific teaching at later stages in order to compensate.
The premium for students now is on learning and speaking well in English, for example, rather than building the student’s analytical skills to deal with his natural (and social) world. This choice is usually driven by the government’s perceived need to join the globalization bandwagon such as its drive to cash in the business process outsourcing (BPO) boom (or bust, as US President Barack Obama had said). Fluency in English is a must for many of us from the Third World, since most industries here are owned or run by foreign firms. Even in local employment, English is usually one important criteria required from applicants.
We also teach science in English. Most textbooks in the Third World are English imports that contain cultural examples that make sense only in the US or the UK. We need to translate these textbooks to teach science in the local language in order for more students to appreciate the subject matter.
Yet maybe the real problem lies in how we teach and appreciate science and mathematics in the country. It seems that for some, science has become a chore of memorization of facts and numbers for students and accompanied with little or no processing at all. It does little help to know who Alexander Graham Bell is than knowing how the principles behind magnetism and electricity that drives the functionality of the telephone.
Learning how to view the world scientifically should be introduced as early as possible. Inquiry- based methods, wherein teachers guide their students in investigating the world, can be designed to be both useful and enjoyable to young students. We need this kind of analytical tack for our students on top of their other competencies as we use science, not only in the production of goods, but in many aspects of everyday life. This type of science teaching should be taught at all levels, if possible.
We see the K+12 retooling of the curriculum to follow the demands of the globalized market, rather that a shift to really improve the local pool of educated youth that will drive local industries. Since it is the target of the government to rely more on BPO and investments rather than domestic industrialization to improve our economy, this K+12 retooling distorts the preparation of our students to become science-competent into just science-“familiar.”
The recent pronouncement by Obama to pass legislation to bring outsourcing jobs back to the US shows how vulnerable this strategy is. The Philippine government has budgeted at least P575 million in subsidies for private and foreign BPO investors consisting of trainings, curriculum and teacher development, career marketing and scholarships through TESDA and CHED. We agree with think tank IBON Foundation that these funds will be more productively spent supporting Philippine industry, science and technology, than for a sector that is such a small part of the economy and by its nature does not give much value.
Developing a domestic industry starts with a correct track in education. Science is not just the facts and figures we have in the textbooks. It is the observational and analytical skills that you gain in these science subjects that make us act and think “scientific” in our lives. Dr. Tapang is a physicist and chair of the Agham-advocates of Science and Technology for the People.