Abolish the CPD Law?

It seems that SB 2073 is now gaining support among teachers. For those who don’t know, the senate bill seeks to abolish RA 10912 also known as the CPD Law.

Before expressing my stand on the SB, I would like to make it clear that the main thrust of CPD is valid. Apparently there is a need to promote and upgrade the practice of professions in the Philippines. In the face of ASEAN integration, there is no other choice but to step up in an increasingly competitive market. However it is one thing to say that an idea is valid. It is, practically, another thing to say if its execution or implementation is carried out fairly and systematically.

Even before its full implementation, the law has been viewed with so much suspicion and antagonism. Foremost, institutions, especially the educational sector has not been prepared for it. Two, it is a directive with good intentions but would operate within a system that has a lot of existing deficiencies and flaws.

Such a law therefore would not succeed without considering other structural changes that should be implemented side by side with it. For example, in the Philippine educational landscape, there is a wide public-private divide. Some if not many might not agree with this but private and public schools do not have the same conceptualization, operationalization, and application of the term “quality.” The Department of Education and CHED both claim that public schools have improved a lot in terms of quality. On what bases?

One possible way to make teachers’ lives less complicated in the face of this demanding law is the optimization by the government of the resources of private institutions. Private institutions have been improving its system from within through autonomous accrediting institutions. Aren’t these enough? Is CPD really a much better way to continually develop professionally? Bigger private schools have been refining their Summer In-service Training through the years. In fact, public schools have been recipients of some seminars sponsored by private schools.

We cannot blame people, teachers in particular, if they think that the CPD Law has become a moneymaking activity. And why not? It is basic in economics that the price of a service would increase whenever the demand is high and where supply (of the service) is low. How many accredited CPD service providers are there? Truth to tell, even if the institution is an accredited CPD provider, it cannot automatically offer seminars or conferences with CPD units. It has to go through another process of application and accreditation for the event. We don’t need to mention that complying the documentation and other requirements is practically discouraging.

The road to hell is paved with good intentions. There is no question that 21st century education demands innovation. Professionals, specifically teachers cannot settle for anything less. The lessons taught in Teacher Education Colleges are in now way sufficient. The Education curriculum in fact is another thing that must be reviewed. But is the current model of CPD the solution to this? Are there no other ways of continuing and enhancing professional development?

Precisely, genuine change cannot happen if only a portion of the system would be improved. Not if we are merely retouching or beautifying a certain corner of a house that is about to collapse.

Bluntly speaking, the CPD Law, at least as it is being implemented in the teaching profession, is an additional burden. It has become another source of anxiety among our teachers in a system that has not even addressed its longstanding confusions. Presupposing an authentic and sustained professional development should be a well-organized bureaucracy, well-funded infrastructure, and an ongoing upgrading of technology in the area of instruction.

I have not yet said up to this point my stand on SB 2017. But I guess my message is clear.