Joint Foreign Chambers

ARANGKADA PHILIPPINES 2010: A BUSINESS PERSPECTIVE

Advocacy Paper

JOINT FOREIGN CHAMBERS ADVOCACY PAPER ARANGKADA PHILIPPINES 2010: A BUSINESS PERSPECTIVE ________________________________________________________________________ Figure 237: PhilHealth membership, 1997-2010
25 20 15 10 5

DRAFT Education September 13, 2010 Not for Distribution

Principal members, in mil, lhs Members as % of labor force, rhs

60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10%

Education in the Philippines is inadequately robust to support high economic growth and needs 0 0% extensive reform including greatly increased resources. All levels of education in the Philippines have deteriorated over several decades, faced with an increasing young population that has outstripped available resources. Yet rapid economic progress, attracting Source: PhilHealth Insurance Coporation's annual reports and "Stats and Charts" reports high levels of investment, and moving into knowledge-based services, require a well-educated workforce with appropriate skills for a middle income economy. Maintaining and improving national competitiveness also Education requires much improved education.
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Having a large pool of skilled manpower is an attraction to foreign direct investments, which in turn improves economic activity. Policy makers should focus on enhancing the countrys competitive edge by improving its educational system.

The quality of Philippine education and its output are deteriorating to such distressing levels that the country now ranks among the poorest performers in East Asia.
Gearing Up the Nation for Growth and Competitiveness, Congress Secretariat Planning Workshop, House of Representatives, July 2007

The WEF Global Competitiveness Report ranks the quality of the education systems of 139 countries. The Philippines ranked 69th, just behind Thailand and Vietnam, but is declining and will remain the lowest rated in the ASEAN-6 if it does not pursue strong educational reform (see Figure 238). Figure 238: Qualityof ofeducation education system, ASEAN-6, 2008-2010 Figure 238: Quality system,rank, rank, ASEAN-6, 2008-2010
1 21 41 61 81 101 121

1 23 40 61 66 69

Singapore Malaysia

Indonesia
Vietnam Thailand Philippines

141
2008-09 2009-10 2010-11

Source: WEF; Total countries evaluated: 2008-134; 2009-133; 2010-139

DECEMBER 2010

2010-1Q

373

Joint Foreign Chambers ARANGKADA PHILIPPINES 2010: A BUSINESS PERSPECTIVE

Advocacy Paper

DRAFT September 13, 2010 The national government spends only 2.5% of GDP on education, less than Malaysia, Thailand, Not for Distribution JOINT FOREIGN CHAMBERS ADVOCACY and Singapore (but more than Indonesia) while the East Asian average was 3.6% inPAPER 2005 (see

ARANGKADA PHILIPPINES A BUSINESS PERSPECTIVE Figure 239). The education budget proposed2010: for 2011 totals PhP 207 billion, an 18.5 percent ________________________________________________________________________ increase, which will include building 18,000 more classrooms, buying 32 million textbooks, and hiring 10,000 more teachers.
Figure 239: National government ASEAN-5, spending on1995-2008 education, % of GDP, ASEAN-5, 1995-2008
9% 8% 7% 6% 5%

Figure 239: National government spending on education, % of GDP,

Malaysia Thailand Singapore Philippines Indonesia

4%
3% 2% 1% 0% 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

Source: ADB Key Indicators, various years; Note: No data for Vietnam; Indonesia - latest is 2004; Singapore latest is 2008.

Of the Table ASEAN-6 Philippine government spends the per student Table 84). The 84: the Public expenditure per student asleast % of GDP per(see capita, amounts are shockingly low, with Malaysia, Thailand and Vietnam spending more than twice ASEAN-6, 2005-2009 as much and Indonesia 65% more. With so little public sector investment in education, the poor performance of graduates should come as no surprise.
All levels Indonesia 15.1 Table 84: Public expenditure per student Malaysia 17.3 Philippines 9.1 All levels Singapore 14.1 Thailand 22.0 Indonesia 15.1 Vietnam 22.2 Malaysia 17.3 Source: UNESCO Philippines 9.1 Singapore 14.1 Thailand 22.0 Vietnam 22.2
Source: UNESCO
16

as

Figure 240: Elementary enrollment and participation rate, 1990-2009

Private
100%

Primary Secondary Tertiary 15.7 13.9 16.1 % of GDP per capita, ASEAN-6, 2005-2009 11.6 14.2 49.4 8.6 9.2 11.6 Primary Secondary Tertiary 11.2 16.6 26.9 21.4 22.1 23.0 15.7 13.9 16.1 19.7 17.3 61.7 11.6 14.2 49.4 8.6 9.2 11.6 11.2 16.6 26.9 21.4 22.1 23.0 19.7 17.3 61.7

98% Public Over 20 million Philippine children are enrolled in basic (elementary and secondary) education 14 96% Participation rate, rhs 12 240 and 241). Elementary school lasts for six years and secondary for four. In the (see Figures 94% 10 American colonial period, elementary was for seven and secondary was for four. 92% 8 6 4 2 0 90% 88% 86% 84% 82% 80%

2000-01

1990-91

1991-92

1992-93

1993-94

1994-95

1995-96

1996-97

1997-98

1998-99

1999-00

2001-02

2002-03

200304

2004-05

2005-06

2006-07

2007-08

Source: DepEd; This includes both public and private schools

2008-09

374

DECEMBER 2010

_____________________________________________________________________373

Indonesia Malaysia Philippines Singapore Thailand Vietnam Joint Foreign Chambers

Source: UNESCO

15.1 17.3 9.1 14.1 22.0 22.2

15.7 11.6 8.6 11.2 21.4 19.7

13.9 14.2 9.2 16.6 22.1 17.3

16.1 49.4 11.6 26.9 23.0 61.7 Advocacy Paper

ARANGKADA PHILIPPINES 2010: A BUSINESS PERSPECTIVE

Figure 240: Elementary and participation rate, 1990-2009 Figure 240: Elementary enrollment enrollment and participation rate, 1990-2009
16 14

12
10 8 6 4 2 0

Private Public Participation rate, rhs

100% 98% 96% 94% 92% 90% 88% 86%

JOINT FOREIGN CHAMBERS ADVOCACY PAPER ARANGKADA PHILIPPINES 2010: A BUSINESS PERSPECTIVE Source: DepEd; This includes both public and private schools ________________________________________________________________________
2000-01
1990-91 1993-94 1991-92 1992-93 1994-95 1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-00 2001-02 2002-03 200304 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08

Figure 241: enrollmentand and participation rate, 1990-2009 Figure 241:Secondary Secondary enrollment participation rate, 1990-2009
8 7

6 70% _____________________________________________________________________ 373 5 60% NOVEMBER 2010 4 50% 3 2 1 0 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%

Private Public Participation rate, rhs

2008-09

DRAFT September 13, 2010 Not for Distribution

84% 82% 80%

100% 90% 80%

1991-92

200304

2004-05

1990-91

1992-93

1993-94

1994-95

1995-96

1996-97

1997-98

1998-99

1999-00

2000-01

2001-02

2002-03

2005-06

2006-07

2007-08 2005-2006

Source: DepEd; This includes both public and private schools

The 10-year total for basic education is elementary the shortest in the secondary, Asian region, which follows a 12Figure 242: Drop-out rates, and 1990-2009 year basic education system, followed by four years of college. In the Philippines, high school and 14% Elementary college graduates are in school for two years less than their counterparts elsewhere and graduate at Secondary 12% 16 often inadequately prepared and too young for fulltime employment. Because their first year in 10% used to repeat their high school curriculum, colleges are increasingly adding a fifth college is often 8% to the financial burden on families. year, which adds
6% 4%out rates of 6% for elementary and almost 8% for secondary mean many students High-drop 2% do not complete their education and do not acquire skills needed for jobs in a modern middle0% income economy (see Figure 242). From 1,000 students who begin schooling at Grade 1, only 650 complete elementary school. Of these, only 430 graduate from high school, and 230 enter college, but only 120 will get a degree (12% of the number who started).245 Most who drop out are among the poorest and cannot afford the costs associated even with free basic education and college. Like Source: DepEd their parents, the drop-outs are destined for low-skill jobs and unemployment, repeating the cycle of a life of poverty.

1999-2000

1990-1991

1991-1992

1992-1993

1993-1994

1994-1995

1995-1996

1996-1997

1997-1998

1998-1999

2000-2001

2001-2002

2002-2003

2003-2004

2004-2005

2006-2007

2008-09 2007-2008

Table 85: Pupil-teacher ratio, selected Asian countries, 1990-2008

245

Philippine Human Development Report 2008/2009, UNDP Primary

1990 2000
a

Secondary 2007-2008 17.7 32.7 18.8 18.5 15.7 33.7

b

1990

2000

2008-2009

2007-2008 16.4 32.7 13.0 12.2 17.0 35.1

China DECEMBER 2010

India Indonesia Japan Malaysia Philippines

22.3 46.0 23.3 21.2 20.4 32.7

19.4 40.0 22.4 20.7 19.6 35.2

14.6 28.7 12.9 17.1 19.3 33.3

17.1 33.6 15.8 14.0 18.4 36.4

375

3 2 1 0

40% 30% 20% 10% 0%

1991-92

200304

1990-91

1992-93

1993-94

1994-95

1995-96

1996-97

1997-98

1998-99

1999-00

2000-01

2001-02

2002-03

2004-05

2005-06

2006-07

2007-08

Joint Foreign Chambers

2008-09

Advocacy Paper

Source: DepEd; This includes both public and private schools

ARANGKADA PHILIPPINES 2010: A BUSINESS PERSPECTIVE

Figure 242: Drop-out andsecondary, secondary, 1990-2009 Figure 242: Drop-outrates, rates, elementary elementary and 1990-2009
14% 12% 10% 8% 6% 4% 2% 0%

Elementary Secondary

1999-2000

1990-1991

1991-1992

1992-1993

1993-1994

1994-1995

1995-1996

1996-1997

1997-1998

1998-1999

2000-2001

2001-2002

2002-2003

2003-2004

2004-2005

2005-2006

2006-2007

2007-2008

Source: DepEd

Classrooms in basic education in the Philippines are very over-crowded. The pupil-teacher ratio is higher than most Asian countries and has been increasing (see Table 85). By contrast, Table 85: Pupil-teacher ratio, selected Asian countries, 1990-2008 elsewhere in Asia, the ratio has been declining. In Philippine primary schools in 2008, the ratio was 33.7 and in secondary schools it was 35.1. Both were the highest of theSecondary ten countries included Primary a b d e in Table 85. The combination from teachers and a cshorter basic cycle 1990 of less attention 2000 2007-2008 1990 2000 education 2007-2008 means Philippine students are less well-educated than 14.6 students in other China 22.3likely to be 19.4 17.7 17.1 Asian countries, 16.4 India study longer 46.0 40.0 32.7 from teachers. 28.7 33.6 32.7 where students and receive more attention
Indonesia Japan MalaysiaTable Philippines Republic of Korea Singapore Thailand Vietnam 23.3 22.4 18.8 12.9 15.8 21.2 20.7 18.5 17.1 14.0 85: Pupil-teacher ratio, selected Asian countries, 1990-2008 20.4 19.6 15.7 19.3 18.4 32.7 35.2 33.7 33.3 36.4 36.3 32.1 25.6 27.7 21.0 Primary Secondary 25.8 25.6 19.3 17.9 19.4 a c d 1990 2000 2007-2008 1990 2000 20.3 20.8 16.0 b 16.2 24.0 34.2 29.5 19.9 18.0 28.0 13.0 12.2 17.0 35.1 18.1 16.4 2007-2008 21.2 e 20.7

China ADB and UNESCO 22.3 19.4 17.7 14.6 17.1 16.4 Sources: Note: a - China 2001, Philippines 2001; b - India 2004, Malaysia 2006; c - Singapore 1991;28.7 d - China 2001, Philippines 2001, Singapore India 46.0 40.0 32.7 33.6 32.7 1999, Thailand 2001; e - India 2004, Malaysia 2005

Indonesia 23.3 22.4 18.8 12.9 15.8 13.0 Japan 21.2 20.7 18.5 17.1 14.0 12.2 Malaysia 20.4 19.6 15.7 19.3 18.4 17.0 Philippines 32.7 35.2 33.7 33.3 36.4 35.1 Republic of Korea 36.3 32.1 25.6 27.7 21.0 18.1 374 _____________________________________________________________________ Singapore 25.8 25.6 19.3 17.9 19.4 16.4 NOVEMBER 2010 Thailand 20.3 20.8 16.0 16.2 24.0 21.2 Vietnam 34.2 29.5 19.9 18.0 28.0 20.7
Sources: ADB and UNESCO Note: a - China 2001, Philippines 2001; b - India 2004, Malaysia 2006; c - Singapore 1991; d - China 2001, Philippines 2001, Singapore 1999, Thailand 2001; e - India 2004, Malaysia 2005

The number of students declines considerably at the tertiary level, where the total enrollment of 2,700,000 is only about 40% of the total number of secondary students. Only a half million students are forecasted to receive their college degrees in 2011 (see Figure 243).

2008-2009

376

DECEMBER 2010

DRAFT DRAFT September 13, 2010 September 13, 2010 for Distribution FOREIGN CHAMBERS ADVOCACY PAPER DRAFT JointJOINT Foreign Chambers Advocacy Paper Not for Distribution JOINT FOREIGN CHAMBERS Not ADVOCACY PAPER September 13,BUSINESS 2010 ARANGKADA PHILIPPINES 2010: A PERSPECTIVE ARANGKADA PHILIPPINES 2010: BUSINESS PERSPECTIVE ARANGKADA PHILIPPINES 2010: AA BUSINESS PERSPECTIVE Not for Distribution JOINT FOREIGN CHAMBERS ADVOCACY PAPER ________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________ ARANGKADA PHILIPPINES 2010: A BUSINESS PERSPECTIVE ________________________________________________________________________ Figure 243: Tertiary enrollment graduates, 2000-2011 Figure 243: Tertiary enrollment and graduates, 2000-2011 Figure 243: Tertiary enrollmentand and graduates, 2000-2011
4,000 4,000 3,500 3,500 3,000 4,000 3,000

Figure 243: Tertiary enrollment and graduates, 2000-2011 Enrolees, in 000, lhs Graduates, in 000, lhs Enrolees, in 000, lhs Graduates, in 000, lhs
Enrolees, yoy growth, rhs Enrolees, yoy growth, rhs Graduates, yoy growth, rhs Graduates, yoy growth, rhs Enrolees, in 000, lhs Enrolees, yoy growth, rhs Graduates, in 000, lhs Graduates, yoy growth, rhs

2,500 3,500 2,500

10% 10% 8% 8% 6%10% 6%

2,000 3,000 2,000 1,500 2,500 1,500 1,000 2,000 1,000 500 1,500 500

4%8% 4%

2%6% 2% 0%4% 0%

0 -6% 1,000 -2% 0 -6% 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10E 2010-11F 500 2000-01 -4% 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10E 2010-11F Source: CHED 0 -6% Source: CHED
2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10E 2010-11F

-2% 2% -2% -4% 0% -4%

Source: CHED

Figure 244: Distribution of college students by field of study, 2008 Figure 244: Distribution of college students by field of study, 2008 Figure 244: Distribution of college students by field of study, 2008 Figure 244: Distribution of college students Engineering and by field of study, 2008 Engineering and
Education and Teacher Education and Teacher Training, 14.1% Training, 14.1% Technology, 10.9% Technology, 10.9% Education and Teacher Training, 14.1% Information Information Technology, 8.8% Technology, 8.8% Engineering and Social and Behavioral and Behavioral Information Technology, 10.9% Social Science, 2.6% Science, 2.6% Technology, 8.8% Agricultural, Fis Social and Forestry, Behavioral Agricultural, Forestry, Fis heries, Vet Med., 2.5% Science, 2.6% heries, Vet Med., 2.5% Maritime, 2.3% Maritime, 2.3%Forestry, Fis Agricultural, Mass Communication heries, Vet Med., 2.5% Mass Communication and Documentation, 1.0% and Documentation, 1.0% Maritime, 2.3% Humanities, 1.0% Mass Communication Humanities, 1.0% and Documentation, 1.0% Others, 8.4% Others, 8.4% Humanities, 1.0% Others, 8.4%

Business Admin. and Business Admin. and Related, 21.1% Related, 21.1% Business Admin. and Related, 21.1%

Medical and Allied, 27.3% Source: CHED of math and science education ranks the Philippines as 112th of 139 The WEF rating for quality countries, far behind245: Thailand (57th) Singapore (1) (see Figure 245). Figure Quality ofand math and science education, ASEAN-6

Source: CHED Source: CHED

Medical and Allied, 27.3% Medical and Allied, 27.3%

Figure 245: Quality of math and science education, ASEAN-6

1 Figure Quality of math and science education, ASEAN-6 Figure 245:245: Quality of math and science education, 2008-2010 1 ASEAN-6, 1 1 21 21 1 41 41 21 61 61 41 81 81 61 101 101 81 121 121 101

31 1 31 46 5146 51 57 31 57 46 51 57 112 112

2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 112 121 Source: WEF; Total countries evaluated: 2008-134; 2009-133; 2010-139

Singapore Singapore Malaysia Malaysia Indonesia Indonesia Singapore Vietnam Vietnam Malaysia Thailand Thailand Indonesia Philippines Philippines Vietnam Thailand Philippines

Source: WEF; Total countries evaluated: 2008-134; 2009-133; 2010-139

2008-09 2009-10

2010-11

Source: WEF; Total countries evaluated: 2008-134; 2009-133; 2010-139

_____________________________________________________________________ 375 _____________________________________________________________________ 375 NOVEMBER 2010 DECEMBER 2010 NOVEMBER 2010 _____________________________________________________________________375 NOVEMBER 2010

377

Joint Foreign Chambers ARANGKADA PHILIPPINES 2010: A BUSINESS PERSPECTIVE

Advocacy Paper

The Philippines is moving too slowly to reform it educational system and should accelerate reforms as soon as possible. Budgetary restraints in 2010 are holding it back. By contrast, over the last decade China has nearly tripled the share of its fast-growing GDP devoted to education. (In the Philippines the opposite happened as the GDP share declined). China has doubled the number of colleges and quintupled the number of college students to 5.5 million in 2007. China has identified its nine top universities and singled them out as its version of the Ivy League. Chinese colleges have relationships with more than 700 foreign universities. Yale president Richard Levin observed, This expansion in capacity is without precedent. China has built the largest higher-education sector in the world in merely a decades time.246 With a debatable claim to be the worlds third-largest English speaking country, the Philippines DRAFT cannot afford to lose one of its main competitive advantages, its large English-speaking workforce.247 September 2010 skills is a series of SWS polls taken The only reliable survey of the extent of English 13, language Not for Distribution JOINT FOREIGN CHAMBERS PAPER in 1993, 2000, 2006, and 2008 in which respondents were asked toADVOCACY self-assess their ability to ARANGKADA PHILIPPINES 2010: A BUSINESS PERSPECTIVE understand, read, write, speak, and think in English. In 2006 only 32% responded that they could ________________________________________________________________________ speak, but this rose to 46% in 2008 for reasons that were not researched (see Figure 246).

Figure 246: Self-assessed inRP, RP, 1993-2008 Figure 246: Self-assessedEnglish English competence competence in 1993-2008
90%

80%
70% 60% 50% 40%

77.0% 74.0%

76.0%

76.0% 73.0%

75.0% 59.0%61.0% 61.0% 55.0% 54.0% 46.0% 32.0% 42.0%44.0% 38.0%

65.0%

65.0%

Dec-93 Sep-00 Mar-06 Apr-08

48.0%

30%
20% 10% 0%

27.0% 14.0% 7.0% 7.0%

8.0%

Understands spoken English

Reads English

Writes English

Speaks English

Thinks in English

None Applies

Note: Question - Which of the following applies to you? (Showcard; allow multiple response) (Reads English, Writes English, Understands spoken English, Speaks English, Thinks in English, None Applies) Source: Social Weather Stations; Legends represent survey periods

Philippine leaders have acknowledged the deterioration of spoken English among younger Filipinos and the importance of reversing this trend to maintain international competitiveness (see Headline Recommendations Part 3 BPO). Based on data from public schools for the school year 2003-04, for every 1,000 entrants to Grade 1 only seven graduated Grade 6 sufficient in English, math, and several years mastery to at least PhP 400 billion 1. Increase public education budget over with science required to succeed in high school and college.

378

(3.5-4% of GDP) for better classrooms, more and better teachers quality, and reduced teacher/student ratio. Double average spending per student to ASEAN-6 Former president Macapagal-Arroyo realized the English skills of basic education and many average. Adopt K+12 model to extend basic education by two years and add a precollege graduates were inadequate, especially for employment in the BPO sector. In January 2003 elementary year. she restored English as a primary medium of instruction in public schools. The Department of Constantly teacher quality and curriculum to produce graduates with 2. Education (DepEd)improve has subsequently sought to improve the English skills of teachers, but its success skills required for higher quality jobs. Apply competency-based standards, more inservice training, maintain teacher welfare and morale. Increase study of math and 246 science , technical/vocational skills training. Encourage college/post-graduate With some paraphrasing from The Real Challenge from China: Its People, Not Its Currency, Fareed Zakaria, Time, October 7, 2010 247 study in fields needed for specialized positions , including foreign languages. After India and the US and ahead of the UK. Intensify investment in technology for high school education to connect all 6,786 schools to internet. Equip high school teachers with notebook computers and students with e-readers. Establish computerized English language centers in high 2010 DECEMBER schools. 3. Strengthen higher education by providing more resources for world class centers of excellence. Expand scholarships/loans for higher education. Encourage more accredited foreign schools and foreign teachers. Undertake a vigorous public

Joint Foreign Chambers ARANGKADA PHILIPPINES 2010: A BUSINESS PERSPECTIVE

Advocacy Paper

has not been measured with international testing. More can be done, especially using computerized training software. The base of English speakers in the Philippines remains sizeable. Most students know some English but need more opportunities to listen to and speak English. Philippine radio and television media predominantly use Filipino, while 30 years ago more of their broadcasts were in English.
In Bangalore, knowing English is equal to having food. If you dont have English you cant survive in your job.
Rajeev Chamoli, software programmer, quoted in Indias Aspiring English Speakers, AWSJ, March 3, 2010

Headline Recommendations
1. Increase public education budget over several years to at least PhP 400 billion (3.5-4% of GDP) for better classrooms, more and better teachers quality, and reduced teacher/student ratio. Double average spending per student to ASEAN-6 average. Adopt K+12 model to extend basic education by two years and add a pre-elementary year. Constantly improve teacher quality and curriculum to produce graduates with skills required for higher quality jobs. Apply competency-based standards, more in-service training, maintain teacher welfare and morale. Increase study of math and science, technical/vocational skills training. Encourage college/ post-graduate study in fields needed for specialized positions, including foreign languages. Intensify investment in technology for high school education to connect all 6,786 schools to Internet. Equip high school teachers with notebook computers and students with e-readers. Establish computerized English language centers in high schools. Strengthen higher education by providing more resources for world class centers of excellence. Expand scholarships/loans for higher education. Encourage more accredited foreign schools and foreign teachers. Undertake a vigorous public campaign to emphasize English language competency. Strengthen the Dual Education/Dual Technical System. Expand the internship period to prepare students better for employment.

2.

3.

Recommendations (12) A. Commit to a large increase in the public education budget over several years to at least PhP 400 billion and 3.5-4% of GDP to build, repair, and equip new and old classrooms, eliminate the teacher shortage, raise teacher salaries, and reduce the teacher/student ratio. Double the average spending per student to be closer to other ASEAN economies. (Long-term action DepEd, DBM, NEDA, and Congress) B. Over a period of several years, extend basic education by two years and add one year before elementary school (the K+12 model). Students should graduate high school at age 18

DECEMBER 2010

379

Joint Foreign Chambers ARANGKADA PHILIPPINES 2010: A BUSINESS PERSPECTIVE

Advocacy Paper

prepared either to enter the workforce or college. Increase technical/vocational skills training in the high school curriculum. (Long-term action DepEd, DBM, and NEDA) C. Empower teachers by constantly improving their quality and their curriculum to help students acquire the knowledge and skills required to enable them to get higher quality jobs. Apply competency-based standards for teachers and provide more in-service training, while maintaining their welfare and morale. (Medium term action DepEd and CHED) D. Basic education and college curricula should be adjusted to increase the study of math and science. Encourage more college students to study fields needed for specialized positions in the economy (e.g. agribusiness, computer science, engineering, environmental science, mining, and physics). Teach more foreign languages in colleges to support the BPO and tourism sectors. (Medium-term action (DepEd, CHED, DOLE, DTI, NEDA, and private sector) E. Intensify investment in technology for high school education. Complete the private sector Gearing Up Internet Literacy and Access for Students (GILAS) program to connect high schools to the Internet (of 6,786 high schools, 3,892 remain to be connected). Equip high school teachers with notebook computers and students with e-readers. Place more computers in high schools using grants, donations, and purchases. (Long-term action DepEd, DBM, NEDA, and private sector) F. Strengthen higher education by providing more resources for world class centers of excellence and expanding scholarships and loans for higher education, while reducing national government subsidies for low quality state and local universities/colleges. Make government student loans available through SSS, GSIS or banks to be repaid after employment for tertiary and technical/vocational education students to enroll in accredited public and private higher education institutions. (Medium-term action CHED, SSS, GSIS, and private sector) G. Encourage qualified foreign schools to operate and foreigners to teach in the Philippines. Solutions to the educational deficit should include foreign as well as domestic resources. (Immediate action DTI, CHED, DOLE, and private sector) H. Install English language computer training labs in high schools, supplementing teacher resources with English training software. Each lab should have ten computers. The private sector can donate large numbers of used computers, while the government can purchase the software and handle logistics. (Long-term action DepEd, LGUs, and private sector) I. To advance bilingualism, undertake a vigorous public campaign to emphasize the importance of English competency to entering and existing workforce members. Such a campaign should point out that mastery of English enables access to global knowledge and wider economic opportunities. Encourage television and radio stations to use more English in their programs. (Immediate action OP, DepEd, NEDA, and private sector)

380

DECEMBER 2010

Joint Foreign Chambers ARANGKADA PHILIPPINES 2010: A BUSINESS PERSPECTIVE

Advocacy Paper

J. Recognize high schools and tertiary schools and students who score well on English tests. Schools should be assessed for their capacity to deliver quality English-language instruction given quality scores based on test results of their graduates. (Immediate action DepEd and private sector) K. Strengthen the Dual Education/Dual Technical System by expanding scholarships and involving the private sector in curriculum development and internships. (Immediate action DOLE and TESDA) L. Universities and Colleges should allow students in the second half of their studies to spend longer periods in companies (expand the internship period) to prepare them better for employment. (Immediate action CHED and private sector)

DECEMBER 2010

381