Local

2 preschool curriculums
Old Curriculum vs. New Curriculum: What are their differences?
Department of Education
Old Curriculum: 2002 Basic Education Curriculum BEC Reform
vs.
New Curriculum: K to 12 Curriculum
What are their differences?

School Year 2011-2012 was the last year for using the 2002 BEC Reform in
grade 1 level in the Philippines, for that reason the Department of Education under
Aquinos administration implemented the K to 12 Curriculum effective this School
Year 2012-2013 in grade 1 level. As today, this new curriculum was only
implemented for all public schools in Philippines nation-wide. As for now, private
institutions were given a limited freedom to use their old curriculum and we do not
know when they will follow the K to 12 Curriculum in their schools.

Since this new curriculum was implemented in this school year, what kind of
curriculum is K to 12? How did it differ from the old one? Why did they implement
this kind of curriculum? And what are the effects of this curriculum to the Grade 1
teachers and Pupils? Before we can give our conclusion from these questions, let us
differentiate the new from the old one.

This table shows the Leveling of Pupils in the Old Curriculum.

In this curriculum, Pre-school is an optional choice for parents and exclusive

for private school, this level is not necessary in BEC. But children with the ages of 6
to 7 must be enrolled in the first grade but children with ages 8 and above can be
enroll in the grade level that they belong to, but if a child cannot write or read in
Filipino or English subjects he/she must enrolled in the Grade 1 level regardless in
his/her age.

This table shows the Leveling of Pupils in the New curriculum.

The new curriculum, K to 12 or K12 show means for Kinder, 6 years in elementary, 4
years in Junior high school and additional two years in Senior high school. Unlike to

the old curriculum, children ages 5 to 6 years old must be enrolled in Kinder even in
public schools and students in high school must enroll in additional two years in
high school for the reason that they can find a job even not taking tertiary
education.
http://cgamek12.blogspot.com/2012/07/old-curriculum-vs-new-curriculum.html

Developmentally Appropriate Practice (DAP)

OVERVIEW
Developmentally appropriate practice, often shortened to DAP, is an approach to
teaching grounded in the research on how young children develop and learn and in
what is known about effective early education. Its framework is designed to
promote young childrens optimal learning and development.

DAP involves teachers meeting young children where they are (by stage of
development), both as individuals and as part of a group; and helping each child
meet challenging and achievable learning goals.
Developmentally appropriate practice is the foundation for all of NAEYC's work
includingpublications, training programs, conferences, accreditation of child care
programs, and more.

3 CORE CONSIDERATIONS OF DAP

Knowing about child development and learning.
Knowing what is typical at each age and stage of early development is crucial. This
knowledge, based on research, helps us decide which experiences are best for
childrens learning and development. (See 12 Principles of Child Development and
Learning from Developmentally Appropriate Practice in Early Childhood Programs
Serving Children from Birth through Age 8.)

Knowing what is individually appropriate.

What we learn about specific children helps us teach and care for each child as an
individual. By continually observing childrens play and interaction with the physical
environment and others, we learn about each childs interests, abilities, and
developmental progress.

Knowing what is culturally important.

We must make an effort to get to know the childrens families and learn about the
values, expectations, and factors that shape their lives at home and in their
communities. This background information helps us provide meaningful, relevant,
and respectful learning experiences for each child and family.
http://www.naeyc.org/DAP
21st century skills
FRAMEWORK FOR 21ST CENTURY LEARNING
P21's Framework for 21st Century Learning was developed with input from teachers,
education experts, and business leaders to define and illustrate the skills and
knowledge students need to succeed in work, life and citizenship, as well as the
support systems necessary for 21st century learning outcomes. It has been used by
thousands of educators and hundreds of schools in the U.S. and abroad to put 21st
century skills at the center of learning.

The P21 Framework represents both 21st century student outcomes (as represented
by the arches of the rainbow) and support systems (as represented by the pools at
the bottom).

While the graphic represents each element distinctly for descriptive purposes, P21
views all the components as fully interconnected in the process of 21st century
teaching and learning.

The elements described below are the critical systems necessary to ensure 21st
century readiness for every student. 21st century standards, assessments,
curriculum, instruction, professional development and learning environments must
be aligned to produce 21st century outcomes for todays students.

Download the Framework for 21st Century Learning 2-page PDF

Download the full P21 Framework Definitions document
21st Century Student Outcomes
The elements described in this section as 21st century student outcomes
(represented by the rainbow) are the skills, knowledge and expertise students
should master to succeed in work and life in the 21st century.

1. Content Knowledge and 21st Century Themes

Mastery of fundamental subjects and 21st century themes is essential for students
in the 21st century. Disciplines include:
English, reading or language arts
World languages
Arts
Mathematics
Economics
Science
Geography
History
Government and Civics

In addition to these subjects, we believe schools must move beyond a focus on

basic competency to promoting understanding of academic content at much higher
levels by weaving 21st century interdisciplinary themes into curriculum:

Global awareness
Financial, economic, business and entrepreneurial literacy
Civic literacy
Health literacy
Environmental literacy
2. Learning and Innovation Skills: Learning and innovation skills increasingly are
being recognized as the skills that separate students who are prepared for
increasingly complex life and work environments in the 21st century, and those who
are not. A focus on creativity, critical thinking, communication and collaboration is
essential to prepare students for the future.

Creativity and Innovation

Critical Thinking and Problem Solving
Communication and Collaboration
3. Information, Media and Technology Skills: Today we live in a technology and
media-suffused environment with: 1) access to an abundance of information, 2)
rapid changes in technology tools, and 3) the ability to collaborate and make
individual contributions on an unprecedented scale. To be effective in the 21st
century, citizens and workers must be able to create, evaluate, and effectively
utilize information, media, and technology.

Information Literacy
Media Literacy
ICT Literacy
4. Life and Career Skills: Today's students need to develop thinking skills, content
knowledge, and social and emotional competencies to navigate complex life and
work environments. P21's essential Life and Career Skills include::

Flexibility & Adaptability

Initiative & Self Direction
Social & Cross-Cultural Skills
Productivity & Accountability
Leadership & Responsibility

21st Century Support Systems

The elements described below are the critical systems necessary to ensure student
mastery of 21st century skills. 21st century standards, assessments, curriculum,
instruction, professional development and learning environments must be aligned to
produce a support system that produces 21st century outcomes for todays
students.

1. 21st Century Standards

Focus on 21st century skills, content knowledge and expertise.

Build understanding across and among academic subjects as well as 21st century
interdisciplinary themes
Emphasize deep understanding rather than shallow knowledge
Engage students with the real world data, tools, and experts they will encounter in
college, on the job, and in life--students learn best when actively engaged in solving
meaningful problems
Allow for multiple measures of mastery
2. Assessment of 21st Century Skills

Support a balance of assessments, including high-quality standardized testing along

with effective classroom formative and summative assessments
Emphasize useful feedback on student performance that is embedded into everyday
learning
Require a balance of technology-enhanced, formative and summative assessments
that measure student mastery of 21st century skills
Enable development of portfolios of student work that demonstrate mastery of 21st
century skills to educators and prospective employers
Enable a balanced portfolio of measures to assess the educational system's
effectiveness at reaching high levels of student competency in 21st century skills
Additional resources:

21st Century Skills Assessment white paper

Professional Development: A 21st Century Skills Implementation Guide

3. 21st Century Curriculum and Instruction

Teaches 21st century skills discretely in the context of key subjects and 21st century
interdisciplinary themes
Focuses on providing opportunities for applying 21st century skills across content
areas and for a competency-based approach to learning
Enables innovative learning methods that integrate the use of supportive
technologies, inquiry- and problem-based approaches and higher order thinking
skills
Encourages the integration of community resources beyond school walls
4. 21st Century Professional Development

Highlights ways teachers can seize opportunities for integrating 21st century skills,
tools and teaching strategies into their classroom practice and help them identify
what activities they can replace/de-emphasize
Balances direct instruction with project-oriented teaching methods
Illustrates how a deeper understanding of subject matter can actually enhance
problem-solving, critical thinking, and other 21st century skills
Enables 21st century professional learning communities for teachers that model the
kinds of classroom learning that best promotes 21st century skills for students
Cultivates teachers' ability to identify students' particular learning styles,
intelligences, strengths and weaknesses
Helps teachers develop their abilities to use various strategies (such as formative
assessments) to reach diverse students and create environments that support
differentiated teaching and learning
Supports the continuous evaluation of students' 21st century skills development
Encourages knowledge sharing among communities of practitioners, using face-toface, virtual and blended communications
Uses a scaleable and sustainable model of professional development
5. 21st Century Learning Environments

Create learning practices, human support and physical environments that will
support the teaching and learning of 21st century skill outcomes

Support professional learning communities that enable educators to collaborate,

share best practices and integrate 21st century skills into classroom practice
Enable students to learn in relevant, real world 21st century contexts (e.g., through
project-based or other applied work)
Allow equitable access to quality learning tools, technologies and resources
Provide 21st century architectural and interior designs for group, team and
individual learning.
Support expanded community and international involvement in learning, both faceto-face and online
http://www.p21.org/our-work/p21-framework

Global

The Bologna Accord: A European Revolution with Global Implications

January-February 2005
GMAC Bologna Task Force

GMAC Bologna Project Task Force Releases Report

The Europeans are coming! Are you ready?

The Bologna Accord, a sweeping educational reform planned for full implementation
by 2010, is already influencing the European graduate management market,
creating new degree distinctions, new potential applicants for graduate
management programs, more options for students, and a new market for graduate
management programs throughout Europe. But U.S. business schools need to be
aware of and prepared for the reforms, as well, because soon the results will affect
their applicant pools. How? Why? What is the Bologna Accord? Graduate
Management News has the story.

What Is the Bologna Accord?

In June 1999, 29 European countries signed a document called the Bologna

Declaration, agreeing to reform higher education to achieve the following aims:

create a system of comparable and understandable degrees throughout the

European Union
establish a clear and standard division between undergraduate and graduate
studies
promote student mobility among different fields of study, institutions, and nations
develop a quality-assurance process and governing body to ensure standard
qualifications and quality throughout participating countries
define a European focus for higher education
Often called the Bologna Accord, the reform agreement has since been adopted by
11 more countries, bringing the total number of signatories to 40. With the
exception of Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Moldova, San Morino, and the
Ukraine, all of Europe is on board. The agreement promises to simplify degree
qualifications and nomenclatures, offer more educational choice and mobility to
European students, and bring many more potential applicants into the graduate
management pipeline. Together, the reforms represent an opportunity for
Continental European graduate management education programs to challenge the
more mature U.S. and U.K. programs market share.

Before the Accord, there was little uniformity in European higher education.
Different countries universities awarded different degrees, and it was not always
clear which degrees were equivalent to one other. These distinctions made it
difficult for graduate program admissions offices and potential employers across
borders to assess an applicants level of education without researching degree
qualificationsan onerous task, given the wide variety of diplomas even within a
single European nation.

The Bologna Accord clarifies the meaning of degrees by establishing a division

between undergraduate and graduate study and introducing the bachelor and
master framework to education in European countries that sign the agreement. It
also defines standard degree requirements, a standard grading scale, a common
transcript, and quality-assurance checks to ensure common practices and quality
standards.

New European Grading Scale

Implementing the Accord will require fundamental administrative, infrastructure,

and financial changes that will radically alter the face of European higher education
and affect the education market on distant shores, as well.

What Does It All Mean?

New degree requirements and transcriptsin your applicant pool. Under the
European Credit Accumulation and Transfer System (ECTS), a bachelors degree can
be earned in three years, so business school admissions officers should be prepared
to consider European three-year bachelors degrees as equivalent to American fouryear undergraduate degrees. The European three-year degrees should, however, be
considered distinct from the Indian BComm, which is not equivalent to a bachelors
degree and which most often requires further study before the degree recipient is
qualified to enroll in a graduate management program.

Business schools should also be prepared to receive and interpret the new Diploma
Supplement that will be appended to degree transcripts from Bologna signatory
countries starting this year.

More bachelors graduates, and consequently, more potential masters students.

The first and arguably most significant impact of the Bologna Accord will be that
more European students will enter, and successfully complete, bachelors degrees,
which would, in turn, create a large crop of potential graduate students. Bachelors
graduates are estimated to number more than 2.4 million students per year by the
year 2010, when the Bologna Accord is to be fully in effect.

Why so many new bachelors recipients? The Bologna Accord creates a shorter
undergraduate degree, making it more likely that students will pursue and complete
the degree. In continental Europe pre-Bologna, first degrees (roughly equivalent to
an American bachelors plus masters degree) were supposed to take 5 years to
complete. In practice, though, the length of study was often considerably longer
than 5 years because of students tendency to resit years and take a long time to
write a final thesiswithout which, many degrees could not be awarded. In Italy,
first degrees took an average of 5.6 years to complete. In France and Germany,
degrees were typically completed in 5.3 and 6 years, respectively. In Austria and
Greece, a first degree took an average of 7.3 years to complete!

The length of these first degrees was a deterrent from attempting them and a
barrier to graduation. Of those that did enter higher education, on average,
students in 5- to 6-year courses had a 17% higher dropout rate than students in 3-

to 5-year courses of study. Shorter degrees will almost certainly encourage more
students to earn a bachelors degree.

More bachelors graduates would then mean more potential masters students.
Some graduates will decide to continue directly to the masters degree, and some,
to enter the workforce, but even if they choose to go into the workforce, the shorter
duration of the bachelors degree may mean that bachelors graduates will be more
likely to return for more education, such as an MBA. Although choice at the end of
bachelor studies may not be new for American students, for Europeans this is a
fundamental shift.

Anticipating what students will actually do is difficult, and each European country
appears to have its own ideas. Universities in countries where long first degrees
were the dominant model anticipate that more than 80% of bachelors graduates
will continue their studies directly. That would mean roughly 1.9 million masters
students across all signatory countries.

Meanwhile, evidence from more mature masters degree markets, such as the U.K.
and the United States, suggests that a far lower number of bachelors students will
continue their studies immediatelyroughly 20 to 25% of eligible bachelors grads,
or 500,000 to 600,000 students.

More willingness to study abroad. The Bologna Accord will reduce the amount of
government educational funds spent per student (shorter degrees are less
expensive) and is also likely to shift some of the cost of higher education to the
students themselves. Presented with this new reality, European students may well
decide to spend their educational funds outside their home countries. This could
mean that more European students will apply to schools in European countries other
than their countries of citizenship. It may also mean that more European graduates
will apply to masters programs in the United States, seeking a more established
MBA market.

The Bologna Accord may also influence U.S. bachelors grads to study in European
masters programs. Data from the IIE Open Doors 2004 report show that the
number of U.S. students going abroad to study for business and management
qualifications has been growing at an average of 10% per year since the 199394
academic year. A well-developed, high quality European higher education system
could be an attractive study destination not only for Americans, but for students
from all over the world.

More competition for students. The uncertainties surrounding student behavior will
be reflected in a very dynamic graduate education market in Europe over the next
10 years. Attempts to second-guess student behaviors are likely to lead to
significant numbers of graduate management programs being created to meet
anticipated demand. If every degree-granting institution in Europe establishes
three graduate management degrees, it is estimated that 12,000 programs will fight
for students.

If there is an oversupply of programs in European higher education, those programs

will need to attract students to fill the classrooms. Some countries are already
eyeing their student targets and ramping up their marketing efforts. Germany, for
example, is trying to attract students from the U.K., promising low costs, an
excellent social life, and a low cost of living. Schools are also adopting English as
the language of instruction, to maximize their attractiveness to a nondomestic
student body. We can almost certainly anticipate more competition in the European
market as a result of Bologna reforms.

http://www.gmac.com/why-gmac/gmac-news/gmnews/2005/january-february/thebologna-accord-a-european-revolution-with-global-implications.aspx

Washington accord
The agreement recognizes that there is substantial equivalence of programs
accredited by those signatories. Graduates of accredited programs in any of the
signatory countries are recognized by the other signatory countries as having met
the academic requirements for entry to the practice of engineering. Recognition of
accredited programs is not retroactive but takes effect only from the date of
admission of the country to signatory status.
The Washington Accord covers undergraduate engineering degrees under Outcomebased education approach.[2] Engineering technology and postgraduate programs
are not covered by the accord, although some engineering technology programs are
covered under the Sydney Accord and the Dublin Accord. Only qualifications
awarded after the signatory country or region became part of the Washington
Accord are recognized. The accord is not directly responsible for the licensing of
Professional Engineers and the registration of Chartered Engineers, but it does cover
the academic requirements that are part of the licensing processes in signatory
countries.

Signatories have full rights of participation in the Accord; qualifications accredited or

recognised by other signatories are recognised by each signatory as being
substantially equivalent to accredited or recognised qualifications within its own
jurisdiction.

Australia - Represented by Engineers Australia (1989)

Canada - Represented by Engineers Canada (1989)
China - Represented by China Association for Science and Technology (2016)
Chinese Taipei - Represented by Institute of Engineering Education Taiwan (2007)
Hong Kong China - Represented by The Hong Kong Institution of Engineers (1995)
India - Represented by National Board of Accreditation (2014)
(Applies only to programmes accredited by NBA offered by education providers
accepted by NBA as Tier 1 institutions.)
Ireland - Represented by Engineers Ireland (1989)
Japan - Represented by Japan Accreditation Board for Engineering Education (2005)
Korea - Represented by Accreditation Board for Engineering Education of Korea
(2007)
Malaysia - Represented by Board of Engineers Malaysia (2009)
New Zealand - Represented by Institution of Professional Engineers NZ (1989)
Russia - Represented by Association for Engineering Education of Russia (2012)
Singapore - Represented by Institution of Engineers Singapore (2006)
South Africa - Represented by Engineering Council of South Africa (1999)
Sri Lanka - Represented by Institution of Engineers Sri Lanka (2014)
Turkey - Represented by MUDEK (2011)
United Kingdom - Represented by Engineering Council UK (1989)
United States - Represented by ABET (1989)

Organisations holding provisional status have been identified as having qualification

accreditation or recognition procedures that are potentially suitable for the purposes
of the Accord; those organisations are further developing those procedures with the
goal of achieving signatory status in due course; qualifications accredited or
recognised by organisations holding provisional status are not recognised by the
signatories

Bangladesh - Represented by Board of Accreditation for Engineering and Technical

Education
Costa Rica - Represented by Association of Engineers and Architects of Costa Rica
Mexico - Represented by Consejo de Acreditacin de la Enseanza de la Ingeniera

Pakistan - Represented by Pakistan Engineering Council

Peru - Represented by Instituto de Calidad Y Acreditacion de Programas de
Computacion, Ingeneria Y Technologia (ICACIT)
Philippines - Represented by Philippine Technological Council
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_Accord
http://www.ieagreements.org/Washington-Accord/signatories.cfm