Addressing Educational Challenges in the Philippines: DepEd’s Learning Recovery Plan and House Resolution No. 1805

The Philippine education system faces significant challenges, exacerbated by the global COVID-19 pandemic. In response to these pressing issues, the Department of Education (DepEd) has recently committed to submitting a comprehensive plan for learning recovery within two weeks. This commitment aligns with House Resolution No. 1805, which proposes suspending regular academic programs for 8 to 12 weeks to implement an effective learning recovery program. This article examines the context, implications, and potential outcomes of these developments in the Philippine education sector, offering a detailed analysis of the current situation and proposed solutions.

Background: The State of Philippine Education

Pre-pandemic Challenges

Even before the COVID-19 pandemic, the Philippine education system grappled with numerous challenges. These issues included:

1. Overcrowded classrooms
2. Insufficient learning resources
3. Inadequate teacher training and support
4. Limited access to quality education in remote areas
5. High dropout rates, particularly in secondary education

These long-standing problems contributed to the country’s consistently poor performance in international assessments. For instance, in the 2018 Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), the Philippines ranked last among 79 participating countries in reading comprehension and second to last in both mathematics and science.

The Impact of COVID-19 on Education

The global COVID-19 pandemic significantly disrupted education systems worldwide, with the Philippines experiencing particularly severe effects. According to UNICEF (2021), schools globally closed for an average of 79 days. However, in the Philippines, educational institutions remained shuttered for over a year, making it one of the longest school closures globally.

This extended closure resulted in substantial learning losses, as many students struggled to adapt to remote learning modalities. The challenges included:

• Limited access to technology and internet connectivity
• Lack of suitable learning spaces at home
• Reduced interaction with teachers and peers
• Increased stress and mental health concerns among students and educators

A World Bank study revealed that 9 out of 10 Filipino children aged 10 are unable to read and understand simple age-appropriate texts, highlighting the severity of the learning crisis. The estimated learning gap has grown to 5.5 years, indicating that students are significantly behind where they should be in terms of academic progress.

House Resolution No. 1805: A Bold Proposal for Learning Recovery

Key Provisions and Rationale

House Resolution No. 1805, introduced by Representatives Roman Romulo and Jose Francisco “Kiko” Benitez, proposes a radical approach to address the learning crisis. The resolution’s main provisions include:

1. Suspension of regular academic programs for 8 to 12 weeks
2. Implementation of a focused learning recovery program during this period
3. Emphasis on improving literacy and numeracy competencies for K to 12 learners

The rationale behind this proposal is based on several critical observations:

• Persistent low performance in international assessments such as PISA, Southeast Asia Primary Learning Metrics (SEA-PLM), and Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS)
• Reports of non-readers in Grades 7 and 8, and poor reading comprehension in higher grades
• The inadequacy of current learning recovery efforts, including the National Learning Recovery Program (NLRP) and Catch-Up Fridays

Representative Romulo emphasized the urgency of the situation, stating, “We all know that we have taken the 2018 and 2022 PISA, we took the SEAP PLM exam, the TIMSS exam. All the results show that we need interventions for reading comprehension and math age appropriate. Meaning that our learners are not faring well in any of these international assessment exams.”

Proposed Implementation Strategy

The resolution outlines a comprehensive approach to implementing the learning recovery program:

1. Comprehensive preparation by DepEd before implementation
2. Conducting assessments for all learners before the start of the intervention program to determine their level of proficiency
3. Grouping learners according to their proficiency levels rather than their grade levels
4. Prioritizing foundational skills in reading, writing, and numeracy, as well as socioemotional learning
5. Conducting post-intervention assessments to evaluate the need for further interventions
6. Mobilizing parents and the community to provide support to teachers during the intervention period

Representative Benitez stressed the importance of data-driven remediation design, stating, “You cannot do the remediation design unless you have the data of where the students actually are. Does DepEd have the data? Because classes are opening now. If they stick to their old remediation design, it is not clear that it will be effective vis-a-vis the amount of time and resources both students and teachers will put into it.”

DepEd’s Response and Commitment

Welcoming the Resolution

DepEd has shown a positive response to the proposed resolution. Undersecretary Gina Ginoong expressed the department’s openness, stating, “We [at DepEd] welcome the resolution, your Honor. We spoke about this with the Secretary and the ExeCom. The whole DepEd is open to working with you [Congress] and EDCOM on thinking about how to operationalize this resolution.”

This receptive attitude demonstrates DepEd’s recognition of the severity of the learning crisis and its willingness to consider innovative approaches to address it.

Commitment to Action

During the House of Representatives’ Committee on Basic Education and Culture deliberation, DepEd made several important commitments:

1. Lead and coordinate with the Second Congressional Commission on Education (EDCOM 2) on setting realistic targets for implementing the proposed resolution
2. Ensure proper assessments of learners needing remediation
3. Submit a position paper, budget breakdown, and costing of the proposed intervention within two weeks

These commitments indicate DepEd’s intention to take swift and concrete action in response to the proposed resolution. The two-week timeline for submitting a comprehensive plan demonstrates the urgency with which the department is approaching the issue.

The National Learning Recovery Program (NLRP): Current Efforts and Challenges

Overview of the NLRP

In response to the learning challenges, DepEd launched the National Learning Recovery Program (NLRP) through DepEd Order No. 13, s. 2023. The NLRP consists of five subprograms:

1. National Learning Camp (NLC)
2. National Reading Program (NRP)
3. National Mathematics Program (NMP)
4. National Science and Technology Program (NSciTP)
5. Other programs implemented by the Central Office and field offices supporting learning recovery efforts

Each of these subprograms aims to address specific aspects of the learning crisis. For example, the National Learning Camp offers three types of camps:

• Enhancement Camp: Designed to enrich learning for advanced learners
• Consolidation Camp: Provides further practice and application of previously taught competencies
• Intervention Camp: Supports high-need learners who struggle with foundational skills in Mathematics and English

Implementation Challenges

Despite the NLRP’s potential to address learning gaps, several challenges have been identified in its implementation:

1. Voluntary participation: Programs like the NLC are voluntary, which may limit their reach to learners most in need of remediation. For instance, at Taguig National High School, the intervention camp did not proceed because parents did not permit learners with grades below 75 in Math and/or English to participate.
2. Resource constraints: Families with limited resources may be unable to allow their children to participate due to associated expenses, such as transportation and food. This creates an equity issue, where those who need the interventions most may be the least likely to access them.
3. Assessment issues: There has been a lack of effective baseline and endline assessments, which hinders proper grouping of learners and makes it difficult to monitor progress. For example, as of the time of writing, the pretest results for the National Learning Camp Assessment (NLCA) have not been released, forcing teachers to rely solely on learners’ grades and outcomes from other local assessments to group students.
4. Incomplete policy framework: Detailed policies for some NLRP components, such as the National Mathematics Program and National Science and Technology Program, are yet to be released. This lack of clear guidelines can lead to inconsistent implementation across different regions and schools.
5. Teacher preparation and support: The success of these programs heavily relies on teachers’ ability to deliver targeted instruction. However, there are concerns about whether teachers have received adequate training and support to effectively implement the various NLRP components.
6. Time constraints: The learning camps are conducted during the end-of-school-year break, which may not provide sufficient time to address significant learning gaps, especially for students who are multiple grade levels behind.
7. Continuity of interventions: There are questions about how the short-term interventions provided by the learning camps will be sustained and integrated into regular classroom instruction during the school year.

Preliminary Results and Observations

EDCOM II’s preliminary analysis of PISA 2022 data reveals some interesting findings:

• Learners in the Philippines who attained the minimum proficiency level in Math, Reading, and Science often express aspirations for higher educational attainment, such as master’s or doctorate degrees.
• These successful learners frequently come from classes characterized by positive disciplinary climates, where teachers can promptly commence classes without prolonged disruptions.

These observations underscore the importance of creating positive learning environments and fostering high educational aspirations among students. They also suggest that addressing behavioral and classroom management issues could be an important component of improving overall educational outcomes.

Recommendations for Effective Implementation

Based on consultations with groups that conducted learning loss recovery initiatives during the COVID-19 pandemic and analysis of the current situation, the following recommendations are proposed for effective implementation of learning recovery efforts:

1. Comprehensive and Ongoing Assessment

• Develop and implement effective baseline and endline assessments for all learning recovery programs.
• Conduct regular formative assessments throughout the intervention period to track progress and adjust instruction accordingly.
• Use assessment data to inform instructional decisions and grouping of learners.

2. Targeted and Differentiated Instruction

• Group learners according to their proficiency levels rather than grade levels to ensure that instruction is tailored to their specific needs.
• Provide differentiated instruction within each group to address individual learning gaps.
• Focus on foundational skills in reading, writing, and numeracy, ensuring that students master these before moving on to more complex concepts.

3. Extended Learning Time

• Consider extending the duration of learning recovery programs beyond the proposed 8-12 weeks to provide more time for addressing significant learning gaps.
• Explore options for integrating intensive learning recovery efforts into the regular school year, rather than relying solely on end-of-year programs.

4. Teacher Support and Professional Development

• Provide comprehensive training for teachers on effective strategies for addressing learning loss and delivering targeted instruction.
• Offer ongoing support and mentoring for teachers throughout the implementation of learning recovery programs.
• Facilitate regular opportunities for teacher collaboration and sharing of best practices through professional learning communities.

5. Parental and Community Engagement

• Develop strategies to increase parental involvement in learning recovery efforts, including parent education programs and regular communication about student progress.
• Mobilize community resources to support learning recovery, such as volunteer tutors, after-school programs, and partnerships with local organizations.

6. Addressing Resource Constraints

• Provide transportation allowances and meals to incentivize learner participation, especially for students from low-income families.
• Explore partnerships with local governments and private sector organizations to secure additional funding and resources for learning recovery programs.

7. Technology Integration

• Leverage appropriate educational technology to support personalized learning and provide additional practice opportunities for students.
• Ensure equitable access to technology and internet connectivity for all students participating in learning recovery programs.

8. Socioemotional Support

• Incorporate socioemotional learning components into all learning recovery programs to address the psychological impact of the pandemic and prolonged school closures.
• Provide training for teachers on recognizing and addressing mental health concerns among students.

9. Continuous Monitoring and Evaluation

• Establish a robust monitoring and evaluation system to track the effectiveness of learning recovery programs and make data-driven improvements.
• Conduct regular reviews of program implementation and outcomes, adjusting strategies as needed based on evidence of effectiveness.

10. Policy Alignment and Clarity

• Expedite the release of detailed policies for all NLRP components to ensure consistent implementation across the education system.
• Align learning recovery efforts with broader education reform initiatives to create a coherent and sustainable approach to improving educational outcomes.

Conclusion

The commitment of DepEd to submit a plan for learning recovery within two weeks, coupled with the proposed House Resolution No. 1805, represents a significant step towards addressing the educational challenges faced by the Philippines. The success of these initiatives will depend on careful planning, effective implementation, and ongoing evaluation and adjustment.

As the education sector moves forward, it is crucial to maintain a focus on evidence-based practices, regular assessment, and targeted interventions. By addressing the unique needs of each learner, providing comprehensive support to teachers, and engaging parents and communities in the educational process, the Philippines can work towards closing the learning gap and improving educational outcomes for all students.

The coming weeks and months will be critical in shaping the future of education in the Philippines. Stakeholders at all levels – from policymakers to educators, parents, and students – must work together to ensure the success of these learning recovery efforts. Only through collaborative and sustained action can the nation hope to overcome the current educational challenges and build a stronger, more effective education system for future generations.

The road ahead is undoubtedly challenging, but with a clear vision, evidence-based strategies, and a commitment to continuous improvement, the Philippines has the potential to transform its education system and provide its young people with the knowledge and skills they need to thrive in the 21st century.