Growing Number of Non

“Today a reader, tomorrow a leader.
”
― Margaret Fuller”
Growing number of non-readers alarming
Artemio Dumlao (The Philippine Star) - November 14, 2019 - 12:00am

BAGUIO CITY, Philippines — The government, via Senate basic education committee
chairman Sherwin Gatchalian, is being urged to face head-on the growing incidence of
non-readers and frustration-level readers in public schools around the country.
Residents in Tabuk City, Kalinga initiated a signature campaign asking the government
to confront the problem.
“If the Every Child a Reader Program (ECARP) and the Philippine Informal Reading
Inventory (Phil-IRI) are properly implemented, there would be no non-reader beyond
Grade 3,” they said.
Earlier, Education Undersecretary for curriculum and instruction Diosdado San Antonio
had acknowledged that the Department of Education (DepEd) is aware of the presence
of non-readers in high school. The official’s admission stemmed from the February
report of the Philippine Institute for Developments Studies calling on the DepEd to
discourage the practice among public elementary schools of sending non-readers to
high school.
The petitioners claimed that the presence of non-readers and frustration-level readers in
high school means that programs for reading and the K-12 curriculum are failing.
They said the intent of the ECARP is to make every child an independent reader by
Grade 3 and the Phil-IRI, a nationally validated reading proficiency assessment tool, is
intended to strengthen the implementation of the ECARP.
“Under DepEd Order No. 021, series of 2019, setting forth the policy guidelines for the
K-12, reading in English is included among the competencies to be attained in Grade 2,”
the plea to Sen. Gatchalian read.
Taking note that most school children could read in Grade 3, the petitioners asked why
the DepEd cannot successfully teach “all mentally normal children how to read at the
grade prescribed by the curriculum when it was able to make them all read in Grade 1 in
the past?”
They told Gatchalian, “we believe the breakdown in the effectiveness of the DepEd to
teach children to read started with the decision to scrap the ‘No Read, No Move’ policy
for Grade 1 back in 2001.” ‘Our generation learned to read in Grade 1 and there is no
justification whatsoever for young Filipinos to learn the skill at a much later stage in their
educational journey specially so that under the current curriculum, they are supposed
be able to read in Grade 2,’ they added.
A classroom teacher in the late 70’s and 80’s, retired Provincial Cooperative Officer
Robert Salabao, Sr. said, there are non-readers among the first and second year
students in the high school Tabuk City. He suspects while one of the bases for
performance rating of teachers is the failure rate, teachers pass even the undeserving
because nobody is to be retained.
Salabao instead suggested the use of the period intended for the Mother Tongue
subject for practical reading for the reading laggards. “Anyway the Mother Tongue is
not really essential as part of the curriculum,” insisting that, “why (do) children still have
to be taught the Mother Tongue in school when it’s the language at home adding that
priority language is actually English and which therefore should be learned in the
grades.”
Lutheran minister Luis Aoas, also a petitioner, blamed the DepEd for the overall
erosion of the quality of education attributing it to the frequent changes in the curriculum
and the system that had caused confusion. He recalled that during the time when the
curriculum only revolved around reading, writing and arithmetic or 3Rs, children were
proficient. While we need change, the clergy member admitted, “but when you keep on
changing, the system is weakened as people no longer know which is which and things
begin to look like experiments. We change for the better but frequent change could be
disastrous.”
Aoas’ wife, Victoria, who used to work for the DepEd, observed that each time there is a
new Education Secretary, there are changes in the curriculum.
Petitioners hope that under Sen. Gatchalian’s Basic Education Committee, the reading
crisis is addressed because if there are any national government officials acquainted
with the non-reader headache, Gatchalian would be one of them.
Valenzuela City where Gatchalian was the former mayor and congressman, was the
first LGU to discover and take action on the non-reader problem. Back in 2014, the
LGU found out that eight of 10 Grade 6 pupils in the city were frustration level readers
and one of every 10 a non-reader.
The petitioners believe Sen. Gatchalian knows very well that delay in teaching school
children to read takes resources to remedy because in 2014 alone, Valenzuela City
allocated P300M to rescue the Grade 6 non-readers and frustration level readers in its
public schools.
Gatchalian knows that the problem is a tough nut to crack because last summer,
after four years of giving full support to the reading program of the Department of
Education (DepEd) there, the LGU still conducted a reading skills training for “213 non-
readers, 3,725 frustrated readers and 14,712 instructional readers” from Grades 2 to 6
from the city’s public schools, they reiterated.
We hope the senator will also realize that if that’s the situation in his home city where
the LGU is actively intervening, it could be much worse in places where the DepEd
is single-handedly addressing the problem, the petitioners said.
DO 18, S. 2017 – GUIDELINES ON THE UTILIZATION OF THE 2017 EVERY CHILD

A READER PROGRAM FUNDS FOR THE EARLY LANGUAGE, LITERACY, AND
NUMERACY PROGRAM: PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT COMPONENT
April 19, 2017

DO 18, s. 2017
Guidelines on the Utilization of the 2017 Every Child a Reader Program Funds for the
Early Language, Literacy, and Numeracy Program: Professional Development
Component
To: Undersecretaries
Assistant Secretaries
Bureau and Service Directors
Regional Directors
Schools Division Superintendents
Public and Private Elementary and Secondary Schools Heads
All Others Concerned
1. The Department of Education (DepEd) issues the enclosed Guidelines on the
Utilization of the 2017 Every Child a Reader Program (ECARP) Funds for
the Early Language, Literacy, and Numeracy Program: Professional
Development Component. These guidelines shall cover the expansion of the
professional development component of the program described in DepEd Order
No. 12, s. 2015 entitled Guidelines on the Early Language, Literacy, and
Numeracy Program: Professional Development Component.
2. The Program aims to develop in Filipino children the literacy and numeracy skills,
and attitudes, which will contribute to lifelong learning. With this, it is the goal of
the Department to improve the literacy and numeracy skills of learners from
Kindergarten to Grade 3 following the K to 12 Basic Education Curriculum by
establishing a sustainable and cost-effective professional development system
for teachers.
3. In line with the K to 12 Program and the goal of making every child should be a
reader, the Department of Education (DepEd) is strengthening its reading
program through the implementation of the Early Language, Literacy, and
Numeracy Program.
4. For more information and inquiries, all concerned may visit the Bureau of
Learning Delivery-Teaching and Learning Division (BLD-TLD), 4th floor,
Bonifacio Building, Department of Education (DepEd) Central Office, DepEd
Complex, Meralco Avenue, Pasig City or contact telephone nos. (02) 687-2948
or (02) 637-4347 or through email address: [email protected].
5. Immediate dissemination of and strict compliance with this Order is directed.
UNE 15, 2012 DO 50, S. 2012 – GUIDELINES ON THE UTILIZATION OF FUNDS

FOR THE EVERY CHILD A READER PROGRAM (ECARP)
June 15, 2012

DO 50, s. 2012
Guidelines on the Utilization of Funds for the Every Child a Reader Program (ECARP)
To: Undersecretaries
Assistant Secretaries
Bureau Directors
Regional Directors
Schools Division/City Superintendents
Heads, Public Elementary Schools
1. The Every Child A Reader Program (ECARP) is a national program that supports
the thrust of the Department of Education (DepEd) to make every child a reader
and writer at his/her grade level. It is supporting the attainment of Education for
All (EFA) target of universal school participation and elimination of dropouts and
repetition in the first three- grades.
2. ECARP is implemented through the following components: a) design,
implementation and monitoring, and evaluation of early reading interventions;
and b) development, administration of reading assessments and treatment and
reporting of data.
3. ECARP funds will be utilized to carry out the two (2) components of ECARP
implementation specifically to implement specific activities under each
component:
a. Implementation. Effective and sustained implementation of any intervention
necessitates fund support. ECARP funds will be downloaded to the regions to
support the following activities:
 1. Acquisition of Children’s Story Books. Children learning to read need
books within their level to practice strategic skills in reading;
 2. Training of Implementers (school heads and teachers). ECARP shall
cover training expenses like travel expenses, food and accommodations,
supplies and materials, contingency and honorarium of non-DepEd
resource persons;
 3. Setting Up a School Reading Center. This needs to be established in
each school to provide exclusive space for teacher and pupil interaction
during intervention sessions. ECARP shall provide funding support to
each school for the establishment of said centers; and
 4. Advocacy. This may include conferences and meetings with
stakeholders, among others.
b. Monitoring and Evaluation. ECARP shall allocate funds for the periodic
monitoring and evaluation of the implementation of the ERI. An impact evaluation
shall be conducted to determine program’s efficiency and effectiveness and to
further improve implementation design.
c. Reading Assessment. ECARP shall support the development/ enhancement,
administration and treatment, and reporting of data obtained from reading
assessment that the DepEd shall endorse. Specifically, ECARP shall support the
conduct of the specific activities under each major step:
 1. Development/Enhancement of Reading Assessment Designs and

Tools. ECARP shall venture on the localization of standardized Early
Grades Reading Assessment (EGRA) to be able to obtain valid and
reliable data on children’s reading achievement. Localization shall entail
redevelopment of EGRA in mother tongues. ECARP will fund the
continuous enhancement/improvement of its home-grown reading
assessment: Philippine Informal Reading Inventory (Phil-IRI) which may
include review and redevelopment as well as development of relevant
texts for informal reading inventory;
 2. Administration of Reading Assessment. ECARP shall allocate support
funds for the administration of Reading Assessments.
Funds may be utilized on the reproduction of assessment tools and
orientation of teachers/enumerators on the administration of reading
assessments and other incidental expenses; and
 3. Reading Assessments Data Treatment and Reporting. ECARP shall
support the treatment of assessment data as well as the enhancement of
existing data-base reporting of the Phil-IRI or development of reporting
mechanisms by other reading assessments specifically the EGRA.
4. The DepEd has allotted funds in support of the Every Child A Reader Program
(ECARP). The support fund for the Reading Interventions shall cover selected
schools per region, the list of which is contained in Enclosure No 1. For the
remaining funds, the Bureau of Elementary Education (BEE) shall be provided a
Program Support Fund to undertake activities such as review and alignment of
reading models to Mother Tongue- Based Multilingual Education (MTB-MLE),
development of storybooks by reading level in Mother Tongue, review and
printing of Best Reading Practices Compilation, Phil-IRI, and monitoring as listed
in Enclosure No. 2.
5. Upon release of the allotment by the Department of Budget and Management
(DBM) to DepEd-Central Office (CO), the Budget Division-FMS shall issue the
Sub-Allotment Release Order (Sub-ARO) to the schools with fiscal autonomy,
and through the Schools Division Offices (DO) for those schools without fiscal
autonomy. After receipt of the Sub- ARO, the implementing units (IUs) and the
concerned Division Offices (for the Non-IUs) shall request from DBM-Regional
Office the corresponding cash requirements or Notice of Cash Allocation (NCA).
6. Utilization of the subsidy shall be subject to the usual accounting and auditing
rules and regulations.
7. An evaluation of the program shall be conducted by a composite team in
accordance with the program implementation plan under the supervision of the
Office of the Planning Service (OPS).
8. The recipient schools must submit to the DO physical accomplishment and fund
utilization reports two months after receipt of the sub-ARO. Copies of reports
shall be submitted simultaneously to the Regional Office (RO) and Bureau of
Elementary Education (BEE).
9. All existing Orders and Memoranda inconsistent with this Order are rescinded.
10. These guidelines will remain in force and effect during the duration of the
program, unless sooner repealed, amended or rescinded.
11. Immediate dissemination of and strict compliance with this Order is directed.

Growing Number of Non

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Growing Number of Non

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Growing Number of Non

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

“Today a reader, tomorrow a leader.

Growing number of non-readers alarming

Artemio Dumlao (The Philippine Star) - November 14, 2019 - 12:00am

DO 18, S. 2017 – GUIDELINES ON THE UTILIZATION OF THE 2017 EVERY CHILD

April 19, 2017

UNE 15, 2012 DO 50, S. 2012 – GUIDELINES ON THE UTILIZATION OF FUNDS

June 15, 2012

 1. Development/Enhancement of Reading Assessment Designs and

You might also like