ARTICLE REVIEW

IN
MM-602 ( PHILOSOPHIES AND THEORIES
OF EDUCATION )

A. A Mini Critique of K-12 Basic Education

Curriculum

B. Mathematics Learning in Early Childhood: Paths

Toward Excellence and Equity

Submitted by:
Mercy P. Latigay

Submitted to:

Mary Jean S. Falsario, Ph.D.

Professor, Graduate Studies, SKSU

ARTICLE #1: A Mini Critique of K-12 Basic Education

Curriculum
 Given the fact that the Philippines is one of the only three countries in the world
(Angola and Djibouti are the other two) and only one in Asia that still had only 10 years
inbasic education; and this has always been seen as a disadvantage for the students in
who are competing in an increasingly global job market [1].
As cited in the K12 Philippines on October 27, 2015:

K-12 Education System Old System

● The K-12 program offers a decongested ● Students lack mastery of basic

12-year program that gives students competencies due to a congested
sufficient time to master skills and ten-year basic education curriculum.
absorb basic competencies
● Students of the new system will ● Graduates of the old curriculum are
graduate at the age of 18 and will be younger than 18 years old and are not
ready for employment, legally ready to get a job or start a
entrepreneurship, middle level skills business.
development and higher education
upon graduation ● Foreign countries perceive a ten-year
● The K-12 program accelerates mutual curriculum as insufficient. They do not
recognition of Filipino graduates and automatically recognize Overseas
professionals in other countries. Filipino workers (OFWs) as
● Kindergarten is mandatory for five professionals abroad.
year-old children, a prerequisite for
admission to Grade 1 ● Kindergarten (a strong foundation for
● The new curriculum gives students the lifelong learning and total
chance to choose among three development) is optional and not a
tracks(i.e Academic, prerequisite for admission to Grade 1.
Technical-Vocational-Livelihood; and
Sports and Arts) and undergo ● Old education system offers a broad
immersion, which provides relevant curriculum that does not include
exposure and actual experience in their enough practical applications.
chosen track.

K to 12 (also K-12) is an education system under the Department of Education

that aims to enhance learners’ basic skills, produce more competent citizens, and
prepare graduates for lifelong learning and employment.“K” stands for Kindergarten and
“12” refers to the succeeding 12 years of basic education (6 years of elementary
education, 4 years of junior high school, and 2 years of senior high school) [2]. As
Isagani Cruz put it, “The whole point of the entire K to 12 reform is to answer the needs
of about 30 million young people (those below 24 years of age) who have not finished
Fourth Year High School. Of the out-of-school youth of employable age, more than six
million are unemployed, primarily because they do not have the skills that employers
want [3].” The new system guarantee that the students will be able to master lifelong
skills and by the time they graduated from the K-12 program, they will be more
equipped and ready to enter college, get a job, or start on their own venture. However, it
is inevitable that challenges will occur. One of the greatest impediments to success with
the new educational reforms in the Philippines is the lingering poverty within the nation
[4]. The new curriculum will probably be seen as an additional expenses. Parents have
to shell out more money (for transportation and food) for the education of their children.
The government does not have the money to pay for two more years of free education,
since it does not even have the money to fully support today’s ten years. DepEd must
first solve the lack of classrooms, furniture and equipment, qualified teachers, and error-
free textbooks [5]. Prof. Calingasan explains that “while parents may look at this as
extended expense i.e., paying tuition for another 2 years in high school, this would
offset itself since the competencies one would learn from the additional years are the
same ones which the first two years of general education in college teach.”

Critical role of teachers

To John Dewey, it’s our responsibility to lead students to genuine learning

(Noddings, 2007, p.33). We need trained early childhood teachers who will ensure the
reading, writing and arithmetic learning outcomes from age 3-8 years old.
Indeed, the K to 12 Program has proven to work around the world. Its origins
could be traced back to a classic philosopher – Plato.
Plato believed that students should be educated according to their capacities –
that they should not all have exactly the same education Plato’s plan provided for the
special education of workers, of artisans, of guardians (soldiers), of rulers (the upper
echelon of the guardian class). The first group was to be well trained in specific
occupations so that, Plato says through Socrates, our shoes will be well made and our
crops well tended. The second, identified by physical strength and spirit, was to receive
an expert level of physical and moral training. Socrates described the noble auxiliary or
guardian as well trained in philosophy, spirit, swiftness, and strength. Finally, potential
rulers were to be educated with meticulous care in philosophy, mathematics, literature,
and history and their education would continue well beyond their school years [6].
 According to Education Secretary Br. Armin A. Luistro [former Secretary], the
new curriculum is focused more on the learners and not on the teacher. Luistro said,
“We are making it a real learning experience for the students, meaning, it will be less on
memorization and more encouraging of critical thinking”.... Furthermore, Luistro
explains, “It is important that our learners develop that natural love for learning and not
feel that it is something imposed on them…we will reduce it to four hours to make
education less stressful and more enjoyable. [7]”
Change is never easy, especially when it is about a big undertaking such as the
implementation ofthe new K-12 curriculum guide in the Philippines. It is high time,
however, that we join the rest of the world and improve the quality of our basic
education system and our graduates [8].

ANALYSIS:
The 10 year program in the Philippines basic education resulted to consistent low
levels of performance in the Trends in the International Mathematics and Science
Survey (TIMSS) and the National Achievement Test (NAT). Our country consistently
ranked the lowest in the TIMSS as compared to other countries over the years. Aside
from the TIMSS result, the NAT administered to year 6 showed a passing rate of
69.21% which is 5% below the passing rate of 75%. Some of the achievement levels of
our country cannot be made because of the absence of international assessments
conducted.
The present educational system is also faced with increasing dropout rates and
graduates having weak chances of getting better job because of their lack of
occupational skills.
In order to produce better graduates that are skilled and competent imbued by
the 21st century skills, further recommendations support the expanding of the present
basic education into 13 years. The 13 years is known as the K to 12 Curriculum which
includes a year of kindergarten, six years of primary school (Grade 1-6), and an
expanded six years in high school (Junior High School: Years 7-10, senior High School:
Years 11-12).

CONCLUSION:
In conclusion, Priority should be given to upgrading the current state of our
country’s education by providing the necessary resources for the current set up. The
government should improve overall teacher compensation. The 4-year implementation
of the most recent salary standardization law significantly increases the nominal income
of teachers. While some say that this is still not enough, it is actually a very good
compromise. What government can now do is to improve other benefits and perks.
Improving systems for GSIS, Pag-ibig and Philhealth will make all teachers very happy.
The mere idea of getting their salaries on time would also be a major boost to morale.
We strongly think that, by adding more classrooms, better text books, better
facilities/equipment, continuing teaching skills upgrading programs and more post-
graduate scholarship, we can find a better quality education. The K-12 as a whole,
brings with it a lot of potential to bring significant changes in our educational system. But
whether the change will be constructive or destructive will all depend on the
government’s strategies and cooperation of the public sector. K-12 program was
already implemented, we have no other choice but to embrace changes to move
forward and progress as a nation. Let’s just all hope for the best but let’s also remember
the most of the time, quality is more important than quantity and we need to have better
education, not more education. K-12 is a milestone for all of us and one big step for the
Filipinos because in the end, education will always stay as one of the best ways to rise
above poverty and reach for the top.

RECOMMENDATION:
a. Develop and implement a retooling/capacity enhancement program to support
new curricular programs and to enable faculty or those with competency gap
to handle K to 12 courses.
b. As teacher, change your role to that of a guide, a mentor, a facilitator—and an
expert when needed. We must help students find—and then develop—their
passions, gifts, and abilities. One of the best gifts we can give to our
students/pupils is a love of learning.

REFERENCES:
[1] Uyquiengco, Mariel. “Benefits of the K 12 curriculum for Filipino students!”
theAsianparent. n. d. Web.
https://ph.theasianparent.com/advantages-new-k-12-curriculum/
[2] “What is K12.”. 27 Oct. 2015. Web. 15 July 2016. <http://k12philippines.com/>
[3] Shahani, Lila Ramos. “THE CHALLENGES OF BASIC EDUCATION: DEALING
WITH K-12.”philstar GLOBAL. 15 June 2015. Web. 15 July 2016.
<http://www.philstar.com/opinion/2015/06/15/1466151/challenges-basic-education-deali
ng-k-12>
[4] Fioriello, Patricia. “Common Challenges in K-12 Education in the Philippines”. K-12
Education System. n. d. Web. July 15, 2016.
<http://k12educationsystem.com/k-12-reviews-educational-system-philippines/>
[5] “Pros & Cons in the K+12 Basic Education Debate.” Multilingual Philippines. Web. 18
July 2016. https://mlephil.wordpress.com/
[6] Calderon, MT. F. (2014). A CRITIQUE OF K-12 PHILIPPINE EDUCATION
SYSTEM. International Journal of Education and Research Vol. 2 No. 10. Retreived
from http://www.ijern.com/journal/2014/October-2014/42.pdf
[7] Franco-Velasco, P. T. (2012, March 6). A primer on the new K-12 Philippine
education curriculum. Retrieved from www.smartparenting.com.ph
[8] Uyquiengco, Mariel. “Benefits of the K 12 curriculum for Filipino students!”
theAsianparent. n. d. Web.
https://ph.theasianparent.com/advantages-new-k-12-curriculum/

ARTICLE #2: Mathematics Learning in Early

Childhood: Paths Toward Excellence and Equity
 Mathematics education has risen to the top of the national policyagenda as part of
the need to improve the technical and scientific literacy of the American public. The new
demands of international competition in the 21st century require a workforce that is
competent in and comfortable with mathematics. There is particular concern about the
chronically low mathematics and science performance of economically disadvantaged
students and the lack of diversity in the science and technical workforce. Particularly
alarming is that such disparities exist in the earliest years of schooling and even before
school entry.
Recognizing the increasing importance of mathematics and encouraged by a
decade of success in improving early literacy, the Mathematical Sciences Education
Board of the Center for Education at the National Research Council established the
Committee on Early Childhood Mathematics. The committee was charged with
examining existing research in order to develop appropriate mathematics learning
objectives for preschool children; providing evidence-based insights related to
curriculum, instruction, and teacher education for achieving these learning objectives;
and determining the implications of these findings for policy, practice, and future
research.
The committee found that, although virtually all young children have the
capability to learn and become competent in mathematics, for most the potential to
learn mathematics in the early years of school is not currently realized. This stems from
a lack of opportunities to learn mathematics either in early childhood settings or through
everyday experiences in homes and in communities. This is particularly the case for
economically disad vantaged children, who start out behind in mathematics and will
remain so without extensive, high-quality early mathematics instruction.
In fact, well before first grade, children can learn the ideas and skills that support
later, more complex mathematics understanding. There is expert consensus that two
areas of mathematics are particularly important for young children to learn: (1) number,
which includes whole number, operations, and relations; and (2) geometry, spatial
thinking, and measurement. A rich body of research provides insight into how children’s
proficiency develops in both areas and the instruction needed to support it. The
committee used this evidence to develop research-based teaching-learning paths
to guide policy and practice in early childhood education.
Examination of current standards, curricula, and instruction in early childhood
education revealed that many early childhood settings do not provide adequate learning
experiences in mathematics. The relative lack of high-quality mathematics instruction,
especially in comparison to literacy, reflects a lack of attention to mathematics
throughout the childhood education system, including standards, curriculum, instruction,
and the preparation and training of the teaching workforce.
 For example, many widely used early childhood curricula do not provide sufficient
guidance on mathematics pedagogy or content. When early childhood classrooms do
have mathematics activities, they are often presented as part of an integrated or
embedded curriculum, in which the teaching of mathematics is secondary to other
learning goals. Emerging research indicates, however, that learning experiences in
which mathematics is a supplementary activity rather than the primary focus are less
effective in promoting children’s mathematics learning than experiences in which
mathematics is the primary goal. Finally, education and training for most teachers
typically places heavy emphasis on children’s social-emotional development and
literacy, with much less attention to mathematics. In fact, academic activities such as
mathematics can be a context in which social-emotional development and the
foundations of language and literacy flourish.
As noted, opportunities to experience high-quality mathematics instruction
are especially important for low-income children. These children, on average,
demonstrate lower levels of competence with mathematics prior to school entry, and the
gaps persist or even widen over the course of schooling. Providing young children with
extensive, high-quality early mathematics instruction can serve as a sound foundation
for later learning in mathematics and contribute to addressing long-term systematic
inequities in educational outcomes.
The committee found that although the research to date about how young
children develop and learn key concepts in mathematics has clear implications for
practice, the findings are neither widely known nor imple mented by early childhood
educators or those who teach them. To ensure that all children enter elementary school
with the mathematical foundation they need for success requires that individuals
throughout the early childhood education system—including the teaching workforce,
curriculum developers, program directors, and policy makers—transform their approach
to mathematics education in early childhood by supporting, developing, and
implementing research-based practices and curricula.

ANALYSIS:
A coordinated national early childhood mathematics initiative should be put in
place to improve mathematics teaching and learning for all children ages 3 to 6. An
essential component of a coordinated national early childhood mathematics initiative is
the provision of professional development to early childhood in-service teachers that
helps them (a) to understand the necessary mathematics, the crucial teaching-learning
paths, and the principles of intentional teaching and curriculum and (b) to learn how to
implement a curriculum.

CONCLUSION:
There is a need for increased informal programming, curricular resources,
software, and other media that can be used to support young children’s mathematics
learning in such settings as homes, community centers, libraries, and museums. To
ensure that all children enter elementary school with the mathematical foundation they
need for success requires that individuals throughout the early childhood education
system—including the teaching workforce, curriculum developers, program directors,
and policy makers—transform their approach to mathematics education in early
childhood by supporting, developing, and implementing research-based practices and
curricula.

RECOMMENDATION:
1. Mathematics experiences in early childhood settings should concentrate on (1)
number (which includes whole number, operations, and relations) and (2) geometry,
spatial relations, and measurement, with more mathematics learning time devoted to
number than to other topics. The mathematical process goals should be integrated
in these content areas. Children should understand the concepts and learn the skills
exemplified in the teaching-learning paths described in this report.
2. Early childhood education partnerships should be formed between family and
community programs so that they are equipped to work together in promoting children’s
mathematics.
3. There is a need for increased informal programming, curricular resources,
software, and other media that can be used to support young children’s mathematics
learning in such settings as homes, community centers, libraries, and museums.

REFERENCES:
Barnett, W.S., Hustedt, J.T., Friedman, A.H., Boyd, J.S., and Ainsworth, P.
(2007). The State of Preschool 2007: State Preschool Yearbook. New Brunswick:
Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, The National Institute for Early Education
Research. Available: http://nieer.org/yearbook/pdf/yearbook.pdf#page=6 [accessed
August 2008].
 Cannon, J., and Ginsburg, H. (2008). “Doing the math”: Maternal beliefs about
early mathematics versus language learning. Early Education and Development, 19(2),
238-260.
Ceci, S.J., and Papierno, P.B. (2005). The rhetoric and reality of gap closing:
When the “havenots” gain but the “haves” gain even more. American Psychologist,
60(2), 149-160.
Chau, M., and Douglas-Hall, A., (2007, September). Low-income Children in the
United States: National and State Trend Data, 199 6-2006. Mailman School of Public
Health at Columbia University, National Center for Children in Poverty. Available:
http://www. nccp.org/publications/pdf/text_761.pdf [accessed August 2008].
Clements, D.H., and Sarama, J. (2007). Early childhood mathematics learning. In
F.K. Lester, Jr. (Ed.), Second Handbook of Research on Mathematics Teaching and
Learning (pp. 461-555). New York: Information Age.
Clements, D.H., Sarama, J., and DiBiase, A. (2004). Engaging Young Children in
Mathematics:Findings of the 2000 National Conference on Standards for Preschool and
KindergartenMathematics Education. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.