Decades of miseducation confirmed!

By Herman M. Lagon

The education system is the cornerstone of the country’s future, and it has been steadily regressing for decades. The recently released EDCOM 2 Year One Report, “Miseducation: The Failed System of Philippine Education,” sharply focuses attention on the obvious errors and omissions that have bedeviled the industry for more than 30 years. This report is more than simply a document; it is a clear call to action that necessitates a prompt and firm reaction. Let us examine why this document is more than simply another file that collects dust on the shelves of bureaucracy.

To begin with, EDCOM 2 covered more ground than most. They dug in and started a thorough investigation of the Philippine educational system that involved in-depth study, nationwide interviews, and even field trips. The commitment to identifying the underlying causes of the issue is clear, exposing the structural problems that have impeded advancement from early life to higher education.

Out of 28, the report identifies 12 crucial topics, highlighting the complexity and range of the problems at hand. This is about drawing attention to the systemic flaws that need to be fixed, not about placing blame. Among the most significant obstacles to high-quality education are the obvious shortcomings in technical-vocational education, the excessive administrative load placed on teachers, and the lack of cooperation amongst important education agencies.

Furthermore, EDCOM 2 goes beyond just problem identification. They offer 40 reform suggestions that can be put into practice. These are realistic, doable actions that have the potential to drastically alter the state of education in the Philippines—not just lofty ideals. The paper serves as a change roadmap, covering topics such as streamlining textbook purchase procedures and improving early childhood care and development.

It is impossible to exaggerate the importance of having a permanent coordination body between TESDA, CHED, and DepEd. A major obstacle now preventing good coordination is the fragmented approach to education that serves no one. This analysis makes it very evident that various agencies must collaborate effectively in order to proceed.

There is a startling absence of early childhood education access, with child development facilities absent in a striking proportion of barangays. It is critical that this issue be addressed immediately due to the potential long-term impact that this inequality in early learning chances may have on a child’s educational trajectory.

The foundation of the educational system, teachers, are crumbling under the weight of administrative responsibilities that take them away from their main responsibility of teaching. The study not only highlights this problem but also argues for a framework that lets teachers concentrate on their areas of expertise.

Another issue is the condition of Technical-Vocational Education and Training (TVET) programs. Since most of them are low-level, these programs urgently need to be improved in order to give graduates real work possibilities.

The report’s recognition of the difficulties the Philippine educational system faces in functioning as a cohesive whole is arguably one of its most important discoveries. The title “Miseducation” serves as a clear reminder of the fragmented efforts and neglected chances that have plagued the industry for an excessive amount of time.

It is important to include everyone. The importance of all parties involved in the reform process—teachers, students, and parents—is emphasized in the report and debates that follow. Their participation is not only advantageous but also necessary to create thorough and efficient education strategies.

The research uses the phrase “isomorphic mimicry” to describe the mindless copying of other governments’ procedures and frameworks, a tendency that has caused inefficiencies and unfulfilled expectations in the Philippine education sector. This idea emphasizes the necessity of moving away from paper perfection and toward pragmatism.

The education sector’s resistance to change, overload, and a lack of accountability have been cited as major obstacles to its transformation into a real system. The research recommends taking a closer look at the incentives and disincentives present in government operations, reevaluating the roles and capabilities of education authorities, and reevaluating the changes related to procurement and auditing.

Human capital investment is desperately needed. The research emphasizes the critical need for a sustainable talent pipeline by pointing out the dearth of qualified professionals in the education sector, from early childhood educators to public school instructors.

It is stressed that stakeholder engagement is a critical component of an effective educational system. According to the research, the government should ensure that stakeholders are included in the process of fine-tuning policies and solutions by facilitating critical engagement with them.

The paper highlights particular instances where early intervention could have lessened long-standing issues, highlighting the recurring issue of inadequate oversight of education organizations. It is suggested that strengthening supervision systems is a prerequisite for timely and efficient policy implementation.

In addition, the research draws attention to the issue of “dirty, incomplete, and late” data amongst education agencies, emphasizing the necessity of effective data collection and analysis to support decision-making at all educational levels.

In order to address issues that complement or affect learning results holistically, the paper concludes by highlighting the significance of system-wide medium-term strategies that are articulated and monitored by the three education authorities. It also emphasizes the necessity of coordination with other government entities.

The EDCOM 2 report is essentially a call to arms rather than merely an academic exercise. It emphasizes how critical it is to act quickly to repair an educational system that has been bogged down in “miseducation” for many years. In order to go forward, it is necessary to acknowledge these problems and work together to implement the suggested changes over time. For the benefit of the current and upcoming generations, who deserve nothing less than a top-notch educational system, it is imperative that we take this with a great sense of urgency.


Doc H fondly describes himself as a ‘student of and for life’ who, like many others, aspires to a life-giving and why-driven world that is grounded in social justice and the pursuit of happiness. His views herewith do not necessarily reflect those of the institutions he is employed or connected with.