MANILA, Philippines – A recent UNESCO-sponsored forum on education for all, provided the opportunity to examine why many countries of the world, including the Philippines, have failed to achieve their educational targets. There are many reasons but the lack of government support stands out. Although the share of the GNP allocated to education has increased with the rise in income in most countries, it is not so in the Philippines. Thus, education has not been able to reach some marginalized areas.

Here are some “stark differences in education opportunity” within countries, according to Dr. Anwar Al-Said, head of the UNESCO Regional Office in Jakarto who cited data from  the Global Monitoring Report:

The aftershock of the global financing crisis threatens to deprive millions in the world’s poorest countries of an education.

Being  born into a poor household significantly raises the risk of deprivation. There is a four-year education gap between the richest and poorest households.

Disparities within countries are often bigger than disparities between countries.

Language and ethnicity often reinforce marginalization.

Marginalization is fueled by structural disadvantages, bad policies, and neglect by political leaders.

Need to ensure the marginalized access to skilled teachers.

Expanding entitlements and social protection policies such as cash transfers.

However, there had been some advances such as a drop by 33 million in the number of children not attending school. More children are completing a full cycle of primary education and the gender gap has also narrowed. Too, as Dr. Al-Said noted, the country is now taking positive steps by demonstrating political will in implementing the enhanced K-12 program.

But we are one country that has gone through considerable educational reforms. We agree with Dr. Vicente Paqueo who observes that despite the number of educational reforms implemented through the years, we continue to face the same old problems. Paqueo says that this could be due to our failure in converting proposals into results because of institutional limitations and weak incentive structures. Perhaps we are doing many things. Perhaps too, as the other speakers noted, we have failed to view education in a more comprehensive way. Prof. Taguiwalo speaks of the need to integrate neurosciences in our educational planning.

A more expanded view of education is to look  beyond schooling and include the family, media, arts and culture, the mother tongue, competencies, not credentials. This broadened view according to Dr. Ciel Habito is to regard education as a vital public investment that makes economic growth inclusive. Poverty goes down with investment in education. A shift in perspective would look at entrepreneurship-oriented education, and not merely a means to earn money but also to create jobs and wealth, and to regard other intelligences beyond the verbal and mathematical, equally important. Dr. Manuel Alba who has been at the forefront in the early educational reforms, believes that we have not given adequate emphasis on the management of education. He cites Dr. O.D. Corpuz who said that, education is too much important to be left to educators. So much learning is taking place outside the school that going to school could be regarded as an interruption in the learning process.

Many of these experts’ insights could answer the earlier  question:  “Why is it that despite previous policy reforms in education, we are still where we were when we started?”  That we have failed to look at education within a comprehensive framework,  that we were too concerned with inputs and outputs when in fact, what is more important is to focus on the “black box” in between – the processes in the learning system – efficiency, management, decentralization, and other policies as well as political will, attitudes, mindsets, and values which will convert the inputs – money, materials into desirable outcomes – knowledge, wisdom, and values instead of mere information. My e-mail is florbraid@yahoo.com.