|
The Philippines’ Cyber Education Project:
Pros and Cons
Recently, the Philippine’s Department of Education (DepEd) announced its new
promising proposal called the CYBER EDUCATION PROJECT (CEP) which aimed at
“providing an efficient and cost-effective solution to the need to deliver
educational services to public elementary and secondary schools throughout the
whole archipelago.”
Cyber Education is defined as a brand new form of education in which
instructional and management activities are carried out mainly based on
E-Learning technologies. It includes concepts like “online education”,
“E-Learning”, “virtual education”, “digital education”, “multi-media learning”
and among others. The Philippines’ Cyber Education Project is accurately
described as a Satellite-based Distance Learning Program.
It was learned that the Satellite-based education in the Philippines was
conceptualized during the time of President Fidel V. Ramos. The idea was to use
the country’s Agila satellite system, which was launched into orbit in 1997, as
the tool. However, it didn’t push through. Now, President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo’s
government is trying hard in realizing this development amidst the strong and
challenging political and economic concerns. The Satellite-based Distance
Learning Program links the schools to a nationwide network that provides 12
video channels, wireless wide area networking, local area networking and
wireless Internet connectivity. Through the Cyber Ed Project, the Department of
Education (DepEd) expects substantial improvement in student performance. At the
same time, its network will provide cost-effective teacher training to close to
half a million public school teachers, enabling them to upgrade their
capabilities using virtual teacher training modules.
DepEd’s P26.48-billion Cyber Education Project
is seen as a major solution to the myriad education problems. It is claimed to
totally enhance the traditional concept of classroom teaching because teachers
and pupils can interactively view and respond to teachers in the live feeds and
computer-enhanced delivery of lessons. According to the NEDA, of the total cost
of P26.48 billion, 86 percent or P22.77 billion of which will be financed
through a loan from China and the remaining 14 percent or P3.71 billion will be
funded by the Philippine government.
DepEd explained that under this project, a total of 37,794 schools or 90% of all
public schools nationwide will be connected in the next three years. These
schools will receive live broadcasts featuring lectures and presentations from
master teachers as well as course wares on demand and other valuable resource
materials. Furthermore, the Cyber Ed Project is based on China's E-Education
Project which covers some 500,000 schools and universities. DepEd’s official
website revealed that the Cyber Ed Project is in accordance with the ICT-based
education agenda included in the economic cooperation agreement signed by the
Philippines and China in June 2006 and it is undertaken with assistance from
Tsinghua University, China's premier technology university.
On the other hand, The Philippine Inquirer wrote that Thailand's Distance
Learning Foundation is positioned as the Cyber Education model for the
Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). It started in 1995 when the
Distance Learning Foundation and the King's Wang Klaikangwon School started a
project to broadcast live class lectures for 15 channels. There is one for
grades 1 to 12 and three other channels for vocational, university classes and
teacher training. The broadcasts are transmitted via satellite. It was
originally planned to address the lack of teachers in the kingdom and at the
same time to ensure that students are taught in a uniform way. In its present
form, the program also reaches overseas Thais to keep them rooted in their
culture. The system in Thailand uses the Direct to Home or DTH technology, which
is also available in the Philippines. Thailand has so far spent 1 billion baht
(about US$31 million) for the program.
The Philippine Inquirer further revealed that Thailand’s Distance Learning
Foundation is keen on donating a satellite receiver set to the Philippines'
DepEd which hopes to start a bilateral cooperation on cyber education. The
satellite receiver set would enable the DepEd to capture the same live lectures
broadcast to Thai schools for free under the "One Class, One Channel' project.
Moreover, the Philippine Star reported that the Thai government invited
officials of the DepEd to observe Thailand's satellite TV project for schools.
An initial observation from DepEd officials who witnessed the implementation of
the project in Thailand said that Philippine schools could implement the program
for 20-40 minutes only per day. Nevertheless, the Thai government is still
willing to help the Philippines implement the program.
DepEd Secretary Jesli Lapus said that the Cyber Ed Project would partially solve
the shortage in books and teachers. The program would initially include 3,000
schools but would exclude those that are in first and second-class cities. Each
grade and year level will have its own channel and will cover all subjects in
the curriculum with each subject consisting of a 20-minute interactive computer
lecture and 40-minute classroom lecture. Lapus disclosed that many private
companies whose line of business is in information technology would have an
avenue to extend their assistance to the community through this program.
Director Lorenzo Mateo, who manages the Cyber Education Project, said in The
Sunday Times that “the Cyber Ed Project is the answer to the problems of lack of
learning and instructional materials for students and costly teacher training.
It thought of also as a solution to the late transmission to remote areas of new
policies and memorandums discussing new regulations from the DepEd central
office to the different regional offices and the schools themselves…and that
public schools suffer from lack of relevant instructional and learning materials
and rely heavily on textbooks. Also, the work of training close to 500,000
public school teachers to become experts in a single subject takes years and is
costly, with DepEd allotting an average of P5,000 for every teacher.”
“The cyber education project of DepEd will dramatically improve the delivery of
quality basic education through ICT to thousands of public schools in remote
barangays,” said President Arroyo during the Corporate Social Responsibility
Expo 2007 on July 16 (The Sunday Times).
Unfortunately, sometime in September 2007, the $460-M Cyber Education deal
between the Philippine government and China was marred by political chaos in the
Philippines. After a month of uncertainty, Trade Secretary Peter Favila, as
divulged by the Philippine Inquirer, announced that President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo
did not scrap DepEd’s P26.48-billion Cyber Education Project.
As always, public opinion is divided on this matter. Supporters of DepEd’s Cyber
Ed Project like Mr. Conrado R. Banal III wrote at the Philippine Inquirer that
“the project would use technology to save our education system, which our
neighbors have been using for more than 10 years now. Thailand for instance!” He
claimed that “the satellite system would have allowed a teacher at the
Philippine Science High School who has doctorate degree in Physics to give a
lecture of 20 minutes a day to all the physics students in all public schools in
the country.” He further added that “If the project has flaws, the answer is to
correct them. If some people are making money out of it, the solution is simply
to shoot them.”
Focusing on the importance of Cyber Education through television, Banal wrote:
In the past 13 years, the ABS-CBN Foundation, together with the Department of
Education, has been producing education TV shows for elementary school subjects
such as mathematics, science and English. They were just 20-minute shows, shown
in almost 8,000 schools nationwide.
Recently, the foundation documented the results of those TV education shows. It
used two schools in a validation test, assigning one as the experimental school
that used the TV shows, and the other as the control school that did not use the
program.
As expected the students in the experimental schools got significantly higher
grades in the tests than those in the control school.
In science subjects, moreover, the grades of the students in the experimental
schools increased by 8 percentage points after three months of educational TV
shows.
Jenny Rose Olfindo , a university student, though not in favor of the Cyber Ed
program commented:
The advantages of television education cannot be denied. Regular television
programs are enriched with entertaining visualizations, making it easier for the
viewer to process the information he acquires from them. One does not
necessarily have to have a cable to access different channels. There is always
an antenna, no matter how bad the reception is, to back up. News, movies, soap
operas and all other kinds of programs are only a few clicks on the remote
control. Given the relative importance of and exposure in television, it is not
surprising that the government used this medium to address the poor education
quality in the country. A 12-channel television network specifically focused on
the five subject areas would be a big leap in television programming amidst
commercialization and advertising issues if the program is pursued.
Surprisingly, it seemed like there are more voices that are against or dubious
of DepEd’s Cyber Education Project. The Alliance of Concerned Teachers provided
specific details and situations to refute DepEd’s claims:
• no studies on effectivity of live TV-based instruction in basic education
• real school situation:
- District, Sarangani School, Glan
879 students, 27 teachers, 10 classrooms,
268 desks/chairs
1:32 teacher-pupil ratio
1:88 classroom-student ratio
3.28 pupil seating ratio
- 1 TV every 219 students
impossible to provide for all grade levels simultaneously
clustering scheme to pad the figures
if implemented, means displacement of pupils in 11,176 schools
• No mention whatsoever of maintenance costs
- Deped EDPITAF Director Jess Mateo: LGUs will be asked to get
funding from their Special Education Fund (SEF) for the maintenance of the
project.
• Philippine Administrative Network Project
- Php 411 million, French gov’t loan, completed in 2001; uses same
VSAT technology as CEP
- Connects Office of the Press Secretary, PIA, NBN (TV), and other related
offices
- “dust magnets:” “Today, the PANP system is barely used because ‘there’s no
MOOE (maintenance and operations funds)’ to keep it running…”
• Overprice
Philippine Business for Education (PBED):
- CEP multimedia classroom @ Php 479,000
- Gearing up for Interconnectivity and Learning to Assist Schools (GILAS) @ Php
300,000 (10 personal computers, one server, one printer, one LAN, one year free
Internet connection)
- Knowledge Channel @ P100,000-P130,000 per institution
• It fails to address the roots of the problems in basic education.
- high dropouts, declining completion, low achievement levels; declining status
of teachers
- chronic underspending on education, prioritization of debt payments and
military spending
- general economic crisis
- investing in technology, not people
• It lacks transparency.
- Official Development Assistance (ODA) from China (3% over 10 years)
- Contract signed in the presence of PGMA on April 21, 2007 in Boao, - - China
together with the NBN and other projects
- Original contracts were “stolen” and subsequently reconstituted.
The Philippine Star divulged that in the 11-page PBED paper on the project, it
was noted that the DepEd has quoted an excessively high price for the so-called
multi-media classrooms to be set up in 37,794 of the more than 42,000 public
schools all over the country. The nominal cost set by DepEd for one multi-media
classroom was said to be P479,000. PBED revealed that the nominal cost of
outfitting a multi-media classroom in each school (two PCs, four television
sets, one printer, one send/receive antenna) is roughly P479,000 and by any
estimate, that appears to be excessive. The study pointed out that in two
similar projects undertaken by private groups with DepEd to provide digital
education using technology to certain schools, the costs were notably lower. One
of the two programs was the Gearing up for Interconnectivity and Learning to
Assist Schools (GILAS) program launched in 2003 that was intended to connect
public high schools that already have computer laboratories or classrooms to the
Internet. GILAS provides an Internet-connected school environment for P300,000
per school, which already included 10 personal computers, one server, one
printer, one local area network arrangement, and a year of free Internet
connection. The Knowledge Channel program to equip certain schools with
education through one-way education television programs, meanwhile, only costs
P100,000-P130,000 per institution.
Rony Diaz, a columnist of the Manila Times had this inquiry:
Is cyber education suitable for basic education? If the measures of effective
learning are understanding and retention, how does Secretary Lapus know that
these outcomes can be achieved by CEP? Related questions concerning teacher
training, school planning, the right blending of traditional and new methods
should also be asked. The use of technology to improve basic education should be
encouraged. However, the technology should be appropriate and affordable.
Patricia Evangelista of the Philippine Inquirer had this observation:
The CEP proposes to deliver education through the sophisticated mechanisms of
satellites, television and computers to Filipino classrooms. Without the
classrooms, without the teachers, without the electric sockets to plug in the
thousands of computers and televisions that have to be bought on taxpayers’
money, the CEP proposal appears to be crafted for an entirely different country.
At the moment, 51 percent of Filipinos have had only elementary education. Only
14.3 percent of rural poor Filipinos graduate from high school or have higher
educational attainment. Even with multilateral and bilateral institutions
pouring in millions into textbook development, stories of defective and
substandard textbooks have made it into the news. It is patently obvious that
reforms are necessary in many areas of public education—and investment in
satellite technology is not only unsuited to the problem, it will be done at the
expense of thousands of students possibly going to new classrooms. Not to
mention the effectiveness of the program—how can computers and televisions be
effective teachers to a class of 50, especially if real teachers are either
unable or not present to apply television lessons to the individual difficulties
of students?
A blog on the Cyber Ed project was written by Dong Calmada who openly expressed
opposition of the project and thus gave these recommendations:
1. Give a full accounting of its ICT projects, including their impact.
2. Have clear guidelines on how the project will be implemented, including
procurement of equipment and the software applications that will be used. The
guidelines must be clear about open standards, including the software source
codes and document formats.
3. Come up with a feasibility study, which should include DepEd’s capacity to
implement the project as well as the project’s assumptions and risk analysis.
Unless the abovementioned are done, the CEP will be another scam in Philippine
history. And no one will bear the brunt but the tax-paying Filipino citizens,
rich or poor.
Finally, Martin Perez, an educator, had this reminder:
Moreover, a school is not just a building, with rooms full of books and chairs.
It is also an integral part of a community, especially in rural areas. Local
government units must sustain communities where children stay in school. There
must be water, electricity and food. The mere fact that a lot of schools in our
country lack these most basic necessities raises the question of how responsive,
practical and responsible CEP can be.
All of the above important information and points for discussion were collected
from various online articles, columns, blogs, studies and reports. It is hoped
that this compilation has objectively presented the advantages and disadvantages
of the Cyber Education Project of the Philippine government and public opinions
on the pressing issues relating to it.
- Abel Morales Cadias
Online References:
Alliance of Concerned Teachers. “Bakit Nating Tutulan ang Cyber Education
Project ng DepEd at Malacanang?”
http://www.bloggerskapihan.com/wpcontent/uploads/bk2/ACT%20cyber%20education%20project%20Oct%202007.pdf
Banal III, Conrado. 2007. “Who’s afraid of education hi-tech tools?”
http://business.inquirer.net/money/columns/view_article.php?article_id=92394
Calmada, Dong. 2007. “Cyber Education Project: The best response to challenges
in Philippine education?”
http://activism102.wordpress.com/2007/09/21/cyber-education-project-the-best-response-to-challenges-in-philippine-education/
Department of Education, Philippines. 2007. “The Cyber Education Project.”
http://www.deped.gov.ph/cpanel/uploads/issuanceImg/CyberED%2018.IX.07_files/frame.htm
Department of Education, Philippines. 2007. “Cyber Ed to boost quality education
for all.”
http://www.deped.gov.ph/updates/updateslinks.asp?id=182
Diaz, Rony V. 2007. “Is cyber education worth the money?”
http://www.manilatimes.net/national/2007/june/03/yehey/opinion/20070603opi2.html
Elchico, Alvin. 2007. “Thailand vows to help RP’s Cyber-ed program.”
http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/storypage.aspx?StoryId=92712
Evangelista, Patricia. 2007. “Assuming that”.
http://opinion.inquirer.net/inquireropinion/columns/view_article.php?article_id=90145
Hicap, Jonathan M. 2007. “How CEP will serve entire archipelago’s school
system.”
http://www.manilatimes.net/national/2007/aug/19/yehey/top_stories/20070819top2.html
Olchondra, Riza. 2007. “Illiteracy more costly than education.”
http://services.inquirer.net/express/07/11/05/html_output/xmlhtml/20071104-98805-xml.html
Olfindo, Jenny Rose. 2007. “Substitutes.”
http://www.malaya.com.ph/aug24/edreader.htm
Perez, Martin. 2007. “Why I am NOT excited about the Cyber Education Project?”
http://sirmartin.wordpress.com/2007/09/16/why-i-am-not-excited-about-the-cyber-education-project/
Sun Star Manila. 2007. “Cyber education now offered to students.”
http://www.sunstar.com.ph/static/man/2007/06/20/feat/cyber.education.now.offered.to.students.html
Ubac Michael Lim and Esplanada Jerry E. 2007. “ $460-M Cyber Education deal not
scrapped.”
http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/breakingnews/nation/view_article.php?article_id=92399
Zhiting, Zhu. 2004. “The Development and Applications of eLearning Technology
Standards in China.”
http://www.ijcim.th.org/v12n2/pdf/p100-104-Zhu-Zhiting-elearning%20in%20China.pdf
|
