Comparative Analysis of RBEC and K-12 Curriculum

Name: Laiza May A. Lampad Professor: Dr. Antonio P. Talamayan Course: PhD 235 Specialized Curriculum Studies Comparative Analysis of BEC 2002 and K-12 Curriculum of Grade 7 English I.

What is curriculum? The term curriculum has been derived from a Latin word „Currere’ which means a „race

course‟ or a runway on which one runs to reach a goal. Hence, when used in the academe, curriculum is the instructional and educative program by following which the pupils achieve their goals, ideals and aspirations in life. In addition, Morroe defines curriculum as “all those activities which are utilized by the school to attain the aims of education.” Also, Crow and Crow said that curriculum includes all the learners‟ experiences (in or outside the school community) which helped them become developed emotionally, socially, spiritually and morally. Thus, it should be viewed as various forms of activities that are grand expressions of human spirit and that are of the greatest and most permanent significance to the wide world (T.P. Nunn). Nevertheless, it should not be forgotten that there are traditionalists who first defined curriculum way different from the progressivists above. If the word curriculum is defined as a written document or a plan of action to accomplish goals; a body of subjects or a subject matter prepared by teachers in order for the students to learn; a course of study; syllabus, lesson plan, or a field of study – then these definitions come from the traditional point of view (Bilbao et al., 2008). Therefore, any school without a curriculum is like a car with no destination at all. It is just wasting its resources for achieving nothing because, first, it has no sense of direction to where it should be going. A school without curriculum is like a human being with no heart, too. It simply and undeniably cannot stand and survive. In the Philippines, it cannot be denied that curriculum has gone a major change from the time formal education has been first introduced in the country. It is but necessary to recall the brief

history of Philippine Education Curriculum before one can produce a comparative analysis of two curriculums. II.

History of Philippine Curriculum.

It is known that Filipinos put high regard for education, which they view as a primary opportunity for upward social and economic mobility. From the beginning of United States colonial rule, when they underscored on mass public education, Filipinos adopted the American ideal of a democratic society in which one could get ahead over accomplishment of a good education. Because of this, Filipinos did not stick on one formula to developing and crafting a curriculum that best adheres to the Philippine Constitution as stated below. These goals have been translated into educational policies and further elaborated as the basic (elementary and secondary) education framework. All educational institutions shall inculcate patriotism and nationalism, foster love of humanity, respect for human rights, appreciation of the role of national heroes in the historical development of the country, teach the rights and duties of citizenship, strengthen ethical and spiritual values, develop moral character and personal discipline, encourage critical and creative thinking, broaden scientific and technological knowledge and promote vocational efficiency. Section 3(2), Article XIV of the Philippine Constitution

Before the birth of K-12 Basic Education Curriculum in the Philippines, the country had gone through different curriculums. In secondary, there was New Secondary Education Curriculum (1991-2002), and Revised Basic Education Curriculum (2002-2010). True to its definition that the best curriculum is the one those changes, the Department of Education never stopped from researching and studying what fits for its learners. Accordingly, the New Secondary Education Curriculum, along with the implementation of National Elementary School Curriculum (1984-2002), was considered as the first research based curriculum in the country. In other words these curriculums were not implemented for no reason and no basis. The objective of NSEC was to improve performance in Science, Math and Communication; and it focuses on process, values development, productivity and technology. While it aimed at improving the performance of students in three subjects mentioned above, the

old curriculum gave an equal number of 400 minutes to the eight learning areas to be taught daily to the students from First Year to Fourth Year. Learning Area 1. Values Education 2. English 3. Mathematics 4. Araling Panlipunan 5. Science and Technology 6. PE Health and Music 7. Filipino 8. Technology and Home Economics

Number of Minutes/Day 400 minutes/ Day 400 minutes/ Day 400 minutes/ Day 400 minutes/ Day 400 minutes/ Day 400 minutes/ Day 400 minutes/ Day 400 minutes/ Day

With this curriculum, it cannot be denied that there were flaws and imperfections. Thus, resulting, again, to the introduction and implementation of Revised Basic Education Curriculum. To name a few: Studies/Researches National Secondary Assessment Test (NSAT) Aurora Roldan, “Present Realities In Reading Education”

I.

Findings/Recommendations A mean percentage score of only 50% was achieved. Our students are deficient in Reading ability. They Have not developed the higher order thinking skills even at Grade V. There is the danger of reverting to illiteracy if the students dropped out before completing Grade VI.

What is BEC? Basic Education Curriculum of 2002 or Revised Basic Education of 2002 was based on a 16-

year study (starting in 1986) according to, then DeEd Secretary Raul Roco. Upon the recommendations of the Philippine Commission on Educational Reforms (PCER), Executive Order No. 46 was passed for the implementation of RBEC 2002. The BEC 2002 has a vision that the Department of Education envisions every learner to be functionally literate, equipped with life skills, appreciative of the arts and sports, and imbued with desirable values of a person who is makabayan, makatao, makabansa, at maka-Diyos. While its mission was to provide quality basic education that is equitable accessible to all, and to lay the foundation for lifelong learning and service for the common good.

“The restructuring of the curriculum is part of an ongoing effort to improve the quality of learning. We are focusing on the basics of improving literacy and numeracy while inculcating values across learning areas to make it dynamic” (Raul Roco, 2002). He furthered that RBEC is not a sweeping change of the elementary and secondary curricula (NESC & NSEC). The objectives of secondary education are threefold: 1. Continue the general education started in elementary. 2. Prepare the learners for college. 3. Prepare the learners for the world of work. Thus, RBEC 2002 has only four core subjects (English, Filipino, Mathematics and Science), while one experiential area that encompasses Araling Panlipunan, MAPEH, TLE, and Edukasyon sa Pagpapahalaga. RBEC Time Allotment

II.

Why RBEC? Studies indicate that an overcrowded curriculum and its insufficient relevance to the diverse

contexts of our learners hinder or delay the development of lifelong learning skills. Hence, crafting RBEC 2002 to decongest the previous curriculum. The restructured curriculum makes use of innovative, interdisciplinary, and integrative modes of instructional delivery, whenever these modes are possible and appropriate. Accordingly, there was an aim to greater emphasis on helping every learner become a successful reader; emphasis on interactive/ collaborative learning approaches; emphasis on the

use of integrative learning approaches; teaching of values in all learning areas; development of self-reliant and patriotic citizens; and development of creative and critical thinking skills. During the implementation of RBEC, curriculum implementers were able outline the easiest possible paths for creating a severly under-educated students as to follow the current trend, its disadvantage is that it allowed the teachers union to control over this and education in general for 40 years; producing the result of virtually illiterate children after graduation. RBEC introduced most of the scientific and geographical knowledge that is critical to young people. However, most of the curriculum still focuses on white collar jobs and do not create the atmosphere for entrepreneurship. As to English, it is one of the learning areas that develop the learners confi dence and ability in using language for effective communication and critical thinking in the real world. This basic tool subject develops these macro skills: listening, speaking, reading, writing, and thinking in English. Through the English subject, learners were expected to access varied information and creatively use them in spoken and written forms; communicate fluently and accurately orally and in writing, for a variety of purposes and different social and academic contexts at their level while carrying out activities in everyday life.

The above is one curriculum for English taken as one learning area and the genera topics being discussed in each year level. It can be noted, then, that Grammar was given great consideration. However, literature topics were divided according to each year level. This should be noted well because later in the K-12 Curriculum, there has been a great change. III.

K-12 Curriculum Comparison How and why curriculum developers had come to decide adapting to K-12 Curriculum?

What changes were observed and manifested?

Just a little background of the latest curriculum, K-12 means Kindergarten and 12 years elementary and secondary education. The secondary education that is only a 4-year long has been added to more years as senior high school. The English subject in Grade 7, formerly First Year High School in the old curriculum, is more organized and specific when it comes to its competencies and topics to be attained by the learners.

Because K-12 Curriculum follows a spiral progression of the topics in every learning areas, the English subject does not only tackle Grammar and Philippine Literature unlike the RBEC 2002. But, it covers all those literature (Philippine, Afro-Asian, American, and World) in every year level. However, the level of difficulty varies. As to its time allotment in each week, the English subject in K-12 curriculum does not get a 60-90 minute classroom discussion per day. Instead, it only has 30-50 minutes every day. Also, the learning area does not have a five-hours a week classroom teaching discussion, but a fourhour discussion a week. Obviously, curriculum developers lessen the time students spend in classroom per week of each learning area.

One of the many reasons why there has been a shift of curriculum is to decongest what has been considered congested curriculum in the past. According to the http://k12philippines.com/ site, there are six reasons why the Philippine government has shifted to K-12 Curriculum. First, the Philippines is the only country in Asia with 10 years in the basic education; second, poor quality of education; third, there were too many non-practical subjects; fourth, high school graduates were never prepared for college education; fifth, the graduates were too young for labor force; and lastly, Philippine graduates were never recognized globally.