|
By Josefina S. Patron, Ed.D., Special To The
Manila Times
Editor’s note: The previous parts detailed the
flaws that technology and education experts found in the Cyber-Ed
Project. Assistant Secretary Jesus Mateo of the Department of
Education presented merits of the project at the roundtable
organized by The Manila Times College.
Last of four parts
WHY not scale up successful projects of the
Education department instead of going into a very costly project
like CyberEd
Mentioned were the Third Elementary Education
Project and the Basic Education Assistance for Mindanao (BEAM),
which were implemented in some of the poorest provinces in the
country and did not
involve large amounts of investments but led to
clear measurable improvements
in learning and governance.
Education department officials replied that
their frame of mind is not to reinvent the wheel. There are bits and
pieces of successes but these should be seen as a seamless program
to be mainstreamed into the system. They should not be seen in
isolation of other successful projects.
Then why not do a pilot first?
Why not do a pilot first instead of going
national immediately? This was strongly recommended at the workshop.
Peter V. Perfecto, associate director of the Philippine Business for
Education and senior vice-president of the Phinma Education Network,
said the business community would support such pilot and will also
support generating resources to scale up what has worked. Glenn
Sumido, chief of staff of the office of the Education secretary,
said the department is open to ideas.
Dr. Nilda R. Sunga, vice-president for academic
affairs of the Global City Innovative College and formerly with the
Philippine Normal University, asked: “What prompted DepEd to think
of this project? Was needs analysis done? Were consultations made?
Why CyberEd when there are so many existing programs that answer
existing problems?”
To these questions, Sumido replied with
refreshing candor: “DepEd decided to take advantage of the offer
of Chinese technology and Chinese money.” He said CyberEd is now
in the hands of Fr. Bienvenido Nebres, chairman of the Presidential
Task Force on Education, who will, according to Education Secretary
Jesli Lapus, “lead in the transparent implementation of CyberEd.”
Sumido added that, depending on inputs from stakeholders, CyberEd
may take on a different form and shape.
Maybe Sumido’s response provides an answer to
the questions posed by the conveners of the roundtable: Should the
Philippines go into CyberEd now? Should the project be rejected?
Should a modified version be considered?
Quo vadis CyberEd?
It cannot be denied that a radical system-wide
reform is needed in our educational system. The educators,
educational technologists, private sector and media people present
at the roundtable were only too aware of the vast potential of
information communication technology (ICT) in transforming the
teaching learning process. Despite the many critical questions he
posed regarding the Cyber-Ed Project, Dr. Allan Bernardo of De La
Salle University applauds the political will of the current
Education department administration to push a project in the scale
of CyberEd. But at the same time, he doubted the department’s
capacity to oversee a project of this scale given observations on
its track record in implementing large-scale endeavors and
technology-related projects.
Thus, Dr. Bernardo suggested that if the
Education department will push through with CyberEd, it has to do
much homework. It needs to sustain and augment efforts to address
other existing problems related to the curriculum, teacher
preparation and working con–ditions, assessment of students’
learning, and the provision of other basic educational inputs.
In this connection, Victoria L. Tinio, executive
director of the Foundation for Information Technology for Education,
commented that it could take a lot of resources to effectively
respond to the issues related to CyberEd such as time, content
development, imple–mentation support, etc. She asked if the loan
application or approval process is in the stage where some radical
change can be introduced in the project cost. Tinio said studies
have shown that of the total cost of technical projects, the upfront
cost, which is principally infrastructure only, constitutes 20
percent to 25 percent of the project implementation cost of a
project over a lifetime of the technology. Dr. Torres also suggested
the project needs to put more funds into the development of
courseware rather than infrastructure.
To these queries, Sumido replied that the cost
of development of courseware and teachers’ training is supposed to
be funded by the national budget and that there is only a small
portion of this as part of the loan from China.
On introducing changes in the project costs,
Sumido said the Education department will await proposals of Nebres’
task force and that will be the time when the department will go
back to negotiate the costing.
Tinio also asked if there will be simultaneous
development of courseware when the initial phase of putting the
infrastructure in place would have been completed and if there will
be sufficient courseware to use.
To this, Sumido replied that as soon as the
project loan and other documents are signed, the first thing that
the Education department should do is undertake a project
implementation planning and list activities to be done before
procuring a single material or importing any from China. He said the
department is gathering all the materials available to determine
what it has pertaining to hardware and software content, etc. and
see where the gaps are. Sumido added that the Education department
will be conducting reorientation and training of ICT coordinators,
and divisional and regional ICT units.
Capacity building
The roundtable can, in effect, be said to have
contributed to what might now be happening: a rethinking of the
Cyber-Ed Project as designed particularly with regard to the four
project components—infra–structure, courseware, training and
quality assurance—and, hopefully, a rethinking of the seeming
overdependence on Chinese technology for the infrastructure
component and applications as well as on Tsinghua University as the
department’s major partner in the implementation of the project.
It is hoped that the project designers will have
as their underlying framework what Dr. Bernardo stressed as “the
vast transformation powers of ICT in redefining the goals and
processes of learning in schools and linking these goals and
processes to learning in communities and in ways that respond to the
high-knowledge requirements of a globalized knowledge community.”
This, Dr. William Torres, Mozcom president, also
underscored “that when utilized effectively, ICT should be seen as
an enabler for efficiency and effectiveness, new business models and
opportunities, tran–sparency and empowerment.”
Based on the roundtable recommendations, the
primordial concern of the Education department on CyberEd would now
appear to be to prepare for it, so that CyberEd will truly be the
“best option for educational reform.” This will mean
capacity-building so that in CyberEd will be realized the “radical
system-wide reform” so necessary to advance pedagogy, training,
governance, against which, suggests Dr. Alexander Flor, the project
should be evaluated. And capacity-building to effectively manage a
project of this magnitude, the cost of which is deemed staggering by
many observers.
Maybe the Education department could look
pointedly at the suggestion made at the roundtable discussion by Dr.
Ester B. Ojena, director of the Science Education Institute at the
Department of Science and Technology, to convene an education summit
to develop a roadmap for education particularly in the use of ICT
and to plan for every component of CyberEd.
Ramon R. Tuazon, president of the Asian
Institute of Journalism and Communication and roundtable open-forum
moderator, summed up the discussion by saying: “We’re
interested, and we want to know more about the CyberEd Project. And,
it is too important to be left solely to DepEd.”
It can be said the participants in the
roundtable see the possibilities of the CyberEd Project in
Philippine education, but they also aver that it must be done
properly and well.
At the roundtable, it was evident that the
Education department representatives were listening. It also seemed
that the department was willing to go back to the drawing board and
undertake participatory planning on the CyberEd with all
stakeholders who are truly con–cerned about how the country’s
educational system will go in the years to come.
-- With Belina Sb. Capul And Grace V. Agoncillo
Dr. Josefina S. Patron is a consultant to
National Broadcasting Network. Belina SB. Capul is staff director
for the Management Information Systems, Philippine Information
Agency. Grace V. Agoncillo is a staff director for Human Resource
Development, Philippine Information Agency. Patron, Capul and
Agoncillo were members of the executive committee of the November 9,
2007, roundtable on the Cyber-Ed Project convened by The Manila
Times College in coordination with the UP National Institute for
Science and Mathematics Education Development.
|
