On the Bridge Program
I posted yesterday an article I got from inq7.net. It is about the newest gig of the government, specifically the DepEd, the Brigde Program.
Personally, I don't see any benefits that student and parents would get from the said program. I also don't understand the rationale, if there is, behind the program. Here are the reasons why:
First, the quality of education in the Philippines cannot be uplifted by just adding another year of schooling. What quality? Here are some facts: based from the High School Readiness Test the the DepEd gave last school year, only 50% of the approximated 1.4 million student who took the exam passed. However, these about 700,000 students passed on the basis of only 30% passing grade. If high-standards, 75% passing grade, was considered in the test, only 0.52% of the 1.4M students passed. So what does this say? It is very true that the quality of education in the Philippines is very low. To change and uplift the quality of education, raise the quality of the six elementary years. Adding another year does not guarantee more competent students.
Another point, the Bridge program is a way of the government to pass its responsibility of high-quality basic education to parents and students. The government is finding an easy way out to its responsibilities. By saying that the addition of another year would raise the quality of education, the government sneaks of its responsibilities to raise the quality of the original six years in elementary. I very much think that it is cheaper to add another year than to revolutionize the original six years. Also, the additional year is basically another financial burden to parents.
So far, the Bridge Program is an option for the parents to choose. However, this should not be the case. The Bridge Program should be scrapped.
Personally, I don't see any benefits that student and parents would get from the said program. I also don't understand the rationale, if there is, behind the program. Here are the reasons why:
First, the quality of education in the Philippines cannot be uplifted by just adding another year of schooling. What quality? Here are some facts: based from the High School Readiness Test the the DepEd gave last school year, only 50% of the approximated 1.4 million student who took the exam passed. However, these about 700,000 students passed on the basis of only 30% passing grade. If high-standards, 75% passing grade, was considered in the test, only 0.52% of the 1.4M students passed. So what does this say? It is very true that the quality of education in the Philippines is very low. To change and uplift the quality of education, raise the quality of the six elementary years. Adding another year does not guarantee more competent students.
Another point, the Bridge program is a way of the government to pass its responsibility of high-quality basic education to parents and students. The government is finding an easy way out to its responsibilities. By saying that the addition of another year would raise the quality of education, the government sneaks of its responsibilities to raise the quality of the original six years in elementary. I very much think that it is cheaper to add another year than to revolutionize the original six years. Also, the additional year is basically another financial burden to parents.
So far, the Bridge Program is an option for the parents to choose. However, this should not be the case. The Bridge Program should be scrapped.
