When what’s-his-name congressman came up with the suggestion a couple of weeks ago to extend education by two years, I posted an update on Twitter that what we need is better quality education and not an additional two years. I thought a short comment like that was all that the suggestion deserved — I so believed that nothing would come out of it.
Today, weeks later, what’s-his-name’s idea is all over the news.
I’m almost sure that the suggestion is something that owners of private elementary and secondary schools would welcome. Two more years means more earnings for them. But, aside from them, who else stand to benefit from a lengthier education?
Not the students, for sure. Off the bat, I can already think of three reasons — and I didn’t even need to exert any effort.
First, consider the shortage of facilities in public schools. And I mean shortage both in quality and quantity. Not enough classrooms, not enough desks, not enough books in the library (in some public schools, the library is just a library in name), not enough laboratory equipment, not enough teachers.
Picture a typical public school with finite resources — a perimeter, a specific number of classrooms in a specific number of buildings occupying a specific physical space. Let’s say that the school has a thousand students (and, sheesh, that’s a modest estimate when we talk of public schools but since this is just an example, let’s stick with a thousand students), half of whom are in the day sections and the other half in the afternoon sections (let’s not forget that some public high schools have evening sections). Let’s say the same number of students per level. We all know that with so many subjects, it is very difficult to cram everything within half the day. But there’s no choice. Either that or prevent half of the usual student population from enrolling. So, we already have a kind of half-baked education.
If two more years are added, without an increase in the per level ratio, there would be an additional five hundred students in that school. Again, that’s being conservative because with the rate of population growth, the number of new students every year does get higher. It’s a progression (at least in numbers because you can also look at it as a regression from the context of the ability to provide and acquire quality education). If there are a hundred first graders this year, chances are, there will be a hundred twenty next year. Congress snubbed the Reproductive Health Bill, didn’t it, so the population growth rate is not likely to go down any time soon.
Where will you put the additional students — the ones who should have graduated already? Schools are already crammed and we make the situation worse?
Second, where will the additional teachers come from? If there are no additional teachers (they get fewer every year as they continue to leave to work abroad), then, the current teachers will have to take in additional work load. What happens to overworked teachers? Do they become more or less effective? That’s a no brainer, isn’t it?
Third, what benefits can a student derive from two additional years if the same curriculum would only be extended? If two additional years means a mere repetition of what he has heard during the last ten years, what’s the point? In other words, if a student hasn’t learned to read and write and do his math after ten years in school, will he learn them in another two years if the same books and teaching methods are employed? Will he learn them in another two years in a school with the same dilapidated science lab and hole-in-the-wall library?
Fore sure, a suggestion to extend education by two years comes with logistics. Surely, there’s a budget proposal somewhere for the construction of more classrooms etcetera.
Now why can’t that money go into the upgrade of existing facilities — better libraries, better laboratories, free and better food for public school students, and better training for teachers with better pay too so they don’t get tempted to seek employment overseas as domestic helpers? Why can’t that money fund research to develop a better primary and secondary school curriculum that is more attuned to today’s realities? IN SHORT, WHY NOT MAKE THE QUALITY OF EDUCATION BETTER?
UPDATE on August 11, 2010 @ 11.09 a.m.
Below: A Facebook discussion on another perspective on the suggestion of extending basic education in the Philippines. Some names truncated for privacy reasons.
It never ceases to amaze me how the mind of a bureaucrat works.
They have this sex education program for elementary and high school and did not consider who will teach this sensitive topic to those students.
Now we have this extending the education for additional two years. And they will not tell us how this one can be accomplished. They did not even support it with verifiable/convincing data on why they want to do it except to insinuate that today’s STUDENTS are totally different from those during the Philippine’s education golden years. (Or is it the quality of education and the kind of the discipline they are teaching the students?)
Just like this DOST’s bureaucrat Montejo who justified his sacking of the PAGASA chief because his qualification did not fit the future requirement of the job. (Did I mishear it or has he misspoken?)
really. This kind of news really makes my head hurt. It really doesn’t benefit anyone except those whose pockets are going to be filled with the tuition fees. They really should research stuff first before putting anything into action or in this case, in writing. kind of like a feasibility studies.
I say, let the government, the DepEd to be precise, present its case first, then the discourse on this proposal would be much interesting to follow or even join in. Though right off the bat, a lot of folks are against the idea.
i wanted to hit the tv when this came out on the news. this is like trying to heal a sick man by prolonging his stay in the hospital but without giving him any medicines. they are not treating the REAL problems at all, as what you have mentioned — shortage of facilities, teachers, etc. it takes simple common sense to realize that these present problems should be dealt with FIRST, before a proposal like this can even be made. and i don’t think the additional two years will make our graduates more marketable to international firms (which is one of the deped’s arguments). yeah, right. more dropouts and out-of-school youths is more like it.
I’m wondering where the proponent is basing his proposal. Is there a credible study that says the additional 2 years will be more beneficial than a re-write of the current curricula, upgrade of facilities and further training of teachers?
i think the extension will consist of some technical/vocational skills training that will supposedly allow high school graduates to get gainful employment even if they don’t get to college. in a way, this can be beneficial. but the problems in education in this country is far too intense to be simply addressed by an addition of two years. notwithstanding the added burden to the students and their parents who can hardly get them through the current 10 years of school.
and come on, a review of the current curriculum should be prioritized. i pity the students now who need to memorize impossible math and science formulas without these having any direct value to them. being in school now is much more difficult than it was some 10 or 20 years ago.
well said, ms connie! *appplause*
for suggesting what he suggested, it is what’s-his-name who needs extended education and let him have continuing education the rest of his life LoL!
I do not see anything wrong with additional two years of school in order to prepare the children to the ever increasing requirements of the job market if it is well-funded and organized. However, they should put a little bit of flexibility into the system to enable the students to nurture his or her individual skills. The current system is not only underfunded – it is rigid in a sense that they force outdated curriculum down their throats making it difficult for them to realize his or her potential to create more employment opportunities in the future. In other words, it stifles creation of knowledge-based capital and investment that drives the labor market to push forward.
Please see the update in the entry.
That reminds me of Sir Ken Robinson’s position that education, globally for the past century, is a relic of the Industrial Revolution. But education is — or can be — more than that. It ought to be maximizing potentials of individuals, finding innate talents and honing them rather than treating them as commodities for the job market.
I remembered back in high school, we have guidance councilors who would oftentimes recommend us to take elective subjects that you might be interested in since I needed 6 more academic units/credits to go before graduation. After passing all the required subjects needed to get a high school diploma during my 11th grade (3rd year equivalent), I was given recommendations by my guidance councilor to take business, drafting (pre- engineering), and advanced math subjects if I really like to start a career with lots of math. She also gave me the option to take media production classes, acting and writing classes if you’re into literary arts. If visual arts is your thing, they offer art programs that covers everything from painting to sculpture. If you haven’t made up your mind yet, you can take college level advanced placement classes so if you pass their exams, it will be automatically credited to your transcript when you are already in college. In the end, I ended up taking business classes.
I remembered back in high school, I did an essay about the same thing, I argued that what’s best is to allocate (I’m not sure now if I’m using the right term) students to the nearest school from their residence since proximity can also affect quality education. Imagine a 4-hour travel from home to school back and forth, 5 days a week.
Imagine gradeschoolers who have to WALK for an hour or more to school — a reality in rural areas.
We are the only country in asia (perhaps in the world) which has 10 years of basic education (even pakistan have 12 years!) and many countries do not recognize degrees earned in the Philippines even if they graduated from the supposedly TOP schools. I agree, it’s not good if the reason for adding two more years is to become more hireable abroad. Personally, I would prefer my kids to have 12 years of basic education and if I can afford it, send them abroad to study college to be more globally competitive.
In other countries, they have different approach in education. For example, students have the option to take a vocational course after 10 years or if they wanted to pursue a BS degree, they are required to attend 2 years pre-university (to complete 12 years) before entering college. This is a good approach bec the additional 2 years is only required for those who wanted to earn a BS degree. But in the Phils – kailangan BS diba – kaligayanhan ng magulang yon. Honestly, only in the Philippines that parents/ students are so concerned on getting a BS diploma. In reality, very few graduates end up in a work related to their degree due to mismatch of degrees and available opportunities. These BS graduates also don’t really end up getting hired as professionals abroad. Most of them end up as technicians, skilled or non-skilled workers not only because our education is not recognized but because technicans, skilled and other non-skilled workers are more in-demand. From experience as OFW, in other countries, they look at experience and skills before hiring a person – unlike in the phils where companies hire only graduates of TOP schools. We don’t really need 12 years of basic education to be more hireable abroad.
We need to strengthen skills development because that’s more in demand locally and abroad. I am in favor of additional 2 years but not as a mandatory requirement for all students.
Well, Nina, so far I can say that you’ve the best comment for the topic as of this time.
You’re sharing us your thought on how a 12 year basic education can be practically achieved, even though nothing on how it can be implemented, by showing us a model. (Is it Singapore?) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Education_in_Singapore
You’ve commented “Honestly, only in the Philippines that parents/ students are so concerned on getting a BS diploma”.
Yes, once they’ve graduated and passed the board of a BS course, a signboard would be nailed in the most conspicuous place in their house (inside and/or outside) bearing the name of the person and his new honorable title. This also includes registered nurses.
I haven’t checked if in Pakistan, they have this 12 years of basic education. If it is true (and can hardly believe it’s true) then why it seems to me, they’re still far far from being truly civilized (except for their nuclear weapons).
My point is,nobody can convince me we need this kind of education system (which IMO is not makeable for the foreseeable next 50 years for our country) if there are more than 50% of countries which has 12 years basic schooling in their education system are the likes of Pakistan.
I’ve worked in Singapore for four years and my last position was Senior Design Engineer of an automation/mechanization department in one of the private companies there. I did not take any engineering course and have semi-finished (read: undergrad) my higher education in TUP Drafting Tech course. I was hired based on what I can do in the position that they’ve wanted me to assume. (Even local semicon/eletronic industries and automation suppliers/machine builders have that kind of approach – education is not the primary consideration.) And I’m not an exceptional case for expats in countries which include Hong Kong and Malaysia for technical field industries.
(Caveat: Our local similar industries, when promoting key personnel – education matters most of the times. I can’t provide numbers – just basing it on my anecdotal observations.)
Going back in education. For some of us, getting the higher education in foreign first world countries is something one could be very proud of. We know that one has to be filthy rich in order to get this kind of this higher education. But not in Singapore. The joke(?) that is going around there is if one has taken his higher education in a foreign country, the probability is that that person feels he/she will fail (or has already failed) the exam to pursue his higher education of his/her choice in Singapore.
Pahabol lang -
In Singapore, if you’re a new expat technical employee/worker, most of the colleague that you’re going to work with will ask you if you’re a diploma or degree holder. If I’m not mistaken, for them, diploma holder are those polytechnic or technical school grads (which includes engineering course equivalent to our full engineering course) while degree holder are those that are higher (BS perhaps in our higher education).
All the time, my thought is that if your a BS grad, then you’re a diploma holder. Or to say it in general terms, finish any course and you’re a diploma holder.
Degree holder = diploma holder.
Just curious.
You’re right, diploma holder are those that completed vocational/technical courses and degree holders are those that completed at least a BS degree. Though in the Phils, when you say DIPLOMA – that means you’re degree holder.
I think I need to correct my statement – In Pakistan, after 10 years, they get a secondary diploma but needs additional 2 years for higher secondary diploma and to be able to enter the University. Regarding them being uncivilized, all I can say is that educated Pakistanis are okay naman.
Well you’re right, in other countries they hire you based on your skills and you can work your way up as you gain experience and skills. But here’s the thing – for example in my company since we do consulting we specifically hire ENGINEERS and SCIENTISTS – at least BS degree holders and this is where sometimes Filipinos are descriminated. I’m lucky my company didn’t really mind that I am not a westerner or that I didn’t have 12 years of basic education but many companies do mind where you got your degree. In EUROPE, degrees earned in the Phils are no longer recognized.
Granted that Philippines will adjust to the 12 years basic education, it is still not a guarantee that western countries will welcome you with open arms. Sorry, that will not happen.
The employers look at 2 things – local experience or professional test. The professional board (engineers, scientists, doctors, nurses, accountants, etc) have their own requirements and 12 years basic education is not necessary (since they allow accreditation of foreign graduates by core units).
Way back when I was still in my youth, parents used to tell their children to “study hard so that someday you can find good employment when you graduate from college…”
Today, many parents still adhere to that mindset.
I hope time will come when parents encourage their children to “study hard so that someday you will own your own business…”
That, or “do something that you love and be good at it.”
Having a business and raking in money is NOT and absolute measure of success.
“That, or “do something that you love and be good at it.”
Having a business and raking in money is NOT and absolute measure of success.” – A
I agree. However, entrepreneurs create jobs. Sana lang, may mga estudyante na “utak negosyante” at hindi “utak empleyado.”
Are you a successful entrepreneur b & w?
Entrepreneurs is not for creating jobs for others. They need somebody to make their business to run and flourish. Entrepreneurship is not for charity.
Reading the success story of successful entrepreneurs will tell you that some if not most of them failed to be a successful empleyado. It was not by design but by accident they have succeeded to be an entrepreneur. Seldom that I’ll encounter a story that a person studied, say journalism, and used that one to be a successful entrepreneur.
I can be persuaded that one choose to study architecture or law in order to meet those other rich students of the same course that could be potential future business partner. That is a planned one.
One does not have to “study” to have an “utak negosyante”.
Take the words of those drug dealers. It’s always business for them. Nothing personal.
The decision to become an entrepreneur is about CHOICE, not accident.
The thing is, the current state of education does not emphasize enough that there is that choice because of a built-in bias (a result of the mindset of generations of employees) in favor of employment.
Then, our government decided it is to its best interest to keep sending employees abroad so that their remittances can keep the economy afloat.
Who then will tell the youth that there is a CHOICE to become an entrepreneur rather than a employee?
Re: drug dealers. Why — are all drug dealers uneducated? The street punks selling shabu are mere minions. Who knows how highly educated the really big bosses are? Lots of big criminals got first rate education. Affirmed convictions in Supreme Court decisions attest to that.
Sass as per your comment (in quote) -
“The decision to become an entrepreneur is about CHOICE, not accident. ”
Most of the stories I’ve read, heard, and watched were they failed as an employee in their income and they have to find something to augment it. Eventually, finding that they can be more successful with the business and then be an entrepreneur instead. We can check the ratio on how many has succeeded and failed.
Perhaps it’;s an exception rather than a rule that somebody in his/her high school days can right away focused his/her interest in entrepreneurship. Most of those successful business persons who has studied for the purpose of business are scions of successful business persons.
What I’m saying is is what I perceived to be what is in the context of the commenter. And I would wish we could have a further discussion on this.
“The thing is, the current state of education does not emphasize enough that there is that choice because of a built-in bias (a result of the mindset of generations of employees) in favor of employment.”
IMO, that can be discussed when students are about to finish their high school. If they’re in college or universities, the assumption is that they are there to finish what hey want to be.
“Then, our government decided it is to its best interest to keep sending employees abroad so that their remittances can keep the economy afloat. ”
I’m not nit picking. But it’s not the government who has the final say(decision) in sending employees/workers abroad. If they are, they have to find those who are willing.
“Who then will tell the youth that there is a CHOICE to become an entrepreneur rather than a employee?”
It’s always advertised in media. Lucio Tan is often the role model.
“Re: drug dealers. Why — are all drug dealers uneducated? The street punks selling shabu are mere minions. Who knows how highly educated the really big bosses are? Lots of big criminals got first rate education. Affirmed convictions in Supreme Court decisions attest to that.”
I’ve commented “One does not have to “study”. to have an “utak negosyante”. Take the words of those drug dealers. It’s always business for them. Nothing personal.”
And you’ve remarked “Who knows how highly educated the really big bosses are?”:
Same with me. I don’t know. That was why my previous comment “Take the words of those drug dealers. It’s always business for them. Nothing personal.”
Perhaps they’re thinking why they’ve wasted their time in education when they can easily get tons of money in drug dealing without education.
“Most of those successful business persons who has studied for the purpose of business are scions of successful business persons.”
“Lucio Tan is often the role model.”
First of all, entrepreneurship is not the same as big business. Balut vendors, suman stall owners and market vendors are entrepreneurs. And a lot of them didn’t even finish high school. You’d be surprised at how financially comfortable market stall owners are.
So, I’ll just say it again. With an addition. It’s about CHOICE. And initiative. The majority don’t have initiative because education tells them that all they have to do is look for a job, keep it and climb up the ladder. In our culture, that spells success. You yourself prove my point when you say (twice) that entrepreneurs are former employees who failed. I think that what you consider failure as employees are the true successes because they dare to dissent from the norm.
Sass, Now we have a common point, as you’ve said –
“You yourself prove my point when you say (twice) that entrepreneurs are former employees who failed. I think that what you consider failure as employees are the true successes because they dare to dissent from the norm.”
I think the the gray area in our discussion is in my position that if they’ve seen themselves as failed employees, one of the best choice is to be an entrepreneur. That IMO is the same as they will not be entrepreneurs if they’re successful as an employee. (Perhaps “choice” is more fitting than “initiative”). On my part, maybe I’ve misused the words “design” and “accident” and I’ve misinterpreted your use of the word “choice” in its context.
BTW, I was a successful employee who got tired of doing jobs I don’t like and has availed for an early retirement option. Tried entrepreneurship and unfortunately failed. Now I’m an employee again doing the job I like most.
As always, your arguments are valid and as far as I’m concern, thought refreshing.
“Having a business and raking in money is NOT and absolute measure of success.”
Neither are they the absolute measure of happiness and self-fulfillment.
Yet, the educational system tells us that the ability to earn money as adults is the measure of success, fulfillment and self-respect. That’s why most people sneer at those who find it difficult to get employed or stay employed. As though it’s a failure. So, there must be something wrong with education if that’s what it teaches us.
Extending 2 years in the Philippine education system is a huge waste of money for the parents who are practically paying for it. The owners of private schools will be happy for this. It is also a very lame excuse for the government to put on hold students for 2 years to cover its problems in creating local job opportunities. Plus stretching the use of public school resources to the limits and dump more load to its overworked teachers.
And for what? To have comparative education with the western countries, the intended labor market. Excuse me, wake up! That is not how it works.
It is not automatic. Regardless if you have 12 years of basic education or not, US, Canada or UK will ask for your Philippine transcipt and have it verified by its accredited research company for equivalent units. I finished 4yr Philippine college course within 3 years including summer classes. In short, I had only 13 years education total (10 yrs basic plus 3 yrs college). Still, the US accrediting company give me full credits for my Philippine education to allow me to take the US Board Exam. What matters is your core units.
What a useless exercise to go through 16 years when one can do it in 13 years and become productive. What a creative bureacracy!
Oh, another wrong notion is for the transfer students from Philippines to US being behind. The truth is the student will be tested to determine ones level. So the smart ones can jump 3 years ahead.
Instead of adding more years, put advanced subjects early on so students can quickly get mastery. It is proven that a child is faster than an adult in learning multiple languages. The child’s brain is like a sponge.
Extending more years will not improve the quality unless you put quality content on that 10 years span. It is just dilly dallying on the part of the government because it has no matching jobs available for its new workforce. It is like my cousin who was aimless, took engineering for 10 years because he doesn’t like to work.
The education budget will be better spent on upgrading school facilities. improve classroom content and raise the payscale of teachers so it can get a more qualified professionals running the system.
“The education budget will be better spent on upgrading school facilities. improve classroom content and raise the payscale of teachers so it can get a more qualified professionals running the system – - Dodong
I absolutely agree. The critical period in a student’s life is in the primary grades. Building a strong foundation, i.e., reading, writing and arithmetic. Well-trained teachers mean well-educated students.
“Are you a successful entrepreneur b & w? Entrepreneurs is not for creating jobs for others. They need somebody to make their business to run and flourish. Entrepreneurship is not for charity. ” – Trosp
I’ve had my share of failures. But that’s beside the point. John Gokongwei put it more aptly with his now-famous commencement address in Ateneo.
Think about it, if there are more entrepreneurs like Henry Sy of SM, Tony Tan of Jollibee, and John Gokongwei…people who create job opportunities here, maybe, just maybe, those who prefer to be employees will stay here and not hunt for jobs overseas.
They create jobs because they’re needed to run their businesses.
It never ceases to amaze me that this food chains always hire food attendants/workers by contract. in which one of the terms of employment is it will not exceed 6 months duration. They call it creating jobs.
In my book, I call it labor exploitation.
Has anybody here have an idea of how much those food cart attendants earn for their more than ten hour work a day (and without overtime pay)? That is, working without an hour break.
It’s better than nothing, sasabihin ng iba. Or to be more classy – comrade, sacrifices have to be made…
“They create jobs because they’re needed to run their businesses…It never ceases to amaze me that this food chains always hire food attendants/workers by contract. in which one of the terms of employment is it will not exceed 6 months duration. They call it creating jobs.
In my book, I call it labor exploitation.” – Trosp
I see you’re looking at a “half-empty” glass.
B & W, how do you define half -empty glass as you’ve earlier commented in the way I look entrepreneurs exploiting the workers? Best if not by you’re own words so it would not be confusing.
I don’t know what do you mean by half-empty glass. To tell you the truth, I can’t even find its relationship with the topic that we’re discussing.
Let’s call a spade a spade. If it’s labor exploitation then it is. One does not have to sugarcoat it with the phrase “creating job”. More aptly, it should be, entrepreneurs taking advantage of the available cheap labor.
“B & W, how do you define half -empty glass as you’ve earlier commented in the way I look entrepreneurs exploiting the workers? Best if not by you’re own words so it would not be confusing.” – - Trosp
It’s basically how a person views things. Look it up.
I agree — it is exploitation. Even more important question is how they get around labor laws which prohibit such practices.
The way I see it, it’s still about “choices” on the part of a food attendant. He/she is a food attendant because he/she chose to apply for that kind of work. If he/she feels exploited, he/she is always free to go find another job or another line of work.
Just like you, for example, you are where you are now because of the choices that you made many years ago.
I am where I am now because i chose to leave my dead-end job many years ago. I’m a college drop out. I cannot say I’ve failed as an employee because I earned more than most college degree holders, who by the way, tend to look down on blue collar jobs and prefer to wait for white-collar jobs to come their way.
Until they realize too late that time has passed them by.
Sa tingin ko, a food chain owner and a food attendant has a “symbiotic relationship.”
Teka, before a food chain owner can “exploit” a food attendant, he has to build his fast food store first, right?
So he hires a contractor who, by the way, happens to have employees such as engineers, architects, draftsmen, etc.
The operative word here is “employees” di ba? alangan namang volunteers ang tawag sa mga tauhan ng contractor.
In a society where jobs are scarce, the “If he/she feels exploited, he/she is always free to go find another job or another line of work” is easier said than done. And it is exactly where exploitation comes in. In a world where there are enough jobs for everyone, no employer can dare exploit because employees can easily find work elsewhere.
Food chains are franchises and the franchise owner does not “build” his outlet. He merely buys the franchise and the company (food chain mother company, that is) builds for him and, when operation starts, hires for him. Ergo, it is the mother company that skirts regularization provision of labor law with the six-month term.
“In a society where jobs are scarce, the “If he/she feels exploited, he/she is always free to go find another job or another line of work” is easier said than done. And it is exactly where exploitation comes in. In a world where there are enough jobs for everyone, no employer can dare exploit because employees can easily find work elsewhere.” – Ms. Connie
So true. Unfortunately, it’s the sad reality in this country.
@B & W (your comment in quote) –
“Just like you, for example, you are where you are now because of the choices that you made many years ago.”
It’s not the choice I made, it’s my initiative.
“The operative word here is “employees” di ba? alangan namang volunteers ang tawag sa mga tauhan ng contractor.”
As I’ve commented before, they’re not charitable institution. I’m sure they would be on a different business if there are no abundant workers than can be exploited. They are in that kind of business because they factor the abundance availability of the labor that they can take advantage of.
Complicated pa rin ba sa iyo ang logic?
“It’s not the choice I made, it’s my initiative. – - Trosp
Okay. If you say so.
I wouldn’t want to engage you in semantics.
@ B & W (Your comments in parenthesis)
(I wouldn’t want to engage you in semantics.)
Ok…sabi mo eh… Let’s have some fun before we part ways on this post. Let’s put the dessert before the main course. Let’s stat with one of the definitions of semantics in philosophy and logic -
Semantics: (of a formal theory) the principles that determine the truth or falsehood of sentences within the theory, and the references of its terms.
By that, you have told us where you want a discussion to be. Para maintindihan mo agad – gusto mo yung tipong ikaw ang magdidikta ng tempo. On your terms ‘ika nga dapat ang discussion..
You made these claims:
(However, entrepreneurs create jobs.)
Failed!
My claim is entrepreneurs have factored the abundance of below the minimum wage labor that will be available to their businesses. They’re not creating jobs.
Of course your retort is I’m seeing the half-empty glass. Half-empty glass is a PERCEPTION and not a FACTUAL one (semantics on my part again). Entrepreneurs exploiting the workers is a FACTUAL one and not a PERCEPTION.
(He/she is a food attendant because he/she chose to apply for that kind of work. If he/she feels exploited, he/she is always free to go find another job or another line of work.)
Failed!
He/she did not chose to apply for that kind of work – he/she was FORCED to apply for that kind of work. You call that “entrepreneurs creating jobs”.
(How to make them comply with the labor code is another thing for discussion.)
The above are my semantics.
Pahabol lang para sa definition of “creating jobs”.
Have you ever wondered that there are still some buildings which has an elevator boy or elevator man or to be PC, an elevator person? Specifically in government buildings (let’s include SSS building)?
One example of creating a jobs.
Okay.
Teka, saan ka kamo nag-aral sa college?
This reminds me of the argument about retaining students. If they haven’t learned to read in first grade with a certain teacher and his/her methods – what makes anyone think the student will learn to read with another year of the same?
I agree that it’s the methods, the quality of the education that counts. Not the number of years in school.
Sass, I’ve got a feeling that Emil Jurado is reading your blog.
@ B&W
Saan akonag-aral ng college? Fourteenth comment –
http://casaveneracion.com/quality-not-lengthy-education/
Oh I see, you’re from TUP and you’re M.E. (Murag Engineer)
Look, I merely expressed my opinion about the need for more people to go into business and create more jobs in the first place.
I’m free to express my opinion. Likewise, you too, are free to voice out yours…even though your reasoning is a bit flawed.
@B&W
Best if you explain yourself by not using your own words.
You’ve commented -
“Oh I see, you’re from TUP and you’re M.E. (Murag Engineer) ”
Failed! (for the nth time, tsk…tsk…)
I didn’t take any M.E. or Murag Engineer (I don’t know what that thing is. Is it a part of your expressing your opinion? Confusing your adversary with a word that most likely he/she would not understand?.) in TUP. Read it again.
This time I’ll agree with you that every body is free to express an opinion. You must take note that opinion has its quality and must be persuasive. (And I’m certain that there is no way to persuade a person who’s mind is already made up).
Just like being clueless. Everybody has the right to be clueless. Just don’t abuse it.
BTW, I wish to know where is this bit of flaw in my reasoning. Care to share it with us?
“I’ve worked in Singapore for four years and my last position was Senior Design Engineer of an automation/mechanization department in one of the private companies there. I did not take any engineering course and have semi-finished (read: undergrad) my higher education in TUP Drafting Tech course.” – Trosp
I forgot to tell you, ‘Murag Engineer’ is a Visayan expression.
You claimed that you occupied a senior design engineer’s position in a private company. And yet you did not take up any engineering course.
By the way, ‘Murag Engineer’ means ‘Parang Engineer’ in Tagalog or pseudo-engineer in plain English.
@ B & W
As you’ve commented -
“You claimed that you occupied a senior design engineer’s position in a private company. And yet you did not take up any engineering course.”
Why, of course yes. I was also employed at AMKOR as Senior Product Engineer to develop incoming new IC products (from womb to tomb). And my present position with my present employer is Senior Project Engineer. I’m the one who is handling the concepts and designs of all equipment (specialized and automation) design requirements of my present employer.
Not bad for a person like me who has never taken any engineering course. Unfortunately, it’s very hard for me to go any higher. How would it look to an engineering graduate reporting to somebody who has not graduated an engineering course or let’s just say who has not graduated any collegiate course?
In short, I did not take any engineering course and I’m an engineer by my employers’ designation.
Twice I’ve repeated to you that it’s best to explain your comment by not using your own words. And another reminder for the second time – everybody has the right to be clueless. It seems to me that you’re abusing it.
And where are those of flaws in my reasoning? Please tell the readers about them and I would be glad to apologize and make the necessary corrections.
“Twice I’ve repeated to you that it’s best to explain your comment by not using your own words. And another reminder for the second time – everybody has the right to be clueless. It seems to me that you’re abusing it. – Trosp
Tell me sir, how the heck can I comment by “not using my own words?” You want me to borrow from somebody else’s words?
What am I abusing? I merely called a spade a spade.
“My claim is entrepreneurs have factored the abundance of below the minimum wage labor that will be available to their businesses. They’re not creating jobs…Entrepreneurs exploiting the workers is a FACTUAL one and not a PERCEPTION.” – Trosp
You mean to say jobs appear as if by magic? If businessmen aka employers, do not create jobs, tell me sir, how did you manage to get employed?
Take your present employers, for example, do you mean to say that they do not create job opportunities? How the heck did you land in your current position if there was no job opportunity in the first place? Do you mean to say that these businessmen just “factored the abundance of below the minimum wage labor that will be available to their business?”
You generalize things when you say it is a fact that entrepreneurs exploit workers. So, does this mean your current employers are exploiting you? A full-pledged engineer might demand a bigger salary for that position, so they hired a pseudo-engineer like you to cut costs. Is that it?
Sus, he submits his column via fax; I don’t think he knows how to surf hehehehe Baka someone printed the blog post for him.
Sass,
Huh?!?! I’d admire him more if he’s still using a typewriter (he he he daisy wheel naman…). I’m dead serious. I like his opeds except the divorce and birth control issues. The same admiration I have for those people who are journalling (specially if they’re using a Moleskine and a fountain pen).
But then, I’ve seen a lot of managers, directors, CEOs, etc. who still want their assistants to print the day’s email for their readings and then to put notes on emails of interest for the assistant to compose a reply.
And talking about the web. The joke that’s going around now (local) -
“I know that may maid is using my computer in her social networking.”
How did you know it?
“She’s using Friendster.”
(Does it mean Friendster is more user-friendly than Facebook or it’s not overwhelming the way Facebook seems to be? I’ve a Facebook account and I still can’t move any forward than to have my things there which are not accessible to anybody except me and my family).
Our household help, whose son is in the honors section of a Marikina public elementary school, says that they have had no science subject since the first grade (the subject, she thinks, is first offered in the fifth grade). Given the truncated school hours, subjects have been collapsed together. She is not surprised that public school students are barely passing Filipino (a front page article in the Inquirer today) because, from her experience with her own son, students are just told to memorize (as in, kapag ganito ang hitsura, pangungusap siya at di parirala). She had to explain to her son why “Takbo!” was a pangungusap and not a parirala (good thing she reached second year college). This is the honors section of a public school where MTAP (a program by the national assoc. of math teachers) participants come from; what about the other sections where students are said to be less traditional learning-inclined? She wants the government to first fix the curriculum and upgrade the teachers’ skills before adding on to the number of school years.
Sassy’s so right… it’s quality not quantity.
Sass, do the powers that be (or their aides de camp) read the blogs here? Coz even if they don’t care or don’t intend to do anything about whatever the heck we’re discussing here, constant pecking sometimes produce unexpected (welcome) results.
Are there any movements or movements out there that see things as they are (as you do) and are working to effect change or at least creating the blueprint for it for in contemplation of RP’s future.
Otherwise, as with all Philippine endeavors, this is just a waste of time.
Yes, they do read. Even as far back as five years ago.
“Are there any movements…”
Yes, there are. I know a lot of NGO initiatives. But then, they are not exactly the real decision makers.
i think they should improve quality of education AND add 2 years to the current educational system simultaneously. In my opinion, students here in both public and even private schools aren’t globally competitive. I studied in an international school for junior high (equivalent of grade 6 and 7 here I guess) and we were already doing algebra, geometry, intermediate biology and basic chemistry. I came back to Manila for high school and breezed through 1st and 2nd year because I’d already covered most of the lessons in my previous school.
Quality of course is very important but mastery and competencies need to be developed over a reasonable amount of time (i.e. 12 years) to ensure that the students fully absorb and understand the lessons. If we improve quality and stick to only 10 years, the topics that students will be able to cover will still be limited, unless teachers overload students with information and students rely more on memorization.
As for problems regarding resources, both human and structural, they seem like obstacles that can be overcome with careful planning and a little creativity.