By Estanislao Albano, Jr.
In 1991 when Republic Act No. 7165 (An Act Creating the Literacy Coordinating Council, Defining its Powers and Functions, Appropriating Funds Therefor, and for Other Purposes) was enacted, there was still no illiteracy problem in our schools. The declared intent of the law is to totally eradicate illiteracy but it only covered people who could not attend school as the learning programs it prescribed to attain the goal are carried out outside of schools.
The law said nothing about the participation of schools in the effort to totally eradicate illiteracy which implies that at the time, the education arm of the government was still performing its task of teaching reading satisfactorily.
In 2002, then Education Secretary Raul Roco attested that there were no non-readers in the elementary grades, only some pupils who lacked reading comprehension. Referring to the 2002 Basic Education Curriculum, Roco wrote in DepEd Order No. 25, s. 2002, dated June 17, 2002
(Implementation of the 2002 Basic Education Curriculum): “It seeks to cure the inability of students who cannot read with comprehension at grade 3 and worse, at grade 6.” This is worlds apart from the current situation wherein there are non-readers and non-numerates even in Grades 7-10 as admitted by DepEd Undersecretary Gina Gonong (“How DepEd plans to implement program on reading, math,” ABS-CBN News, August 29, 2024).
The trouble began in 2002 when the DepEd replaced “No Read, No Move Policy” with DepEd Order No. 45, s. 2002, and subsequently decided to never enforce the latter in effect opening up Grade 2 onwards to non-readers and frustration level readers. The DepEd did not document its decision to disregard DepEd Order No. 45, s. 2002. However, then Education Secretary Jesli Lapus implicitly admitted that as of 2006, the DepEd had already sidelined the policy when as cited on page 2 of the letter, he advocated for the enforcement of the “no promotion beyond Grade 3 for non-readers” policy when he presented the 2007 proposed budget of the DepEd.
In the same document, Lapus had informed that in SY 2004-2005, 1.67 percent of Grades 1-3 learners were non-readers and 52.19 percent were frustration level readers. It only got worse from there. In the news story “DepEd to launch project on reading” in its July 4, 2006 issue, the Philippine Star reported that in Cebu, 2,531 pupils from Grades 2 to 6 were found to be non-readers and 54,787 frustration readers.
That same school year, illiteracy had crossed into the secondary as non-readers were detected in the Krus na Ligas High School in Quezon City (“KLHS tutorial program gets UP support,” The DSC-QC Chronicler, the official publication of the Division of City Schools of Quezon City, September 2006 issue). This marked the point illiteracy has completed its infiltration of the country’s basic education system.
By 2019, the learning poverty rate of the country had hit 69.5 percent climbing to 90.9 percent in 2022 and from 2018 to 2024, functional illiteracy incidence among senior high school graduates was 21 percent. These disasters happened despite the fact that under the K to 12 Curriculum, learners are supposed to be reading in English with comprehension by Grade 3 (English Curriculum Guide, page 53) and by Grade 6 they are supposed to be functionally literate (English Curriculum Guide, page 125) thus, clearly, mass promotion is the culprit.
The following testimonies from respected personalities regarding the quality of the country’s basic education particularly that offered by public schools before the DepEd ditched the “No Read, No Move Policy” and adopted mass promotion in 2002 are instructive:
The late Washington SyCip of the SyCip, Gorres Velayo & Co: There was a time when Philippine public schools system was known as “perhaps the best in Asia” (“Back to His Roots,” Forbes website, April 28, 2011).
Former Education Minister Jaime Laya: The country’s poor education system is to blame for the low average IQ of Filipinos. With their poor comprehension and reasoning ability, our youth “will end up in conference rooms serving coffee while other nationals analyze and decide” (“Coffee Server or Decision Maker?”, Manila Bulletin, June 7, 2021).
Laya who was commenting on the dismal showing of the country in the 2018 PISA alluded there was a time that the country’s education system was sound enough to produce decision makers. **
To be continued
