By Estanislao Albano, Jr.
Note: This is a continuation of our series on the reaction of DepEd to the Philippine Daily Inquirer (PDI) report “70,000 Bicol pupils can’t read – DepEd.”
What Undersecretary Nepomuceno Malaluan says:
Education Undersecretary Nepomuceno Malaluan said this lack of standardized tools meant results could not be used for policymaking.
“This is a teacher-administered test, unlike the standardized National Achievement Test that students are required to take,” Malaluan told reporters. “The pretests in schools are all different, that’s why while we do have the data, it would be difficult to put these out.”
“DepEd pressed to bare national data on reading,” Philippine Daily Inquirer, February 19, 2020
What old Phil-IRI policies say:
DepEd Memorandum No. 153, series of 2006, “Administration of the Philippines Informal Reading Inventory (Phil-IRI)-Oral” stated: “The Phil-IRI results shall provide educators, policy makers and teachers information on pupils’ reading proficiency and shall serve as bases for appropriate intervention.”
DepEd Memorandum No. 186, series of 2007, “Administration of the SY 2007-2008 Philippines Informal Reading Inventory (Phil-IRI)-Oral” stated: “The Phil-IRI results shall provide educators, policy makers and teachers information on pupils’ reading proficiency and shall serve as bases for appropriate intervention.”
My comment:
The claim that the Phil-IRI data is not intended for policymaking is true as of the DepEd Order No. 014, series of 2018, issued on March 26, 2018, because the issuance makes the assessment test entirely a school level concern. However, this was not always the case as is very clear in the foregoing issuances. I see in the rescission of the policymaking function of the Phil-IRI a cunning maneuver of the DepEd central office officials to wash their hands and distance themselves from the worsening illiteracy mess the agency has created.
Granting but not accepting that indeed the results of the Phil-IRI cannot be used for policymaking, does that justify the withholding of the data from the public? Is the information about the reading proficiency of children in public schools specially the population of non-readers in both elementary and high school only for purposes of policymaking? Would not parents for one need it in deciding whether to send their children to public or private schools? Don’t local officials and other education stakeholders need the information so they could properly intervene and contribute?
Finally, we would like to ask Undersecretary Malaluan who we read was one of those who worked tirelessly for the enactment of an FOI law if the badly eroded capability of the DepEd to teach children the fundamental skill not a matter of compelling public interest and therefore should be revealed and explained fully to the public. We also ask him under which section of DepEd Order No. 72, series of 2016, the DepEd’s FOI manual, can the agency legally justify keeping Phil-IRI data beyond the reach of the public. **
