[OPINION] Cha-cha in Education: An excuse to sell Filipinos’ future
by Juleana Sarmiento | May 25, 2024
Ever since, basic education has been a crucial value for students like myself to build a foundation on their developing skills and principles. It aids knowledge within and outside its textbooks curated in the Filipino context. But with the current issue of amending the constitution, especially affecting the education sector, does its value still stand once stained by foreign influence?
During the Senate subcommittee public hearing on May 17 in Baguio City, several stakeholders and officials expressed their concern over the 1987 Constitution amendment on the education sector.
The Charter change (Cha-cha), according to the Senate, lifts the restrictions on foreign ownership of basic education institutions in the country. This allows the internationalization of the education system to solve the country’s weakening education caused by the COVID-19 pandemic.
According to the Department of Education (DepEd) Undersecretary Omar Romero, the involvement of foreign entities may weaken Filipino identity, culture, and principles, further endangering the country’s security.
Hence, it seems that the amendment creates more problems for both the country and its citizens rather than solving one.
Institutions, especially the public sector, have been a driving force for students to be enlightened on social and political issues related to local contexts. This current system allows students to critically think early on and let themselves be involved and engage in discussions for a socially progressive system. With the current proposed amendments, this will no longer pose a clear possibility.
One of the proposed revision’s objectives is to mold Filipino students to be globally competitive by meeting international standards — adopting international curriculum to “improve” the education system of the country. However, I don’t think that adopting these standards is what the education system needs, especially here in the Philippines.
First, relying on international standards will only encourage students to be of service to the global market and corporate jobs. It has been a long toxic mindset in our culture that the only way to be successful is to either work for white-collar jobs or work abroad. With this existing stigma on manual labor or blue-collar jobs as a sign of being impoverished, this reform only further tolerates and supports it.
Second, granting this power to foreign investors doesn’t stop them from discouraging students from thinking critically and engaging themselves in socio-political discussions. One of the driving forces that allows students to radically think is based on what they learn from their academic institutions. It has ever since become an avenue to enlighten students on recurring issues that the public has been continuously battling for. With this reform, not only would it further confine students from the truth but they would be left clueless about the issues our country and its people constantly face. Afterall, no foreign entity would allow an individual to critically think about their underlying schemes.
Lastly, this amendment poses a distraction to lessen the allocated budget for the education sector. The education system is a foundation for individuals to sharpen their skills and values needed for social and economic transformation — and that should be prioritized for. Rather than take accountability and be held responsible, the government thinks they should pass the authority to foreign entities. Besides, it is yet another strategy for them to possibly use the local budget for private needs and indulge themselves in corruption.
The education system in the country has indeed declined and allowing foreign ownership will not be the answer to this recurring issue. Aside from what they want to perceive, the government has the full power to improve the education system with its own accord and authority — without adhering to foreign standards or with foreign partnerships. It is only that they have far more interest in improving their private necessities rather than the needs of the public.
Additionally, Filipinos have ever since struggled to attain basic education rights. Students and parents are in a continuous struggle to call for action and improve the current education system in the country. With the limited resources and facilities, and high cost and inaccessible education, I don’t think foreign ownership solves either of these recurring issues nor is an answer to it all.
During a press conference about the second reading approval of foreign ownership, Alliance of Concerned Teachers (ACT) Chairperson Vladimer Quetua suggested the government reallocate the funds in increasing teachers’ wages and providing more facilities for students to utilize instead. Along with the shortage of classrooms, it has been a concern for the ACT that the approval of this reform would lead to the closure of small-scale schools and the dismissal of educators working in the public sector.
The proposed amendments only benefits the education system no more than its surface level and further allows foreigners to internally colonize the country from its roots. Adhering to foreign standards as a basis for “progressive” development is just an excuse to slowly build students confined from the truth and ultimately serve foreign interests — another agenda for its commercialization.
Academic institutions serve as a great foundation for students to acquire knowledge, skills, and values necessary for our country’s social and economic development — in which foreign investors should have no place to meddle with. As long as the government prioritizes the wrong thing over the other, the country has yet to experience true progress.
