Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 5

GARCIA, JANICE C.

BSE FIL II-4

LEVELS OF DECISION-MAKING

I.

INTRODUCTION

Decision-making is done at various levels involving different individuals or groups of


individuals. Decisions on what subjects to include in the curriculum are results of state
legislation or national policies. Courses of Jose Rizal are example of this mode. Some decisions
the thrust of the Department of Education, Culture and Sports as in the teaching of values in
secondary level. A basis may also the vision-mission of the school, as in requiring religion
subjects in private sectarian schools. Sometimes, preferences of individual teachers or a group of
teachers become the basis for choosing the focus of classroom instruction which may be on
either content or process.
The current curriculum development practices in the Philippines follow the same pattern
as in other countries. There are levels of decision-making too. The bases for each type and levels
of decisions are the same ones normally used by the curriculum developers in many parts of the
world. The development of national curricula for basic education such as the Program for
Decentralized Educational (PRODED) for elementary, and the Secondary Education
Development Program (SEDP took place in stages and encompassed many dimensions. Multisectoral committees took part in designing the curricula. Each curriculum development project
comprised several components. PRODED consisted of the following components: 1
development of the New Elementary School Curriculum (NESC) ;2 physical facilities
development and staff development; 3 instructional materials development; 4 in-service
training; and 5 assistance for quality improvement and sector management and evaluation.
For both PRODED and SEDP, the development of textbooks, course guides, syllabi,
learning packages and lesson plan also involved the participation of different sectors and
different levels in the educational system such as schools, departments, curriculum committees
and teachers
II.

READINGS

There are external and internal enablers/impetus to the educational system or conditions at
various levels that permit and provide the encouragement and support for curricular reform
efforts. In the Philippine setting, new legislation, public opinion about the state of education,
technological advances, societal as well as industry demands and expectations had paved the way
for the revision of the curriculum in the past. In addition, improvement in the educational system
but also became the basis for nationwide curriculum reforms.

However even in the presence of permitting conditions, the decision to undertake major
curricular reform activities in the Philippine educational system ultimately depends on an
important enabler:availability of funds. By experience, educational leaders are aware that any
major curriculum reform project requires considerable expense. Nationwide curriculum
improvement is undertaking that needs sufficient funding. In many instances, developing
countries like the Philippines cannot rely on the national budget to fund curricular reform efforts.
Historically, the government budget had not been able provide to provide enough funds even for
the formal operations of the education sector. For instance, because of the sheer size of the public
elementary school system (9 million students in 55 schools in over a thousand islands in 1982 ,
the effort to provide quality alongside with equity to this sector had to take the form of a World
Bank-assisted project popularly called PRODED (Quisumbing, 1989) . The needed funding for
such a major project could not be sourced logically. Given this situation, it was, therefore, not
logical for the educational leaders to have allocated a certain portion of the budget for curriculum
innovation when the amount appropriated annually by the national government for teachers
salary, construction and maintenance of buildings, purchase of instructional materials and
equipment was consistently not enough.
Levels of Making-decision and Enabling Factors in Curriculum Development in the Philippine
Setting
EXTERNAL ENABLERS:
Legislation
Public Opinion
Education Studies
Technological Advances
Societal Demands
Industry Demands

SOURCES OF DATA:
School Records
Research Outputs
Textbooks and References
Other Documents

INTERNAL ENABLERS:
Research Findings
National Testing
New Leadership
Accreditation
Cross-country Evaluation
Available Funds

National Level (Multi-sectoral committees)


Regional Level (Multi-sectoral committees)
School Group (Private& Public)
School (Faculty, School Committees)
Teachers Group (Department, Curriculum Committees)
Individual Teacher (Classroom, Demonstration)

TYPES OF DECISIONS:
Curriculum Policies
Curriculum Design
Implementation Strategies
Evaluation Procedure
Curriculum Revision

Public Expenditure on Education for ASEAN and Selected Countries in Asia, 1985
COUNTRY

% OF BUDGET

% OF GNP

13.7
15
16
19.4

1.3
3.7
6
3.6

7.8
1gat3.7
16.6
12.6

3.3
3
3.4
3.3

ASEAN Countries
Philippines
Indonesia
Malaysia
Thailand
Selected Countries in Asia
China
India
Korea
Average for all countries in
Asia

Source: Jee-Peng Tan and Alain Mingat


Eductional Development in Asia
World Bank, 1989 in EDCOM Report, 1991
The table shows that the Philippine budget for the education is the lowest in the Southeast
Asia. This allocation has also the lowest ratio to GNP. The budget distribution in the above table
reveals that the amount allocated to secondary education in the Philippine is 76%. This ratio is
lower compared to that of Indonesia, 79%, and that of Thailand, 82% but relatively higher than
that of Malaysia, 72%.
As mentioned earlier, because of budgetary constraints, financing the various activities
and phases of major curricular reforms could not be appropriate from the regular budget. The
education bureaucracy cost too much (EDCOM, 1992) . Personnel services already accounted for
about 70% of the total budget of the Department of Education, Culture and Sports). In order to
finance curricular reform projects, the education sector had to borrow money from the external
sources to support past projects contributing in the process, to the increase in the countrys
external debts. Again, because of previous experience, this unfortunate situation has created
apprehension in various sectors every time government has to borrow money for education.
There are sectors in the society who have become wary about borrowing money from foreign
donors for education. The apprehension springs from the misgiving that the money to be
borrowed may not be well spent and may just add to the financial burden of the government
without any commensurate in the educational system.
The highly centralized DECS and its complex procedures in asset management had
resulted in loss and waste (EDCOM, 1992). The Congressional Commission concluded that the
stages in procurement bidding, pricing, purchasing and delivery of goods and services were

susceptible to graft and corruption which eventually translated to loss of revenue or value of the
government.

Distribution of Public Spending by Level of Education


Country

ASEAN
Countries
Philippine
s
Indonesia
Malaysia
Thailand
Selected
Countries
in Asia
China
India
Korea
Average
for Asia

Elementar
y
Education

% of GNP

Secondary
Education

% of GNP

Higher
Education

% of GNP

64
62
36
58

1.2
2.3
2.2
2.1

12
27
34
24

0.3
1
2.1
0.8

24
9
26
12

0.4
0.3
1.5
0.4

41
27
57

1.3
0.8
1.9

42
47
34

1.4
1.4
1.1

18
19
9

0.6
0.6
0.3

48

1.6

31

19

0.7

Source: Jee-Peng Tan and Alain Mingat


Eductional Development in Asia
World Bank, 1989 in EDCOM Report, 1991
III.

INSIGHTS

I can actually say that decision-making for curriculum development is not easy. It takes
time to develop curriculum policies, design, implementation and revision. According to
Adelaida Bago, as a standard practice, the curriculum developer has to determine the design
by carefully 1) choosing the general aims of schooling as well as the more specific objectives
of instruction; 2) selecting the subject matters to be included as well as their scope and
coverage; 3) determining the suitable learning experiences based on the objectives; and 4)
deciding on how to evaluate what students are learning. Along with the curriculum design, an
implementation scheme has to be planned which normally includes variables such as human
and physical resources, schedule, and a monitoring strategy. It is also necessary to plan

carefully the manner by which the effectiveness, efficiency and impact of the curriculum will
be assessed.

IV.

REFERENCE:
Curriculum Development:
The Philippine Experience 2nd Edition, Adelaida Bago
C & E Publishing Inc. 2008