Private Education

posted November 18, 2019 at 12:20 am

by
Jude Acidre

Two weeks ago, I moderated a dialogue between representatives of the Catholic

Educational Association of the Philippines (CEAP) led by its president, Fr. Elmer G. Dizon of the
Archdiocese of San Fernando (Pampanga) and officials of the Department of Education and the
Commission on Higher Education headed by DepEd Secretary Leonor Briones and CHED
Executive Director Atty. Cinderella Filipina Benitez-Jaro. The meeting was made possible
through the efforts of House Majority Leader Ferdinand Martin G. Romualdez, who was also
present through most part of the discussion.
The CEAP officials, representing more than 1,500 Catholic schools in the country,
presented the growing challenges faced by the private education sector in the Philippines. They
expressed concerns regarding the sustainability of the private education sector, including the
increasing migration of private school teachers to the public school system and apparently
skewed competition between private and public schools.
Despite the intensity of the issues raised by the CEAP officials, the meeting turned to be
warm and congenial. Secretary Briones was quick to point out that she once served as
president of Silliman University, a private university in Dumaguete City, and thus she fully
understood the concerns of the private schools. In fact, to date, she mentioned that more than
1,000 private schools had already closed down due to dwindling resources and decreasing
enrollment.
Listening to the friendly exchange of views between government and private education
stakeholders validated my personal view that private education in the Philippines needs more
attention and support than what it is getting at the moment. A prevailing secularist perspective in
governance tends to oppose increase public funding for private, especially sectarian, schools,
citing the often-misquoted principle of the separation of Church and State.
But it is surprisingly to note that in many strong democracies, including the United
States, public funding is afforded to private schools, with the caveat that the subsidy is paid to
the private or faith-based institutions that own and manage these private schools in
consideration of the public service that they provide.
The state of private education in the country is worth examining. The role that private
schools has played in the education of young Filipinos cannot be denied, and I daresay,
indispensable, if we were to ensure the availability of quality education services.
There are two main reasons that I can think of why the government should ensure the
sustainability of private educational institutions—cost efficiency of subsidizing private schools
and the complementarity between public and private schools.
 Simply put, it is far more cost efficient for government to subsidize private schools than
construct and operate more public schools. In many cities and municipalities with growing
student populations, it will be more affordable for the government to subsidize the enrollment of
students in existing private schools than to establish new schools, construct new school
buildings and hire additional teachers. Furthermore, with private schools already in place, the
results of subsidizing private schools would be immediately available and the students can
almost immediately avail of educational services. But instead of maximizing the opportunities
and capabilities that private schools provide, in recent years, the subsidy provided to private
schools have has been reduced significantly, In fact, seldom is it pointed out that while
government schools are financed by public funds, private schools struggle to pay for their
operations, relying significantly on income derived from income payments. With the dwindling
enrollment in private schools, the logical outcome is almost inevitable.
What our public policymakers fail to consider is that neglecting our private schools is a
missed opportunity for us in widening access to quality education. With these schools already in
place, the more cost efficient course of action would simply to subsidize these private schools.
In fact, there are several government subsidies already in place available to both students and
teachers in public school. However, it seems that these subsidies are not, in themselves,
enough to keep our private schools in operation. More than just subsidies such as vouchers for
students and scholarship for teachers, it might be worth to consider performance-based soft
loans or grants for private schools that will finance infrastructure projects or purchase equipment
and learning materials. For example, if a particular private school can retain or increase its
enrollment by a specific percentage, or meet a particular performance indicator such as the
passage rate in the national assessment exams—the school can then qualify for a soft loan or
grant, subject to certain conditions.
Worse, with subsidies being reduced significantly in recent years, private schools have
had to raise their income, in most case this means increasing tuition fees. But that they can do
only to an extent—or else they risk losing even more students to public schools.
Second, the country’s educational system must aim for stronger complementarity
between public and private schools, thus ensuring diversity not only in pedagogical techniques
but more importantly in terms of specific learning perspectives. The complementary roles of
public and private schools is, of course, provided for by Article XIV, Sec 4 of the Constitution.
Unfortunately, the modality of how this complementarity still warrants a clear-cut delineation, or
at the very least, definition of roles. CEAP Past President Joel E. Tabora, S.J. defined in clear
terms what complementarity means, “combining different things in such a way as to enhance or
emphasize each other’s qualities. It could more simply be defined as supplying mutual needs or
offsetting mutual lacks.” In the context of the relationship between private and public educational
institutions, these means a co-enriching existence between them, with the end of providing
educational services to young Filipinos.
The opposite appears to happen, though, much to the detriment of our private schools.
Educational policies, especially the allocation of resources, seem to favor government school
with limited opportunity available for private schools to cope with the demands of the revised
curriculum and other learning requirements.
Unfortunately, this complementarity is often negatively perceived as competition
between government and private schools, instead of both of them mutually enriching the
teaching and learning capabilities, benefiting in the end the students of both school types. Until
recently, government policy has appeared to favor supporting private schools insofar as it
serves the purpose of facilitating access to education or alleviating the congestion in a number
of government schools, without taking into consideration what private schools can and has
actually contribute towards improving the quality of learning in our schools.
Government schools follow a standard curriculum, while private schools have a more
pronounced space for innovation, creativity, flexibility, and cultural or ideological specialization—
including religious education. This allows not only for greater diversity, but more importantly, in
ensuring both learning content and methods that are even more adaptive, if not, responsive to
shifting demands of both learners and later on, of the labor market.
The dialogue ended well, with Secretary Briones emphasizing her years of working with
a private university. It was admitted that much is to be desired in terms of maximizing the role of
private education, whether in terms of increasing subsidies or instituting grants or soft loans to
private schools. It was also mentioned that education policies must balance interests of both
public and private schools, including regulating the establishment of government schools in
communities where there is already a private school. I think a window of opportunity has opened
to private schools, one that would lead our education policymakers to review the roles that
private schools play in our educational system.

CRITIQUE/REFLECTION ON THE ARTICLE:

While it is true that education is the domain of government schools, several small private
schools including the Catholic educational institutions are providing education that have existed
for the passion of training and developing very young Filipino minds. The cost of running a
school with very low enrollment and low fees compared to the big ones in the cities, is daunting.
In my own perspective, one way to sustain the financial needs of a private school is to
strategized on how to promote their system to the possible stakeholders, like for example the
marketing/promotion of the school to the parents and especially the students. Plus, these
private schools can practice some initiatives like different fund raising activities, which can be
assisted by the local community.
The Philippines has embarked on education reforms that it considers crucial to its
economic development, bringing its school system, whether in public or private sector into line
with international standards and seeking to open up its higher education sector to more
people.The government had to overcome substantial opposition to introduce K-12, a sign of its
determination to bring lasting change, but sustained funding to support the increased demand
on resources especially in the private education will be crucial if these bold reforms are to be a
success.

REFERENCE:
Acidre, J. (2019) Private Education. Retrieved from
https://manilastandard.net/mobile/article/310288