East Versus West: Differences in Learning

UCLA Professor Jim Stigler talks about the observations he made as a graduate student at University of Michigan while comparing American against Japanese classrooms. Apparently, in the US, a student struggling with a lesson implies lack of ability while in Japan, struggling is seen as an opportunity. In a Japanese classroom, it is clear that academic success is not so much about what a student knows but more about a willingness on the part of a student to work and struggle to learn. It is not about intelligence, but more about motivation. Japanese classrooms focus therefore on effort. It teaches the students that the process is important. It is the most important lesson in life, persistence in the face of challenges, profoundly affecting behavior. One vivid comparison involved giving a class of first grade students a problem impossible to solve. Inside the American classroom, students gave up within half a minute saying that they have not seen such a problem before while inside the Japanese classroom, students continued to work on the problem until the one-hour period was over.

There are certainly advantages and disadvantages between the two different cultural views of learning. Japanese students do well in science and math but American students are more individualistic and creative. There is perhaps a middle path that reaps the benefits from the two culturally different approaches. Of course, a middle path that combines the shortcomings of both approaches is likewise possible, one that destroys creativity and at the same time, does not encourage perseverance. This a serious question that one must ask especially with DepEd's K to 12. In an abandonment of "rote learning", are we sacrificing the lessons of perseverance and practice? The reason why Americans have been comparing their schools against those of the Japanese is to see why Japanese students outperform American students in math and the sciences. It is a quest for the reason behind an "Eastern advantage". The Philippines, although it is in Asia, does not have this "advantage". It must therefore look at what it has lost in its culture.

To learn more about Stigler's work, please listen to National Public Radio's Alix Spiegel,

Struggle For Smarts? How Eastern And Western Cultures Tackle Learning : NPR

http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2012/11/12/164793058/struggle-for-smarts-how-eastern-and-western-cultures-tackle-learning

For the most part in American culture, intellectual struggle in school children is seen as an indicator of weakness, while in Eastern cultures it is not only tolerated, it is often used to measure emotional strength.

Stevenson and Lee have also provided extensive comparisons between Eastern and Western schools in the following monograph:

http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/1166090

In this monograph, they also noted the following:

Although more emphasis was generally given to effort than to ability as a basis for achievement, the relative strength of the belief in the importance of these factors differed among American, Chinese, and Japanese mothers. Relative to the Chinese and Japanese mothers, the American mothers placed greater emphasis on ability; Chinese and Japanese mothers placed greater emphasis on effort as an explanation for achievement.  

When parents believe that success in school depends on ability in contrast to effort, they are less likely to foster participation in activities related to academic achievement that would elicit strong effort toward learning on the part of their children, such as doing homework, attending after-school classes, and receiving tutoring. American parents, in fact, did not use these activities with great frequency as means for improving their children's scholastic performance, even though they were willing to provide such supplemental activities for their children in sports, music, and art. Mothers who emphasize the importance of ability may ask if such activities are useful for children of low ability and may accept the poor performance of their children. If the child has high ability, the mother may question whether such activities are needed. A greater emphasis on ability appears to be related, therefore, to American children's lower accomplishments in elementary school.

Teaching "x = 'why'"

Previously, I shared in this blog the experiences of a Washington Post reporter who went back and spent a year taking high school math. A lot could be learned by returning to the classroom. Having been in a profession offers new perspectives, certainly a new vantage point, to see high school education. These are anecdotes yet useful insights can be drawn from all of these. Another useful immersion has been recently described by Harvey Mudd College professor of mathematics Darryl Yong. Professor Yong spent his recent sabbatical teaching high school math classes in a large urban school district. Yong wrote a wonderful piece describing his experiences as well as his thoughts on this unusual excursion in the Notices magazine of the American Mathematical Society:

http://www.ams.org/notices/201210/rtx121001408p.pdf

The piece illustrates an example of how higher education may be able to help society understand the needs of basic education. For such an immersion to be genuine, it is important that classroom conditions are not altered simply to please a guest lecturer in high school. Otherwise, it defeats the purpose of experiencing first hand what it really means to teach elementary or high school. Professor Yong clearly did not receive special treatment as the following excerpt demonstrates:

...As a final illustration of the kinds of frustration that teachers face, here is an excerpt of a letter I received from my school district a few weeks after the end of the school year.

Dear YONG, DARRYL:
Our records show that you have received an overpayment as a result of a change that was processed in June 2010. The total adjusted gross amount  of your overpayment (reduced by any
retirement contribution) is $12,197.66. This letter is intended to advise you of  your options in repaying the identified overpayment.

The letter was not signed by anyone, there was no contact person listed, and there was no phone number to call! The letter seemed to make it impossible to contest the overpayment; it only listed options for repayment and threatened referral to a collections agency if the amount was not repaid....

Seeing the above proves to anyone without any doubt that this immersion was real and what Yong has to say about teaching in high school reflects a genuine scenario. What he describes in his piece is therefore worth our time. His reflections provide a deeper vision of basic education seen through the eyes of a professor in mathematics. And here are the main points, which he appropriately calls lessons, that he raises in his essay:

• Basic education schools are complex. Even this is still an understatement. When schools fail, explanations (or excuses) offered are usually too simplistic, thus, depriving society the complete view to address properly the problems. In the Philippines, the old ten-year curriculum described as congested has been pinpointed as the main culprit in the poor state of basic education. The explanation, however, is more of a justification to go to K to 12, than a sincere and in-depth examination of the situation. These are excuses and are no different from knee-jerk comments made by high school teachers regarding how poor they perceive elementary school education is. As Professor Yong writes, "Simplistic diagnoses are dangerous because they encourage quick fixes. Instead of long-term plans for systemic change, school reform becomes a series of short-lived fads that cause teachers to become jaded by unfulfilled promises of improvement." This explains in part why reform after reform, problems in basic education remain. 
• It helps to have a teacher who has mastery of the subject content but this is no guarantee for high student learning. Yong cites a study made by  Hattie (John Hattie, Visible Learning: A Synthesis of over 800 Meta-Analyses Relating to Achievement, Routledge, 2009.) that shows that a how a student views himself or herself with regard to the subject counts significantly towards the learning outcome in that domain. If a student begins with a perception of weakness in mathematics, this has serious implications on the student's performance in math. Thus, if student's performance correlates with what we perceive as high quality teaching then effective teaching must be able to address and correct a student's preconception of the subject. Perhaps, this is a major difference between an effective and an ineffective teacher. The following excerpt from Yong illustrates this vividly:

I initially spent a great deal of time thinking of fun or creative lessons that would get students excited. These lessons rarely worked because they were often too complicated or inappropriate for my students’ mathematical development. Instead, I began to design my lessons and accompanying student work so that (1) all of my students could successfully complete the first problem or task independently, and in which (2) the sequence of problems/tasks matched my students’ tolerance for challenge and self-concept. 

This strategy not only increased student learning but also eliminated most of the discipline issues in my class and relieved the pressure of having to develop whiz-bang “fun” lessons every day. 

• There is a great need to understand correctly what the teaching profession entails. No different from the practice of medicine, the teaching profession is an ongoing learning. Only with the realization of the emotional, physical and intellectual demands of teaching, would society understand and begin to truly respect teachers. If society treats its physicians in a similar manner as teachers are currently treated in the Philippines, for example, one could only wonder what will happen to the quality of health care and medical services.
• The last lesson Yong shares is that the "Written curriculum does not matter." What matters is what actually occurs inside the classroom. In this respect, the teacher serves a central role.

Yong's experiences are rich with insights and I invite everyone interested in improving the state of basic education to read his article. 

While the Philippines Moves to Spiral Approach, Missouri Does the Opposite

School districts in the state of Missouri are changing their science curriculum for Grades 6 to 8. The reform primarily changes science instruction from a spiral approach to a field-focus curriculum. The Philippines, on the other hand, with DepEd's K to 12 goes in the opposite direction. Without debating which direction is the correct one to take, both need to face the challenge of a major transition. Poor implementation of an education reform leads to failure even if the change is the correct prescription. A major part of the implementation is the transition stage, which is crucial for the success of the reform. It is therefore necessary to pay close attention to the transition process as this stage can easily lead to failure if not implemented correctly. Missouri's efforts are assisted by institutions of higher learning within the state. One is Lindenwood University.

The Spellman Clock Tower of Lindenwood University reflecting its view on education

One dissertation from Lindenwood University tackles specifically the transition of Missouri school districts to the new science curriculum: 

http://gradworks.umi.com/3450281.pdf

Abstract 

This investigation examined the transition from a spiral science curriculum to a field-focus science curriculum in middle school. A spiral science curriculum focuses on a small part of each field of science during each middle school year, more of a general science concept. In contrast to that, the base of a field-focus curriculum is that each grade level focuses on a specific field of science, more of a high school like concept. The literature reviewed provides a history of science education, the steps of the change process, and the importance of professional development. The literature review provided a basis for determining trends in the science education. 

The researcher collected a variety of data to understand the process that districts move through to transition to a field-focus science curriculum. Interviews provided information concerning the transition process of three Midwestern school districts that have arranged their curriculum into a field-focus alignment. Teacher surveys of one district supplied the perceptions of the professional development involved during the transition process. The researcher also examined school district student achievement data in the area of science. 

Suggestions made through this investigation focused on the Eight Steps to a Successful Change when implementing a field-focus science curriculum alignment. Following the suggested steps will help a transition go smoother.

This study specifically looks at the New Heart School District in the state of Missouri. The science teachers in this district have agreed to abandon the spiral approach and adopt a field-focus approach to teaching science. The rationale was simple - surrounding school districts that have instituted this reform are doing better in statewide standard exams. The following are among Alwardt's findings regarding the transition New Heart School District undertook:

• Transition is always difficult so it is important that evidence supporting the reform is shared. In this particular case, data supporting the notion that a spiral approach leads only to a superficial treatment of topics and does not prepare students for the the rigor expected in standard tests.
• Communication is vital between supervisors and teachers. These need to be regular so that updates and concerns are immediately addressed.
• All necessary materials required for the new curriculum are promptly provided to all teachers. This effectively alleviates tension and anxiety toward the new curriculum.

As Alwardt emphasizes, "Transitions are inherently difficult for teachers." While trying to adjust to the change, teachers still have the obligation to give the very best instruction to the students. There are no "dress rehearsals". It is therefore very important that teachers during this stage are heard and supported. With these in mind, one can evaluate how DepEd in the Philippines is implementing its K to 12. One should understand and appreciate the crucial role of teachers in education reform.

As Senate Debates DepEd's K to 12

It is in the news (Philippine Star): The Senate of the Republic of the Philippines has started debating DepEd's new K to 12 program.

Senate starts debates on K+12  By Marvin Sy (The Philippine Star) Updated October 09, 2012 12:00 AM

MANILA, Philippines - The Senate has started plenary debate on a bill seeking to increase the number of years in the country’s basic education or the K-to-12 program.

Sen. Edgardo Angara, chairman of the Senate committee on education, arts and culture, sponsored Senate Bill 3286 yesterday, which he said would enhance the curriculum so the Filipino student would be better prepared for higher education.

“They will be prepared for higher education, middle-level skills development, employment and entrepreneurship,” Angara said.

_______________________________________________________________________________

Unfortunately, the likelihood that the discussion in the Senate will be framed within an evidence-based approach is close to nil. Angara already notes that the change in curriculum is not new and that consultations have been made throughout the entire country.

As the Senate debates DepEd's K to 12, I wish senators would first read an article by Professor Paul Thomas of Furman University where he talks about how education reform in the United States has been missing the correct approach to education reform. Thomas' important points are:

• Standards have never worked and never will.
• Student poverty is a very strong factor.
• Teacher quality is not a major factor to student learning, but society's treatment of its teachers is.

DepEd's K to 12 fails to address these important points. Upgrading of teachers' salaries still has not won the attention of the Philippine government. DepEd's K to 12 focuses more on the curriculum and number of years, which are not the important factors in student's learning. DepEd's K to 12 does not address the poverty and hunger faced by millions of Filipino children. And most importantly,

"Public education has failed historically and currently because educators have never run our school system...

...Because "reform" has been a political football; not a process of scholarship, research and implementation by educators."

Photo downloaded from Daily Kos: Faux Education Reform or Improved Education

_________________________________________________________________________________

Here's the article:

TUE OCT 02, 2012 AT 07:52 AM PDT

On "Reform" and the "Public" in Education

byplthomasEdDFollow

U.S. public education appears in dire need of reform. To address that problem central to the health of America's democracy and economy (reformers note), committees must be formed and solutions proposed and then implemented:

"That it is expedient to hold a conference of school and college teachers of each principal subject which enters into the programmes of secondary schools in the United States and into the requirements for admission to college—as, for example, of Latin, of geometry, or of American history—each conference to consider the proper limits of its subject, the best methods of instruction, the most desirable allotment of time for the subject, and the best methods of testing the pupils’ attainments therein, and each conference to represent fairly the different parts of the country."

This committee constituted of university presidents and school leaders set out to answer the following questions:

"1. In the school course of study extending approximately from the age of six years to eighteen years—a course including the periods of both elementary and secondary instruction—at what age should the study which is the subject of the Conference be first introduced?
2. After it is introduced, how many hours a week for how many years should be devoted to it?
3. How many hours a week for how many years should be devoted to it during the last four years of the complete course; that is, during the ordinary high school period?
4. What topics, or parts, of the subject may reasonably be covered during the whole course?
5. What topics, or parts, of the subject may best be reserved for the last four years?
6. In what form and to what extent should the subject enter into college requirements for admission? Such questions as the sufficiency of translation at sight as a test of knowledge of a language, or the superiority of a laboratory examination in a scientific subject to a written examination on a text-book, are intended to be suggested under this head by the phrase 'in what form.'
7. Should the subject be treated differently for pupils who are going to college, for those who are going to a scientific school, and for those who, presumably, are going to neither?
8. At what stage should this differentiation begin, if any be recommended?
9. Can any description be given of the best method of teaching this subject throughout the school course?
10. Can any description be given of the best mode of testing attainments in this subject at college admission examinations?"

Is this an initiative from the U.S. Department of Education led by Secretary Duncan? A committee formed by the governors to help schools implement Common Core State Standards? A committee funded by the Gate Foundation? A move endorsed by Michelle Rhee, Wendy Kopp (TFA), or the KIPP charter chain?

No. This is the Committee of Ten from the 1890s.

But it certainly is similar to any reform movement concerning education since then and including now.

The reform movement must be examined against two issues: (1) What is the status quo of education and education reform? and (2) How might we re-imagine the "public" in public education?

The Education and Reform Status Quo

Central to the potential effectiveness of reform is an essential process: identify the status quo, evaluate the status quo, and then change the elements of the status quo that are clearly failing. For education reform to change our schools directly and our society indirectly, we must first identify the status quo; thus, what are the elements of the educational status quo as well as the status quo of education reform?

• Identifying "high" standards for K-12 to insure college and work readiness is the status quo. Common Core State Standards can be traced back to the Committee of Ten; identifying standards, raising standards, and implementing new standards have never worked, and never will.

• Aligning standardized testing to those standards is the status quo. The Committee of Ten identified needed testing, and then standardized testing exploded in the early to mid-twentieth century. More and better tests have never worked, and never will.

What is not a part of the status quo (or the problem with education)?

• Unionization is not uniform or present throughout the U.S.; thus, unions are not part of the status quo. Heavily unionized states often have the highest student outcomes, while non-union states have some of the lowest outcomes. Relative student poverty is a much stronger status quo than unionization.

• Teacher quality is not central to or a major element in student achievement; thus, teacher quality is not part of the status quo needing urgent reform. But teacher assignment is part of the status quo since affluent students are assigned the most qualified and experienced teachers while children of color and children living in poverty are assigned new and unqualified teachers.

Current education reform elements being endorsed and implemented by the reformers with power and money are, in fact, perpetuating the status quo, and are in effect the exact opposite of reform.

Further, the dominant education reform initiatives in the U.S. are demonstrably counter to overcoming social and educational inequity.

Driven by more than a century of the same education policies and reforms, public schools face the exact same issues confronted in every decade since the late nineteenth century.

Re-Imagining (Not Rejecting) the "Public" in Education

In the education reform movement during the past thirty years of accountability and high-stakes testing, the U.S. has failed to identify the status quo, and has ironically perpetuated the status quo—entrenching deeper and deeper the social inequity the public schools reflect.

Universal education is a public good that should serve to correct the historical and current failures of society, such as economic inequity, racial injustice, and gender inequity. For public education to be a corrective public institution, then, public schools must be publicly funded but not politically managed.

Public funding is essential for basic aspects of a culture, such as a road system, a judicial system, a police force, a military, and the most important foundational system, schools. [The U.S. ignores the foundational nature of healthcare, however.]

Yet, when public institutions fail, that failure is not due to the public aspect of the institution but because of the failure to create a wall between public funding and partisan political bureaucracy.

Public education has failed historically and currently because educators have never run our school system.

Public funding of education, in order to reform education and overcome the failures of the status quo, must be implemented at every level of schooling—from the Secretary of Education to each teacher in every classroom—by qualified and experienced educators and scholars. Not by appointees, not by presidents, not by governors.

Then, instead of technocratic (and misleading) accountability policies imposed on education by partisan politicians, those professional educators must serve the public transparently while remaining committed to outcomes that support democracy, equity, and the public good.

Partisan political bureaucracy de-professionalizes education and creates a constant cycle of starting over with the exact same policies in different packages.

Common Core State Standards, high-stakes testing for student and teacher accountability, charter schools, and Teach for America are slightly new packages for the status quo—not reform that changes schools so schools can change society.

Let's start there and re-imagine the "public" in education.

ORIGINALLY POSTED TO PLTHOMASEDD ON TUE OCT 02, 2012 AT 07:52 AM PDT.

ALSO REPUBLISHED BY EDUCATION ALTERNATIVES.

Community Involvement in Public Schools

It takes a village to raise a child. Does it also take the entire community to educate the young? True. Brigada Eskwela, as described in this blog, provides pictures of hope and optimism. I wrote in that article:

"The sense of where reforms should come from is quite clear. And the photos demonstrating how much a community cares for its schools is a testament that improvements in basic education can begin from the ground. Flexibility is important as it allows for the community to build on its existing good practices and innovation. Herein lies the importance of keeping the national curriculum for schools as lean as possible, offering only a general set of guidelines for schools to follow. Such empowers the teachers in each classroom, each principal in each school, to develop in greater specifics a school-based curriculum. The community can only take ownership of its schools with responsibility. And responsibility can not be cultivated in a culture marked with policies and orders always handed down from a central authority. Decisions regarding the curriculum must take place inside the school and not from a far-away office within the national government if a "Schools First" initiative is desired. Communities are capable of taking the challenge, but the challenge must not end with just supporting the facilities for education. Communities must likewise be empowered to take part in the actual education of its members. Through these, there is reason for optimism."

In more than one way, "Brigada Eskwela" engages the community.  This is the good side of "privatizing" public schools. It is a genuine partnership since the members of the community are likewise stakeholders. Most of these are the parents of the children who attend school and their work is purely voluntary. "Privatizing" public schools, however, can take a different route. Though uplifting education may still be a driving force, there are other motivations and reasons for the private sector to participate. Education historian and New York University Professor Diane Ravitch views privatization of public schools as "opening up public education as a prime marketplace where entrepreneurs can pursue new business opportunities and make money." Ravitch recently raised this concern as the United States moves forward toward developing a common core across all states. Establishment of common standards and tests enables a large scaling of learning materials, which is particularly lucrative in the eyes of business.

Huffington Post recently published an article: "Privatizing Public Schools: Big Firms Eyeing Profits from US K-12 Market".  Investors are apparently excited with the opportunities coming their way with the introduction of new standards for US public schools. Before, each school district in the US pretty much decided the curriculum content. Then, each state came up with their own standards. With a common core across all states, "investors are signaling optimism that a golden moment has arrived.... The goal: an education revolution in which public schools outsource to private vendors such critical tasks as teaching math, educating disabled students, even writing report cards."


Business can be good for public schools. It comes with a sense of efficiency in terms of cutting costs. However, business with its focus on making profits can undermine the real purpose of education:

"This is a new frontier," Ravitch said. "The private equity guys and the hedge fund guys are circling public education." 

Some of the products and services offered by private vendors may well be good for kids and schools, Ravitch said. But she has no confidence in their overall quality because "the bottom line is that they're seeking profit first." 

Vendors looking for a toehold in public schools often donate generously to local politicians and spend big on marketing, so even companies with dismal academic results can rack up contracts and rake in tax dollars, Ravitch said. 

"They're taking education, which ought to be in a different sphere where we're constantly concerned about raising quality, and they're applying a business metric: How do we cut costs?" Ravitch said.

It is useful to note what US investors currently see as promising areas of business in public school education. One is the use of information communication and technology, specifically the development of software which can do some of the tasks that teachers do. Unlike in the Philippines, teachers in the US demand a much substantial salary. Replacing teachers with computer programs will therefore reduce significantly labor costs. Here is a quote from the founder of Princeton Review: "How do we use technology so that we require fewer highly qualified teachers?"  Highly qualified teachers not only demand high salaries, but also expensive and time-intensive preparations and training in higher education.

Downloaded from  http://forpubliced.blogspot.com/2011/01/got-dough-public-school-reform-in-age.html

There are several online learning platforms now available in the US, each one providing automated services on writing and grading quizzes, giving feedback to students, and generating report cards. DreamBox Learning, one of the players in this new arena of electronic classrooms, takes a step further by providing software that can analyze a student's current standing or abilities to tailor specifically questions in math to drill the student. If teachers are the biggest contributor to the costs of public school education, why not? And if the lack of qualified teachers impedes progress in public schools then software maybe the solution. Compared to Finland, this approach is exactly the opposite. United States does not score anywhere near Finland's in international tests. This is the bottom line in education, quite different from the point of view of business. Business looks primarily at cost efficiency. Public school education must remain focused on quality.

Building classrooms remains attractive. There are ways to cut costs and make profit in construction. They can even overprice:

Salceda says classrooms in DepEd plan overpriced

The cost of classrooms to be built by private contractors under a public-private partnership program (PPP) of the Department of Education (DepEd) is double that of the cost pegged by the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH), according to Albay Gov. Joey Salceda....http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/242727/salceda-says-classrooms-in-deped-plan-overpriced 

But as soon as classrooms are built, the business stops there. The curriculum, on the other hand, offers so much more. Learning materials, assessment tools, and electronic platforms can be gifts that keep on giving....

Does DepEd Need PAGASA? A Tale of Two Visions

Forecasting is difficult. There are so many variables necessary to predict the future. While the United States has the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the Philippines has the Philippine Atmospheric, Geophysical and Astronomical Services Administration (PAGASA). One acronym sounds like a character from Genesis while the other is the Tagalog word for hope. This maybe appropriate since, for some, hope is actually a readiness to whatever may happen in the future. 

Downloaded from  http://www.facebook.com/YouScoopGMA 

Reforming education is in a way similar to the challenges faced by climate and weather forecasters. The phrase "21st Century Learning" connotes tailoring the schools to meet the anticipated needs of the new century. Education is indeed very much about the future. Reforming education thus requires a vision. DepEd's K to 12 is advertised as a response to what other countries have done with their basic education. The claim of being left behind by other countries forms the very first rationale for adding two more years at the end of high school. When I was preparing my first commentary on DepEd's K to 12, one of my former graduate students, who is now a postdoctoral fellow at the Weizmann Institute in Israel, cautioned me when I was about to use the phrase "a mile wide but only an inch deep", saying that this phrase might not be familiar to people in the Philippines. I wanted to use the phrase since it had been used to describe in general terms one of the biggest problems of K-12 education in the United States. Seeing the initial framework of DepEd's K to 12 made me think that the Philippines might just be jumping into the same problem. There is indeed something that is in the past and the present that helps in seeing the future. Similar to constructing homes, the past and the present tell us where the danger zones are and we should therefore not build in those areas.

Another instrument in forecasting is seeing a trend. In education reform, the question is what are other countries doing. John Merrow, an education reporter for the National Public Radio in the United States, maintains a blog called "Taking Note, Thoughts on Education from John Merrow". Much of the remaining points in this post are from his recent article entitled, "Schools Do Need a Weatherman" (of course, the title of his article also inspired the title of this post), where he introduced four programs that might describe the future of basic education in the United States. Each of the four programs describe an important vision. Each one is a possible road map, each one is expressing a value. Thus, it is useful to enumerate these programs and describe each one briefly:

A New Learning Objective for Basic Education.  John Merrow cites the works of Dr. James P. Comer of Yale University on school development, which has the following core beliefs:

• Child rearing, child development and learning are inextricably linked;
• Development starts early and must be a continuous process;
• Children's most meaningful learning occurs through positive and supportive relationships with caring and nurturing adults;
• Parents are children's first teachers;
• All parents, staff and community members, regardless of social or economic status, have an important contribution to make in improving students' education and their preparation for life; therefore
• Adults must interact collaboratively and sensitively with one another in order to bring out the best in children

Dr. James P. Comer on Student-Centered High School

A Comer's school is therefore designed not only to address pupils but the society in general. A Comer's school is actively engaged in helping the society by preparing its members for a family that is supportive of a child's growth, development and learning. This indeed sounds more like "responsible parenthood". 

Core Knowledge.  With this philosophy, developed by E.D. Hirsch, Jr., "Education for All" means recognizing that education has fundamentals, which all students should be given an opportunity to learn. This is the core, which is roughly half of the current K-12 curriculum of the United States. Core Knowledge is therefore described as the content and skills that should be addressed from kindergarten to grade 8:

To dowload, visit  http://www.coreknowledge.org/mimik/mimik_uploads/documents/480/CKFSequence_Rev.pdf 

Core Knowledge does address the problem of having a curriculum that is a "mile wide but only an inch deep". And in distilling the curriculum while adding depth and mastery, basic education can be achieved in nine years. 

Quality PreSchool. As a previous post, "Focus on the Early Years", pointed out, the United States is very much aware of the importance of early childhood education. And to reiterate, here is that quote from Kevin Drum of Mother Jones:

...Here you go. There are two big things we could do if we really wanted to improve our childrens' future: aggressively get rid of all the remaining lead in our soil and in old houses — all of it — and spend a bunch of money on high-quality early childhood interventions among poor and working-class families. If we don't think we have the money — an argument I'll put off to another day — we should take it out of the K-12 budgets. We'd be better off with 100% more pre-K and 20% less K-12 than we are with our current funding priorities....

The rationale is simple. One problem that basic education clearly faces is the gap that is already present among children on their first day of school. Such gap only widens with each grade level. Quality preschool addresses this initial gap. It is solving the problem before it gets bigger.

Removing the Last Two Years of High School. This is the punch line. John Merrow takes Kevin Drum's suggestion one step further. To provide the necessary funding for quality preschool, two years may be removed from high school. Merrow writes:

About 10% of high school students are taking college courses in Minnesota, New York and elsewhere. I would open up “early college” to anyone who’s motivated, because it’s a win-win all around. 

Eventually, in this approach, senior year will disappear, and perhaps junior year as well, as education becomes seamless. The savings should be used for pre-school programs.

And to support this, a special school in Texas is cited:

Learning Matters, Early College HS in South Texas Part 1

Learning Matters, Early College HS in South Texas Part 2

Contrast the above four visions against DepEd's K to 12. Congressman Palatino recently shared in his blog some contents of one of the new teaching modules. 

Under the household service TLE subject, children will learn about the professional code of conduct or ethics of a household worker. They will be taught how to ‘maintain a professional image’ as household workers. Other topics include ‘Desirable Traits of a Household Worker’ and ‘Duties and Responsibilities of a Household Worker.’ At the end of the semester, students will be able to identify and operate a vacuum cleaner, floor polisher, and other cleaning materials. The teaching module also gives valuable tips to K-12 students and future supermaids:

Household workers should not sexually harass clients. Sexual harassment includes sexual advances, sexual solicitation, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature. 

Household workers should not use derogatory language in their written or verbal communications to or about clients. 

When setting fees, Household workers should receive fee that are fair, reasonable, and commensurate with the services performed. Consideration should be given to clients’ ability to pay. 

Household workers should make reasonable efforts to ensure continuity of services in the event that services are interrupted by factors such as unavailability, relocation, illness, disability, or death. 

They should take reasonable steps to avoid abandoning clients who are still in need of services.

-From Congressman Palatino's  K-12: TESDA IN HIGH  SCHOOL

Another major difference is the Department's introduction of a perfunctory kindergarten program. And of course, the fact that DepEd's K to 12 vision is adding two years to basic education while those in the United States are beginning to think of removing two years. DepEd does need a "PAGASA" to help it determine which direction the wind is really blowing.