Rolando D. Dollete, Ph.D.
Professor
Reporter
EMMANUEL DG. VILLA AGUSTIN
MSEd - Math
History – the branch oh knowledge that records and
analyses past events
Project– a task or planned program of work that
requires a large amount of time, effort and planning.
Development – the process of changing and becoming
larger, stronger, or more impressive, successful, or
advanced, or of causing something to change.
Analysis – the examination of something in detail in order to
understand it better of draw conclusions from it
Planning – is a method of doing something that is
worked out in advance
• According to this definition, planning is
nothing exceptional. Human beings have
been planning in one way or another since
rational thinking emerged. However, as a
formalized way of organizing development
in complex societies, planning is an
invention of the twentieth century.
• The preparation of directive development
plans has been the backbone of socialist
states since the communist revolution of
1917.
• But, soon after the Second World
War, several non-socialist
countries in Western Europe (e.g.,
France and the Netherlands) and
elsewhere (Japan) adopted the
idea of indicative planning as an
instrument for post-war recovery
and the development which
followed it .
• Contrary to the socialist directive
planning, indicative planning
accepts the primacy of private
market economies, but it tries to
guide investments toward national
priority objectives, avoid
duplication of efforts and, to the
extent possible, reduce cyclical
instability.
Traditional Educational Planning
Over time, various forecasting techniques and
simulation models were developed which aimed at
orienting the educational investments either
according to the needs of the labour market
(manpower approach), or to the social demand for
education (social demand approach), or to the
needs of education sub-sectors with the best rate
of return (cost-benefit approach), or to a more-orless harmonious combination of these three
approaches.
• Manpower approach
This approach that has it that planning should
consider human resource in all fields required
for country. Education planning should be skilled
based, expected man power. Based on demand
supply principle, need based.
• The social demand approach
This approach requires the education authorities
to provide schools and find facilities for all
students who demand admission and who are
qualified to enter.
• The Cost-Benefit Analysis holds that for an
individual or government to be able to make a
wise decision concerning investment, it must
calculate the cost of such a project, the benefits
to be derived from it and the alternative for
investing in that particular project
At the beginning of the 1960s,
educational planning was seen as a
‘must’ for the newly independent
countries in order for them to move
ahead quickly and systematically with
their human resource development.
Planning units were set up in ministries
of education but were highly dependent
on external expertise.
Philippines
According to the Department of Education,
today’s educational planning in the Philippines
can claim an unbroken history even before the
establishment of our formal educational system.
During the pre-Spanish era and the period of
more than four centuries when the Philippines
was a possession of Spain and of the United
States there was a long and routine sort of
educational planning though it was not visible
enough to compare with the present
educational planning activities.
At a minimum, they had to estimate how many
students there would be, how many classroom,
teachers, desks and books would be needed to
serve them adequately; how much money these
would require, where the money would come
from; and how and when it would be spent.
This process was educational planning which
was taken for granted as a normal part of the
school administrators’ job. Much more in some
instances. It was abused that it led to wasteful
imbalances of our much limited school inputs.
Development of Educational Planning
In 1954, the defunct Congress of the
Philippines created the Board of National
Education through Republic Act No. 1124, Its
broad functions were:
• to formulate the objectives and basic
policies of education in conformity with the
Constitution;
• to coordinate the objectives, functions, and
activities of different types of educational
institutions; and
• set up general goals of accomplishments for
the entire school system.
The Board, aside from being the highest
policy making body in education has
been known as the first official planning
body for education. Initially, its activities
that were concentrated on the public
school system were integrated with the
national development plan.
Republic Act No. 4372 amended Republic Act No.
1124 and provided among others the following
additional functions of the Board of National
Education;
• To establish guidelines, policies, and criteria on the
basis of which the examination, evaluation and
approval of textbooks by the Board of Textbooks
shall be made.
• To compile educational statistics, keep records on
education, conduct researches, surveys, and
studies on educational conditions and problems,
evaluate the effects of national educational policies
and undertake such other activities as to effectively
carry out all purpose of this act.
To secure data and information from all
government offices and entities and
educational institutions, public and
private, and to consult and confer with
the offices and personnel thereof, on
such matters as may be necessary for
the Board to discharge its functions.
To submit an annual report to the President
and to Congress not later than January thirtyfirst of each year which shall include a
compilation of the national educational
policies formulated by the Board, an
evaluation of the national educational
system, and recommendation to the
Executive and Legislative branches of the
government on the improvement of the
educational system of the country.
Operational planning then in the
Department of Educational originated
from its three bureaus. Although in
principle these bureau-sectoral plans
were consolidated at the level of the
Secretary of Education, in practice they
were submitted to the Office of the
President with hardly any substantial
change and were not coursed through the
Board of National Education unless they
involved changes in curricula and
standards.
The following were the basic criteria by the
Bureau of Public Schools for 1965-1970 was
such a resource-oriented program. It was
formulated by an Ad-Hoc Committee on
Educational created by the Director of Public
Schools in 1964.
In the Bureau of Vocational Education, an
attempt was made to relate projected
occupational requirements to vocationaltechnical education, but the conclusions were
primarily directed towards the cost of vocational
education and did not establish actual physical
targets.
It can be said that in the past years
the partial educational planning in
the Philippines, both of policy and
implementing levels, was more
concerned with “humanistic values”,
quality of instruction, and “costdetermination” , than integration into
the general strategy for accelerated
economic development, according to
the DECS.
Through the Office of the Division of
Educational Planning, the
Department of Education conducted
a comprehensive review of the
educational system in coordination
with the Presidential Commission to
Survey Philippine Education (PCSPE).
One of the concrete measures recommended by
the PCSPE was to expand the planning Division.
Consequently, Educational Decree of 1972
provides in part…….”the National Board of
Education (NBE) shall be assisted by an office of
planning and research known as planning Service
in the Department of Education , the Planning
Service of the Department of Education and
Culture secondary and higher education .
“The proposed Division of Planning and
Programming of the Department of Education
was expected to consolidate the Plans of the
Bureaus into Five-Year Department of Education
Report which would establish priorities
Evolution of Educational Planning in the Philippines
The more significant ones were the Monroe
Survey in 1925, the United Nations Economic
and Social Commission (UNESCO) Mission in
1949, the joint Congressional Committee of
Education Survey of 1949, the Swanson
Survey in 1960, the Presidential Commission
to Survey Philippine Education (PCSPE) in
1970, and the Congressional Committee on
Education (EDCOM). It has been pointed out
by the PCSPE that educational planning is not
one of the strengths of Philippine education.
This observation is supported by several
factors, namely:
(a) the lack of a clear definition of the role
of education in national development,
(b) the absence of long-range goal setting
performance targets for each operational
component of the educational system,
(c) the absence of policy guidelines that
define the proper function of each
educational level or sector,
d) the nature of decision making process
of both individuals and educational
institutions that is based on forced
choice rather than guided selection; and
(e) the disproportionate magnitude of
educational responsibility relative to the
capacity of the economy to support the
corresponding requirements for
educational service.
The promulgation of Presidential Decree
No. 6-A, popularly known as the
Educational Development Decree of
1992, gave emphasis to educational
planning in education. The Decree
provided for “… a broad general
education that will assist each individual
… to respond effectively to changing
needs and conditions of the nation
through a system of educational planning
and evaluation.”
The Integrated Reorganization Plan of
1972 put this into action by providing an
office for Planning Service in the
reorganized structure of the then
Department of Education and Culture.
The three decades that followed had been
problematic for tertiary education in the
country. State-run universities and colleges
had mushroomed from 23 in 1972 and 78 in
1984. Today, there are 108 tax-funded
colleges and universities in the Philippines.
As a consequence of this proliferation of
SUCs, the budget for education significantly
increased from 1978 to 1990 resulting to the
ballooning of the budget and external debt.
Eventually, the budget of many SUCs had to
be cut due to reduced public budget and
increased debt burden.
The issuance of Letter of Instruction No.
1461 on May 23, 1985 provided the
necessary impetus for planning among
SUCs. The LOI required SUCs to
formulate long-term development plans
including a physical development plan
that support the manpower goals of the
region where the SUCs are located and
of the entire country.
Moreover, each university or college
is mandated to identify a field of
specialization that is defined in its
charter, its capability to implement
well taking into account its available
resources, and the educational
opportunities in other SUCs and
private education institutions in the
area.
Answering the call, the Department of
Education, Culture and Sports (DECS),
forerunner of the Department of Education
(DepEd), organized two training programs on
institutional development planning in
collaboration with the Development Academy
of the Philippines and the Philippine
Association of State Colleges and
Universities.
The Congressional Commission on Education
(EDCOM) study of 1992 found that the quality of
Philippine education was declining continuously. As a
result, the EDCOM recommended the restructuring of
the Department of Education, Culture and Sports into
three agencies, namely:
the Commission on Higher Education, which
oversees tertiary and vocational-technical education,
the Technical Education and Skills Development
Authority, which is responsible for short-term
manpower skills training,
and the Department of Education, Culture and Sports,
which was renamed as the Department of Basic
Education, which will take charge of kindergarten,
elementary, and secondary education.
The Commission on Higher Education came
up with its first Long-Term Higher Education
Development Plan (1996-2005). The plan
served as the blueprint of change, reform and
innovation in higher education. Subsequently,
the Commission required all SUCs and
CHED- supervised higher education
institutions in the country to formulate and
submit their respective ten-year development
plan. In the private sector, the preparation of a
long-term plan is a requirement for the grant
of permit to operate a college or university.
In 2010, then-Senator Benigno
Aquino III expressed his desire to
implement the K-12 basic education
cycle to increase the number of
years of compulsory education to
thirteen years. According to him, this
will "give everyone an equal chance
to succeed" and "have quality
education and profitable jobs".
After further consultations and
studies, the government under
President Aquino formally adopted
the K-6-4-2 basic education system-one year of kindergarten, six years
of elementary education, four years
of junior high school education and
two years of senior high school
education.
Kindergarten was formally made
compulsory by virtue of the Kindergarten
Education Act of 2012, while the further
twelve years were officially put into law
by virtue of the Enhanced Basic
Education Act of 2013. Although DepEd
has already implemented the K-12
Program since SY 2011-2012, it was still
enacted into law to guarantee its
continuity in the succeeding years.