CLICK HERE FOR BLOGGER TEMPLATES AND MYSPACE LAYOUTS

Thursday, October 18, 2007

COMMENT: A $460-Million Question



MINDAVIEWS

Patricio P. Diaz

GENERAL SANTOS CITY

Why did the government buy P329-million worth of textbooks and
computer equipment with instructional materials for the public schools
only to be left unused, gathering molds, moth-eaten and deteriorating
in stockrooms all over the country? This the Commission on Audit
revealed in its 2006 report (INQUIRER.net, Oct. 10).

As generally broken down: (1) 2.5 million copies of textbooks or
instructional materials costing around P186.96 million; (2) P136.84
million worth of computers coming in ICT (information and technology
communication) packages – each package consisting of 349 units of
computers with compact discs, workbooks and teacher's manuals as aids
of instruction for English, Math and Sciences for elementary schools,
and English, Chemistry and Geography for high school.

What explanations did the COA get?

Books

The textbooks did not comply with the revised education curriculum and
the minimum learning competencies. Many of the books were riddled
with factual and grammatical errors. And many more which were
purchased by the local governments duplicated the books procured by
the national government.

Other reasons appeared incredulous: the teachers refused to accept the
books for fear of liability for losses; the books could not be used on
a 1:1 ratio; and, the purchase was unplanned.

From the COA's recommendations, the following can be deduced: (1) the
Department of Education had not determined the actual textbook
situations as a basis for the preparation of an allocation and
distribution list and for monitoring the distribution; (2) no
permanent personnel were tasked to procure and distribute the books;
and, (3) there were no sanctions for the loss suffered by the
government.

ICT Packages

As INQUIRER.net reported:

In Central Luzon, the computer textbooks were not appropriate for the
schoolchildren's required level of competency so the P6 million worth
of computer equipment bought out of the Priority Development
Assistance Fund were traced to a congressional office.

In the Western Visayas, the ICT packages were delivered to eight
school divisions; 280 units were used in the offices of principals and
district supervisors for preparing reports and financial statements,
not for instructional purposes.

Why were the 280 units not used for instructional purposes? The
computer supplier did not provide the teachers the training to operate
the computers and most of the CDs could not be installed. Some
principals said it was safer to keep the computers in their offices
for they could not set up laboratories for lack of secured
air-conditioned rooms, maintenance funds and trained teachers.

In the Eastern Visayas, 766 units remained idle in stockrooms due to
defects.

In Agusan del Sur, because of the wet weather in the province, 8,244
video tapes and CDs were destroyed by molds. Defective VHS players
could not be repaired because spare parts were unavailable as they had
become obsolete; besides, there were no funds for repair.

COA reports for other regions should be as revealing, interesting and
galling.

Passing the Buck

From the COA findings, it is clear that the purchases of textbooks and
of ICT equipment – as well as the ICT program – were not well
planned;
the teachers were untrained for the program and the use and
maintenance of the equipment; besides the lack of maintenance funds,
as the computers and other equipment became obsolete, no spare parts
were available for repair.

Planning, teacher' training, and funding are the responsibilities of
the Department of Education. Yet, Education Secretary Jesli Lapus is
blaming the mess on the local government units that did some of the
purchases from 1999 to 2002. He also blamed the policies under
Secretaries Andrew Gonzales (1998-2001) and Raul Roco (2001-2002)
(INQUIRER.net, Oct. 10).

Undersecretary Vilma Labrador for programs and projects said that the
department's policies for procurement and distribution have already
been revised and "most of the COA findings have already been
satisfactorily addressed". This is meant to assure that the
P329-million mess will not be repeated.

But it is not enough for Lapus to pass the buck to the LGUs and for
Labrador to assure that the mess will not happen again? For helping,
the LGUs should not be blamed. The accountability falls on Labrador's
and other concerned department top officials – not on the now
deceased
Gonzales and Roco. Will Lapus just allow Labrador and the other most
responsible officials wash their hands of the P329-million mess?

Bigger Question

Lapus only evaded the P329-million question: What was the real purpose
of the textbook and ICT equipment procurement project? Who benefited
most? After the project's failure, these questions will continue to
annoy and scandalize us. But this is only like an appetizer. A bigger
$460-million question looms -- the Arroyo government's Cyber Education
Project

What is this project about? INQUIRER.net (Oct. 11) stated it simply:
"The CEP aims to fill gaps in the education system by using satellite
technology to deliver key learning concepts and other educational
services to every school in the country through [the television]." A
$460-million gap-filler!

Secretary Lapus calls the project the "best thing to happen to
Philippine education". President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo says it is
"an investment that the government should make to reduce poverty in
the country". Are these well-studied or just off-the-cuff
observations?

But INQUIRER.net, in three separate postings last October 11, reported
serious questions on the project – the latest of the many questions

from educators and members of Congress.

Educator Antonio Calipjo-Go observed: "No First World country has
adopted this kind of project and no studies have been conducted to
determine the effectiveness of TV-based instruction in basic
education." This questions the effectiveness of the project.

[NOTE: In the United States, many universities offer graduate and post
graduate studies through the internet. Currently, 2.5 million are
taking on-line courses. One student taking a doctoral course said the
on-line lectures are as good as the on-site (classroom) lectures.
Certain units must be earned on-site. (Google) Inspired, Arroyo must
have modeled CEP after this.]

Party-list Rep. Luz Ilagan, an educator, asked: "What's the rush? As
yet, none of the questions that have been raised on the Cyber-Ed
Project have been answered. Where is the contract? And what are its
ramifications? Is it feasible? Does it answer the needs of our
country's education system?"

Sen. Francis Escudero, noting that 7,000 of the 42,000 barangays or
villages in the country are without electricity, asked: "Would a 15-
or 20-minute lesson per subject per day be useful, especially when our
students don't have electricity, classrooms, books, desks, and
teachers?"

Concerns

The problem perennially bugging Philippine education system is the
lack of classrooms, desks, books and teachers. These are basic
requirements in effective education. This lack CEP, with an
allocation of $460 million or more than P21 billion, is intending to
remedy. Will the remedy effectively work under such very un-ideal
conditions?

In its study, the Alliance of Concerned Teachers (ACT) showed that the
P21 billion can (1) fund the construction of 51,913 classrooms; (2)
hire two million teachers; (3) buy 336 million chairs; or (4) acquire
434 million new books. Why not use the CEP fund to first solve the
perennial problem?

With the P21 billion, all the necessary computers, CDs, televisions,
etc. will be procured. Then the many problems arise: With the lack or
poor state of classrooms, where will the equipment be installed? With
teachers untrained in ICT technology, who will operate the equipment?
In remote places where there is no electricity, how can the equipment
operate? Will there be funds to keep the system in tip-top condition?

ACT asked: "How can the DepEd be entrusted with the $460-million Cyber
Education Project when it cannot even manage the most basic logistical
tasks, such as the distribution of textbooks?" Bulls-eye! Will it be
able to maintain the high-tech ICT equipment when it was unable to
maintain the computers under the failed ICT project?

Of greater concern is the CEP's effectiveness on the children. The
lessons will be given from centers – whether national, regional,
division or district is not known. How can the lessons be suited to a
very wide variance of learning competencies of children in the urban
and remote schools? There will be more learning concerns.

Grave Doubt

That the ICT equipment will be procured, don't doubt it. Companies are
just waiting for bidding or negotiation. Last week, the president of
one such company explained to educators having their seminar and
convention in Baguio City the "benefits of digital convergence … to
enhance learning in public schools and improve its (DepEd's)
services".

But beyond procurement, what? Ilagan raised this concern: "Because of
the questions and doubts surrounding the project, it seems there is a
rush not to upgrade the education system but a rush to create another
white elephant and perhaps another possible source of kickbacks." That
was being brutally frank.

Escudero, chair of the Senate ways and means committee, expressed a
similar doubt -- that the CEP "might be overpriced".

By Philippine "SOP system", in the P329-million mess unearthed by COA,
how much did the suppliers of the undelivered textbooks and misused
ICT packages overprice their bids to take care of the commissions
while keeping untouched their hefty profits?

The $460-dollar question: Who will benefit most from the CEP?

###