SALIENT POINT OF K-12 PROGRAM

The K to 12 Program covers Kindergarten and 12 years of basic education

(six years of primary education, four years of Junior High School, and two years of

Senior High School [SHS]) to provide sufficient time for mastery of concepts and

skills, develop lifelong learners, and prepare graduates for tertiary education,

middle-level skills development, employment, and entrepreneurship.

Every Filipino child now has access to early childhood education through

Universal Kindergarten. At 5 years old, children start schooling and are given the

means to slowly adjust to formal education.

Research shows that children who underwent Kindergarten have better completion

rates than those who did not. Children who complete a standards-based

Kindergarten program are better prepared, for primary education.

Education for children in the early years lays the foundation for lifelong learning

and for the total development of a child. The early years of a human being, from 0

to 6 years, are the most critical period when the brain grows to at least 60-70

percent of adult size..[Ref: K to 12 Toolkit]

In Kindergarten, students learn the alphabet, numbers, shapes, and colors through

games, songs, and dances, in their Mother Tongue.

Examples, activities, songs, poems, stories, and illustrations are based on local

culture, history, and reality. This makes the lessons relevant to the learners and

easy to understand.

Students acquire in-depth knowledge, skills, values, and attitudes through

continuity and consistency across all levels and subjects.

Discussions on issues such as Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR), Climate Change

Adaptation, and Information & Communication Technology (ICT) are included in the

enhanced curriculum.

Students are able to learn best through their first language, their Mother Tongue

(MT). Twelve (12) MT languages have been introduced for SY 2012-2013: Bahasa

Sug, Bikol, Cebuano, Chabacano, Hiligaynon, Iloko, Kapampangan, Maguindanaoan,

Meranao, Pangasinense, Tagalog, and Waray. Other local languages will be added in

succeeding school years.

Aside from the Mother Tongue, English and Filipino are taught as subjects starting

Grade 1, with a focus on oral fluency. From Grades 4 to 6, English and Filipino are

gradually introduced as languages of instruction. Both will become primary

languages of instruction in Junior High School (JHS) and Senior High School

(SHS).

After Grade 1, every student can read in his or her Mother Tongue. Learning in

Mother Tongue also serves as the foundation for students to learn Filipino and

English easily.

Subjects are taught from the simplest concepts to more complicated concepts

through grade levels in spiral progression. As early as elementary, students gain

knowledge in areas such as Biology, Geometry, Earth Science, Chemistry, and

Algebra. This ensures a mastery of knowledge and skills after each level.

For example, currently in High School, Biology is taught in 2nd Year, Chemistry in

3rd Year, and Physics in 4th Year. In K to 12, these subjects are connected and

integrated from Grades 7 to 10. This same method is used in other Learning Areas

like Math.

Senior High School is two years of specialized upper secondary education; students

may choose a specialization based on aptitude, interests, and school capacity. The

choice of career track will define the content of the subjects a student will take in

Grades 11 and 12. SHS subjects fall under either the Core Curriculum or specific

Tracks.

Core Curriculum

There are seven Learning Areas under the Core Curriculum. These are Languages,

Literature, Communication, Mathematics, Philosophy, Natural Sciences, and Social

Sciences. Current content from some General Education subjects are embedded in

the SHS curriculum.

Tracks

Each student in Senior High School can choose among three tracks: Academic;

Technical-Vocational-Livelihood; and Sports and Arts. The Academic track includes

three strands: Business, Accountancy, Management (BAM); Humanities, Education,

Social Sciences (HESS); and Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics

(STEM).

Students undergo immersion, which may include earn-while-you-learn opportunities,

to provide them relevant exposure and actual experience in their chosen track.

TVET (Technical Vocational Education & Training) National Certificate

After finishing Grade 10, a student can obtain Certificates of Competency (COC)

or a National Certificate Level I (NC I). After finishing a Technical-Vocational-

Livelihood track in Grade 12, a student may obtain a National Certificate Level II

(NC II), provided he/she passes the competency-based assessment of the

Technical Education and Skills Development Authority (TESDA).

NC I and NC II improves employability of graduates in fields like Agriculture,

Electronics, and Trade.

Modeling Best Practices for Senior High School

In SY 2012-2013, there are 33 public high schools, public technical-vocational high

schools, and higher education institutions (HEIs) that have implemented Grade 11.

This is a Research and Design (R&D) program to simulate different aspects of

Senior High School in preparation for full nationwide implementation in SY 2016-

2017. Modeling programs offered by these schools are based on students’

interests, community needs, and their respective capacities.

Nurturing the Holistically Developed Filipino (College and Livelihood Readiness, 21st

Century Skills)

After going through Kindergarten, the enhanced Elementary and Junior High

curriculum, and a specialized Senior High program, every K to 12 graduate will be

ready to go into different paths – may it be further education, employment, or

entrepreneurship.

Every graduate will be equipped with:

1. Information, media and technology skills,

2. Learning and innovation skills,

3. Effective communication skills, and

4. Life and career skills.

WHAT ARE THE SUBJECTS TAUGHT IN K-12 PROGRAM?

The program will run on a K-6-4-2 education model, wherein a student has to

study in grade school for 6 years, in junior high school for 4 years (grades 7 to 10),

and in senior high school for two years (grades 11 to 12).

The incoming grade 1 students of school year 2012-2011 are the so-called "guinea

pigs" of the program. DepEd started implementing its revised curriculum last

school year, when these students were in kindergarten.

Starting with this batch, no public school student in the Philippines will be

admitted to Grade 1 without taking up kindergarten.

Private schools are also covered by the program, but officials have yet to discuss

its implementation.

Based on the curriculum guide provided by DepEd, the incoming grade 1 students

will be taking up 6 subjects for an entire school year. Each subject will be taught

for a maximum of 40 minutes per day:

Reading and Writing in the Mother Tongue - 40 minutes

Oral Fluency in Filipino - 40 minutes

Edukasyon sa Pagpapakatao (EsP) - 30 minutes

Mathematics or Arithmetic - 30 minutes

Araling Panlipunan (AP) - 30 minutes

Music, Arts, Physical Education, Health (MAPEH) - 30 minutes

When the second half of the school year comes, a 7th subject, Oral Fluency in

English, will be introduced. This subject will be taught for 40 minutes.

Despite the increase in the number of subjects, the total hours to be spent by a

first grader in school would still be less.

Before this, the grade 1 level used to have only 4 subjects, each lasting an hour or

more daily:

English - 100 minutes per day

Filipino - 80 minutes per day

Mathmatics - 80 minutes per day

Sibika at Kultura - 60 minutes per day

This set of subjects, along with the schedule, was introduced when DepEd

overhauled its curriculum in 2002. Among the features of this revised curriculum is

the inclusion of the subject Makabayan.

Makabayan was not offered to students in grades 1 to 3, but some concepts of the

subject were integrated in Sibika at Kultura.

Education Secretary Armin Luistro explained that the shortened time will "make

education less stressful and more enjoyable for our young learners."

DepEd has already prepared revised curriculums for grades 2 to 6, but these will

not yet be implemented until the incoming grade 1 students reach these levels.

Incoming grade 2 to 6 students in June 2012 will not be covered anymore by the

new program -- at least for the duration of their stay in grade school.

Still no Science

Just like in the old curriculum, Science will still not be offered as a separate

subject to grade 1 students.

In the 2002 revised curriculum, Science and Health concepts were integrated in

English. But in the new program, Science will be integrated into more subjects:

Mother Tongue, English, Health, and Math.

In a forum with businessmen on March 28, Luistro explained that DepEd wants to

promote the idea that "science is a study of everyday life."

"These concepts and skills are integrated rather than discipline-based, stressing

the connections across science topics and other disciplines as well as applications

of concepts and thinking skills to real life," he said.

Just like in the old curriculum, the K to 12 program will offer Science as a separate

subject starting grade 3.

High school freshmen included

The revised curriculum will also be introduced to incoming high school freshmen, or

the grade 7 students.

They will have 2 years added in their high school period. The additional years will

offer students subjects or electives that will offer specialization depending on the

occupation or career track that students wish to pursue.

Incoming 2nd to 4th year high school students will not encounter these additional

years in high school anymore.

Based on the curriculum guide by DepEd, grade 7 will have the same subjects as in

grade 1, minus the Mother Tongue subject, since this will be offered from grades 1

to 3 only. But the high school freshmen will have the Technology and Livelihood

Education (TLE) subject, which will offer various skill-enhancing topics for the

entire high school level.

Though incoming students in grades 2 to 6 in June 2012 will not be covered by the

new program in the grade school level, they will be affected once they reach high

school.

HOW THE ASSESSMENT IS DONE?

According to Dr. Raymond Yeagley “I believe the highest value of student

assessment is to provide data and information that can support and facilitate

stronger instruction and increased student learning. As we develop assessments,

whether teacher-created tests for a single classroom or large-scale assessments

given to millions of students (frequently referred to as standardized tests), it is

crucial that we keep student benefit in the forefront of our thinking.”

We do this, of course, at a time when assessments – virtually all assessments – are

coming under attack. While challenging, it is important we determine the right

amount and kind of assessment needed for a school or classroom. To get there, we

must understand test purposes and identify appropriate uses of the test. In a 2012

study conducted for the Northwest Evaluation Association by Grunwald Associates,

parents, teachers and administrators saw great value in assessment that helps to

monitor individual student progress over time and provides information to the

teacher early enough to inform instructional planning.

There are large-scale assessments designed with a purpose of tracking growth

over time and of providing the teacher with almost immediate information on

individual student achievement and growth. These data can facilitate temporary

grouping, differentiation of instruction based on student need, and can give

evidence of content coverage at the school and district level as related to state

content standards. These tests have been validated for this purpose and have

established a track record for reliability and usefulness in informing instruction.

When these tests are used for purposes not intended in the original test design,

such as teacher evaluation, there is a new challenge. That challenge is to establish,

with research evidence, whether the test is valid for the new purpose and whether

that purpose has value for students.

Those who develop assessments have a responsibility to share the evidence that

established validity and reliability for the test purposes they support. They also

have a responsibility to respond to questions about whether their tests have been

validated for other purposes. But they must be mindful that states and school

districts have the right to decide how to use their own student data. If the tests

are to be used for purposes not currently supported by empirical evidence, as is

the case with using previously developed student assessments to determine

educator effectiveness, then the users share in the responsibility of providing the

evidence of validity for the other purposes and for creating or securing the tools

needed to implement the new purpose in a responsible way.

In the current debates about appropriate testing in the schools, those on both

sides of the issue need to take a careful look, not only at the quality of the tests,

but also at how those tests are to be used. Rhetoric that a particular test is not

valid often ignores the question, “valid for what?”

If increased student learning is our shared top priority, we must ensure that

teachers have all of the tools deemed useful to the process. Used correctly, high

quality assessment is such a tool, empowering teachers and guiding student

learning.

Assessment is a central element in the overall quality of teaching and learning in

higher education. Well designed assessment sets clear expectations, establishes a

reasonable workload (one that does not push students into rote reproductive

approaches to study), and provides opportunities for students to self-monitor,

rehearse, practise and receive feedback. Assessment is an integral component of a

coherent educational experience.

The ideas and strategies in the Assessing Student Learning resources support

three interrelated objectives for quality in student assessment in higher

education.

Three

objectives for

higher

education

assessment

1. assessment that guides and encourages effective

approaches to learning;

2. assessment that validly and reliably measures

expected learning outcomes, in particular the

higher-order learning that characterises higher

education; and

3. assessment and grading that defines and protects

academic standards.

The relationship between assessment practices and the overall quality of teaching

and learning is often underestimated, yet assessment requirements and the clarity

of assessment criteria and standards significantly influence the effectiveness of

student learning. Carefully designed assessment contributes directly to the way

students approach their study and therefore contributes indirectly, but

powerfully, to the quality of their learning.

For most students, assessment requirements literally define the curriculum.

Assessment is therefore a potent strategic tool for educators with which to spell

out the learning that will be rewarded and to guide students into effective

approaches to study. Equally, however, poorly designed assessment has the

potential to hinder learning or stifle curriculum innovation.

16 indicators of effective assessment in higher education

A checklist for quality in student assessment

1. Assessment is treated by staff and students as an integral and prominent

component of the entire teaching and learning process rather than a final

adjunct to it.

2. The multiple roles of assessment are recognised. The powerful motivating

effect of assessment requirements on students is understood and

assessment tasks are designed to foster valued study habits.

3. There is a faculty/departmental policy that guides individuals’ assessment

practices. Subject assessment is integrated into an overall plan for course

assessment.

4. There is a clear alignment between expected learning outcomes, what is

taught and learnt, and the knowledge and skills assessed — there is a closed

and coherent ‘curriculum loop’.

5. Assessment tasks assess the capacity to analyse and synthesis new

information and concepts rather than simply recall information previously

presented.

6. A variety of assessment methods is employed so that the limitations of

particular methods are minimised.

7. Assessment tasks are designed to assess relevant generic skills as well as

subject-specific knowledge and skills.

8. There is a steady progression in the complexity and demands of assessment

requirements in the later years of courses.

9. There is provision for student choice in assessment tasks and weighting at

certain times.

10. Student and staff workloads are considered in the scheduling and design of

assessment tasks.

11. Excessive assessment is avoided. Assessment tasks are designed to sample

student learning.

12. Assessment tasks are weighted to balance the developmental (‘formative’)

and judgemental (‘summative’) roles of assessment. Early low-stakes, low-

weight assessment is used to provide students with feedback.

13. Grades are calculated and reported on the basis of clearly articulated

learning outcomes and criteria for levels of achievement.

14. Students receive explanatory and diagnostic feedback as well as grades.

15. Assessment tasks are checked to ensure there are no inherent biases that

may disadvantage particular student groups.

16. Plagiarism is minimised through careful task design, explicit education and

appropriate monitoring of academic honesty.

What students value in assessment

Unambiguous expectations Students study more effectively when they know what

they are working towards. Students value, and expect, transparency in the way

their knowledge will be assessed: they wish to see a clear relationship between

lectures, tutorials, practical classes and subject resources, and what they are

expected to demonstrate they know and can do. They are also wish to understand

how grades are determined and they expect timely feedback that 1) explains the

grade they have received, 2) rewards their achievement, as appropriate, and 3)

offers suggestions for how they can improve.

‘Authentic’ tasks Students value assessment tasks they perceive to be ‘real’:

assessment tasks that present challenges to be taken seriously, not only for the

grades at stake, but also for the nature of the knowledge and skills they are

expected to demonstrate. Students value assessment tasks they believe mirror the

skills needed in the workplace. Students are anxious to test themselves and to

compare their performance against others. Assessment tasks that students

perceive to be trivial or superficial are less likely to evoke a strong commitment to

study.

Choice and flexibility Many students express a strong preference for choices in

the nature, weighting and timing of assessment tasks. This preference for

‘negotiated’ assessment is a logical extension of the trend towards offering

students more flexible ways of studying and more choice in study options. Students

who seek ‘more say’ in assessment often say they prefer to be assessed in ways

that show their particular skills in the best light. They also argue they will study

more effectively if they can arrange their timetables for submitting assessable

work to suit their overall workload. Providing higher education students with

options in assessment — in a carefully structured way — is worth considering in

many higher education courses though it is not a common practice. Encouraging

students to engage with the curriculum expectations in this way should assist them

in becoming more autonomous and independent learners.

Re-positioning the role of assessment

Capturing the full educational benefits of well-designed assessment requires many

of the conventional assumptions about assessment in higher education to be

reconsidered.

For academic staff, assessment is often a final consideration in their planning of

the curriculum. This is not to imply staff underestimate or undervalue the role or

importance of assessment, but assessment is often considered once other

curriculum decisions have been made. The primary concerns of academic staff are

often with designing learning outcomes and planning teaching and learning activities

that will produce these outcomes. In contrast, students often work ‘backwards’

through the curriculum, focusing first and foremost on how they will be assessed

and what they will be required to demonstrate they have learned.

How academic staff

view teaching and

learning

How students view

teaching and

learning

What course content

should be taught?

What should students

learn?

In what ways am I

going to be

assessed?

What do I need to

know?

What teaching and

learning methods are

appropriate?

Re-positioning

student

assessment as a

strategic tool for

enhancing

teaching and

learning

What then are the

learning objectives?

What approaches to

study should I

adopt?

How can student

learning be assessed?

Assessment can be

the final

consideration for

staff in the design

of the teaching and

learning process

Assessment is

usually at the

forefront of

students’

perception of the

teaching and

learning process

For teaching staff, recognising the potent effects of assessment requirements on

student study habits and capitalising on the capacity of assessment for creating

preferred patterns of study is a powerful means of reconceptualising the use of

assessment.

But designing assessment to influence students’ patterns of study in positive ways

can present significant challenges. Assessment in higher education must serve a

number of purposes. The overall cycle of student assessment (from the design and

declaration of assessment tasks, to the evaluation and reporting of student

achievement) must not only guide student approaches to study and provide

students with feedback on their progress, but also must determine their readiness

to proceed to the next level of study, judge their ‘fitness to practice’ and

ultimately protect and guarantee academic standards. These purposes are often

loosely placed in two categories, developmental (‘formative’ — concerned with

students’ ongoing educational progression) and judgmental (‘summative’ — where

the emphasis is on making decisions on satisfactory completion or readiness to

progress to the next level of study). Both are legitimate purposes for assessment

in higher education and effective assessment programs must be designed with both

considerations in mind.