SiteMap •  Links • Search

Statistics on Philippine Education: Good News and Bad News!
by Dr. Romulo A. Virola ¹
Secretary General, NSCB

Newsweek says Asia’s globalized youth have been cast as “money-grubbing me-firsters”. While this characterization may aptly apply to the conspicuous, capitalistic young consumers of the emerging economic powers of the region, and while Dr. Jose P. Rizal’s hope of the fatherland may not exactly fit this tag to a tee, it pains me to hear about many of our brilliant, young students dropping out of college to work in the call centers.  Yes, the call centers where the money seems to be.

 And I am not sure this bothersome trend is all because of the upward spiral in the cost of education. Or because of the educational plan debacle precipitated by the unsocial corporate proclivity towards greed, for which no one has been punished except the insured (or so their parents thought) young boys and girls,  who have since been forced to stop schooling. So why are our young Pinoys  sacrificing their education and our future for the megabucks of these call centers? Of course the call centers can help us attain the economic growth that we need to be able to reduce poverty. But is education no longer the asset that we of the older generation treasured? Have our education officials failed so badly in their mission that  our young Pinoys now give less value to education than they would dancing to the music of boom tarat tarat? Isn’t there anything anyone can do to contain the fascination of our society for our children to become singers and dancers rather than scientists and engineers?

I tell you, the situation is serious. Statistics stare in our very faces showing the continuing decline in the quality of our human resources. Statistically Speaking has spoken a few times about the importance of education and vaticinated the dangerous direction we are headed to if we do not heed the call trumpeted by those statistics. In fact, among the 8 MDGs, it is on education targets that we seem to be lagging most behind! As we start the year of the fire pig, let me thus call attention once more to the need to give the highest priority to education by citing some statistics, both good and bad.

The UNESCO Institute of Statistics (UIS) compiles education data from 63 countries through the World Education Indicators (WEI) Programme and came up with a report ² that presents data for the school year ending in 2004 on educational attainment, sources and uses of financing in education, school participation and teacher and learning environment. Out of the 63 countries, 19 are referred to as the WEI ³ countries of which, the Philippines ⁴ is one, 30 are from the OECD ⁵ and the rest are countries from which the UNESCO, OECD and the Eurostat are able to collect data. The report tells us the following ⁶ :

1. HIGHER BUT ERODING ADVANTAGE IN LEVEL OF EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT - In terms of educational attainment, the overall standing of the country is quite good but the emerging trend portends of a bleak future (Table 1).
   
   1.1. 27 out of 100 Pinoys aged 25-64 have completed at least tertiary education. This proportion is higher than in Indonesia, Malaysia and Thailand; higher than the average for the 19 WEI countries; and would you believe, even higher than the average for the 30 OECD countries ⁷ ! In fact, Table 1 shows that the proportion of college graduates is highest among Pinoys for all age groups. The sad thing is that many of our college graduates have ended up working as domestic helpers or as caregivers, jobs which are by all means decent, but for which one does not really need college education. Why?
   
   1.2. A similar situation is true for upper secondary education ⁸ except that the proportion for OECD countries and for the younger Malaysians (15-24 years of age) already exceeded the corresponding proportions for the Philippines. This is the dangerous trend. Have our young Pinoys lost interest in learning? Because their parents cannot afford the cost? And the high cost does not give them the commensurate return on their investments? Because the teachers no longer motivate nor inspire? Or is this the result of the ugly transformation of our society from one that cherishes education to one that encourages young boys and girls to enroll in voice and dancing schools, and never mind if they miss their formal classes? Price of poverty or a case of distorted priorities? If it is because of the present high cost of education, why was education more affordable in the good old days? Is there failure of governance somewhere? Come to think of it, why are “catholic” schools some of the most expensive in town? Don’t they anymore preach about the blessedness of the poor?
   
   1.3. Lower secondary education ⁹ is even more foreboding! While we are still doing better than Thailand and Indonesia and the WEI countries on the average, the advantage that Malaysia has gained for upper secondary education has expanded to the 15-44 age bracket for lower secondary education. In other words, our edge over Malaysia in the attainment of at least lower secondary education ended as early as the sixties! And the wide education gap we the older generation of Pinoys enjoyed over Thailand and Indonesia has been dissipated by our bagets.
   
   1.4. But the saddest is glaringest! Whatever educational advantage your lolos and lolas had over their counterparts in Thailand and Indonesia will be completely wiped out sooner than you can sillily sing “Ang pula pula ng bulaklak”! Because among those aged 15-34, the proportion of Pinoys having completed at least primary education at 88-91% is already lower than that for the three ASEAN countries participating in the WEI programme at 92-99%. What is happening to our country, Super Inggo?
   
   
   
2. MATH AND SCIENCE STUDY SHOWS POOR RESULTS - The diminishing importance we give to education is all too obvious in the results of the 2003 Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) ¹⁰. Table 2 tells us that among 45 countries that participated in the TIMSS for eighth-grade students, the Philippines ranked 41st in Math and 42nd in Science. Our score was more than 100 points lower than Malaysia and more than 200 points lower than Singapore, which ranked first! Among 25 countries that joined the study among fourth-grade students, we ranked 23rd in both Math and Science, again with scores more than 200 points lower than the first-ranked Singapore!
   
   
   
3. LOW INVESTMENTS ON EDUCATION - If we look at the financing/investment on education (Tables 3, 4 and 5), it leads us to one possible reason for our underperformance in education. We spend only 3.3% of our GDP on public educational institutions for all levels of education; this is lower than the 7.4% for Malaysia, 4.0% for Thailand, 4.0% average for all WEI countries and 5.2% average for the OECD countries, albeit higher than the 1.0% spent by Indonesia! Similar story for our public expenditure on education as a percentage of total public spending. At all levels of education we spend only 17.2%, way below the 40.0% spent by Thailand and 28.0% by Malaysia, but slightly higher than the 16.9% average for the WEI countries and higher than the 13.3% average for the OECD countries. When viewed from the absolute levels of financing in education ¹¹, the story is even more telling. As a result, our expenditures per student of 500, 505 and 1,718 PPP ¹² dollars for primary education, secondary education and tertiary education, respectively, pale in comparison to our competitors. Malaysia spends 1,830, 2,920 and 10,792 PPP dollars while Thailand spends 3,442, 2,484 and 4,474 PPP dollars! How we envy the OECD countries that have the resources to spend more than 10 times what we spend per student in primary and secondary education! If only we did not have to spend so much for defense or corruption?
   
   
   
4. LOW SALARIES OF TEACHERS - And of course, everybody knows that our teachers are so grossly underpaid many of them have decided to work outside the country as caregivers if not domestic helpers. As Table 6 shows, in the Philippines, it does not matter much whether one is just starting his/her teaching career or has acquired many years of experience. The annual salary of a Pinoy teacher hovers around a narrow band of 9-11 thousand PPP dollars. But look at Thailand – while starting salary is lower, after 15 years of experience, a Thai teacher gets more than 14 thousand PPP dollars and at the top of the scale gets more than 27 thousand PPP dollars. Malaysia pays its teachers even more, especially those in the secondary level. No wonder then that some of our neglected teachers spend their recess reciting “Hoy, Mani, Mani, kayo diyan!”
   
   
   
5. GENDER DISPARITY IN EDUCATION FAVORS FEMALES - In terms of gender equity in education, Table 7 confirms what many of us know! Pinays are getting more than their fair share! The percentage of female enrolment to total enrolment in the Philippines is at least 50% in the different levels of education except for primary education at 49%. In fact, the WEI report shows the Philippines as one of the countries where disparity in education is generally in favor of the females! Just look around you – you hear all those intelligent and articulate ( but sometimes artekulit ) women!

More can be said by reading the WEI report. But one conclusion is safe: in education, we used to be better than many of our neighbors and competitors! Not anymore, or at least not much longer! Time to wake up! Maybe time to shift entertainment from Boom Tarat Tarat to something else!

It is heartwarming to hear that Oprah Winfrey has set up in Henly-on-Klip, a town in South Africa 40 miles out of Johannesburg, the Oprah Winfrey Leadership Academy for Girls. Oprah has spent US $40 million to fund the education of talented but underprivileged African girls. Good for these girls! To the big-hearted, beautiful Oprah, will the Pinoy girls ever get their turn?

Table 1. Educational Attainment of the Adult Population of Selected WEI countries by Age Group

		Age Group
	Year	25-64	15-19	20-24	25-34	35-44	45-54	55-64
At least completed primary education
Indonesia	2003/04	81	97	93	93	84	73	48
Malaysia	2003	93	99	98	98	95	90	76
Philippines	2003/04	82	90	91	88	84	78	67
Thailand	2004/05	55	97	95	92	54	25	16
WEI Average of selected countries	2004	78	96	94	93	79	67	52
WEI Average of all countries	2004	81	95	94	91	84	76	63
At least completed lower secondary education
Indonesia	2003/04	42	60	63	55	42	31	17
Malaysia	2003	65	93	88	83	71	49	26
Philippines	2003/04	64	80	82	74	66	55	40
Thailand	2004/05	33	73	74	50	33	20	13
WEI Average of selected countries	2004	50	77	77	66	53	39	24
WEI Average of all countries	2004	57	73	76	69	60	51	36
At least completed upper secondary education
Indonesia	2003/04	23	9	36	32	24	17	8
Malaysia	2003	44	68	73	59	47	30	16
Philippines	2003/04	51	38	67	61	53	43	31
Thailand	2004/05	23	14	50	34	23	14	8
WEI Average of selected countries	2004	35	32	57	47	37	26	16
WEI Average of all countries	2004	42	25	56	50	44	36	25
OECD Average of all countries	2004	67	…	…	77	71	64	53
At least completed tertiary education
Indonesia	2003/04	4	n.	2	5	5	4	2
Malaysia	2003	12	6	25	17	12	8	5
Philippines	2003/04	27	16	40	33	27	23	18
Thailand	2004/05	13	n.	14	18	13	10	6
WEI Average of selected countries	2004	14	6	20	18	14	11	8
WEI Average of all countries	2004	16	3	13	19	17	15	11
OECD Average of all countries	2004	25	…	…	31	27	23	18
Sources: UNESCO/UIS WEI (www.uis.unesco.org/publications/wei2006) OECD countries (www.oecd.org/edu/eag2006) Notes: … data are not available n. – magnitude is negligible

 

Table 2. Math and Science Scores/Ranks in the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) of Selected Countries

Scores and Ranks for Eighth-Grade Students, 2003
Country	Math Score	Math Rank	Science Score	Science Rank
International Average	466		473
Philippines	378	41	377	42
Indonesia	411	34	420	36
Malaysia	508	10	510	20
Singapore	605	1	578	1
Japan	570	5	552	6
USA	504	15	527	9
Scores and Ranks for Fourth-Grade Students, 2003
International Average	495		489
Philippines	358	23	332	23
Chinese Taipei	564	4	551	2
Hongkong SAR	575	2	542	4
Singapore	594	1	565	1
Japan	565	3	543	3
USA	518	12	536	6
Source: International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement

 

Table 3. Expenditure on Educational Institutions as a Percentage of GDP of Selected WEI and OECD countries

 

Table 4. Public expenditure on education as a percentage of total public spending of selected WEI and OECD countries

 

Table 5. Annual expenditure on educational institutions per student of selected WEI and OECD countries, in PPP dollars , by level of education

 

Table 6. Teachers’ salaries in PPP ollars by level of education of selected WEI and OECD countries

 

Table 7. Female enrolment as a percentage of total enrolment by level of education of selected WEI and OECD countries

 

Reactions and views are welcome thru email to the author at ra.virola@nscb.gov.ph.

 

_______________
¹ Secretary General of the National Statistical Coordination Board (NSCB) and Chairman of the Statistical Research and Training Center (SRTC). He holds a Ph. D. in Statistics from the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor, USA and has taught mathematics and statistics at the University of the Philippines. He is also a past president of the Philippine Statistical Association. The author thanks Debbie Ann P. Sarmiento for the assistance in the preparation of the article.

²   The report is entitled “Education Counts, Benchmarking Progress in 19 WEI Countries, World Education Indicators 2006” released last 12 September. In the report, educational attainment refers only to formal schooling.

³   WEI countries are the following: Argentina, Brazil, Chile, China, Egypt, India, Indonesia, Jamaica, Jordan, Malaysia, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Russian Federation, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Tunisia, Uruguay and Zimbabwe.

⁴   The report credits DepEd Undersecretary Ramon C. Bacani and Assistant Secretary Lilia Z. Roces as the contributors from the Philippines.

5  OECD countries are the following: Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Luxembourg, Mexico, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Slovakia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, United Kingdom and the United States.

⁶   The WEI and OECD means are calculated as the unweighted mean of the data values of WEI and OECD countries for which data are available or can be estimated.

⁷   The OECD average does not include data for individuals aged 15-24 years. But for ages 25-64, the Philippine average is still slightly higher than the OECD average.

⁸   UNESCO defines upper secondary education as the final stage of secondary education in most countries, instruction is often organized even more along subject lines and teachers typically need a higher or more subject specific qualification than at the lower secondary education.

⁹   UNESCO defines lower secondary education as generally designed to continue the basic programmes of the primary level but the teaching is typically more subject-focused, requiring more specialized teachers for each subject area.

¹⁰  Conducted by the International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Attainment. The Philippines participated in the 1999 and 2003 studies but may no longer do so in the next TIMSS to be conducted this year due to “budget limitations”.

¹¹  The Philippine GDP is the lowest among the 5 original members of the ASEAN.

¹²  Purchasing Power Parity

Posted 08 January 2007.

Statistically Speaking

Main Page

Related Links

Press Releases

Announcements

For the Record

E-Newsletter

Media Services

Events

 

	E-mail the webmaster	Terms of Use					Home • Top of Page
		1997-2009, National Statistical Coordination Board Makati City, Philippines