SiteMap •  Links • Search

Will Pinoy students be survivors or will they be voted out?
by Dr. Romulo A. Virola ¹
Secretary General, NSCB

Will  Pinoy students be survivors or will they be voted out?

Since the death of Michael Jackson, we have witnessed worldwide outpouring of sympathy and support for the King of Pop.  Even among those born after the moonwalk and the Thriller, there was a surge of MJ-related Facebook feedbacks and Twitter tales! His caricatured life was forgotten and possibly forgiven, his genius recognized and remembered, and in death, he finally got the love he had longed for! Indeed, life could be so cruel!

Having lost a musical icon, for the rest of us, the show must go on!  On the day Michael died, the National Statistical Coordination Board (NSCB), in collaboration with statistics champion  Tito Rodriguez of the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) organized a forum² on poverty statistics for the basic sectors, particularly children. During the forum and in the presence of Sec. Domingo Panganiban of the National Anti-Poverty Commission (NAPC) and Ms. Vanessa Tobin of UNICEF, NSCB OIC-Assistant Secretary General Lina V. Castro reported that in 2006, as in 2003, Pinoy children accounted for the largest number of  the country’s poor, with 14.4 million of them estimated as poor³ (Figure 1).  OIC-Director Jessa O. Encarnacion also called attention to the fact that from 2000 to 2006, the human development of the country’s children, as measured through the child development index (CDI), has been deteriorating and more so between 2003 and 2006⁴.  Particularly worrisome, as has been previously pointed out by Statistically Speaking, is the deterioration of the country’s human capital with the child education index (CEI) decreasing by 0.132 index point from 2003 to 2006 (Table 1). 

With the opening of classes rudely interrupted by the pharmaceuticals’ enriching panic over the AH1N1 virus last month, the latest statistics on children pose a great challenge not only for our students to do well in school, but equally for our government, our parents and for our profitable schools to give the best education possible to the hope of our fatherland!  In January 2007, Statistically Speaking reported that the country had “higher but eroding advantage in terms of educational attainment” based on education data compiled by the UNESCO Institute of Statistics from 63 countries through the World Education Indicators Programme!  It also showed that the 2003 Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) ranked the Philippines 41st in Mathematics and 42nd in Science among 45 countries⁵!  Makes us sad if the reason our educators decided not to participate in the 2007 TIMSS is because of  these poor results. Statistics are useful but we must know how to use them! For one, we must accept them even, maybe especially if, they show us in a bad light!

We are desperately hopeful therefore that the latest statistics on children from the NSCB will get most people, particularly the dutybearers, to ask several questions and do something about them. What is in store for our children?  How prepared are our children for the challenges of their future? Our future? And what should we, as dutybearers, do?

Certainly, our Department of Education (DepEd) must be commended because it offers  tools to assess our students’ performance, through the National Achievement Test (NAT) and the National Career Assessment Examination (NCAE).  The NAT is administered to Grade VI students for the elementary level and to 2nd year high school (HS) students for the secondary level.  The NAT, administered by the National Education Testing and Research Center (NETRC) of DepEd, aims to determine students’ abilities on five subject areas: Mathematics, English, Science, Filipino and Heograpiya, Kasaysayan, at Sibika (HEKASI)/Araling Panlipunan.  The NCAE, on the other hand, was developed to improve the quality of secondary education graduates entering college.  It aims to maintain the highest quality of education in the Philippines to promote national development by leading the flow of students to courses in post-secondary institutions of learning that match their aptitude.  This was first implemented in school year (SY) 2007-2008 for 4th year HS students, and administered every August thereafter.

Data from the NETRC  allow us to follow the scholastic development of our children. Let us now look at the performance of our 4th year HS students of SY 2008-2009 in the NCAE and at the NAT when they were still in grade VI and 2nd year HS⁶. 

1.  Very slight deterioration  in the overall performance of 4th year HS students of SY 2008-2009 over time! (Table 2)  - The 4th year HS students of SY 2008-2009   registered an overall Mean Percentage Score (MPS) of close to 46.0% showing a slight decrease in performance over time since when they were grade VI and 2nd year HS students. Certainly, 46 correct answers out of 100 is no way to succeed in the knowledge-based  economies.  One might have expected higher MPSs from our students as they progress to higher levels of education, to prepare them to the much tougher and more competitive university life ahead.  Definitely a challenge to DepEd – and also to the Technical Education and Skills Development Authority (TESDA) as well as the Commission on Higher Education (CHED). And not to forget the Council for the Welfare of Children!  More than bright ideas are surely needed!

2.  Large drop in the performance in mathematics between grade VI and 2nd year HS! (Table 2) – After averaging 51 correct answers out of 100 questions in mathematics while they were in grade VI, this dropped to 39 when they reached 2nd year HS.  Despite this setback, overall performance was however maintained through a considerable increase  in the MPS in Filipino, from 42.5% in grade VI to 48.9% in 2nd year HS.

3. Slight but encouraging increases in science and mathematics between  2nd and 4th year HS!  (Table 2) – MPS in science slightly increased from 42.0% in 2nd year HS to 43.2% in 4th year HS.  The same trend was observed in mathematics, which went up from 39.1% to 41.7% between the two-year period.  We are encouraged by these results but in the fiercely competitive knowledge-based economies of the Third Millennium, encouragement is not enough! Not in science and mathematics! We need giant leaps from the current dismal levels of 4 correct answers out of 10! As  the wise ekonomista- turned lavandera-telenovelista would say, Susmaryosep!

How do our Grade VI, 2nd and 4th year HS students compare with their counterparts in the past?⁷

1. 

Overall MPS of Grade VI students of SY 2007-2008 were higherthan their counterparts in the previous SY! (Table 3) – Grade VI students of SY 2007-2008, posted an average increase of 3.9 correctly answered questions as compared to the previous SY’s performance, from an MPS of 60.9% to 64.8%.  Largest improvement in terms of performance was observed in Filipino, HEKASI, and Science with 7.2, 6.4, and 6.3 percentage point increases, respectively.  Good news and good reason for this batch to  “yayyy!”  about!  And we hope these children can sustain their performance as they will soon take the NAT exam as 2nd year HS students!

2. NAT results of 2nd year HS students in SY 2007-2008 were higher than the results in the previous SY! (Table 3) – On the average, 2nd year HS students of SY 2007-2008 had two correctly answered questions more than the students of the previous SY, posting an overall MPS of 49.3% from 46.6%.  Largest increases were observed in Science, Araling Panlipunan, and Mathematics with average increases of 4.7, 4.1, and 3.7 correctly answered questions out of 100, respectively.  As this batch will be graduating from HS in March next year, will they take the Extra Challenge to keep up the good work for next month’s NCAE? Will these seniors be Survivors or will they be voted out by the tribal council?

3. However, the overall MPS of 4th year HS students in SY 2008-2009 decreased as compared to their counterparts the previous SY! (Table 3) – Overall MPS went down by 2.1 percentage points, from 47.5% in SY 2007-2008 to 45.4% in SY 2008-2009.  Biggest deterioration occurred in verbal ability with a decrease of 4.2 percentage points from 49.2%  to 45.0%.

We are not sure what these unclear or at least not so clear signals say. Could it be that while the quality of education  (quality of students and quality of teachers) at the lower levels may have improved, they just have not been sustained all the way to the end of secondary education? Is it a case of students losing interest? Short attention span, maybe because of Internet overload? Or teachers not sufficiently trained nor paid to teach higher levels of learning? Our pillars of education, the DepEd, TESDA, and CHED must find out. And maybe, this is what Congress should be spending time and resources on and leave the videotapes for others to watch? 

What about the spatial dimension of the performance of regions and provinces/key cities⁸ in the NAT for SY 2007-2008? 

      Among Grade VI students,

1. Caraga, Regions VIII and IV-B registered the top three highest MPSs in NAT with 75.5%, 74.7%, and 70.2%, respectively (Table 4).  Balanga City (84.2%), Southern Leyte (81.2%), Ormoc City (80.9%), Romblon (80.0%), and Bataan (80.0%)  were the top in the NAT for Grade VI among school divisions, getting MPSs at least 80% (Table 5)!  This was followed by Cavite (79.6%), Lipa City (79.2%), Batangas (78.7%), Agusan del Norte (78.2%), and Digos City (77.9%). What went wrong with the NCR? Isn’t it expected to do better? (Table 5).

2.  On the other hand, the most challenged regions are  ARMM, Regions V and II  which posted the lowest MPSs of 47.0%, 57.2%, and 58.7%, respectively. (Table 4)!  Among school divisions, Maguindanao (39.9%), Sulu (40.7%), and Shariff Kabunsuan (41.5%) were the three lowest scorers  getting, on the average, 4 out of 10 questions correctly!  These were followed by Lanao del Sur II (46.87), Passi City (48.1%), Iligan City (48.4%), Basilan (48.5%), Roxas City (49.5%), Sagay City (49.9%), and Tawi-Tawi (50.8%) (Table 5). 

Seven provinces from the bottom ten were from Mindanao while the remaining three were from Visayas (all in Region VI!).

      Among 2nd year HS students,

3. Top performers among regions are Region VIII, Caraga, and Region I with an overall MPS of 65.5%, 62.9%, and 56.8%, respectively (Table 6)! 
   
   In terms of school divisions, 2nd year HS students of SY 2007-2008 from Northern Samar, Isabela City, and Easter Samar were the top performers with overall MPS of 80.9%, 80.4%, and 77.7%, respectively.  Also included in the list are Dagupan City (77.2%), Tanjay City (74.1%), Western Samar (72.7%), Agusan del Norte (71.3%), Dinagat Island (68.0%), Gapan City (67.5%), and Calbayog City (67.5%) (Table 7).

4. Bottom three regions registering the lowest overall MPS are: Region V (40.2%), NCR (43.9%), and Region XI (44.3%).  NCR among the bottom three??? (Table 6)

 On the other hand, among school divisions, 2nd year HS students of SY 2007-2008 from Sulu I, Masbate, Roxas City, and Negros Occidental got the lowest overall MPSs with 29.1%, 35.6%, 36.5%, and 37.6%, respectively.  In  the bottom list are Legaspi City (38.1%) Iligan City (38.4%), Camarines Sur (38.4%), Tabaco City (38.7%), Cadiz City (38.7%), Davao City (38.8%), and Valencia City (39.1%) (Table 7).  Students in these school divisions knew the correct answers in less than 4 out of 10 questions! Will we ever wake up?

Having looked at some education output indicators, what about input indicators from the private sector, households, and  government?

1.  Prices of educational goods and services have risen faster than prices of all commodities! (Table 8) – With  2000 as benchmark year, prices of education rose  faster on the average, by 18 percentage points compared with prices of all commodities. In 2007, the difference was highest at 29.9 percentage points! But isn’t expensive education  a violation of the human right to education? By their greed, or whatever reason that drives them to increase their fees faster than other goods and services, isn’t the private sector then denying our poor families access to good quality education?  What has civil society done to address this problem?

2.  Families allocate only 3% of their total basic expenditures on education! (Table 9) -  On the average, families spent only 3.2%, 2.9%, and 3.1% of their total basic expenditures⁹ on education in 2000, 2003, and 2006.  No wonder then that our students fare badly in the NAT and the NCAE. But could poor mothers and fathers be blamed if the high cost of education disincentivizes them from allocating more of their family budget to education?

3.  But the good news is that government spending on education has been generally increasing! (Table 10) -  Share of expenditures on education to total government expenditures is increasing over time (except for the year 2008), from an 11.8% share in 2006 now up to 13.9% in 2009¹⁰.  It is definitely good to see such an increase in the investments made by the government on our children, through education. But is the increase good enough?

Looking at the performance of students from public schools versus those from privately-funded schools, NCAE results for the SY 2008-2009 show that 4th year HS students in private schools excelled over their counterparts in public schools, scoring 4.8, 4.6, 8.8, and 9.0 percentage points higher, respectively in science, mathematics, reading comprehension, and verbal ability (Table 11). 

Private schools are of course better funded. Thus, while government spending on education is on the rise, it may  not be enough!

 In terms of public investments on education, among the five original ASEAN countries, the Philippines ranked fourth with a 15.2 % share on education to total government expenditure in 2005.  Malaysia had the highest share of 25.2 % followed by Thailand with a 25.0% share and Singapore with 23.5%¹¹.  Indonesia was lowest with a 14.9% share. (Table 12)

In terms of the ratio of public expenditure on education to gross domestic product (GDP), the Philippines ranked 7th among the 10 ASEAN countries.

If our ASEAN neighbors, who were way behind us in many aspects during our teens (okay, long time ago!), had made the all too clear political decision to invest more on education, why haven’t we? Why can’t we? If instead of using statistics as evidence to empower our decisions and our lives, we continue to desecrate statistics as nothing but lies, loud and clear, we only have ourselves to blame! Let us listen to these education statistics! Let us not compromise the future of our children any longer! Let us invest on the education of Pinoy children! Ang tunay na pag-asa ng ating bayan!

Adequate nutrition is of course key to the physical and mental development of our children. And so this July, Happy National Nutrition Month to all!

 

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. This article is co-written by Jessamyn O. Encarnacion, OIC-Director of the Social Statistics Office, NSCB. The authors thank Lina V. Castro, Carmelita H. Destreza, Noel S. Nepomuceno, Cynthia S. Regalado, Albert A. Garcia, Jeffrey E. Enrado, Ma. Libertie V. Masculino and Candido J. Astrologo, Jr. of the NSCB for the assistance in the preparation of the article. The views expressed in the article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the NSCB.

² Users’ Forum on the 2006 Official Poverty Statistics of the Basic Sectors and the 2006 Child Development Index held last 25 June 2009 at the Dusit Thani Hotel, Makati City.

³ Source:  http://www.nscb.gov.ph/poverty/default.asp

⁴ Source:  http://www.nscb.gov.ph/gender/index.asp

⁵ Statistically Speaking article on Statistics on Philippine Education: Good News and Bad News!; Source: http://www.nscb.gov.ph/headlines/StatsSpeak/2007/010807_rav_educ.asp

⁶ Taking into consideration however that, among others, 1) the groups of students who took the NAT and the NCAE later are not entirely the same; 2) the NAT and NCAE questions could have variations in  difficulty; and 3) we are looking only at the cohort of students in 4th year HS in SY 2008-2009.  Strictly speaking, we cannot conclusively report an improvement/deterioration in the students’ performance over time. The descriptive analysis should nonetheless give some indication of the changes in their scholastic abilities over time.

⁷ Data available and used from the NETRC are those for SYs 2006-2007 and 2007-2008 for NAT and those for SYs 2007-2008 and 2008-2009 for NCAE. Due to data limitations and time constraints, “cohort” analysis was not undertaken on the rest of the results of the NAT and NCAE

⁸ By school divisions as classified by DepEd.

⁹ Total basic expenditures include the following: 1) food; 2) clothing and footwear; 3) housing; 4) fuel, light, and water; 5) maintenance and minor repairs; 6) rental of occupied dwelling units; 7) medical care; 8) education; 9) transportation and communication; 10) non-durable furnishings; 11) household operations; and 12) personal care and effects.   Other expenditures excluded from total basic expenditures are as follows: 1) alcoholic beverages; 2) tobacco; 3) recreation; 4) durable furniture and equipment; 5) miscellaneous expenditures; and 6) other expenditures.

¹⁰ While 2006-2008 data are based on actual government expenditures, 2009 data are based on proposed budget as we are only halfway through the year.

¹¹ Source:  UNESCO, Institute of Statistics.

 

 

Table 1.
Child Development Index, by Component: 2000, 2003, and 2006

Index	2000	2003	2006	Difference
				00-03	03-06
Child Development Index	0.782	0.779	0.729	-0.003	-0.05
Child Health Index	0.982	0.987	0.988	0.005	0.001
Child Education Index	0.79	0.739	0.607	-0.051	-0.132
Quantity of Life Index	0.575	0.612	0.592	0.037	-0.02

Source: National Statistical Coordination Board (NSCB).

 

Table 2.
Performance of 4th Year HS students of SY 2008-2009
in SYs 2004-2005 and 2006-2007, Philippines

Variable	NAT		NCAE
	Grade VI of SY 2004 - 2005	2nd Year HS of 2006 - 2007	4th Year of SY 2008 - 2009
OVERALL	46.8	46.6	45.4
Science	39.5	42.0	43.2
Mathematics	50.7	39.1	41.7
English	51.3	51.8	---
HEKASI/Araling Panlipunan	50.0	51.5	---
Filipino	42.5	48.9	---
Verbal Ability	---	---	45.0
Reading Comprehension	---	---	51.1

Source of data: National Education Training and Research Center (NETRC), Department Of Education (DepEd).

 

Table 3.
  Results of the NAT for SYs 06-07 and 07-08 and NCAE for SYs 07-08 and 08-09

	NAT (Grade VI)			NAT (2nd Year HS)			NCAE (4th Year HS)
	SY 06-07	SY 07-08	Inc/ (Dec)	SY 06-07	SY 07-08	Inc/ (Dec)	SY 07-08	SY 08-09	Inc/ (Dec)
AVERAGE	60.9	64.8	3.9	46.6	49.3	2.7	47.5	45.4	(2.1)
Science	51.6	57.9	6.3	42.0	46.7	4.7	43.8	43.2	(0.6)
Mathematics	60.3	63.9	3.6	39.1	42.8	3.7	45.0	41.7	(3.3)
English	60.8	61.6	0.8	51.8	53.5	1.7	---	---	---
HEKASI	61.1	67.4	6.4	---	---	---	---	---	---
Filipino	66.0	73.2	7.2	48.9	47.6	(1.3)	---	---	---
Araling Panlipunan	---	---	---	51.5	55.6	4.1	---	---	---
Verbal ability	---	---	---	---	---	---	49.2	45.0	(4.2)
Reading comprehension	---	---	---	---	---	---	50.9	51.1	0.2

Source of data: NETRC, DepEd.
NAT - National Achievement Test
NCAE - National Career Assessment Examination
HEKASI - Heograpiya, Kasayasayan, Sibika
--- not applicable

 

Table 4.
  NAT Results of Grade VI Students, by Region and Subject:
SYs 2006-2007 and 2007-2008

Region	Average				Science				Mathematics
	06-07	Rank (1=Highest)	07-08	Rank (1=Highest)	06-07	Rank (1=Highest)	07-08	Rank (1=Highest)	06-07	Rank (1=Highest)	07-08	Rank (1=Highest)
Philippines	60.9		64.8		51.6		57.9		60.3		63.9
XIII - Caraga	73.1	1	75.5	1	65.4	2	70.4	1	75.2	2	77.5	1
VIII - Eastern Visayas	69.2	2	74.7	2	66.7	1	68.5	2	77.8	1	75.5	2
IV-B - MIMAROPA	64.1	5	70.2	3	59.7	3	62.9	3	69.0	3	70.9	3
I - Ilocos	64.1	6	68.8	4	54.0	7	62.2	4	62.4	7	69.4	4
IV-A - CALABARZON	65.0	3	68.4	5	55.3	5	61.7	5	64.4	4	67.7	6
III - Central Luzon	61.9	7	67.7	6	55.9	4	60.7	7	63.3	6	67.0	7
IX - Zamboanga Peninsula	60.6	8	67.6	7	55.1	6	61.4	6	64.3	5	68.2	5
VII - Central Visayas	64.2	4	65.7	8	48.3	12	57.7	8	60.1	8	66.0	8
XII - SOCCSKSARGEN	57.7	11	63.9	9	43.6	16	57.1	9	49.9	16	63.6	9
X - Northern Mindanao	58.4	10	62.9	10	47.3	13	56.2	10	56.1	13	62.6	10
NCR	59.1	9	62.3	11	52.2	8	54.8	12	59.1	10	60.3	11
XI - Davao	56.4	15	61.3	12	51.1	9	55.7	11	59.7	9	60.1	12
CAR	57.6	12	60.9	13	49.9	10	54.3	13	56.7	12	58.6	13
VI - Western Visayas	57.3	13	60.4	14	45.1	15	54.1	14	49.9	15	57.1	14
II - Cagayan Valley	56.9	14	58.7	15	48.3	11	50.7	15	58.4	11	57.0	15
V - Bicol	56.2	16	57.2	16	45.2	14	49.4	16	52.2	14	54.2	16
ARMM	47.7	17	47.0	17	37.4	17	40.2	17	43.3	17	44.3	17

Source of data: NETRC, DepEd.

 

Table 4. (Continued)
  NAT Results of Grade VI Students, by Region and Subject:
SYs 2006-2007 and 2007-2008

Region	English				HEKASI				Filipino
	06-07	Rank (1=Highest)	07-08	Rank (1=Highest)	06-07	Rank (1=Highest)	07-08	Rank (1=Highest)	06-07	Rank (1=Highest)	07-08	Rank (1=Highest)
Philippines	60.8		61.6		61.1		67.4		66.0		73.2
VIII - Eastern Visayas	74.9	1	73.7	1	61.7	6	77.5	2	76.0	1	78.2	1
XIII - Caraga	72.6	2	73.6	2	73.0	2	78.3	1	74.4	2	77.9	2
IV-B - MIMAROPA	66.7	3	66.9	3	57.5	12	73.3	3	71.2	3	77.2	3
IV-A - CALABARZON	62.4	7	64.8	7	64.8	4	71.1	5	69.7	4	76.7	4
III - Central Luzon	63.3	5	65.1	6	65.4	3	70.6	6	69.2	5	75.4	5
I - Ilocos	62.8	6	65.8	4	62.2	5	71.4	4	67.1	7	75.3	6
NCR	59.4	11	57.5	12	61.1	8	64.7	11	69.2	6	74.2	7
VII - Central Visayas	63.5	4	63.0	8	75.0	1	68.2	8	66.2	8	73.4	8
IX - Zamboanga Peninsula	62.2	8	65.7	5	56.1	14	70.5	7	65.8	9	71.9	9
CAR	60.0	9	57.4	13	58.0	11	63.2	13	64.8	12	71.2	10
XII - SOCCSKSARGEN	51.5	16	61.6	9	61.1	7	66.5	9	59.6	16	70.9	11
VI - Western Visayas	55.3	14	56.5	14	56.5	13	63.7	12	63.1	14	70.4	12
II - Cagayan Valley	60.0	10	54.1	15	58.1	10	61.5	15	65.3	10	70.3	13
X - Northern Mindanao	58.8	13	60.4	10	59.2	9	65.4	10	62.4	15	70.2	14
V - Bicol	54.7	15	52.9	16	55.3	15	59.9	16	63.7	13	69.8	15
XI - Davao	59.0	12	58.4	11	52.1	16	62.6	14	65.1	11	69.5	16
ARMM	45.8	17	45.7	17	47.4	17	48.3	17	51.4	17	56.6	17

Source of data: NETRC, DepEd.

 

Table 5.
 NAT Results of Grade VI Students, by School Division:
SYs 2006-2007 and 2007-2008

Division	SY 2006 - 2007		SY 2007 - 2008
	MPS	Rank (1 = Highest)	MPS	Rank (1 - Highest)
Balanga City	77.7	5	84.2	1
Southern Leyte	81.6	1	81.2	2
Ormoc City	79.6	2	80.9	3
Romblon	77.6	6	80.0	4
Bataan	74.6	13	80.0	5
Cavite	71.6	21	79.6	6
Lipa City	73.6	16	79.2	7
Batangas	79.5	3	78.7	8
Agusan del Norte	75.1	11	78.2	9
Digos City	79.4	4	77.9	10
Calapan City	76.6	9	77.7	11
Surigao City	71.7	20	77.3	12
Oriental Mindoro	71.3	22	77.2	13
Dapitan City	68.7	35	76.3	14
Eastern Samar	76.8	8	76.2	15
Siargao	76.1	10	75.8	16
Samar (Western Samar)	73.1	17	75.8	17
Gingoog City	65.9	45	75.4	18
Iriga City	73.6	15	75.4	19
Surigao del Sur	71.1	25	75.4	20
Tacloban City	70.8	27	75.0	21
Agusan del Sur	70.9	26	74.9	22
Guimaras	68.4	36	74.9	23
Butuan City	72.5	19	74.9	24
Malolos City	72.7	18	74.7	25
Dagupan City	71.2	23	74.7	26
Bislig City	68.2	38	74.6	27
Surigao del Norte	70.0	33	74.5	28
Pangasinan II, Binalonan	70.6	28	74.5	29
Northern Samar	66.1	44	74.4	30
Dinagat Island			74.1	31
Dipolog City	70.2	31	73.8	32
Zamboanga del Norte	62.7	65	73.7	33
Ozamis City	62.3	68	73.6	34
Quezon City	52.5	146	73.5	35
Tanauan City	71.2	24	73.3	36
Maasin City	77.3	7	73.1	37
Marinduque	70.6	29	72.7	38
Leyte	70.1	32	72.5	39
Iloilo	62.1	69	72.3	40
La Union	61.8	74	72.3	41
Ilocos Norte	64.5	53	72.3	42
Gapan City	66.5	43	72.0	43
Misamis Oriental	50.4	160	71.7	44
Biliran	74.9	12	71.6	45
Camiguin	58.5	99	71.2	46
Cotabato City	47.8	170	71.1	47
Munoz Science City	67.6	40	71.1	48
Laoag City	74.4	14	71.0	49
Olongapo City	61.0	80	70.8	50
Toledo City	65.0	49	70.7	51
North Cotabato	58.0	103	70.6	52
Cebu	57.3	112	70.4	53
Cabanatuan City	67.0	42	70.4	54
Island Garden City of Samal	55.8	125	70.3	55
Bulacan	65.3	47	70.1	56
Tarlac	63.2	61	70.0	57
Isabela City	63.8	57	69.9	58
Calbayog City	70.4	30	69.9	59
Cebu City	53.2	141	69.7	60
Lucena City	64.7	51	68.9	61
Tangub City	65.3	48	68.7	62
Pagadian City	56.5	123	68.6	63
Tacurong City	47.7	171	68.4	64
Tuguegarao City	69.4	34	68.4	65
Davao del Sur	63.9	56	68.0	66
Aurora	57.6	108	67.7	67
Rizal	62.4	67	67.4	68
Danao City	56.7	120	67.3	69
Camarines Norte	57.7	106	66.9	70
Nueva Ecija	61.4	78	66.8	71
Pampanga	61.7	75	66.8	72
Catanduanes	63.0	62	66.5	73
Paranaque City	53.0	144	66.4	74
Alaminos City	62.9	63	66.1	75
San Fernando City	64.6	52	65.8	76
Pangasinan I (Lingayen)	61.6	76	65.5	77
Las Piñas City	64.1	55	65.5	78
Oroquieta City	56.3	124	65.5	79
Tanjay City	62.5	66	65.4	80
Zamboanga del Sur	58.0	102	65.2	81
Nueva Vizcaya	54.9	133	65.1	82
Cavite City	67.8	39	65.0	83
Ilocos Sur	60.7	82	64.9	84
Ifugao	63.4	59	64.7	85
Davao del Norte	59.7	89	64.4	86
Occidental Mindoro	60.4	85	64.4	87
Valencia City	57.4	110	64.4	88
Capiz	61.1	79	64.3	89
Zamboanga Sibugay	56.5	122	64.1	90
San Carlos City	60.4	84	64.0	91
Negros Oriental	56.7	118	64.0	92
Benguet	60.6	83	63.9	93
Valenzuela City	61.6	77	63.8	94
Davao Oriental	51.0	157	63.5	95
Caloocan City	59.8	88	63.4	96
Vigan City	56.8	116	63.3	97
Bukidnon	57.3	113	63.1	98
Zamboanga City	58.1	100	63.0	99
Palawan	55.5	129	63.0	100
Bayawan City	62.0	72	62.9	101
Bohol	62.1	70	62.9	102
Koronadal City	45.2	180	62.5	103
San Jose del Monte City	59.4	92	62.5	104
Bais City	58.7	98	62.4	105
Compostela Valley	59.5	90	62.4	106
South Cotabato	59.2	93	62.2	107
Makati City	68.2	37	62.1	108
Apayao	51.4	156	62.0	109
Quezon	51.5	154	62.0	110
Sarangani	46.4	175	61.9	111
Marikina City	67.1	41	61.9	112
Mandaluyong City	62.0	71	61.8	113
Cagayan	59.2	94	61.8	114
Dumaguete City	62.7	64	61.6	115
Batangas City	63.6	58	61.3	116
Siquijor	56.7	121	61.3	117
Mt. Province	57.2	114	61.2	118
Zambales	54.7	135	61.1	119
Antique	55.7	126	61.0	120
Antipolo City	54.0	137	61.0	121
Cauayan City	58.0	104	60.4	122
Lanao del Norte	54.7	134	60.3	123
Batanes	58.7	97	60.1	124
Iloilo City	64.8	50	60.1	125
Aklan	59.5	91	60.0	126
Talisay City	52.7	145	60.0	127
Panabo City	49.3	164	59.6	128
Albay	53.1	142	59.3	129
Kalinga	57.0	115	59.2	130
Tarlac City	60.2	86	59.2	131
Malabon & Navotas	56.7	119	59.0	132
General Santos City	55.6	127	58.9	133
Puerto Princesa City	57.8	105	58.9	134
Lamitan			58.9	135
Sta. Rosa City	55.5	128	58.8	136
Sorsogon	57.3	111	58.6	137
Marawi City	54.9	132	58.5	138
Quirino	57.4	109	58.5	139
San Pablo City	61.8	73	58.4	140
Tagbilaran City	64.1	54	58.3	141
Pasay City	59.0	95	57.9	142
Sultan Kudarat	48.3	168	57.8	143
Baguio City	60.7	81	57.7	144
Silay City	43.9	184	57.6	145
Abra	55.0	131	57.1	146
Candon City	44.5	182	57.1	147
San Fernando City	54.2	136	56.9	148
Masbate City	50.5	159	56.9	149
Misamis Occidental	52.1	149	56.8	150
Mandaue City	63.4	60	56.8	151
Laguna	57.7	107	56.7	152
Kidapawan City	53.7	138	56.5	153
Cagayan de Oro City	46.2	177	56.3	154
Tagum City	58.8	96	56.2	155
La Carlota City	56.7	117	56.2	156
Bago City	51.4	155	55.5	157
Urdaneta City	48.0	169	55.4	158
Pasig City and San Juan	55.1	130	55.2	159
Calamba City	51.9	150	55.2	160
Bacolod City	51.6	153	55.1	161
Naga City	52.3	147	54.8	162
Manila	58.0	101	54.5	163
Lanao del Sur I	47.4	172	54.2	164
Davao City	51.7	151	53.9	165
Isabela	48.6	165	53.6	166
San Carlos City	51.7	152	53.6	167
Sorsogon City	53.1	143	53.6	168
Taguig & Pateros	65.4	46	53.5	169
Legaspi City	50.8	158	53.3	170
Camarines Sur	52.2	148	53.3	171
Ligao City	47.2	173	53.2	172
Cadiz City	44.2	183	53.0	173
Kabankalan City	45.7	179	52.5	174
Masbate	49.6	163	52.5	175
Lapu-Lapu City	50.0	162	52.3	176
Tabaco City	50.1	161	51.5	177
Angeles City	53.6	140	51.4	178
Negros Occidental	48.6	167	51.1	179
Muntinlupa City	60.0	87	51.1	180
Tawi-Tawi			50.8	181
Sagay City	46.4	176	49.9	182
Roxas City	53.6	139	49.5	183
Basilan	45.7	178	48.5	184
Iligan City	47.0	174	48.4	185
Passi City	48.6	166	48.1	186
Lanao del Sur II	44.7	181	46.8	187
Shariff Kabunsuan			41.5	188
Sulu I	38.3	186	40.7	189
Maguindanao	39.3	185	39.9	190

Source of data: NETRC, DepEd.

 

Table 6.
NAT Results for 2nd Year HS Students, by region and subject:
SYs 2006-2007 and 2007-2008

Region	Average				Science				Mathematics
	06-07	Rank (1=Highest)	07-08	Rank (1=Highest)	06-07	Rank (1=Highest)	07-08	Rank (1=Highest)	06-07	Rank (1=Highest)	07-08	Rank (1=Highest)
Philippines	46.6		49.3		42.0		46.7		39.1		42.8
VIII – Eastern Visayas	64.3	1	65.5	1	61.9	1	66.2	1	61.9	1	63.0	1
XIII – Caraga	62.9	2	62.9	2	61.2	2	63.2	2	61.0	2	60.1	2
I – Ilocos	51.5	3	56.8	3	48.4	3	55.2	4	46.3	3	52.9	3
IX - Zamboanga  Peninsula	47.2	6	55.6	4	45.0	4	55.8	3	42.3	4	51.9	4
III- Central Luzon	47.2	5	52.2	6	42.9	5	50.1	6	40.9	6	47.2	5
VII - Central Visayas	46.9	7	52.6	5	40.8	7	50.5	5	39.2	8	46.3	6
ARMM	42.6	15	46.5	12	40.0	12	45.6	10	41.5	5	46.0	7
IVB - MIMAROPA	47.2	4	50.4	7	42.5	6	48.1	7	39.6	7	44.7	8
X - Northern Mindanao	43.4	13	47.5	10	40.0	11	46.0	9	35.9	11	41.4	9
XII - SOCCSKSARGEN	41.2	17	46.7	11	37.3	15	44.6	11	33.2	15	41.2	10
IVA - CALABARZON	46.1	8	47.7	9	40.3	9	43.3	13	37.7	9	40.3	11
CAR	45.8	9	49.2	8	40.1	10	46.5	8	36.0	10	40.0	12
VI - Western Visayas	44.8	10	45.2	13	40.7	8	43.3	12	35.5	12	37.4	13
II - Cagayan Valley	43.6	11	44.4	14	39.0	14	41.2	15	35.5	13	36.8	14
XI - Davao Region	43.5	12	44.3	15	39.9	13	42.0	14	35.0	14	36.8	15
NCR	43.1	14	43.9	16	36.1	16	39.0	16	32.0	17	34.2	16
V – Bicol	41.5	16	40.2	17	35.7	17	36.2	17	32.2	16	31.7	17

Source of data: NETRC, DepEd.

Table 6. (Continued)
NAT Results for 2nd Year HS Students, by region and subject:
SYs 2006-2007 and 2007-2008

Region	English				HEKASI				Filipino
	06-07	Rank (1=Highest)	07-08	Rank (1=Highest)	06-07	Rank (1=Highest)	07-08	Rank (1=Highest)	06-07	Rank (1=Highest)	07-08	Rank (1=Highest)
Philippines	51.8		53.5		51.5		55.6		48.9		47.6
VIII – Eastern Visayas	68.3	1	67.5	1	67.4	1	70.1	1	61.8	1	60.8	1
XIII – Caraga	66.3	2	65.2	2	66.4	2	66.7	2	59.6	2	59.2	2
I – Ilocos	54.4	5	59.2	3	55.0	3	60.5	3	53.1	3	56.1	3
IX - Zamboanga  Peninsula	51.9	6	59.0	4	50.4	9	60.2	4	46.6	10	51.4	4
III- Central Luzon	50.8	8	55.1	7	51.3	6	57.4	6	50.0	6	51.2	5
IVB - MIMAROPA	50.9	7	53.2	8	52.6	4	56.2	8	50.4	4	49.7	6
IVA - CALABARZON	50.7	9	52.1	10	51.3	7	54.9	9	50.4	5	48.1	7
VII - Central Visayas	54.9	4	58.1	5	52.3	5	60.0	5	47.4	8	48.1	8
ARMM	43.4	17	47.4	16	43.2	17	47.1	17	44.5	17	46.3	9
CAR	55.7	3	56.4	6	50.4	10	57.2	7	47.1	9	45.8	10
X - Northern Mindanao	49.4	13	52.8	9	46.8	15	52.5	12	45.1	15	44.8	11
XII - SOCCSKSARGEN	45.7	16	51.0	11	45.6	16	52.2	13	44.5	16	44.6	12
NCR	49.6	11	49.4	15	50.0	11	52.9	11	48.0	7	44.1	13
II - Cagayan Valley	49.5	12	49.6	13	48.3	12	51.4	14	45.8	12	43.0	14
VI - Western Visayas	50.6	10	50.0	12	50.9	8	53.0	10	46.0	11	42.5	15
XI - Davao Region	49.2	14	49.6	14	48.0	13	50.8	15	45.6	13	42.5	16
V – Bicol	46.8	15	45.3	17	47.4	14	48.1	16	45.6	14	39.7	17

Source of data: NETRC, DepEd.

 

Table 7.
NAT Results of 2nd Year HS Students, by School Division:
SYs 2006-2007 and 2007-2008

Division	SY 2006 - 2007		SY 2007 - 2008
	MPS	Rank (1 = Highest)	MPS	Rank (1 - Highest)
Northern Samar	69.9	6	80.9	1
Isabela City	60.3	18	80.4	2
Eastern Samar	77.6	1	77.7	3
Dagupan City	63.5	9	77.2	4
Tanjay City	61.7	12	74.1	5
Samar (Western Samar)	72.1	4	72.7	6
Agusan del Norte	70.7	5	71.3	7
Dinagat Island			68	8
Gapan City	59.3	21	67.5	9
Calbayog City	69.7	7	67.5	10
Maasin City	73.3	2	66.2	11
Zamboanga del Norte	48.8	60	66.1	12
La Union	52.5	36	64.3	13
Southern Leyte	72.5	3	64	14
Surigao del Sur	60.5	17	63.9	15
Siargao	61.3	13	63.6	16
Alaminos City	60.7	15	63.5	17
Ilocos Norte	55.2	29	63.4	18
Bataan	50	45	62.8	19
Agusan del Sur	63	11	61.7	20
Surigao del Norte	65.5	8	61.6	21
San Fernando City	56	25	61.3	22
Toledo City	60.9	14	61.1	23
Zamboanga del Sur	49.9	48	60.5	24
Surigao City	59.3	20	59.5	25
Butuan City	63.1	10	59.2	26
Batangas	60.7	16	59	27
Pampanga	49.7	52	58.8	28
Cebu	47.1	76	58.4	29
Calapan City	48.7	62	58	30
Tacurong City	38.4	176	57.9	31
Leyte	56.7	23	57.6	32
Tarlac	48.4	65	56.8	33
Abra	43.8	113	56.5	34
Ilocos Sur	55.3	28	56.5	35
Marinduque	55.7	27	56.5	36
Tacloban City	50.9	41	56.4	37
Cebu City	45.4	92	56.4	38
Bukidnon	53.5	32	56.4	39
Candon City	37.4	182	56.3	40
Pangasinan II (Binalonan)	51.4	40	56.3	41
Lanao del Sur I	48.5	63	56.3	42
Lipa City	54.1	31	56.1	43
Cabanatuan City	56.8	22	56.1	44
Guinaras	49.9	47	56.0	45
Tangub City	56.5	24	55.8	46
Cavite	45.7	89	55.0	47
PangasinanI (Lingayen)	51.8	37	54.1	48
Biliran	59.3	19	54.1	49
Antique	50.9	42	54.0	50
Oriental Moindoro	45.9	87	53.9	51
Gingoog City	45.2	94	53.7	52
Pagadian City	48.9	58	53.7	53
Balanga City	47.6	70	53.5	54
Aklan	51.6	38	52.9	55
Romblon	54.3	30	52.7	56
Bislig City	47.7	69	52.3	57
Aurora	46.2	83	52.0	58
Davao del Sur	52.8	35	52.0	59
Dapitan City	53.2	33	51.8	60
Siquijor	49.8	51	51.3	61
Misamis Oriental	40.3	156	51.2	62
Dumaguete City	46.7	78	51.0	63
Nueva Ecija	50	46	50.9	64
Apayao	44.4	107	50.6	65
Bulacan	44.1	109	50.5	66
Sultan Kudarat	48	68	50.4	67
Ifugao	46.6	80	50.3	68
Muños Science City	51.5	39	50.1	69
Sulu II	48.5	64	50.1	70
Ormoc City	47.5	72	50.0	71
North Cotabato	41	145	50.0	72
Bohol	49.3	55	49.6	73
Urdaneta City	41.5	136	49.6	74
Tagbiliran City	53.1	34	49.6	75
Kabankalan City	42.9	122	49.5	76
Iriga City	46	85	49.5	77
Vigan City	37.5	181	49.3	78
Catanduanes	49	56	49.2	79
Iloilo	47.6	71	49.0	80
Bais City	55.7	26	49.0	81
Danao City	45.1	95	48.9	82
Dipolog City	45.4	91	48.8	83
Palawan	45	98	48.8	84
Kalinga	41.8	133	48.8	85
Benguet	48.1	67	48.7	86
Bayawan City	49	57	48.6	87
Davao Oriental	42.5	126	48.4	88
South Cotabato	45	100	48.3	89
Mandaue City	47.1	73	48.1	90
Compostela Valley	46.7	79	47.9	91
Basilan	39.7	164	47.8	92
Sarangani	34.9	186	47.6	93
San Fernando City	46.9	77	47.6	94
Lanao del Sur II	48.5	63	47.4	95
Valenzuela City	46.3	81	47.1	96
Zamboanga Sibugay	39.7	163	46.9	97
Cauayan City	39.9	162	46.9	98
Masbate City	50.9	43	46.7	99
Baguio City	49.4	54	46.5	100
Digos City	50.2	44	46.2	101
Batanes	48.7	61	45.9	102
Makati City	49.9	49	45.8	103
Lamitan			45.8	104
Tagum City	47.1	74	45.8	105
Isabela	43.2	118	45.7	106
Marawi City	31.4	187	45.5	107
Zamboanga City	45.8	88	45.4	108
Talisay City	43.1	120	45.4	109
Malabon/Navotas	41	146	45.3	110
Mt. Province	42.7	124	45.3	111
Lanao del Norte	38.3	177	45.2	112
Capiz	47.1	75	44.9	113
Tarlac City	46.3	82	44.8	114
Muntinlupa City	46	84	44.8	114
Negros Oriental	41	144	44.8	116
Naga City	45.9	86	44.8	117
Paranaque City	45	99	44.7	118
Taguig/Pateros	42	130	44.6	119
Tanauan City	49.4	53	44.3	120
Manila	44.4	105	44.2	121
Marikina City	44.7	104	44.1	122
Occidental Mindoro	41.1	143	44.1	123
Sorsogon City	45	102	44.0	124
Cagayan	45.1	96	43.9	125
Quezon City	40.2	157	43.9	126
Las Piñas City	48.9	59	43.7	127
Oroquieta City	45.6	90	43.7	128
Calamba City	40.3	155	43.7	129
Quezon	43.3	117	43.6	130
Sagay City	41.8	132	43.6	131
Zambales	41.1	142	43.4	132
Antipolo City	41.6	134	43.3	133
Caloocan City	40.4	154	43.1	134
Bago City	42.3	128	43.0	135
Davao del Norte	39.6	166	42.9	136
Maguiindanao	43.8	111	42.8	137
La Carlota City	43.8	110	42.8	138
Tuguegarao City	44.4	106	42.6	139
Nueva Vizcaya	41.5	135	42.6	140
Misamis Occidental	48.2	66	42.6	141
Laoag City	45.3	93	42.4	142
San Pablo City	45	101	42.4	143
Lucena City	38.3	178	42.3	144
Island Garden of Samal	41.2	141	42.3	145
Lapu-lapu  City	40.5	151	42.3	146
Rizal	43.8	112	42.2	147
Bacolod City	40.7	148	42.1	148
Sorsogon	45.1	97	42.0	149
Tawi-tawi	37.5	180	42.0	150
Batangas City	42.2	129	42.0	151
Laguna	42.9	123	41.9	152
Sta. Rosa City	42.3	127	41.9	153
Pasay City	41.3	138	41.6	154
Puerto Princesa City	44.2	108	41.5	155
Pasig/San Juan	43	121	41.2	156
Ligao City	41.2	139	41.2	156
Mandaluyong City	43.4	115	41.2	158
Kidapawan City	43.5	114	41.0	159
Shariff Kabunsuan			40.7	160
Angeles City	41.5	137	40.7	161
Ozamis City	41.9	131	40.7	161
Quirino	43.2	119	40.6	163
San Carlos City	39.1	173	40.5	164
Cotabato City	35.2	185	40.4	165
Malolos City	49.8	50	40.2	166
General Santos City	39.5	168	40.2	167
Camiguin	39.6	165	40.2	168
Panabo City	39.4	170	40.2	169
San Carlos City	39.5	169	40.1	170
Cavite City	41.2	140	40.1	171
Cagaya de Oro City	35.9	184	40.1	172
Iloilo City	42.5	125	39.9	173
Olongapo City	39.4	171	39.9	174
San Jose del Monte City	40.4	153	39.7	175
Camarines Norte	40.6	150	39.4	176
Passi City	40	160	39.4	176
Albay	40.2	159	39.2	178
Silay City	39.5	167	39.2	179
Koronadal City	36.8	183	39.2	180
Valencia City	43.4	116	39.1	181
Davao City	40.4	152	38.8	182
Cadiz City	37.9	179	38.7	183
Tabaco City	40.8	147	38.7	184
Camarines Sur	38.8	174	38.4	185
Iligan City	40.2	158	38.4	186
Legaspi City	40.6	149	38.1	187
Negros Occidental	39.3	172	37.6	188
Roxas City	40	161	36.5	189
Masbate	38.7	175	35.6	190
Sulu I	29.5	188	29.1	191

Source of data: NETRC, DepEd.

 

  Table 8.
Consumer Price Index, by Selected Commodity Item: 2000-2009

COMMODITY GROUP	2000	2001	2002	2003	2004	2005	2006	2007	2008
Percentage point difference in the increase of prices in education versus all commodities		4.2	11.1	17.4	21.9	22.1	22.5	29.9	14.9
CPI
ALL  ITEMS	100.0	106.8	110.0	113.8	120.6	129.8	137.9	141.8	151.9
I.  FOOD, BEVERAGES AND TOBACCO	100.0	104.7	107.1	109.5	116.3	123.8	130.6	134.9	153.0
Food	100.0	104.7	106.9	109.3	116.3	123.9	130.7	135.0	153.6
Beverages	100.0	105.7	109.2	111.5	116.1	122.9	130.5	135.2	151.0
Tobacco	100.0	105.8	109.6	112.2	114.1	121.3	126.0	128.9	132.8
II. NON - FOOD	100.0	108.8	112.9	118.1	125.0	135.9	145.3	148.7	150.4
Clothing	100.0	104.1	107.7	111.4	114.4	118.4	122.0	124.8	119.7
Minor Repairs in Housing	100.0	105.8	107.3	108.1	116.3	125.2	131.7	135.9	144.4
Housing Rentals	100.0	107.2	112.5	117.6	121.7	127.0	131.9	133.8	141.1
Fuel	100.0	109.9	110.0	121.0	137.3	161.4	189.5	195.8	192.5
Light	100.0	115.2	117.5	121.6	127.7	149.9	167.0	171.5	153.5
Water	100.0	111.9	125.6	136.3	138.8	169.2	181.3	190.7	201.1
Educational services	100.0	111.0	121.1	131.2	142.5	151.9	160.4	171.7	166.8
Medical services	100.0	109.5	116.8	125.9	132.1	140.1	149.5	156.6	168.8
Personal services	100.0	107.0	112.3	120.1	125.3	131.8	136.8	139.9	144.2
Recreational services	100.0	103.6	105.9	108.6	111.5	116.4	120.9	123.5	112.1
Transportation and Communication services	100.0	111.6	112.7	116.6	131.3	155.4	174.5	175.6	183.1
Other Services	100.0	104.2	108.7	110.3	113.6	116.6	117.6	117.9
Miscellaneous	100.0	107.1	109.0	111.1	113.5	117.1	120.6	122.5	123.4

Source of data: National Statistics Office (NSO).

 

  Table 9.
Share of Education Expenditure to Total Expenditures: 2000, 2003, and 2006

	2000	2003	2006
Share to total expenditures	3.7	4.0	4.4
Share to total basic expenditures 1/	3.2	2.9	3.1

Special computations made by the NSCB Technical Staff using the 2000, 2003,  and 2006 Family Income and Expenditure Survey of the NSO.

Note:
1/ - Total basic expenditures include the following: 1) food; 2) clothing and footwear; 3) housing; 4) fuel, light, and water; 5) maintenance and minor repairs; 6) rental of occupied dwelling units; 7) medical care; 8) education; 9) transportation and communication; 10) non-durable furnishings; 11) household operations; and 12) personal care and effects. 
Other expenditures excluded from total basic expenditures are as follows: 1) alcoholic beverages; 2) tobacco; 3) recreation; 4) durable furniture and equipment; 5) miscellaneous expenditures; and 6) other expenditures.

Table 10.
Total Actual Government Expenditures on Education, by Expenditure Item: 2006-2009

		2006	2007	2008	2009 1/
Total Government Expenditure		1,044,827,405	1,155,508,758	1,226,700,000	1,226,700,000
	Personal services (PS)	323,633,987	341,748,151	383,998,105	383,998,105
	Maintenance and other operating expenses (MOOE)	615,626,882	656,062,152	670,171,782	670,171,782
	Capital outlay (CO)	105,566,536	157,698,455	172,530,113	172,530,113
Total Government Expenditure on Education		123,530,161	145,393,169	152,079,839	170,867,742
PS		108,729,973	117,760,981	116,005,623	138,253,152
	Department of Education 2/	107,536,173	116,487,750	114,768,931	136,820,994
	Technical Education and Skills Development Authority (TESDA)	1,037,505	1,115,842	1,072,768	1,240,258
	CHED (Commission on Higher Education)		156,295	157,389	163,924
MOOE		11,329,401	20,042,384	25,166,475	23,532,744
	DepEd 2/	8,794,793	17,096,034	21,732,212	20,268,105
	TESDA	981,101	1,879,457	2,016,091	1,869,757
	CHED	1,553,507	1,066,893	1,418,172	1,394,882
CO		3,470,787	7,589,804	10,907,741	9,081,846
	DepEd 2/	3,004,030	6,344,798	10,746,042	8,852,870
	TESDA	348,220	734,236	156,699	228,976
	CHED	118,537	510,770	5,000	-
Share of Education to Total Government Budget		11.8	12.6	12.4	13.9
by expenditure item
	PS	10.4	10.2	9.5	11.3
	MOOE	1.1	1.7	2.1	1.9
	CO	0.3	0.7	0.9	0.7
by pillars of education
	DepEd 2/	11.4	12.1	12.0	13.5
	TESDA	0.2	0.3	0.3	0.3
	CHED	0.2	0.2	0.1	0.1

Source of basic data: Budget of Expenditures and Sources of Financing, Department of Budget and Management.

Notes:
1/ - Proposed budget
2/ - Includes the Office of the Secretary, National Book Development Board, National Council for Children TV, Philippine High School and Arts, and state universities and colleges

 

Table 11.
NCAE Results of 4th Year HS Students, by type of school:
SYs 2007-2008 and 2008-2009

School Type	Average		Science Ability		Mathematical Ability		Reading Comprehension		Verbal Ability
	07-08	08-09	07-08	08-09	07-08	08-09	07-08	08-09	07-08	08-09
Total	47.5	45.4	43.8	43.2	45.0	41.7	50.9	51.1	49.2	45.0
Public	46.0	43.9	42.8	42.1	43.9	40.7	49.0	49.1	47.1	43.0
Private	51.8	50.9	46.5	46.9	48.1	45.3	56.1	57.9	54.9	52.1
Diff. bet. public and private	(5.8)	(7.0)	(3.7)	(4.8)	(4.2)	(4.6)	(7.1)	(8.8)	(7.8)	(9.0)

Source of data: NETRC, DepEd.

Table 12.
Percent share of total education expenditure to total GDP, to total government expenditure

Country	Academic Year	Public expenditure on education				Public current expenditure on primary education as a % of GDP
		As % of GDP		As % of total government expenditure
		%	Rank	%	Rank	%	Rank
Malaysia	2005	6.2	1	25.2	1	1.8	1
Thailand	2005	4.2	3	25.0	2	…
Singapore	1995	3.1	4	23.5	3	…
Philippines	2005	2.5	7	15.2	4	1.1	2
Indonesia	2005	2.9	5	14.9	5	…
Cambodia	2000	1.7	9	14.6	6	1.0	3.5
Lao People's Democratic Republic	2005	2.3	8	11.7	7	0.5	5
Brunei Darussalam	2000	5.2	2	9.1	8	…
Myanmar	2000	0.6	10	8.7	9	…
Vietnam	1995	2.9	6	7.4	10.0	1.0	3.5

Source of Data:  UNESCO, Institute of Statistics

 

Figure 1.
Magnitude of Poor Among the Basic Sectors: 2000, 2003 and 2006

Source: NSCB.

 

 

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
		1997-2012, National Statistical Coordination Board Makati City, Philippines