| Philippine students | Photo by Roberto Verzon via Wikimedia Commons
On June 18, 2024, the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA) released their latest (year 2022) assessment of the creative thinking abilities of 15-year-old students. The test investigated how well students can generate diverse and creative ideas, evaluate and improve others’ ideas to reach creative outcomes through written expression, visual expression, social problem solving and scientific problem solving. The report gives insights into how well education systems are preparing students for outside the box thinking and to come up with creative ideas. It is hoped that by comparing results internationally, policymakers and educators in the Philippines can learn from other countries’ policies and practices.
These were the findings for the Philippines according to PISA (excerpted from 2022 PISA Report):
In mathematics, 15-year-olds scored 355 points compared to an average of 472 points in OECD countries. On average, 15-year-olds scored 347 points in reading compared to an average of 476 points in Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) countries. In Philippines, the average performance in science of 15-year-olds is 356 points, compared to an average of 485 points in OECD countries. In the Philippines, 16% of students attained at least Level 2 proficiency in mathematics, significantly less than on average across OECD countries (OECD average: 69%). At a minimum, these students can interpret and recognize, without direct instructions, how a simple situation can be represented mathematically.
Almost no students in the Philippines were top performers in mathematics, meaning that they attained Level 5 or 6 in the PISA mathematics test (OECD average: 9%). At these levels, students can model complex situations mathematically, and can select, compare and evaluate appropriate problem-solving strategies for dealing with them.
In the Philippines, 36% of students (the largest share) were in the bottom international quintile of the socio-economic scale, meaning that they were among the most disadvantaged students who took the PISA test in 2022. Their average score in mathematics was 344 score points.
In the Philippines socio-economically advantaged students (the top 25% in terms of socio-economic status) outperformed disadvantaged students (the bottom 25%) by 36 score points in mathematics. This is smaller than the average difference between the two groups (93 score points) across OECD countries.
Some 12% of disadvantaged students in the Philippines were able to score in the top quarter of mathematics performance (OECD average: 10%). These students can be considered academically resilient.
With a mean score of 14 out of 60 possible points, students in the Philippines scored significantly lower than the OECD average in creative thinking. Students’ relative results in creative thinking are below what could be expected from the Philippines based on their performance in mathematics; and below what could be expected based on their performance in reading. In the Philippines, 44% of the variation in creative thinking performance can be uniquely attributed to variation in mathematics performance, which is above the OECD average. Within the Philippines, the correlation between students’ creative thinking and mathematic performance is 0.8, and 0.83 between creative thinking and reading performance (OECD averages: 0.67 and 0.66). For comparison, on average across OECD countries, the correlation between students’ mathematics and reading performance is 0.80.
In the Philippines, 22% of students attained at least a baseline proficiency in creative thinking (Level 3), significantly less than on average across OECD countries (78%). 6% of students in the Philippines are top performers in creative thinking, meaning that they attained Level 5 or 6 in the PISA Creative Thinking test (OECD average: 27%). just about 1% of top performers in creative thinking are also top performers in mathematics, and 2% are top performers in reading (OECD averages: 20% and 17%).
In the Philippines, socio-economically advantaged students outperformed disadvantaged students in creative thinking by 8.8 score points, on a scale that counts 60 points. However, this is similar to the average difference between the two groups across OECD countries (9.5 score points).
For starters, the government can experiment with charter schools funded with public funds but operated by civil society organizations – accepting only the brightest indigent students. The rich can fend for themselves as they are apt to do anyway.
On average, girls outperformed boys in creative thinking by 4.3 score points in the Philippines. This is significantly above the average gender gap across OECD countries (2.7 score points). In no PISA participating country or economy did boys score above girls in creative thinking.
The Philippines Department of Education budget for 2024 – PhP 924.7 billion
Total 2024 Philippines Department of Education enrollment – PhP 27.56 million
Per student spend – around PhP 33,500.00
Average classroom size – 50
Per classroom annual budget – PhP 1,670,000 Million
Philippines private school:
Per student spend- between PhP 30,000 to PhP 100,000 million
Average class size – 24-30 students
Using the most conservative calculation – lowest class size and most expensive tuition for private schools, each private school classroom costs PhP 3 million. Using the average private school cost of PhP 65,000 and maximum class size of 30 – each classroom cost PhP 1.95 million.
Private schools are for-profit. Clearly, private schools cost less per classroom per student when profits are considered – private schools are quite profitable in the Philippines. Private schools can have between 20%-40% net margins.
Most Filipinos will estimate government corruption to account for about 20-30% of budgets. Even without corruption, it is clear private schools deliver superior results per peso per student of spend. Imagine what the private sector can do with PhP 924.7B for education. This is premised on the assumption that the administration of public education in the Philippines is at too low a bar for any other entity other than government not to surpass. If the clergy apply for funding, grant them the funds – soon the poor can receive an Ateneo, Letran, San Beda, Santo Tomas education – all levels. If the entire DepEd budget is converted into tuition vouchers, more socio-economically disadvantaged students will benefit.
For starters, the government can experiment with charter schools funded with public funds but operated by civil society organizations – accepting only the brightest indigent students. The rich can fend for themselves as they are apt to do anyway.
Additional education funding can be raised by increasing taxes on real estate holdings valued in excess of 500% of the average cost of a one-bedroom condominium located in Makati or BGC for example, adjusted annually for inflation. Property taxes on basic housing such as those for teachers and uniformed services will not change. How much more tax should be based on the need to ultimately extricate the Philippines from the lowest quintile of reading, math and science assessments by PISA.
—————————————–
ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Dr. Crispin Fernandez advocates for overseas Filipinos, public health, transformative political change, and patriotic economics. He is also a community organizer, leader, and freelance writer.
