The Philippine Teachers Professionalization Act of
1994: Its Implications to Teacher Education
Pursuant to the
provision of Section 1 Article XIV of the 1987 of the 1987 Constitution that
“the State shall protect and promote the right of all citizens to quality
education at all levels and shall take appropriate steps to make such education
accessible to all”. The Philippine Teachers Professionalization Act of 1994
(Republic Act No. 7836) was promulgated.
This was signed into
law by President Fidel V. Ramos on December 16, 1994. The above mentioned law
amends and/or supersedes the provisions of P.D. (No. 1006 or the Teachers
Professionalization Decree of 1976, which was the basis of the Professional
Board Examination for Teachers (PBET). This act aimed towards (1) the
promotion, development and professionalization of teachers and the teaching
profession and (2) the supervision and regulation of the licensure examination
for teachers.
To this effect, the
Professional Board Examination for Teachers which was traditionally
administered by the National Board for Teachers, an agency attached to the
Department of Education, Culture, and Sports in coordination with the Civil
Service Commission, will be administered by the Professional Regulations
Commission (PRC) starting August 1996.
The Professional Board for
Teachers
The teacher’s
examination including its rules and regulations will be enforced through a
collegial body called the Board for Professional Teachers, under the
supervision of the PRC. They are appointed by the President of the Philippines
based on the recommendations of the accredited associations of teachers.
Pursuant to the provisions of the law, the board shall be composed of five (5)
members who shall be (a) citizens of the Philippines, (b) at least 35 years
old, of proven integrity, and possess high moral values in their
professional and personal conduct and have not been convicted of any offense
involving moral turpitude, (c) holder of a Bachelor’s degree in Education or
Bachelor of Arts and preferably holders of a master’s degree of doctorate
degree in education or its equivalent, (d) professional teachers with valid
certificate of registration and valid professional license, except those who
shall compose the first Board for Professional Teachers, (e) have been
professional teachers in the active practice of the teaching profession for at
least ten (10) years in the elementary and secondary level, and (f) not
officials or members of the faculty of, nor have a pecuniary interest in any university,
college, school or institution conferring a bachelor’s degree in education or its equivalents for at least three (3)
years prior to their appointment, and neither connected with a review center or
with any group or association where review classes or lectures in preparation
for the licensure examination are offered or
conducted.
Examination and Registration
All applicants for
registration as professional teachers shall be required to pass a written
examination which shall be given at least once a year in places and dates as
the board may determine upon the approval by the PRC. A valid certificate of
registration and a valid professional license from the PRC are required before
any person is allowed to practice as a professional teacher in the Philippines.
The examination for
the elementary and secondary school teachers shall be given separately. The
results of the examination shall be released within one hundred twenty (120) days after the
date of examination. In this connection, a professional license signed by the
Chairman of the PRC and bearing the registration number and date of issuance
and the expiration and renewability shall be issued to every registrant who has
paid the annual registration fees for three consecutive years. This license shall
serve as evidence that the license can lawfully practice his profession.
Periodic Merit Examination
Aside from the
licensure examination, a professional teacher is encouraged to grow
professionally by taking a Merit Examination once in every five years as
provided by section 19 of this law, the result of which shall serve as the
basis for merit promotion as well as for salary adjustments. However, no fee
shall be required in taking the merit examination.
A teacher who fails
to pass the merit examination will be allowed to take the examination for the
second time. If he fails, he shall be required to take a CHED accredited
refresher course or program before being allowed to take another examination.
However, failure in the merit examination shall not be used as ground for
dismissal or demotion.
But those who passed
shall be awarded a diploma of merit by the board, earn merit points for
purposes of salary adjustment or promotion to higher position or grade level,
be placed in priority list for government scholarship, and enjoy other benefits
as may be provided by the board. Moreover, the law provides that these
incentives shall be extended to those teachers who make inventions, develop new
methods of teaching, write a book or books and create works of artistic merit.
Registration and Exception
The Board for
Professional Teachers shall publish a roster of professional teachers, date of
registration, their names and addresses and other pertinent data. Furthermore,
as provided by Section 26, two years after the affectivity of this law, no
person shall engage in teaching and/or act as professional teacher whether in
the pre-school, elementary or secondary level, unless he is a duly-registered
professional teacher and a holder
of a valid certificate of registration. Applications for license as a
professional teacher may be issued without examination under the following circumstances:
a)
a holder of a
certificate of eligibility as a teacher issued by the Civil Service Commission
and the CHED;
b)
registered
professional teacher with the National Board for Teachers under the CHED pursuant to P.D. 1006;
c)
an elementary or
secondary teacher of five (5) years in good standing and a holder of a Bachelor’s degree in Education or its equivalent;
d)
An elementary or
secondary teacher for three years in good standing and a holder of a master’s degree in education or its equivalent.
The teachers who fall
under the above circumstances are given two years from the organization of the
Board for Professional Teachers within which to register and be included in the
roster of professional teachers. Those incumbent teachers who are not qualified
to register without passing any examination or qualified yet failed to register
within the two year period shall be issued a temporary special permit.
Furthermore, those who failed in the licensure examination for professional
teachers shall be eligible as para-teachers.
On the other hand,
this law also provides for a fine of not less than five thousand pesos (Php5,
000) nor more than twenty-thousand pesos (Php20, 000) or imprisonment of not less than six months nor more than
five years, or both, (at the discretion of the court) to any person, school or
school official found guilty of violating the provisions of this law.
THE “LET” AND QUALITY EDUCATION
The law which
professionalizes the teaching profession and placing the authority of
administering the licensure examination for teachers to the Professional
Regulations Commission is a laudable endeavor. Yet it is just one of those
herculean tasks that the
State through the
CHED needs to accomplish soonest in order to rectify the turbulent maladies
that are now pestering the entire educational system.
The teacher is the
most important factor in the educative (teaching-learning) process. The teacher
with his personality has the capacity either to make or break the young minds
that are entrusted to his care. Therefore, the teacher holds in his hands the
future of this nation. No wonder why the oft-quoted EDCOM report in 1991
considered the teachers as the heart of the problem.
That
same report stated that the teachers are poorly trained and most of them in any
level of education do not have the minimum qualifications for teaching. It is
indicated that the deplorable performance can be traced to poor teaching training
and the low quality of students enrolled in teacher training institutions.
This allegation no
matter how hard it is for us in the field of education to accept its veracity
has an inherent truth in it. This is due to the fact that teaching is a poorly
esteemed profession nowadays. Gone are those years when teachers were the helm
of the public’s eyes and were considered to be the most honorable people in any
society.
For this, teaching
can no longer attract the best high school graduates. The prevalent psyche
today is that if you are bright and talented as much as possible you should
avoid being a teacher and instead take up law, medicine, engineering and other
high paying professions. Whereas, if you are mediocre student, teaching is the
easiest course for you to get a college diploma.
What has really
happened to the noblest profession? What did the government do to save this
noble calling from the mire of misery and from its deteriorating condition?
These questions are
just the proverbial “tip of the iceberg” in so far as the horrible state of
teaching in the Philippines is concerned.
As expected, nobody
is willing and courageous enough to accept the blame. Instead, the different
sectors involved are pointing an accusing finger at each The government for
its part will point to the provision of Section 5 Article XIV of the 1987
Constitution as its contribution to alleviate the plight of the poor teachers,
for this mandates that the State should give the highest budgetary priority to
education, so as to attract the best available talents into becoming teachers.
However, it is easier
said than done. As it is mentioned in this book (Foundations of Education II),
teaching has already lost its traditional glory and glamour. It is now
considered a horrible if not a disgusting profession. Teachers are now
demoralized and somehow “demonetized” professionals. To this effect nobody
dares to take the challenge of educating our youth and worst even those are
already in the field are leaving their calling as teachers to serve as domestic
helpers, baby sitters, and even entertainers in foreign countries.
The enrolment of
teacher training schools in Metro Manila and even in the whole country is
declining. Well, no one can blame and force the student to be teachers if they
cannot be promised with a bed of roses once they decided to enter the portals
of the teaching profession. If they have other alternatives to make more money,
surely they would not dare embark on the gargantuan and seemingly unrewarding
task of being a teacher.
But of course there
are other idealists who would content that teaching is not a money- making
machine, but rather a calling, a vocation that needed an unwavering devotion
and commitment. And in the words of Socrates of ancient Greece, if the teachers
teach because of salary, they are degrading the reputation of the profession
and reducing it to a mere income-generating endeavor.
Again, these words
are easier said than done. I firmly believe that teachers are just human beings
like any other professional. They need what everybody needs. Teachers cannot
teach with an empty stomach. They cannot teach if they have nothing to wear. They
cannot teach effectively if their families are starving and are dying because
they have no money to buy the necessary medicine.
Moreover, almost all
the studies conducted in the past until now, since the Monroe Survey of the
1920’s and the Swanson Survey of the 1950’s up to the current report of the
EDCOM revealed the same thing – teachers are poorly paid and trained. So what
else is new? If the proper authorities will not execute decisive actions on
this matter with a sense of urgency,
one day we will wake up to see that
our country and her citizens are already in the arid and barren field of
ignorance, misery and intellectual deprivation.
If we truly care for
the future of our children who are, since time immemorial considered as the
hope of the nation, we will seriously consider the gravity of the problem and
will do all means to thwart these boisterous dilemmas that threaten our very existence.
Yes, it is true that teachers need to be properly trained and be fully equipped
to qualify them to teach our children.
Hence, there is a
need to professionalize them through the licensure examination. However, if the
government continues to ignore their plea for better compensation and brighter
future in their chosen career, and instead of responding constructively to
their clamor when they go
to the streets to seek redress for their grievances, the same “humane”
government slaps them with threats of suspension and even dismissal from
services, we cannot expect these teachers to teach effectively and be satisfied
with their work, thus, we definitely cannot expect quality education. This is
due to the fact that the students are just as good as their teachers, and as
the Lord Jesus Christ stressed in Matthew 22:14, “no student is better than his
teacher.”
The state authorities
still claim that there is not enough money to fully implement the salary
increase of teachers because the government does not have enough budget for
this task. But if we try to carefully and objectively analyze the actual
situation, we will realize that the national budget is devoured by the “foreign
debt servicing scheme” via the provisions of P.D. 1177, which prescribes that
the lion share of the annual budget (General Appropriations Act) be set aside
to pay our foreign debts.
But sad to say all
initiatives in the Congress to repeal this burdensome Marcos’ decree has never
prospered for reasons only the gentlemen in the Senate and House of
Representatives know. And to add insult, to injury the national budget is
further depleted by the “pork barrel” which amounts to several billions of
pesos yearly given to senators and congressmen deceitfully labeled as
countrywide development fund (CDF), which more often than not leads to
budgetary deficits.
And if there is a
need for more revenues to finance the whims of the government, there is always
an easy way to generate funds – levy more taxes to the people, just like
Expanded Value Added Tax.
If the government can
afford to appropriate more than 35% of the national budget to repay the debts
which the past administrative had acquired (yet failed to explain where the
money went) and can provide the president, vice president, 24 senators and 250 congressmen their
respective pork barrels by the millions and can increase the monthly salary of
the legislators by 100% overnight, why can’t it spare the lowly paid teachers a
small amount to augment their income? Are junketing, electioneering, and paying
the private armies and others more important than educating our people?
Every opening of the
school year the CHED announces that there is a need for more teachers to meet
the needs of increasing enrolment. In order to address this problem of lack of
teachers, the CHED has to schedule as many as three teaching shifts, offer multi-grade
classes (a teacher handles at least two different grades at the same time in
one class) and increase the class size to 60 or 70 pupils per section. And as
revealed by the teachers in the rural areas and far flung provinces, they are
already handling as much as 70 to 90 students per section.
Indeed, how can we
expect quality education under this set-up? No matter how efficient a teacher
is and regardless of his rating in the licensure and the subsequent merit
examination, he is definitely incapacitated to control more than 90 students
per section, much more delivering the goods to them. The way it seems the
Philippine society particularly the government is asking too much from the
teachers and yet giving them too little. With these in mind we cannot help it
but ask ourselves that if education is expensive let us try the cost of
ignorance.
