Beyond the Tasks

 

                                                   (image: youtube.com)

Yay karajaw pakialam…

Bella Cariaso of the Philippine Star reported: The United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) warned of a “real and widespread learning crisis” in the Philippines, as recent findings revealed that a vast majority of students are falling significantly behind in reading and mathematics.

Citing data from a 2019 study, UNICEF Education chief Akihiro Fushimi said that 90% of Filipino children in Grade 5 cannot read at their expected level, while 83% continue to struggle with basic Mathematics.

What has become of Philippine education? Are we witnessing a systemic breakdown influenced by political dynamics, wherein leadership roles in the Department of Education are often filled based on political affiliations rather than professional merit? Or is the decline rooted in the growing tendency of some school heads to relegate instructional supervision to a secondary concern, rather than viewing it as a core responsibility essential to educational quality?

Recently, this writer had the opportunity to participate in a group analysis session focused on supervisors’ observations during the opening of classes. One of the most glaring concerns raised was the prevalence of erroneous and hastily downloaded lesson plans being used by teachers. According to some, these templates only add to their already overwhelming workload. But isn’t the lesson plan supposed to serve as the blueprint, the guiding framework, for effective teaching and meaningful learning?

Lesson planning is widely recognized as a fundamental aspect of effective teaching, serving as the blueprint that guides learning objectives, instructional strategies, and assessment methods (Orlich et al., 2012; Yinger, 1980). When done thoughtfully, it supports both teacher clarity and student achievement, but when treated as a formality, it can hinder rather than help the learning process (Shavelson & Stern, 1981).

It was also observed that some school heads tend to delegate a significant portion of their responsibilities to master teachers, resulting in diminished hands-on involvement in school operations. This practice, while perhaps intended to promote shared leadership, borders on over delegation, a hallmark of poor management that can lead to weakened instructional supervision and blurred accountability.

In school settings, when principals excessively pass on their core responsibilities to master teachers, it dilutes their instructional leadership role and often leads to confusion among staff regarding decision-making processes (Lunenburg, 2010). Instead of fostering collaboration, this kind of delegation may signal disengagement, creating gaps in supervision and weakening overall school performance.

A concerning reality has emerged wherein some school leaders delegate substantial responsibilities to administrative officers, many of whom do not possess formal training or academic backgrounds in education. This practice not only blurs the boundaries of professional roles within the school but also poses the risk of these individuals assuming informal leadership positions, potentially undermining the authority and instructional focus of designated educational leaders.

While informal leaders can sometimes provide support in organizations, their unchecked influence in educational settings can lead to confusion, role ambiguity, and weakened formal authority. When administrative personnel without educational training begin to assume leadership functions, it can undermine the school head's instructional leadership and erode trust in the formal leadership structure (Owens & Valesky, 2015). Such dynamics may foster parallel systems of authority, ultimately disrupt decision-making and affecting school cohesion.

UNICEF’s recent warning to the Department of Education serves as a stark reminder of the deep-seated systemic issues plaguing Philippine education. From the misuse of lesson planning to the over delegation of responsibilities by school heads, and the alarming rise of informal leadership among non-educators, the patterns point to a dangerous drift away from instructional integrity and accountability.

It is equally important to view our work not merely as a means of livelihood, but as a vital contribution to nation-building, one that centers on developing competent, lifelong learners. By aligning our daily efforts with the goal of nurturing critical thinkers and responsible citizens, we help lay the groundwork for a stronger and more capable society.