K+12 Education in the Philippines

The Enhanced K+12 Basic Education Program in the Philippines has been officially started. It has been initiated by the Aquino administration where students will have to undergo a new system of education.

This program will require all incoming students to enroll into two more years of basic education. Thus, the K+12 System will basically include the Universal kindergarten, 6 years of elementary, 4 years of junior high school with an additional 2 years for senior high school. Moreover, the program aims to uplift the quality of education in the Philippines in order for graduates to be easily employed. The program also aims to meet the standards required for professionals who would want to work abroad. Most importantly, the system aims to fully enhance and develop the students in order for them to be well-prepared especially in emotional and cognitive aspects. Through this, graduates will be able to face the pressures of their future workplace. However, not all are in favor of the K+12 Education. There are students complaining of the additional years and there are parents who are not in favor of the additional expenses. But indeed, it is an undeniable fact that additional years in the education system will really require more budgets not just from the government but from the parents as well. Aside from this, students will need additional classrooms, school supplies and facilities. The program would need more qualified teachers as well. I personally believe that the K+12 Education in the Philippines would uplift the quality of lifestyle of the Filipino people. But, this could not be done without being prepared. And since the program has already been implemented, what is more important now is for students to do their best and study despite of the lack of facilities. Nothing is impossible when we persist. As for teachers, continue to teach with love and love what you teach despite of your own personal triumphs and economic crisis. Always remember that the future of the students depends upon you. As for the parents who have been doing their best in pursuing their child’s education, remember that the program aims what’s best for your children. It will help your children to become globally competitive and if your children will succeed, you will also succeed.There may be a lot of factors to consider for the K+12 Education to succeed. But as long as we open our minds to change and we will take it on a positive way, we will definitely attain our most-aspired educational standards which will play a great role in our country’s development and will therefore, uplift us from poverty.
link: http://education-teaching-careers.knoji.com/k12-education-in-the-philippines/

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As a student, At  first I disagree in implementing K+12 education in the Philippines because as said in the first part of the article that students will have to undergo a new system of education in which students are to enrol two more years of basic education. Most of the families or some parents are not in favor of this implementation because it requires more budget or expense not just for the parents but also for the government.  Students will need more classrooms, teachers and school supplies in order to provide good education for students to be more aware or ready about their future.

For the past year, as many articles and explanations about the K+12 education, I now understand that K+12 education could enhance the skills of the students but they should to their best to study and  be more prepared for their future and as said in the article, this would uplift the quality of lifestyle of the Filipino people. With the K+12 implementation, teachers can practice more their skills or talents in teaching which leads to the success of the students who learn from the best teachers but their future depends on how they perform their studies or success.

K+12 education aims what's best for the students, to be more competitive and attentive. We should not limit our minds to the positive way of education that our country or government is giving us because it is one way of changing our way and towards the better future of the next generation. 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Midterms:

What if the world all used the same currency?

By John W. Schoen

Senior Producer

With the value of the dollar jumping up and down against other countries' currencies, what if the world just agreed to use the same currency? It sounds like a simple idea. But like many simple ideas, it would come with all kinds of unintended consequences.

Recently, Chinese leaders argued for the creation of a unified global currency, a concept that has been proposed by a number of academics and political officials in modern economic history. While the idea has certainly not received widespread support, the success of the euro demonstrates that currency unification can work and may even have certain economic benefits. What ramifications might the adoption of a universal currency have on global trade and national economies in general?
— R.Z., New York

The Chinese proposal for a single global currency was part of Beijing’s effort to take a more prominent place among world powers at the recent G20 meeting. And they have legitimate reason to float the idea of replacing the dollar as the “reserve” currency — the medium of exchange used for the majority of financial transactions around the world. As the holder of some $2 trillion in dollar-denominated savings the Chinese government has reason to be concerned about the long-term strength of the dollar. One time-honored method of reducing large government debt is to gradually inflate the currency to reduce the real value of that debt. That would also devalue that big pile of Chinese savings. The dollar’s role as a reserve currency also gives the United States a dominant role in the global economy. That also means other countries are subject to U.S. fiscal and monetary policies over which they have no control. So it’s no surprise that China would like to see another entity — it suggests the International Monetary Fund would be a good choice — issue a single global currency that would be used by all countries in place of the dollar. There would be many advantages to this. But it has about as much chance of happening as the adoption of Esperanto as a common global language. A nation’s currency serves several purposes, one of which is a global proxy for the depth, strength and productivity of its economy and the stability of its political system.  For all of the problems facing the United States, investors around the world believe the dollar is the safest place to park their wealth. That’s why, for the moment, interest rates on dollar-denominated debt like U.S. Treasuries are so low. Currencies are also valued based on trade flows; if the Japanese yen is relatively weak compared to the dollar, and American car buyers can buy a higher-end Japanese model for the same price in dollars, they will choose the Japanese car. That means that countries that are more productive generally see the value of their currency strengthen, which gives people who earn wages in that currency more buying power when they buy products priced in other, weaker currencies. This makes the Chinese proposal for unified currency somewhat ironic, given that for many years, China artificially suppressed the value of its currency, the yuan, to make its products more competitive when priced in other currencies. With a single, unified currency, countries no longer have the luxury of devaluing their local currency to make their product more competitive. There are other problems with a unified currency — as countries in the Eurozone are learning. Though the first 10 years of sharing a single currency went relatively smoothly, cracks have begun appearing on the continent as the global recession deepens. One of the original goals of the Euro was to raise the overall productivity of the European economy, as weaker, smaller countries had to become more competitive with larger, stronger countries. In fact, the reverse is true. Weaker countries enjoyed higher purchasing power without having to produce more goods and services. Overall productivity growth slowed in Europe from 1.6 percent a year before the euro to half that pace since. The Euro also suffers from the fragmented political structure that governs the economy it represents. Since each member country can issue its own debt, the euro is used in 16 different bond markets. Each country sets its own tax and spending policies; some countries now carry debts larger than their gross domestic product. So while they’ve been freed of the impact of currency fluctuation, euro countries now face a different — in some cases more painful — impact from the whims of global investors. Borrowing costs in heavily indebted countries like Spain, Greece, Ireland and Portugal are much higher than of Germany, which has accumulated the largest pile of savings. That presents these countries with some painful choices they didn’t have to deal with back in the days when they could devalue their local currency. Italy, for example, faces some stark choices, according to a 2006 report by the Center for European reform, a London-based think tank. It can continue to muddle along as the slowest growing economy among euro countries. Or it could boost productivity, chiefly by cutting wages. Or it could leave the euro, devalue its debts and create its own currency. Doing so, however, would make it much more difficult to borrow. Other euro countries with high debts face similar downward spirals. Those debts increase costs, forcing tax increases or spending cuts. Cutting future borrowing costs means raising productivity — either through layoffs or wage cuts or both. None of those choices is likely to win much support on Election Day. Unless and until the world had a single government to maintain uniform fiscal and monetary policies, it's hard to see how any independent body would be granted sufficient powers to make a workable global currency — especially in times of global recession when the most painful choices are required. (This is what ultimately began the collapse of the gold standard in the 1930s.) And as long as the global economy consists of a collection of local economies governed by multiple countries, a single global currency would do little to eliminate the resulting imbalances that result from the different economic policies pursued by those sovereign nations.

link: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30047877/ns/business-answer_desk/t/what-if-world-all-used-same-currency/#.T6UBqBMgeGE

 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

When this economic issue was on the news, some people said that global currency is the sign of the end of the world but they were wrong. The purpose of global currency is to help the poor country stabilize and improve their income and also their way of living. Global currency can change the life or people for the better.

Equality is emphasized in global currency. This could be a great opportunity to consumers or citizens because it prevents a huge financial loss in businesses especially in a specific country. Maybe it is a loss to some but it is not really harmful. 

Who wouldn't want to live in a fair country? For me global currency is better because it can improve a country's way of living and it can avoid the economic problems that we are facing like poverty. Global currency may be a blessing to other counties especially the poor ones and maybe it can also strengthen the bonds between other countries. Equality to the better future.