Reclaiming the soul of Philippine education

It has often kept me wondering whether the past architects of our nation’s educational system would be proud of how we ended up today. From the Dominican founders of the University of Santo Tomas—the oldest university in Asia—to the American Thomasites who brought the promise of free schooling, each generation built upon the conviction that education is the most powerful equalizer in society.

Even in the early American period, champions like Isauro Gabaldón authored the Gabaldon Law of 1907, erecting schools that stood as monuments to a nation’s faith in learning as the foundation of democracy.

Despite this proud heritage, we confront what may be the greatest learning crisis in our history. However, the system has not failed entirely. It retains three enduring strengths: the high value Filipinos place on education, the quiet dedication of teachers, and the resilient learning capacity of students. These are the foundations upon which reform must stand.

When the Second Congressional Commission on Education (Edcom 2) began, we faced an inconvenient truth: legislative oversight over education agencies—Department of Education (DepEd), Commission on Higher Education (CHEd), Technical Education and Skills Development Authority (Tesda)—was often reactive, fragmented, and event-driven. We lacked sustained, evidence-based engagement.

Edcom 2 changed that, modeling oversight that listens before it legislates. We realized that true accountability is not about assigning blame but ensuring that every reform achieves what it promised. This shifted our perspective from faultfinding to future-building.

In our consultations, we discovered that effective oversight begins with listening. We traveled across Luzon, Visayas, and Mindanao, meeting teachers carrying the weight of their schools and students whose hunger to learn overcame hunger itself. These encounters reminded us that every statistic represents a human face. Oversight grounded in empathy is not weakness; it is wisdom.

Edcom 2 became the prototype for a systematized legislative oversight framework. It bridged the isolated islands of policy, planning, and implementation. By partnering with an independent research consortium, Edcom 2 gave the legislature the capacity to verify data independently, allowing Congress to measure progress by impact rather than just compliance. It proved that oversight can be strategic rather than episodic.

Reform requires institutional memory. Without continuity, even the best policies lose momentum. To sustain this work, Congress should consider establishing an education caucus—a cross-party group of legislators committed to sustained engagement on education reform.

Such a caucus would serve as a permanent platform to review data and monitor reforms, ensuring that education remains a shared national priority across administrations. It would preserve the insights of Edcom 2, transforming them into a living network within Congress.

Looking beyond Edcom 2, three courses of action must define the future:

(1) Coresponsibility: Education is a shared calling. We must move from “yours” and “mine” to “ours.” Oversight becomes stewardship—a shared duty to ensure no child is left behind.

(2) Collaboration: DepEd, CHEd, Tesda, and private institutions must act as one national learning ecosystem. Synergy must replace redundancy.

See Also

Talk of the Town: Accountability for solar power fiasco

(3) Community: Reform must grow from the ground up. Communities are not just beneficiaries of policy; they are coauthors of it.

If Edcom 2 is remembered for one thing, it should be for proving that good governance is the foundation of good education. Our vision is a system guided by reflection and service—where teachers teach with joy and students learn with hope.

In many ways, the work of Edcom 2 continues what early architects began. The Dominicans viewed education as a moral duty; the Thomasites as a right; Gabaldón as a public trust. Today, we affirm that education is a covenant of coresponsibility.

As we conclude Edcom 2, we do not end a project—we carry forward a tradition. Oversight must become a habit of governance and a discipline of service. From the mission of the Thomasites to the legacy of Gabaldón, we inherit a sacred trust: to keep learning, to keep leading, and to keep building. That is the promise we must keep.

—————-

Rep. Jude Acidre is a cochair of Edcom 2 and the chair of the House committee on higher and technical education. A longer version of this article appears in the Edcom 2 Final Report.