John N.

Abletis Sociology of Education

BS Sociology Dr. Zenaida T. Medrano

I. Relationship between economy and education expansion.

To aid the reader in understanding my discussion, I have prepared three causal

figures below. These figures represent, I think, the dialectical relationship between economy
and education.

A. Implying Marx (i.e. substructure and superstructure)

Economy Government Education expansion

B. Cultural consequences to Economy

Education expansion Economy

C. Dialectical relationship

Economy Education Expansion

The first relationship (A) was inspired by the ideas of Marx regarding Dialectical
Materialism. His theory on substructure (economy) as the dominant aspect of society
determining all the superstructures (e.g. politics, education, religion, culture, etc.) implies
that economy, with the intervention of the state, affects education expansion. I used to
recognize the intervention of the state since most schools (i.e. elementary and secondary)
in the country are public. Education expansion, which most modern nation-states would
admit as their responsibility to their citizens, somewhat implies the construction of school
buildings, the provision of school materials, and the dissemination of education services. It
is explicit that those activities are costly, hence, a need for sufficient funds. The government
relies heavily on tax, which, was mainly derived from the economic sector. A weak economy
implies low tax (or else a revolution may happen), a strong economy implies high tax.
Therefore, the responsibility for education expansion by the state depends on whether that
state is earning sufficient funds (tax collections, IRA) for such education expansion
(definitely the state would not solely allocate his budget to the education as there are also
other important sectors in the society, eg. Health, defense, agriculture etc.).
Education expansion implies the proliferation of schools. The (1) nature of these
schools (e.g. courses offered), (2) where they are located (e.g. urban or rural), and (3) how
much they would be gaining (e.g. tuition fees) and/or spending (e.g. school expenses) are, I
think, determined by the kind of economy we have. On the first case, I think, availability of
jobs in the labor market determines which course students would likely to take (especially if
they are securing their future) as well as what courses schools would likely to offer (e.g.
nursing in response to high demand of nurses outside the country). On the location of
schools (2), majority of us would be thinking that private schools would likely to be located
in cities than in remote areas. Accessibility (e.g. through roads) is a primary factor why
school administrators would choose which places they would want to install their schools
(e.g. there are many roads in cities). But I think that such practice do no justice to students
in the rural areas. I also think that profitability for school administrators matter, thus they

1
may be thinking of installing their schools in populous (urban), profit making areas (e.g.
schools at Recto, Taft, Cubao, Fairview etc.). On the third point raised earlier, I think that
school administrators, depending on the state of the economy in the region, decide whether
to increase or not to increase their tuition fees (commonly no decrease), and whether they
would spend their usual budgets for school maintenance or cut off their expenses on a
considerable amount and would look for possible income generating projects (e.g.
commercialization etc.).
Contemplating on Relationship A, I think, could also explain how economy affects
the quality of education rendered by schools.
The second relationship (B) implies that school expansion also affects the economy.
My point here is that, as a consequence of the lack of access to better education,
individuals produced by mediocre schools (e.g. diploma mills) are weak, and therefore not
suitable to join the labor force. Mismatches on graduates’ specializations and jobs’ course
requirements also occur, as one may observe. Minding on these, I could say that weak
labor force produces weak economy.
Having these reasons and discussions, I contend that the relationship between
economy and education expansion is dialectical (two-way) such that both affect one another
(relationship C). One may argue that explicit on my discussion is that the large part of my
paper dealt with economy and therefore, I should be concluding in favor of relationship A.
But I contend that relationship B exists. Relying solely on relationship A implies hastily
generalization, thus I conclude this paper in favor for relationship C.

II. School system is the largest bureaucracy in the country.

It is not hidden in our knowledge that there are numerous schools, whether private or
public, throughout our country. Ideally, most barangays in the country have elementary
schools, many have even high schools, while universities and colleges are most likely
concentrated in towns and cities, no wonder why the education is the largest bureaucracy in
the country.
To give direction to the discussion, I have quoted here the eight characteristics of
bureaucracy posited by Weber (Ritzer, 2004, pp. 32-33).
1. A series of official functions become offices in which the behavior of those
who occupy those positions is bound by rules. Rules of conduct guide administrators,
teachers, and students depending on there roles in the education system.
2. Each office has a specified sphere of competence. Specialization in education
matters. Aside from different functions played by offices in schools (e.g. principal’s office,
guidance office, registrar), teachers also have their specializations (e.g. major in Filipino,
English, History etc.).
3. Each office has obligations to perform specific functions, the authority to
carry them out, and the means of compulsion to get the job done. Each person in the
education system has roles to perform. These roles are based on his status(es) in the
education system (e.g. as teacher, clerk, registrar, chairman etc.). Society expects that
those roles be carried out so that dysfunctions would be minimal. Performing roles
mandated by statuses helps the system to survive while responding to environmental
challenges.
4. The offices are organized into a hierarchical system. Positions of DepEd
Secretary, DepEd NCR Directors, Division Superintendents, Principals, Year level
chairmen, teachers, and students are hierarchical. Each position has roles to perform, with

2
different amount of authority over the others (especially in decision making), and with
different access to material (allocation of budget, salary) and non-material resources
(prestige).
5. People need technical training in order to meet the technical qualifications
for each office. This is in response meritocracy. Higher positions (administrators) may
require a Ph. D., Ed. D., MA, and MS degree while lower positions may require licenses for
teaching and a college degree (BS, AB). Similarly, grade one students should complete the
requirements needed by his level before going to grade two, this principle is similar to other
higher positions.
6. Those who occupy these positions are given the things they need to do the
job; they do not own them. The latter only applies to offices, I think, because school
materials (e.g. notebooks, ball pens, writing pads) are not provided by the school but by the
parents.
7. The position is part of the organization and cannot be appropriated by an
incumbent. These positions, or offices, have impersonal rules, and no above should be
above the law (ideally).
8. Much of what goes on in the bureaucracy (acts, decisions, rules) is in
writing. This is the very evident part of schooling: grades are written following certain
standards in grading, business replies, inquiries, memoranda and decisions are all written in
letters. This once more, implies the impersonal characteristics of bureaucracy.

III. Impact of unions in teaching.

I think unions have impact in teaching on the following grounds:

1. If teachers become too much devoted to unions, quality teaching would degrade.
2. If teachers manage to be with their unions in balance with their teachers, they
tend to become nationalistic and social conscious such that they could influence
their students.
3. Feeling secured and not alone, teachers could be more motivated in teaching.
4. Depending on the situations, member teachers in unions may feel unsecured in
their jobs (scare of lay-off).

On the first ground, what I am thinking is the time spent /amount of services
rendered by teachers to their unions. Too much time for unions lessens time for studying
(i.e. making lesson plans, reviewing, making tests) and for their families. Studying
consumes time, and they are not supermen in instantaneously memorizing and
understanding what they are reading.
I think the good benefit of being a member of a union is that it makes its members to
become aware of the social issues prevalent at their time and place. This social
consciousness, I think, fosters nationalism and patriotism, encourages actions, making
them to think that they are agents for social change. Ideals and beliefs gained from their
unions, I think, are being shared to their students, implying that the latter could be
influenced by the former, making their students to be socially conscious in aiming for social
change –for a just and humane society.
Feeling secured and not alone (due to camaraderie since they are now conscious
that they are not alone in suffering the same problem) teachers could be more motivated in

3
teaching than before. The mere knowledge that some helps you, or shares with your
miseries, increases someone’s self-esteem.
Unions, I think, are safe when teachers are employed in government schools (the
constitution secures this right), however, their tenure are endangered when employed in
private schools (i.e. schools who forbid rallying). The latter situation causes some teachers
not to join unions.

IV. The impact of home computer in increasing school inequality.

I think inequality in school with regards to home computer rests on the following:

1. Access on latest updates in the Academe

2. Costly in doing assignments
3. Time spent and labor rendered in doing assignments and projects
4. Preference of teachers on type written materials
5. Questions on reliability of sources (internet) vs. books

Constraints on latest updates in the academe are met by students who don’t have
home computers, thus, they tend to be outdated. I think, without home computers, students
would suffer from costly internet rentals, library fees, and transportation (going to libraries).
There are teachers who require their students to submit assignments that are computer
type written. Increasingly, teachers also require students to present their projects in
PowerPoint presentations. Many are requiring students to submit their projects via e-mail.
Without home computers, high computer literacy would be impossible. It is also hard,
laborious, and tiring to write your assignments and projects using your hands. I have also
encountered teachers who prefer computer type-written assignments than hand-written
ones, consequently, and sadly, these teachers gave higher grades to those computer type-
written assignments. These, I think, perpetuate up to this date, such that it has also
perpetuated school inequality to students who are poor and could not afford to buy home
computers.
Despite many advantages, home computers (especially each has internet
connection) have flaws. Many question the reliability of materials found in the internet. Other
teachers prefer books instead of internet sources. Although with such convenience, I still
prefer books since I could analyze more thoroughly the text (the material) without loosing
my eye sight. I also think that books are more reliable than internet resources since they are
created by the authorities (teachers etc.). Relying in books also constrains students to copy-
paste the material. I learned to read by reading books, not on web pages.

-John N. Abletis
BS Sociology IV
Dept. Socio, CA, PUP
SY 08-09