Textbooks of mass idiotization now…
Inquirer News Service
THIS refers to the report that the Department of Education has inked a partnership with a certain soft drink company in the delivery of textbooks throughout the country. For the past two years, the private sector was tapped by the DepEd to prevent the "ghost deliveries" of books. It is part of an ongoing effort to reform the inefficient and corrupt practices in the department.
But why a soft drink company?
Just two months ago, the DepEd revitalized its school nutrition program by launching the Universal Medical and Dental Check-up in public schools. President Macapagal-Arroyo herself ordered the release of P30 billion for the school-feeding program.
How could the DepEd not see the irony of vowing to make children healthier and at the same time forging a deal with a company not known for making healthy drinks?
Imagine the Lung Center of the Philippines tapping a cigarette manufacturer to deliver wheelchairs for its patients. Or the Philippine Heart Center allowing a lechon seller to open a canteen in its building. That is how I appreciate the significance of a soft-drink maker delivering textbooks for our children.
The DepEd has always invoked globalization to justify changes in the school curriculum. It should also recognize the global trend of ridding schools of unhealthy food products. In the US states of Alabama, Arizona and Connecticut, junk foods are banned in schools. California governor and former bodybuilder champion Arnold Schwarzenegger wants school vending machines to sell only juice and cereals.
How can schools effectively teach our kids to avoid eating food with too much sugar content or to patronize healthy native drinks when the big trucks of a soft drink company are happily welcomed in school premises for distributing textbooks?
Educators have pointed out that students learn more from messages that are conveyed through actions and statements sanctioned by school personalities. If you have a soft-drink maker doing a good deed recognized by the school, students may not question the nutrition facts of its products. Students will only remember the company as a tireless champion of education, and not a profit-motivated company responsible for making the drink which cannot make children more healthy and intelligent.
Public schools need money. But we must choose the source of the resources to be used for improving the quality of education. Can't the DepEd be more discerning in choosing its donors?
If a soft drink company is tapped because it has a nationwide organization that can reach out to the grass roots, then why not ask the Church instead? Or the barangay and SK units?
We are a country with a predilection for textbook scandals. Before, we had the textbooks of mass idiotization. With a soft drink company delivering books, we are on our way to having textbooks of mass malnutrition.
—RAYMOND PALATINO, vice president, Anak ng Bayan (via e-mail)
