Something is slowly working

By Herman M. Lagon

For once, the news from PISA gives Philippine education something we have not had much of lately: room to smile. Not a victory parade, certainly. Maybe not even a full smile. But after years of seeing our learners near the bottom of international assessments, I will gladly take the small upward curve. Amat-amat. Slowly, yes, but moving nonetheless.

The country recorded its best performance since joining the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) in 2018. Our 15-year-olds scored 373 in science, 371 in mathematics, and 367 in reading. Compared with 2022, those are increases of 17, 16, and 20 points, respectively. The OECD data confirm that these are clear gains, with the country standing out particularly for its improvement in reading (OECD, 2026).

That distinction matters. There will be a temptation to turn the results into either propaganda or pessimism. One side may say the education crisis is being solved. Another may look at our still-low standing and say nothing has changed. Both readings are too easy. The more interesting truth sits somewhere between them: our learners remain far behind many of their peers, but they are no longer standing still.

The proficiency figures keep our feet on the ground. Only about 32 percent of Filipino students reached at least Level 2 in science, 21 percent in mathematics, and 31 percent in reading. That means roughly two-thirds or more remain below baseline proficiency, depending on the subject. So, yes, celebrate the increase. Then look again at the children who are still struggling to understand a paragraph, solve a practical math problem, or use science to make sense of the world.

Still, something changed. That deserves investigation rather than applause alone. DepEd points to a return to the basics, curriculum improvements, reduced administrative burdens on teachers, greater familiarity with PISA-type questions, attention to learners’ psychosocial readiness, and a whole-of-society effort involving schools, parents, communities, and partners. OECD Education and Skills Director Andreas Schleicher was quite clear: the improvement is not merely statistical noise; he described the Philippine school system as one “on the move.”

As a teacher, that phrase interests me more than any ranking. When a struggling student finally gets one problem right after several failed attempts, you do not declare mastery. You notice what changed. Was it the explanation? More practice? Better feedback? More time? A good teacher does not celebrate the correct answer and then remove whatever helped the learner arrive at it. We study the improvement because we want it to happen again.

That is why the timing of the 2027 education budget discussion is troubling. The proposed National Expenditure Program gives the Academic Recovery and Accessible Learning Program, or ARAL, no specific allocation, even as DepEd seeks ₱15.98 billion to continue it. The same proposed budget contains no funding for new teacher positions, although DepEd has identified a need for 14,274 additional teachers. Importantly, this is still a proposed budget, and Congress can restore funding during deliberations.

We should also resist an easy causal story. PISA 2025 does not prove that ARAL produced the gains. Education outcomes do not behave like a laboratory experiment where one variable can conveniently claim the trophy. The students tested in PISA were shaped by years of schooling, teachers, families, pandemic disruption, curriculum changes, remediation, socioeconomic conditions, and countless classroom encounters. The responsible question is not, “Which program deserves credit?” It is, “What actually helped, and how do we know?” That is precisely the inquiry the improved scores now make urgent.

ARAL nevertheless deserves careful attention. During School Year 2025–2026, DepEd reported that the number of struggling readers fell from 6.7 million to 2.2 million, while learners reaching grade-level reading readiness rose from 3.3 million to 5.8 million. EDCOM 2 says the early gains warrant sustained investment while the program is evaluated more rigorously. Those figures do not settle the argument, but they certainly make zero funding a strange place to begin it.

The same applies to teachers. Hiring more teachers will not magically repair every weakness in Philippine education. We also need better preparation, deployment, leadership, classrooms, nutrition, learning materials, assessment, and support. But when DepEd itself says it needs 14,274 additional teachers, leaving those positions initially unfunded deserves explanation. A learning recovery program without tutors and classrooms without enough teachers make an odd pair of companions to a national celebration of improved learning.

Perhaps that is the wiser way to read PISA 2025. We are still in the lower reaches—the bottom quartile—of the table, and the distance ahead remains uncomfortable. But something has begun to move. The present education leadership, teachers, learners, parents, and communities deserve fair acknowledgment for that movement. The next task is less glamorous than announcing scores: find out what helped, and give it room to continue.

We are still far from where we need to be. But for once, the numbers are moving in the right direction. Amat-amat. Something, it seems, is slowly working.

***

Doc H fondly describes himself as a ”student of and for life” who, like many others, aspires to a life-giving and why-driven world grounded in social justice and the pursuit of happiness. His views do not necessarily reflect those of the institutions he is employed or connected with.