What Is The Department Of Education Responsible For?

0 Comments

What Is The Department Of Education Responsible For
People also search for Russia China United Kingdom Canada Ukraine Germany North America
View complete answer

What does Department of education refer to?

federal executive division responsible for carrying out government education programs and policies. It seeks to ensure access to education and to improve the quality of education nationwide. In addition to administering programs in elementary and secondary education, higher education, vocational and adult education, special education, bilingual education, civil rights, and educational research, the department provides funds and services to the American Printing House for the Blind, Gallaudet University, Howard University, and the National Technical Institute for the Deaf.
View complete answer

What are the roles and responsibilities of local government for education?

Local authorities have a duty to identify, as far as is possible, children not receiving a suitable education and intervene, for example, by issuing a school attendance order.
View complete answer

What is the meaning of Decs in the Philippines?

Educational Decree of 1863 (December 20, 1863), as amended, established the Department of Education as the Superior Commission of Primary Instruction under a Chairman.
View complete answer

Why is education a function of the state in the Philippines?

In this classic Kappan article, the author contemplates the value and purpose of public schools and the state’s role in governing them. The problem of providing satisfactory educational opportunity for the millions of American children in the past has been such an enormous one that there has been little time to evaluate properly the success of the task.

Frankly, it has been scarcely necessary to do, for we seemingly have been so successful in handling affairs that few dared to question the soundness of the principles underlying the organization and administration of the vast public education system, which was so largely responsible for training our leaders.

But such is no longer the case. Today the real value of the public school, especially on the secondary level, is being challenged and questioned by many leading thinkers. Representative of that group is our present United States Commissioner, who recently has said: “The high percentage of the eligible age groups in high school is the wonder of the world and many of our people ask what the purpose is and what the outcome is likely to be.

The college officials tell us that these schools do not prepare students for college satisfactorily and many employers express dissatisfaction with the product they obtain from vocational courses.” 1 Concerning the uncertainty and inadequacy of the present educational philosophy in America, Professor I.L.

Kandel writes: “The time has come when education in the United States must become more self-conscious than it has been. The one enduring aim that has persisted since the Revolution, equality of opportunity, is not an adequate guide for the development of a national system of education.

There has, particularly during the War and since the War, been much talk of Americanization, especially of the immigrant, but true Americanization,, is not likely to be achieved until there is a better conception of what is meant by Americanization and the fundamental principles underlying American society.

Until that is achieved American education is likely to be at the beck and call of new theories, changing devices, and uncertain objectives.” 2 In the opinion of Professor Bode, the chief defect in American education today is the lack of a program, or sense of direction.

Yet,” he says, “the material for a significant and distinctive educational philosophy is immediately at hand. The influence of modern science is pervading our whole civilization. It is giving us a new conception of the nature and method of intelligence and it is making the question of the place of intelligence in human affairs the fundamental issue of our civilization.

To understand this issue is to have a basis for a philosophy of conduct and a basis for an interpretation of education in its relation to modern life.” 3 The fundamental principles underlying the control and administration of education in America can be understood only in the light of sociological and historical analysis.

  1. Also, they can best be seen when compared with another country, especially England which offers such an interesting contrast.
  2. Early developments of control At the beginning of the nineteenth century the schools in America were largely controlled by the various churches and consequently were sectarian.

They were far more concerned with the preservation of the church than of the State. Herein was a conflict. It was early recognized that the success of a democratic, representative, republican form of government depended entirely upon an intelligent citizenry, — at least one that could read and write.

The burden of eliminating illiteracy must be upon schools! Church schools were not interested in that problem, so special schools had to be provided. The period of transition from church control to state control of education has been appropriately called The Battle for Free Public Schools, The most effective weapon in that fight was the recognition of the right of the community to levy taxes for the support of free public education.

Gradually the church had to give way to the flag of the state with its slogan of equality of educational opportunity as preparation for life in a democracy, as the exponents of liberty were forced to recognize the following fundamental principles of American education: that schools must be supported from public taxation; be non-sectarian, free, compulsory, and universal ; and, that education is the function of the state.

Even though the latter principle was definitely recognized about a century ago, the tradition of liberty has been so strong that nowhere does it mean state dictatorship of schools, for the people will not grant their representatives power to pass laws centralizing the control of education in any state department.

It seems the American people have had no greater fear than that of the danger of centralization of schools and none that is more vague or misunderstood. It is extremely difficult to harmonize the present highly-centralized, autocratically-controlled city school system with the tradition of liberty so sacred in America.

Laymen simply do not know the truth! It would startle them to learn that many critics believe our city systems are more highly centralized than those in France! The exponents of liberty were forced to recognize the following fundamental principles of American education: that schools must be supported from public taxation; be non-sectarian, free, compulsory, and universal ; and, that education is the function of the state.

Education as a function of the state The principle that education is a function of the State is entirely legal in its origin and meaning. Its first meaning was that the federal government made no provision for establishing any national system of schools; consequently, education was conceived as one of the powers of the individual states.

With the recognition of public taxation for education and the passing of compulsory state laws on education, the power of the state gradually increased until with the creation of State Departments of Education and State Superintendents the power became so great that the courts held that education was a function of the state; however, the state granted the people the right to maintain private and parochial schools as one of the guarantees of the federal government.

As already implied, the most outstanding aim in these state schools always has been that of preparing for citizenship in a democracy. To leave this preparation in the control of private institutions was too dangerous for young America with her new, unassimilated, heterogeneous population.

As Suzzallo so excellently points out: “The attempt of civilization to realize itself on a frontier typifies American education. It has represented the attempt to reduce the out lander, the barbarian, the foreigner to common ideals, — to standardize them and to get them to conform to our culture and civilization.” 4 It seems that the leaders in our civilization have always been great believers in the almost sacredness of American institutions and culture and that it has generally been believed that foreign groups with their diverse cultures had little to add to the present order.

Foreign groups must become Americanized! Many contend that this has been a short-sighted policy and is largely responsible for the criticism commonly given to Americanism. Very few educational leaders even now are emphasizing the likely contribution that can be made to our social order by preserving minority culture groups with the hope of assimilating them into the culture of the entire group and thus leavening it — so great has been and is the emphasis and faith in education by mass-production in a standardized, publicly controlled, state educational system! Although the basis of our social order has always been individualism, this has largely found expression in the faith of the individual to make his contribution alone, by virtue of his ability, rather than through organized cooperative means Opportunities were great and no chances were lost of telling him how he could succeed if only he applied himself.

  • There is little evidence that shows the people ever rejected education as a state function except upon religious grounds.
  • Nor has the need for expression of individuality in a variety of schools often been argued.
  • The ideal of democracy, stressing equality of opportunity as interpreted in the past, has worked contrary to all forms of education that might be branded as “class education” or “education of the intellectual elite.” The state and education in England England offers an interesting contrast.

Evolution of control from the church and other bodies to the establishment of what might be called a national system of education has taken place much more slowly than in America and with more clearly defined principles operating as determinants of pol icy.

  • Like America, individualism has always been the underlying philosophy, but due to a more homogeneous people it has been a much different type.
  • True individualism stresses freedom, variety and experimentation, and fervently opposes standardization.
  • In this, England, unlike America, is consistent as these are underlying fundamental principles of control of education.

The idea of a state system of schools in England never took hold because of the danger of schools being used for indoctrination purposes (political and religious) and for furthering undue uniformity by wiping out individuality. This principle was summarized by J.S.

Mill about 1860 when he said that “a general state education is a mere contrivance for moulding people to be exactly like one another.” 5 Even then, he formulated the criterion that should govern the policy of the function of the central education authority that might well be studied in America. “A central organ of information and instruction for all the localities would be equally valuable in all departments of administration.

A government cannot have too much of the kind of activity which does not impede but aids and stimulates individual exertion and development. The mischief be gins when, instead of calling forth the activity and powers of individuals and bodies, it substitutes its own activity for theirs; when, instead of informing, addressing and, upon occasion, denouncing, it makes them work in fetters and bids them stand aside and does their work instead of them.” 6 At present in England education is regarded as a moral affair of which the government has no right to claim a monopoly even though education should be permeated with a sense of national duty.

To quote Professor Kandel: “The national organization should be broad enough to include groups of schools representing different connections, diverse ways of life, and varied traditions of judgment, leaving the choice to the parents. The chief task of the State is to enforce education under the best possible conditions and to let those who will provide it, taking care only that adequate facilities are supplied at public expense.” 7 The relation of the State to education in England is characterized by flexibility, stimulus, advice, consultation, and financial encouragement and reward,

As a result of this policy there is no truly national system of schools; rather, there are “systems” of schools operating side by side independently of each other. The differentiating features are method of control and? scholastic and financial admission requirements.

That social distinction counts greatly is charged by many writers. Sir Michael Sadler has excellently summarized the emphasis in English education as “variety, set in a national framework.” An attempt is made to keep all the forms of education as efficient as possible largely by means of granting aid to schools which will give the Board of Education (a nominal board, whose work is carried out by the President, a cabinet member and political officer) the privilege of inspection and which will meet other requirements, such as awarding a minimum number of free places, and employing certificated teachers.

The Education Act of 1902 made 317 councils of various government units the Local Education Authority (L.E.A.) in England and Wales to provide adequate education where it was not already being provided. By the Act of 1918, the L.E.A. must submit periodically to the Board schemes “for the progressive and efficient development of education in their area.” These schemes are re viewed and criticized and are used as the bases for allowing grant-in-aid which is figured out on the basis of a rather complicated formula in which expenditures of the L.E.A.

  1. Are classified with standard percentages given to each.
  2. At present approximately 53 per cent of the total cost of education is paid by the Board who have made provision to grant aid to parochial schools — a principle contrary to the policy in America.
  3. Religion is considered fundamental in character training, which is the basic aim of all English education, so it must be preserved.
You might be interested:  Why Can'T I Focus On My School Work?

The relationship of the L.E.A. and the Board of Education is that of cooperation and partnership, and neither is supreme over the other. Both have a place guaranteed by law; both are responsible to Parliament. Of the evolution of this relationship, Professor Reisner believes, “if one has been inclined to disparage the English system of public education, it would be well for him to examine the provisions of the Fisher Act before forming his personal opinion.

England was slow in making the beginning of public education and for years was halting in its progress toward an efficient system of education. The sequel seems to indicate, however, that the English principle of respect for personal liberty and the English system of progress through compromise, are sound guides in the development of a national policy of education.” 8 Although the State is the authority in the control of public schools in America, the local units are the administrators and are practically autonomous except for meeting some legal requirements.

The question of just what should be the proper functions of the State has never been clearly analyzed. On this problem America might well study the English system for they seem to have evolved a new relationship between central and local authorities that retains both the elements of the benefits of central supervision and local initiative.

  • The time has come when there must be a re-interpretation of this fundamental principle of American education — to see what are the advantages of state control of education and what are its disadvantages.
  • Present conceptions inadequate That the Americans have failed and still fail to see the dangers of a state system of education as pointed out by Mill is clearly evident.

This has resulted in underestimating the importance of private and parochial schools as possibilities of the expression of individuality of worthy minority groups and greatly narrowed the whole conception of educational administration largely to “mechanical efficiency” of public schools.

Likewise, it has resulted in stressing the importance of organization and system of public schools until its efforts have been crowned by highly centralized city systems emphasizing departments, subjects, units and credits to such an extent that one of America’s best known superintendents has recently charged that “our administration of teaching makes for artificial, disconnected, inefficient learning and has taught us to think in terms of credits rather than in terms of education.” 9 So great has been the emphasis on framework and machinery that administrators seem to have forgotten entirely the importance of “personality,” the psychology of “integration,” of education as “the reconstruction of experience” as the basis of growth and of “teaching as an art that must be free in its functioning.” No longer is the whole story told when one says that education is the function of the state.

The time has come when there must be a re-interpretation of this fundamental principle of American education — to see what are the advantages of state control of education and what are its disadvantages. Also, to see what phases of the educational program may be controlled best by the central authority and which ones, by the nature of the educative process, must be left to the professionally trained classroom teacher.

Interpretations of Democracy as determinants Any consideration of what are the most desirable functions that the state should assume in its control of education must be approached through an interpretation of democracy. To do this is becoming increasingly more difficult as no one is certain what the social and economic implications of democracy are.

No longer is democracy limited to the political field — more especially to the right of the franchise. This has been attained by practically all citizens and yet no one would say our social order is truly democratic. An analysis of a few definitions of democracy should be an aid.

To quote Bode: “To be truly democratic, education must treat the individual himself as the end and set itself the task of preparing him for the intellectual and emotional sharing in the life and affairs of man which embodies the spirit of the Golden Rule.” 10 Speaking of the broader aspects of democracy, Dewey says that if democracy has a moral meaning “it is found in resolving that the supreme test of all political institutions and industrial arrangements shall be the contributions they make to all-round growth of every member of society.” 11 He summarizes his position by saying that society’s best guarantee of efficiency and power “is the liberation and use of the diversity of individual capacities in initiative, planning, foresight, vigor and endurance.

Personality must be education. Full education comes only when there is responsibility sharing on the part of each person in proportion to capacity, in shaping the aims and policies of social groups to which it belongs.” 12 In the opinion of Leighton, the democratic ideal of education “is that the whole business of education shall be so conducted as to afford to every child a full opportunity to realize his personality, as a member of society; to develop, exercise and enjoy his fundamental human capacities and social aptitudes; and by so doing to play his individual part in the life of society.” 13 It would seem that the state might well study his true aim of education: “To aid the growing individual to become a self-directing, thoughtful, socially minded personality; one able to satisfy his fundamental interests and live in cooperation and fellowship with other persons.” Hart stresses the need of more method or technique in his definition of democracy: “Democracy is an attitude of mind, a keen sense of a particular type of human relationship, a willingness to face realities in a peculiar way, a breaking down of certain types of old artificial barriers, and an opening of a whole world of humanity to new freedom of personal participation in the goods of the world and to new resources of social con tact.

Education for this sort of living demands knowledge, of course; but it demands more than knowledge. It demands a sense of direction; it demands a method.” 14 Method means administration: a program that will meet the demands of educational sociology and psychology as well as economics and government. Criticisms of present state policies In the past this lack of “sense of direction” by the state has evidenced itself in many ways and has resulted in wrong emphasis and mistaken policies.

One of these has already been pointed out as a narrow interpretation of administration to mechanical efficiency, so that there has been an undervaluation of the importance of making provision for the proper development and expression of individuality.

Education has become to be practically synonymous with public schools and these have been largely standardized. There has been practically no attempt to enlist the other educational agencies in the State and to utilize these as a means for the state to improve upon child experience. “Efficiency” has been narrowly interpreted as in the case of city school administration.

Although the state has not been in a position to organize, systematize, specialize and standardize as have been city school administrators, it has failed to recognize the values of some of the educational offerings other than those it controls, and to utilize these for the enrichment of the entire state program.

It seems to have been too intolerant to look for these! A second weakness of the past state program has been an absolute lack of the knowledge of the learning process, so that there has been no differentiation between the principles of control used in dealing with the interna and externa, It has made little difference in the past whether legislatures were dealing with the curriculum or length of school term.

Both have been rigidly determined by law! The state has failed to see the danger that comes from setting up standards (state laws or required courses of study) of the interna which by their very nature largely defeat the end they desire to attain. There are over 900 state laws requiring the teaching of subjects in the elementary school alone in America! These (1) emphasize the importance of unnatural departmentalization of school experience in subjects; (2) further specialization; (3) produce an inflexible, unsatisfactory type of teacher program so that she is unable to provide adequately for different pupil interests, abilities and needs; (4) largely disregard the professional training of teachers; and (5) place the emphasis of education upon “subjects” rather than “pupil personality.” Newlon thinks the tendency to pass such laws “creates an educational problem of the first order in American life.” How many state Commissioners of education are equally aware of the danger? Ryan thinks that prescribed planned-in-advance courses of study are “the worst of all the restrictions that operate in education in the world.” Yet thousands of teachers are required to follow them first and to think of pupil personality secondly.

Practical administrators contend they meet the argument adequately by saying that the kind of teacher they can employ is so poorly trained she cannot be trusted. Why do not they improve her (by education) so she can be trusted? It would seem that if there is any hope of democracy it would be in the better organization and administration of schools.

This will demand less autocratic methods with more emphasis on training and trusting teachers. When unsatisfactory teaching conditions prevail, it is very doubtful if legislation, either local or state, improves the condition. There is no doubt but that the state can further progress by setting up standards for the externa and thus bring the educational program of the state up to minimum standards.

  1. The harm comes when the interna are standardized.
  2. In the administration of her schools England differentiates between the principles of controlling the interna and the externa.
  3. It seems America (both state and federal government) might well study those principles further as they seem to be administratively sound.

We must begin to look inside of the school to see the things that really count in this business of education: Children associating with teachers who are trying to direct their experiences into channels that will produce a maximum of growth and personality.

  • By the very nature of intelligence, personality, learning, and teaching it is impossible to establish minimum standards for the educative process without so handicapping the freedom of the teacher that good teaching is impossible.
  • That is the lesson many school administrators and state officials have yet to learn! America fails to appreciate the importance of the well trained class teacher! She has been overlooked in this business of erecting massive school buildings, studying child accounting, setting up sound policies of business administration, floating bonds, levying taxes, etc.

We must begin to look inside of the school to see the things that really count in this business of education: Children associating with teachers who are trying to direct their experiences into channels that will produce a maximum of growth and personality.

  1. Democracy has been too long interpreted as giving the “same opportunity” because of an underappreciation of the significance of individual differences.
  2. Personality defies rule-of-thumb and formula and can be dealt with only through “intelligence” itself.
  3. As already stated, the final test of the opportunity of any pupil is determined by the professionally trained classroom teacher.

Each pupil must be given opportunity to develop to a maximum consistent with the social situation. This point is interestingly put by an outstanding English educator: “The schools of a democracy should, therefore, seek to be of the utmost variety, but should eschew from the outset that provision of democratic theory which levels the best down to the standard of the average, and destroys idiosyncrasies in favor of a dull normalcy.

  1. We do not want schools to follow a formula, and the last place in which we want mass-production is in education.
  2. Because we are working quickly, and working on a very large scale, we are in danger of producing it, and mistaking it for efficiency, but true education will always remain the sphere of the artist and the craftsman.” 15 This same danger is pointed out by an American educator.

“Democracy, then, is freedom, — not identity or similarity. Democracy does not mean leveling down, or leading up, or any kind of leveling or standardizing process. It does not mean that one man is as good as another, but that all men are good enough to help in finding put who the best ones are.

A public school which pro duces in the course of years a few potential leaders of the state or the nation is far more democratic than one which merely enables thousands to read and write and live respectable and stupid lives. Boys and girls are no more alike in their ability to advise, administer, and create than they are in the color of their eyes and hair.

Democracy means the transcending of all distinctions of race, creed, occupation, or possession.” 16 We do not want schools to follow a formula, and the last place in which we want mass-production is in education. The last result of this lack of “sense of direction” has evidenced itself in the lack of any large state ideals toward which the states have continuously forged.

You might be interested:  What Education Is Needed To Become A Hair Stylist?

When one thinks of all the coercion used by the various states it seems that educators themselves are the first to discard the slow but certain method of education and to resort to the faster but makeshift one of using coercion or force to attain ends. Too often have the various states in their eagerness to put across a program failed to educate their citizenry to the value of the plan so that there was resistance from the beginning and, consequently, little progress was ever made.

Too often have the states themselves taken the reins in their hands in order “to run the show” and consequently stifled out the creative impulses (lying dormant among the citizens), which would bloom if only watered with the stimulus of creative leadership.

In place of being the interpreter of schools to the people, who should know the facts so that they may intelligently decide what to do, too often the states have been the initiators of short-sighted, next-step programs that have lacked direction and momentum because they have failed to utilize all the deeper sociological forces that continually play upon the schools and by and large determine the very policy of the school itself, — in spite of the educator.

Suzzallo summarizes this point excellently by saying, “In America it is a characteristic habit to legislate before we educate, whereas it would be better to educate first and legislate afterwards. The complaint that we have too many laws means not only that we have too many unwise or ill considered laws, but also that we have enacted too many good laws too soon; that is, without educating public opinion to the policy.

  • Much of current disrespect for law and government finds its explanation in the failure to precede political fiat with education.” 17 Such an accusation has far reaching implications for the state and for educators in general.
  • Some suggestions Several suggestions have either been stated directly or implied in the argument.

One more seems to warrant special consideration. Although the battle for free schools was fought and won in the early part of the nineteenth century, the battle for suitable-sized administrative and supervisory units has only begun. Backed by the tradition of liberty, scared by the dangers of centralization and extra cash, and proud of their executive ability “to run schools,” thousands of local school board members supervise the education of millions of American children in tiny cracker box one- and two-room schoolhouses that are as well equipped to meet the demands of modern educational theory as is the pony express to carry mail at the present time.

As long as education is interpreted to mean “book learning,” there is little hope that those who control small schools (enrollment of less than 500) will ever see the inadequacy of their professional leadership (in many cases an eighth grade graduate), their services (practically nothing for health), their curriculum (reciting lessons from books about different subjects), and their equipment (selected entirely on the theory of learning as absorption by “sitting” and not learning by “experiencing”).

How can one expect proper and adequate supervision and educational leadership in this type of school? The job of pointing out the educational in adequacy of these institutions belongs to the educator and the central authority in any state is in the best position to see the problem as a whole and to begin to educate the state as a whole.

  • It will take time and the educator should make use of a minimum of coercion.
  • True to the American tradition, the control of education must always be near the local unit but that does not mean the perpetuation of the old out-worn, haphazard, district system which need no longer be retained since we have our modern means of transportation.

In all its activities the American state must learn to be more tolerant, be more understanding and sympathetic to new and different expressions of individuality and to try to exercise enough leadership so that these will not be wasted. One of the most influential of all American educators was a product of the state organization.

Would that another Horace Mann would appear to guide us out of the present dilemma! His words seem even more true now than when he wrote them in 1842, “The most influential and decisive measure for equalizing the original opportunities of men, that is, equality in the means of education, has not been adopted.” 18 There is little hope that it will be adopted until the emphasis in school administration becomes less determined by the technical business field with its standards, its centralized organization, its emphasis on efficiency and more determined by the consideration of the processes of experience, intelligence and personality.

In administration, the emphasis on specialization and analysis has been carried so far that it has defeated its own purpose by stressing the importance of the disconnected parts at the expense of the whole unified field of education. To unify the whole educational program is the challenge to State leadership! References 1 Cooper, W.J., “Education for a New America,” New Jersey Education Review, February, 1930.2 Kandel, I.L., “The State and Education in Europe,” Teachers College Record, Vol.31, No.3, May, 1930.3 Bode, B.H., “Apprenticeship or Freedom,” The New Republic, Vol.

LXIII, No.309, June 4, 1930.4 Unpublished Lecture Notes, Teachers College, Columbia University.5 Mill, J.S. On Liberty and Other Essays, p.13, Macmillan Co.6 Ibid., p.137.7 Kandel, I.L., “The State and Education in Europe,” Teachers College Record, Vol.31, No.8, May, 1930.8 Reisner, E.H., Nationalism and Education Since 1780, Macmillan Co., 1927.9 Newlon, Jesse H., “Integration in High School and Junior College Curricula,” School Executives Magazine, Vol.49, July, 1930.10 Bode, Boyd, Fundamentals of Education, p.60, Macmillan, 1927.11 Dewey, John.

Reconstruction in Philosophy,p.186, Henry Holt and Co., New York, 1920.12 Ibid., p.209.13 Leighton, J.A., Individuality and Education, p.10, D. Appleton, London, 1928.14 Hart, J.K., Democracy in Education, p.370, The Century Co., 1918.15 Norwood, Cyril, The English Tradition of Education, p.244, John Murray, London, 1929.16 Faunce, W.H.P., “Democracy in Education,” Department of Superintendence, Official Report, 1928.17 Suzzallo, Henry, Our Faith in Education, p.14, Lippincott, Philadelphia, 1922.18 Mann, Horace, Fifth Annual Report of the Board of Education and Secretary, p.70. DANIEL P. EGINTON was assistant supervisor in research and surveys, State Board of Education, Hartford, Connecticut.
View complete answer

What is the abbreviation for Education?

(countable and uncountable, plural edd.) Abbreviation of education.
View complete answer

What is the meaning of NYC Department of Education?

External links –

  • New York City Department of Education
  • NYCDOE Office of School Support Services
  • NYC DOE Email
  • New York City Board of Education/New York City Department of Education (Archive)
    • Archives in 1998
  • NYCDOE school zoning information
  • NYC School Zones: alternative zoning information website
  • New York School Boycott, Civil Rights Digital Library

View complete answer

What are the 3 main responsibilities of the local government?

Local Government – Local governments generally include two tiers: counties, also known as boroughs in Alaska and parishes in Louisiana, and municipalities, or cities/towns. In some States, counties are divided into townships. Municipalities can be structured in many ways, as defined by State constitutions, and are called, variously, townships, villages, boroughs, cities, or towns.

Various kinds of districts also provide functions in local government outside county or municipal boundaries, such as school districts or fire protection districts. Municipal governments—those defined as cities, towns, boroughs (except in Alaska), villages, and townships—are generally organized around a population center and in most cases correspond to the geographical designations used by the United States Census Bureau for reporting of housing and population statistics.

Municipalities vary greatly in size, from the millions of residents of New York City and Los Angeles to the few hundred people who live in Jenkins, Minnesota. Municipalities generally take responsibility for parks and recreation services, police and fire departments, housing services, emergency medical services, municipal courts, transportation services (including public transportation), and public works (streets, sewers, snow removal, signage, and so forth).
View complete answer

What are three educational responsibilities of local governments?

Among the duties common to local governments are establishing specific priorities for student learning and achievement, setting goals and action plans for school performance, and ensuring staff and resource allocations align with district goals.
View complete answer

What is local government in education?

Local Government Education What Is The Department Of Education Responsible For Local Government Education provides information, research, training and tools for local government officials while expanding the knowledge base. We build capacity in communities through instruction that:

Helps new officials understand their roles and responsibilities as public officials in Wisconsin. Develops the abilities of new and continuing officials to fulfill their roles and responsibilities. Builds collaborations between Extension educators and local officials. Provides current information on topics and practices that affect communities. Helps officials fulfill requirements when statutes require specific instruction such as Board of Review.

We also respond to timely issues facing local government officials. >
View complete answer

What does the DepED logo mean?

What Is the Difference Between DepEd Seal and DepEd Logo? DepEd Order (DO) No.69, s.2003 titled DepEd Logo contains the purpose of using the logo in school bulletin boards, publications, reports, circulars and T-shirts designed for printing. It also specifies other colors of the logo, which conform with the official colors of the Philippine Flag, as per Republic Act No.8491, otherwise known as the Flag Heraldic Code of the Philippines.

  1. DepEd Order (DO) No.63, s.2011 titled Department of Education (DepEd) Seal features the colors of the seal and other provisions.
  2. The seal shall be used and applied in all relevant DepEd standard templates and official documents, as specified in the Manual.
  3. Through the standards set on DO 63, s.2011 and DO 69, s.2003, DepEd establishes a unified identity across all governance levels – from the central to the regional, division and school levels.

Proper usage of the marks (seal and logo) also builds a strong awareness and recognition of DepEd’s image as a that continuously improves itself to better serve the public. The use of the marks will also strongly establish DepEd’s credibility to its partners and stakeholders who continuously help in the realization of the Department’s goals and targets. The DepEd seal was approved by the Office of the President, Malacanan Palace and protected by Rule 8, Chapter 6, Sections 49, 50, and 51 of Republic Act (RA) No.8491 otherwise known as the Flag and Heraldic Code of the Philippines. It was disseminated through DO 63, s.2011 entitled, The Department of Education Seal.

  • The Department of Education’s seal and logo, including the size and placement, palettes and typography are elements that make up its corporate identity.
  • The seal represents the Department’s symbol.
  • It is the Department’s service mark so it should be treated with respect, similar to the respect accorded to the Philippine flag.

The seal of the Department is used for:

diplomatic or international communication and external affairs;legal documents;academic awards;diplomas;certificates and plaques;Form 137 or SF10-ES and SF10-JHS;Accreditation and Equivalency Test Result;Philippine Educational Placement Test Result;Government Permit to Operate, and Recognition;Certification, Authentication, and Verification forms;letterheads and stationeries;memos and notepads;official envelopes;business cards;identification cards;press conference backdrops; andother official communications.

The seal is also appropriate for permanent markers, such as architectural elements produced in stone, metal or glass, and for regalia. The seal must also be used on budget forms, planning and statistics forms, and other official documents that need to be submitted to Malacanan Palace, the Senate of the Philippines, the House of Representatives, Department of Foreign Affairs, and other offices. The seal is composed of the outer portion that contains the name of the Department, written as KAGAWARAN NG EDUKASYON and the country, written as REPUBLIKA NG PILIPINAS. The core of the seal contains six symbols: (1) two sea lions, (2) lighted torch with rays, (3) map of the Philippines, (4) open book, (5) rope, and (6) shield. The shield looks like an open hand. It represents DepEd as a caring and nurturing institution. The two sea lions holding an open book over a plate symbolize leadership and excellence. The open book and lighted torch radiating its light over the Philippine archipelago represent the quest for knowledge and the practice of values and skills inculcated in every Filipino by DepEd. The approved color specifications stipulated in DepEd Order No.63, s.2011 are: The full-color version must be used at all times; however, the seal may be occasionally rendered in a grayscale version. The white background is preferred to ensure the visibility or legibility of its elements. Extra care must be observed when the official seal is applied to colored backgrounds. Do not crowd the seal with texts or images that interfere with its legibility. Surround it with a clear space equivalent to the size of the sea lion applied on all sides to separate the seal from other graphic elements. The seal cannot be redrawn nor re-created. You may access a digital version of the Seal through the Publications Division. The Don’ts on the seal’s usage is also applicable to the logo. DepEd Logo refers to a mark for recognition. It is utilized in school bulletin boards, publications, reports, circulars, T-shirt printing, stationaries and others (DepEd Order No.69, s.2003).

The logo is an important element that identifies DepEd. It is a tool or mark for recognition. This is used by all DepEd offices. The elements of the logo include the abbreviated name, “DepED,” in which the “ED” is capitalized to emphasize the importance of basic education. The spelled out name of the Department, all in capital letters, is found below the “DepED” element.

The only symbol in the official logo is the torch with a burning flame superimposed on the middle letter “p” at the middle of its communicative name. Like the burning torch in the inner core of the official seal, this symbol means the burning desire for learning or knowledge of every Filipino learner.

You might be interested:  How Do High School Credits Work?

print publications and nonprint materials (online collaterals like infographics, website banner);promotion and advocacy materials;leaflets, flyers, brochures, posters, streamers, backdrops, and backgrounds;DepEd vehicle signages;employees’ vehicles;name tags;covers of instructional and educational materials; andwebsite as part of a “signature” in conjunction with the wordmark.It is also used as a roof mark in all public elementary and secondary schools nationwide.

The official logo shall be rendered in its three official colors stipulated in DO 69, s.2003 in addition to its white background, which purports to emphasize it. Aside from the colored version, the logo may also be rendered in grayscale. The shade of “Dep” and “Department of Education” is C-0, M-0, Y-0 K-46.

The shade for “ED” is C-0, M-0, Y-0, K-100. The flame is C-0, M-0, Y-0, K-16. The logo may also be rendered in black version and white version, depending on the background the logo is being applied and in observance of the rule of contrast. The logo may appear in different sizes depending on the available space on which it is being applied.

However, the logo must never be smaller than 3/4 inch (0.75″). The logo should never be crowded with texts or images to maintain optimum recognition and clarity. Surround it with a clear space equivalent to the size of the torch (without the flame) applied on all sides to maintain its impact.

The Don’ts on the logo’s usage is also applicable to the seal. READ MORE:

: What Is the Difference Between DepEd Seal and DepEd Logo?
View complete answer

What is basic education sector reform agenda Philippines?

The Basic Education Sector Reform Agenda (BESRA) focuses on improving quality and equity in student outcomes within budgetary projections obtained from the Five-Year Education Spending Plan prepared by a Bank team working with the DepED.
View complete answer

Who is the DECS secretary in the Philippines?

List –

# Name Term Began Term Ended President Period
Under Pres. Emilio Aguinaldo, supervision on schools and basic education was put under the Department of the Interior, First Republic
The Department of Public Instruction was established in January 1901 upon the recommendation of the Taft Commission, with Dr. Fred Atkinson as the first General Superintendent, In 1916, the post was renamed as the Secretary of Public Instruction, The position was held by Americans until the proclamation of the Philippine Commonwealth. Insular Government (American occupation)
Secretaries of Public Instruction Manuel Quezon Commonwealth
1 Sergio Osmeña November 15, 1935 April 18, 1939
2 Jorge Bocobo April 19, 1939 January 22, 1941
Secretary of Public Instruction, Health, and Public Welfare Commonwealth (in exile)
3 Sergio Osmeña December 24, 1941 August 1, 1944
Secretary of Public Instruction and Information Sergio Osmeña
4 Carlos P. Romulo October 1944 February 1945
Commissioner of Education, Health and Public Welfare N/A Japanese occupation
Claro M. Recto 1942 October 1943
Minister of Education José P. Laurel Second Republic
Camilo Osías October 1943 February 1945
Secretaries of Instruction Sergio Osmeña Commonwealth (restored)
5 Maximo Kalaw February 27, 1945 May 4, 1945
6 Jose Reyes May 5, 1945 January 3, 1946
7 Francisco Benitez January 3, 1946 May 27, 1946
8 Manuel Gallego May 28, 1946 July 4, 1946 Manuel A. Roxas
July 4, 1946 October 1947 Third Republic
Secretaries of Education
* Manuel Gallego October 1947 April 17, 1948
April 17, 1948 September 20, 1948 Elpidio Quirino
9 Prudencio Langcauon September 1948 September 13, 1950
10 Pablo Lorenzo September 14, 1950 April 3, 1951
11 Teodoro Evangelista May 18, 1951 September 30, 1951
12 Cecilio Putong April 18, 1952 December 30, 1953
December 30, 1953 January 13, 1954 Ramon Magsaysay
13 Pastor Endencia January 13, 1954 June 30, 1954
14 Gregorio Hernandez, Jr. July 1, 1954 March 28, 1957
15 Martin Aguilar, Jr. March 29, 1957 September 2, 1957 Carlos P. Garcia
16 Manuel Lim September 3, 1957 November 17, 1957
17 Daniel Salcedo November 18, 1957 May 31, 1959
18 Jose E. Romero June 1, 1959 December 30, 1961
December 30, 1961 September 4, 1962 Diosdado Macapagal
19 Jose Tuason September 5, 1962 December 30, 1962
20 Alejandro Roces December 30, 1962 September 7, 1965
21 Carlos P. Romulo December 30, 1965 December 16, 1967 Ferdinand Marcos
* Onofre Corpuz December 17, 1967 April 20, 1971
22 Juan Manuel April 21, 1971 September 23, 1972
Secretary of Education and Culture
* Juan Manuel September 24, 1972 June 1978
Ministers of Education and Culture
* Juan Manuel June 1978 June 1979
23 Onofre Corpuz July 1979 February 1981
February 1981 September 10, 1982 Fourth Republic
Ministers of Education, Culture and Sports
* Onofre Corpuz September 11, 1982 January 1984
24 Jaime C. Laya January 1984 February 1986
Secretaries of Education, Culture and Sports Corazon C. Aquino Fifth Republic
25 Lourdes Quisumbing February 1986 December 1989
26 Isidro Cariño January 3, 1990 June 30, 1992
27 Armand Fabella July 1, 1992 July 6, 1994 Fidel V. Ramos
28 Ricardo Gloria July 7, 1994 December 1997
29 Erlinda Pefianco February 2, 1998 June 30, 1998
30 Bro. Andrew Gonzalez, FSC, Ph.D. July 1, 1998 January 22, 2001 Joseph Ejercito Estrada
31 Raul Roco January 22, 2001 August 10, 2001 Gloria Macapagal Arroyo
Secretaries of Education
* Raul Roco August 11, 2001 August 2002
32 Edilberto de Jesus September 2002 August 2004
33 Florencio Abad September 24, 2004 July 8, 2005
Ramon Bacani (OIC) July 8, 2005 August 30, 2005
Fe A. Hidalgo (OIC) August 31, 2005 October 3, 2006
34 Jesli A. Lapus October 4, 2006 March 15, 2010
35 Mona D. Valisno March 15, 2010 June 30, 2010
36 Bro. Armin A. Luistro, FSC June 30, 2010 June 30, 2016 Benigno S. Aquino III
37 Leonor Magtolis Briones June 30, 2016 June 30, 2022 Rodrigo Duterte
38 Sara Z. Duterte June 30, 2022 Incumbent Bongbong Marcos

Notes:

  • A in concurrent capacity as Vice President.
  • (*) Acting Capacity

View complete answer

Is DepEd only in the Philippines?

Programs and Services – DepEd provides education programs and services to all Filipinos, both those who live in the Philippines and those who live overseas. Only a small percentage of the population is aware of the DepEd’s programs and services. Take a look at this comprehensive list of programs and services available to all Filipinos for better guidance.
View complete answer

Why is education a problem in the Philippines?

ASEAN Beat | Society | Southeast Asia – Out of the country’s 327,000-odd school buildings, less than a third are in good condition, according to government figures. What Is The Department Of Education Responsible For Three Filipino schoolgirls walking home from school on a muddy road in Port Barton, Palawan, the Philippines. Credit: Depositphotos Several recent studies have pointed out the alarming deterioration of the quality of learning in the Philippines, but this was officially confirmed in the basic education report delivered by Vice President Sara Duterte on January 30.

Duterte is concurrently serving as secretary to the Department of Education. Addressing stakeholders with President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. in attendance, Duterte highlighted the key issues that plague the country’s basic education system before announcing her department’s agenda for reform, She echoed what previous surveys have indicated about the low academic proficiency of Filipino students.

She also identified her department’s biggest concern. “The lack of school infrastructure and resources to support the ideal teaching process is the most pressing issue pounding the Philippine basic education,” she said. She presented the latest government inventory which shows that out of 327,851 school buildings in the country, only 104,536 are in good condition.

  1. There are 100,072 school buildings that need minor repairs, 89,252 that require major repairs, and 21,727 that are set for condemnation.
  2. She added that the procurement practices in the agency “had red flags that demanded immediate actions.” She shared initial findings in the ongoing review of the K-12 curriculum that underscored the failure of the 10-year-old program to deliver satisfactory results.

“The K-12 curriculum promised to produce graduates that are employable. That promise remains a promise,” she said. Duterte criticized the heavy workload assigned to teachers as she pressed for an immediate review of the current setup in public schools.

This is a system that burdens them with backbreaking and time-consuming administrative tasks, a system that provides no adequate support and robs them of the opportunity to professionally grow and professionally teach, assist, and guide our learners,” she said. She unveiled her education agenda themed “Matatag: Bansang Makabata, Batang Makabansa,” (Nation for children, children for the nation) and focused on curriculum reform, accelerated delivery of services, promoting the well-being of learners, and providing greater support to teachers.

Responding to the report, Marcos joined Duterte in acknowledging the government’s accountability to the nation’s young learners. “We have failed them,” he said. “We have to admit that. We have failed our children and let us not keep failing them anymore.” He promised to build better infrastructure by investing heavily in education.

He can cite as reference his government’s development plan, which was also released in January, about how the education crisis is linked to “decades of incapacity and suboptimal investment in education.” Duterte’s admission about the dismal state of basic education was welcomed by some educators. Senators vowed to work with Marcos and Duterte in passing education reform measures.

Opposition legislators urged Duterte to hear the views of school unions and student organizations whose appeals for better learning conditions are often dismissed by authorities as part of anti-government propaganda. Meanwhile, the Alliance of Concerned Teachers (ACT) noted that the report “failed to present today’s real extent and gravity of the learning crisis due to the lack of an evidence-based learning assessment conducted after the pandemic-induced school lockdowns.” The group was referring to the prolonged closure of schools under the government of President Rodrigo Duterte.

Her father was president for six years and had not done any significant move to improve the lot of our mentors and of the education system. It is the government who have failed the teachers and our learners,” the group insisted. It was also under the Duterte government when around 54 Lumad schools for indigenous peoples in Mindanao Island were either suspended or forced to shut down by authorities based on accusations that they were teaching rebellion.

The report also didn’t mention that some of the major questionable procurement transactions in the education department took place under the previous government. The ACT criticized Duterte’s reform agenda because it features “general promises that lack specific action plans and definite targets.” “No specific targets and timelines were presented to convincingly show that the agency will cut down the classroom shortage significantly,” it added.

  • Duterte said the agency will build 6,000 classrooms this year, which is quite small compared to the backlog identified in the report.
  • There’s also no deadline for the electrification of around 1,562 schools that still do not have access to power.
  • Despite her impassioned plea to uplift the working conditions of educators, Duterte was castigated for being silent about the pending proposals to raise the salary grades of public school teachers.

ACT reminded officials to prove their political will in reversing the decline of Philippine education. “The call to reforming education should not be a grandstanding cry but a sincere pledge to rectify the mistakes and shortcomings of the past and the present,” it said.
View complete answer

Is education compulsory in the Philippines?

Philippine education structure – What Is The Department Of Education Responsible For For a long time, the education system in the Philippines was one of the shortest in the world. Back then, formal education was only required for 10 years (6 years of primary school and 4 years of high school). In 2012, the government introduced new legislation requiring students to attend school from kindergarten (around age 5) to grade 12 (around age 18).

  • Primary School (Primary Education) – K to 6
  • Junior High School (Lower Secondary Education) – 7 to 10
  • Senior High School (Upper Secondary Education) – 11 to 12

After which, students have the option to pursue Higher Education. This includes a Bachelor’s degree, Master’s degree, Doctor of Medicine, Juris Doctor and PhD.
View complete answer

What does AG stand for in school?

Academically Gifted (AG) / Overview.
View complete answer

What is the short form for teacher?

Abbreviations: T = teacher A = assistant Ss = students L = listening S = speaking R = reading W = writing.
View complete answer

What does AC stand for in high school?

Curricular. AC ( Advanced Content )
View complete answer

How many teachers are in the US?

How many teachers are there in the U.S.? – What Is The Department Of Education Responsible For All together, there are 4,007,908 teachers in the United States. This includes all K-12 public and private schools, plus adult education and career/technical schools. Teachers account for about 2.5% of the working population,
View complete answer

How many schools are there in London?

How many schools are there in London? – There are approximately 3250 schools in London. This excludes universities.
View complete answer

Who runs education in NY?

What Is The Department Of Education Responsible For Dr. Betty A. Rosa is the Commissioner of Education and President of the University of the State of New York (USNY). In this role, she oversees the work of more than 700 school districts with 3.2 million students; 7,000 libraries; 900 museums; and more than 50 professions encompassing nearly 900,000 licensees.
View complete answer

What is the Department of Education called in UK?

Latest from the Department for Education – The Department for Education is responsible for children’s services and education, including early years, schools, higher and further education policy, apprenticeships and wider skills in England. DfE is a ministerial department, supported by 18 agencies and public bodies, Read more about what we do
View complete answer

What is the acronym for the Department of Education in Australia?

DET stands for Department of Education and Training (Australia) – This definition appears very frequently and is found in the following Acronym Finder categories:

Military and Government

See other definitions of DET Other Resources: We have 90 other meanings of DET in our Acronym Attic Link/Page Citation
View complete answer