From 1990 and 1998, the mean GER for the Philippines rose accompanied by a decrease in variance among regions. The 1990 national mean was 6.497% with a standard deviation almost equal to it at 6.281%. In 1998, the national mean has grown to 11.992%, with, however, an almost constant standard deviation of 6.414%. Thus, the variation was, in 1998, only nearly half of the mean. The spread of regional GERs around the national mean had contracted (refer to Table III-4 below for the means and standard deviations).

However, an examination of the variance within regions shows a different situation. As the table above presents, regional standard deviations were generally higher in 1998 than the standard deviation around the national mean. The national figures therefore mask the inequalities that prevail within the regions or among the provinces. There are regions where the standard deviations are either double, thrice, or even nearly four-fold that of the national standard deviation. The mean GERs for the regions show impressive increases between 1990 and 1998, but the within-region variations have widened considerably. There is therefore a marked deterioration in the evenness of provision and access to ECD programmes (see also Figures III-2 and III-3 below).

(Core Indicator 2)

Between 1995 and 1999, the percentage of new entrants to Grade 1 who attended some form of organized ECCD programme fell slightly from 72.5 percent to 70.6 percent. Females had only a small edge in ECCD exposure than males, but the gap between urban and rural areas remained large. However, it should be noted that compared with the negative performance of the urban areas between those two years, the rural areas registered a positive change for both males and females. Tables III-5 below shows the comparative figures for 1995 and 1999.

In terms of sectoral distrbution, private school pupils had an overwhelming advantage over the public school Grade 1 entrants. Prior ECCD exposure among private school first-graders rose from 92.5 percent in 1995 to 96.2 percent, which indicates that ECCD services are availed of to an almost universal extent by families who enrol their children in private schools. In fact, between those two years, the rate of ECCD exposure among public sector enrolees even declined from 66.2 percent to 63.5 percent (see Table III-6 and Figure III-4).

As mentioned beforehand, there was near-parity between genders in 1995 and in 1999. All the regions uniformly reflected this pattern, as exhibited in Table III-7 below.

The mean ECCD attendance rate for new first graders was almost the same between 1995 and 1999. Variance across and within regions was insignificant for both years (Table III-9 and Figure III-6). Except for ARMM, the clustering of standard deviations within regions hardly changed at all (Figure III-7).

(Core Indicator 3)

Between 1990 and 1998, the apparent intake rate remained at high levels substantially exceeding 100 percent. Rural areas have higher AIRs than the urban areas. Males have slightly higher AIRs than females consistent for both urban and rural areas (see Table III-10 and Figure III-8).

Near-parity in the AIR between genders was maintained between 1990 and 1998, with very little variation among regions, although in 1998, 14 out of the 16 regions had higher male intake rates than that for females. It is quite notable to find a substantial female bias in the GPI in the ARMM, which is a predominantly Muslim region, contrary to the usual expectation that the reverse should hold true (see Table III-11 below).

Although there is no major gender disparity problem, the fact that there is a lower female intake ratio in the majority of the regions does raise some concern. This may mean then families tend to postpone their female children’s education relative to the males’.

There were no disturbing gaps in the urban-rural parity among regions in the AIR. Nationwide, the bias was even in favour of the rural areas. This situation has generally remained constant between 1990 and 1998. However, the urban-rural difference in Region VI needs to be looked into closely, as it is the distinct outlier in view of its 0.86 urban-rural parity index in 1998 that is decidedly urban-oriented (see Figure III-12).

Between 1990 and 1998, the mean AIR for the Philippines rose accompanied by a decrease in variance among regions. The 1990 national mean was 137.8 percent with a standard deviation of 21.2 percent. In 1998, there was higher national mean of 142.8 percent, with a lower standard deviation of 19.6. Regional means likewise improved between 1990 and 1998, and a comparison of the standard deviations within regions show the same general finding of low variance in relation to the mean (refer to Table III-13 and Figures III-9 and III-10). ARMM, however, presents a higher ratio between its mean and its standard deviation compared to the other regions, indicating relatively wider variation in the AIRs of its component provinces and cities.

Table -11: Apparent Intake Rate in Grade 1, Means & Standard Deviations

(Core EFA Indicator 4)

There was a steady decline in the NIR between 1990 and 1998. From a nationwide figure of 79.8 percent in 1990, the NIR went down to 71.62 percent in 1998. The decline was uniformly felt between genders and between urban and rural areas. Thus in 1998, nearly 30 percent of Grade 1 entry-age children did not enter school as against the 20 percent who did not do so in 1990 (see Table III-14 and Figure III-11).

This is suggestive of the tendency of families to postpone the schooling of their children, owing to parents’ perceptions on the readiness of their 6-year olds for Grade 1 work. The fact that there was a higher NIR when the entry age was 7 years shows that the participation problem was most likely exacerbated by the lowering of the entry age to 6 years starting in 1995.

There seems to have been an emerging trend towards a female-biased gender parity index, since the national GPI rose from 0.95 in 1990 to 1.04 in 1998. As shown by the table below, almost all the regions shifted from having male-biased GPIs to female-biased ones. The only exception had been Region IX, but its experience between 1990 and 1998 reveals that it is also heading towards higher female participation in Grade 1. The difference between male and female participation is very slight, but it has a deeper connotation. It was always believed that families try to postpone their female children’s schooling because they are needed in the homes to help care for much younger siblings or perhaps to simply help the mother around the house. Family priorities may have already changed in favour of education (see Table III-15).

What is notable is that the NIRs for the urban and the rural areas nationwide were almost the same in 1990 and in 1998. At least with respect to the NIR, it can be said that the rural areas do not suffer any disadvantage in access to schooling. However, on a regional basis, Regions VII and the ARMM need a close look, since these regions had, in 1998, urban-dominated NIRs (see Table III-16).

Between 1990 and 1998, the mean NIR for the Philippines declined from 80.8 percent in 1990 to 73.6 percent in 1998. The decline in the mean, however, came with a decrease in variance among regions, and had it not been for two outlier regions, the clustering would have been tighter. Within-region variations also lessened in 1998, as seen in Table III-17 and Figures III-12 and III-13 below.

Figure -12: Net Intake Rate in Grade 1, Standard Deviations

Core EFA Indicator 5

The Philippines’ high level of gross participation in the elementary level was further bolstered during the EFA period. Between 1990 and 1998, the national gross enrolment ratio increased from 106.8 percent to 118.8 percent. This increase was characterised by parallel expansion rates between males and females, although the female GER was slightly higher in 1998 (see Figure III-14 and Table III-18 below).

During the same period, there was an appreciable increase in the GER for both males and females in the urban and rural areas, but the rate of increase in the rural areas was higher. In contrast to the very apparent differences in gender and in urban-rural participation in 1990, the corresponding GERs had become essentially similar in 1998. What these indicate is that (a) the stock of overage and underage children in the urban areas had not contracted and more children were attending school at the wrong age and that (b) school participation has tremendously improved in the rural areas where children who had previously postponed their studies are now in school.

The high level of gender parity that obtained in 1990 was further improved in 1998 with very little variation among regions. In 1998 as in 1990, most regions had higher female GERs (see Table III-19 below).

In 1998, as in the previous years, the nationwide gross enrolment ratio was almost similar for urban and rural areas. Between 1990 and 1998, however, areas that previously had male-biased GERs (Regions IX, XI and XII) experienced sharply enhanced urban-rural parity. (see Table III-20 below).

The mean GER among regions rose from 105.8 percent with a standard deviation of 12.2 percent in 1990 to 119 percent with a standard deviation of 8.3 in 1998. An improvement in the mean gross participation rate had thus been achieved without sacrificing equity among regions. However, an examination of the regional means and their standard deviations reveals a different situation. Whilst the regions generally experienced increased GERs between 1990 and 1998, there had been a corresponding deterioration in equity within them. Not only did standard deviations within regions increase, which by 1998 had covered a much wider range, the majority of regions had even posted standard deviations higher than the national standard deviation (see Table III-21 and Figures III-15 and III-16).

(Core EFA Indicator 6)

Nationwide, the NER increased from 84.6 percent in 1990 to 95.73 percent in 1998. However, there was an even more impressive improvement in the NER between 1990 and 1995. The increase in the Philippines-wide NER between 1990 and 1998 was characterised by a large jump in the rural NER, while there was only a small increase in the urban rate. Males had a higher NER than females, although the gender parity index was very close to 1.0 at 0.95. Because the urban NER was practically stagnant between 1990 and 1995 and even suffered a very slight decrease in 1998, the observed improvement in the national NER could be attributed mostly to the appreciable showing in rural performance (see Table III-22 and Figure III-17 below).

The failure of the urban NER to move ahead was caused by the deterioration in female participation, which went down from 94.8 percent in 1995 to 91.5 percent in 1998. Thus, even though the urban male NER improved from 89.8 percent in 1990 to 97.1 percent in 1998, the setback in the female NER pulled the urban figure down. In fact, in 1998, the rural NER was higher than the urban NER, a huge reversal of the situation in 1990.

The impressive stride in the rural NER was characterised by a tremendous increase in the male NER and an equally large growth in the female NER. In the rural areas, the male NER grew from 75.9 percent in 1990 to 98.6 percent in 1998, while the female NER increased from 80.0 percent in 1990 to 93.2 percent in 1998.

High levels of gender parity can be observed among the regions. Nationwide, the GPI was 1.05 in 1990 and 0.95 in 1998. The national female participation rate has declined in relation to the male participation rate. Among the regions, gender parity has not fallen below the 0.9 level, with the exception of Region VII where its 0.86 GPI indicates a relatively wide mismatch between male and female participation (see Table III-23 below}.

The record shows a decline in the variation in urban-rural parity indices among regions. In 1990, there were five out of the 14 regions that had UPIs below the reference level of 0.9 (Regions V, VIII, IX, X and XII); in 1998, by 1998, the number had been reduced to one (Region VI with a UPI of 0.85). Surprisingly, though, Region VI had a UPI of 1.01 in 1990. (see Table III-24 below).

Between 1990 and 1998, the mean NER among Philippine regions rose from 85.5 percent with a standard deviation of 6.7 percent to a mean of 94.84 with a standard deviation of 6.09 for 1998. There was therefore very little variation among regional NERs, a situation that was constant for 1990 and 1998. Within regions, there had likewise been an increase in the means but this was achieved with higher standard deviations. It could be discerned therefore, that there was an appreciably larger variance within regions or among the provinces that make up each region (see Table III-25 and Figures III-18 and III-19).

 Figure -17: Primary Level NER, Regional Means