Keywords

Four OECD Scenarios, Future of Schooling, ADAPT.

Introduction

From the words taken from the Trends Shaping Education of the OECD (2019) which states that “Future is not straightforward as it is inherently unpredictable” falls us trap into thinking that educators must have multiple plans to make us really prepared for the different situations in the future. OECD (2019) has identified some potential future shocks that may re-shape education. These are the natural disasters, economic shock/crisis, (cyber) war, internet disrupted/communication cut and human-machine interfaces/General Artificial Intelligence (AI). The COVID-19 infection has hit the entire education hard and forces us to re-shape the conventional education in 2020. With COVID-19 and other potential forces, the question rest on a shoulder of our educators on their preparedness for the future of schooling and whether they are really prepared to promote the experience making every learner a citizen, a person and a productive collaborator.

The Philippine education setting confronted a big challenge in the absence of a digital technology across the public school during the Coronavirus (COVID-19) Pandemic 2020. According to the Department of Education data, there were a total of 6.3 million students registered from June 1 to 6 for the school year 2000-2001 compared to 27 million enrollees last school year. Of the 6.3 million students, 174,108 are in private schools. While many countries reverted to the use of technology to continue the education, a large number of public schools in the country has no option but to rely primarily in the preparation and distribution of self-learning modules across the grade levels while few can do remote learning through the use of some learning platforms (Montemayor, 2020). Though self-learning modules may seem helpful, this temporary solution has opened doors to criticism in the public of its quality. Adonis (2020) reported 30 errors in the learning modules distributed in October of 2020. The social media circulated photos of modules with glaring spelling errors and impossible tasks. Though these error-filled modules are circulated in limited areas, they are still received by students who are prone to learning gaps. Department of Education (DepEd) tasked teachers to correct these mistakes with their students. However, with very limited communication tools, this will obviously lead to learning losses or misunderstanding when not addressed right away. Such a cloudy delivery of education in a long term may undermine the country’s economic competitiveness as the learning losses may adversely affect the economic potentials and productivity of the students in adulthood (Cho, 2021).

The story presented is one of the indicators that the future is unpredictable and we shall remain scrambled if the future of schooling is not embedded in the strategic education vision. OECD (2019) identified four scenarios whose primarily purpose is to understand the intentions of learning and drawing actions in the present. Scenarios were defined in three different snapshots from the OECD library published in their website. They described scenario as not a prediction of what the future looks like but rather a narrative to challenge our assumptions about what a school feels like in the future presented in a “big picture”. Four scenarios were developed by OECD through the collaborative effort of the educational leaders (Figure 1). Below is the updated OECD scenarios built from the scenarios of the original set developed in 2001(Burns & Fuster, 2001).

Furthermore, the scenarios shown the figure above are built with an approximate time frame of 20 years with a span until 2040. OECD (2019) suggested to navigate the scenario as a tool to observe the emerging trends and evolution in the school, explore the signals in the present timing and continue, change or speed up the process of evolution; and put ourselves in these futures and reflect how prepared schools are in the expected or unexpected situations that may disturb the ecosystem of the education.

Sheppard (2017) has developed a framework in outlining the global issues of the world today. This framework is called ADAPT. Figure below shows the acronym and the descriptions of each acronym. When Sheppard and his team used this framework, it allows them to identify global issues and use the findings to act and respond to prevent destructive consequences. Moreover, the ADAPT framework summarizes extremely urgent issues confronting society, business, and individuals that are acute, divisive, and for which there are no easy answers.

As the world adapts to the new normal, it is imperative for school leaders and teachers to have a tool to explore the educational situations within the OECD four scenarios, identify priority issues confronted by the public-school teachers through the ADAPT framework to make them more prepared for the future of schooling and lastly reflect on the implications of these situations to teacher education and training. Caution must be taken into consideration when interpreting this research as the findings are based primarily on the perceptions of the public school teachers selected randomly.

Methods

The study employed an explanatory research technique to answer the research questions. Explanatory research techniques combined the quantitative and qualitative approaches intended to identify the educational situations and are further confirmed by interview (Creswell, 2018). Survey questions primarily fill the quantitative approach while the interview is the strategy for the qualitative approach. The findings of the survey were then analyzed in the discourse taken from the interview to further validate the findings.

The participants in this research were public school teachers from the National Capital Region in the Philippines. The survey was distributed to the target samples through snowballing technique to access targeted respondents in considerations of the COVID-19 restrictions in Manila at the time of the study. A total of 595 samples were obtained which is 33% more than the targeted samples of 398 calculated from the total population of public-school teachers in NCR via Slovin Formula. Out of these, two samples were interviewed to support the findings of the research. These two were selected randomly and were willing to participate.

In adherence to the ethical protocol in the conduct of research, an electronic survey was released with the permission of the Director of the Division Office of the Department of Education - NCR. Moreover, respondents of the survey were made voluntary including the two who were selected to do an interview. Confidentiality was secured and anonymity was respected throughout the conduct of this research.

Data Gathering Instruments

The instrument of the study is a researcher-made instrument collated and formulated with the aid of several works of literature related to the variables in the study. The instrument consisted of two parts. Part I, solicits the demographic profile of the respondents and Part II consists of the statements covering the four (4) categories of OECD's future of schooling and five (5) categories under the ADAPT framework. It was then validated by five (5) experienced educators who are well-adept with the educational situations in and out of the country. The instrument was piloted to 60 public school teachers to test its reliability using Cronbach alpha. Results of the reliability test reflected an acceptable overall alpha value of 0.95.

Data Analysis

Two research components were utilized to meet the objectives of this research. These are the quantitative and qualitative strategies under the mixed method type. The quantitative strategy uses the weighted average mean and standard deviations to determine the situations and the problems that were faced by the public school teachers as ascribed to the future of schooling and the ADAPT framework. The table below shows the descriptions for the weighted average obtained in each statement. To further confirm the data, linguistic discourse analysis was used from the responses of the selected interviewee where the results of the interview were analyzed based on social context (Suciu, 2019). The researcher uses large discourse context to understand the meaning of the sentence (Tannen, 2012) Table 1.

Table 1 Interpretation Guide
Intervals	Description
1.00 – 1.20	Totally Disagree
1.21 – 2.40	Disagree
2.41 – 3.50	Neither Agree or Disagree
3.51 – 4.80	Agree
4.81 – 6.00	Totally Agree

Research Procedure

PSDA (Brydon-Miller, et al) was used as a framework to draw answers to the research questions. PDSA is an iterative cycle to solve the problem. Researchers planned meticulously the four school scenarios from the OECD intended to determine the educational situations of the current times and juxtaposed these with the ADAPT framework intended to identify the issues being confronted on the lenses of the public-school teachers. The survey questions were them formed from these which went through validity and reliability. Permission was sought from the Division Office of the Department of education before the release of the survey.

Weighted mean and standard deviation were used to interpret the data that leads to the formulation of interview questions to validate the findings. Two among the 595 respondents were selected for interview. The discourse analysis was used to process the responses during the interview from which was used to build the argument that supports or contradicts the findings of the research.

Results and Discussions

The presentation of the data that determine the educational situations in the Philippines is divided into the four levels of the OECD Scenarios. As a school extended presented in table 2, public school teachers perceived that education remains a requirement for a better life and that a school is a place that can promote this. 78% of them totally agree to this idea while less than 1% of those who participated totally disagree. These findings confirmed that formal education and academic certificates are tickets to economic and social success. The interviewee explained that at this time of pandemics, the educational delivery teaches the students to become independent learners (Trends Shaping Education, 2019). Below are statements quoted directly from the interviewee.

Table 2  School Extended
	Indicators	Percentage Distribution (%)						Weighted Mean	Interpre-tation
		1	2	3	4	5	6
1.A.1	Education is a requirement for a better life.	0.67	0.17	0.67	3.53	16.81	78.15	5.7	Totally Agree
1.A.2	The collaboration opportunity is given to a large majority (75% or more) of the teachers regardless of area of expertise, gender, educational qualifications.	0.168	0.67	2.52	14.29	38.99	43.36	5.21	Totally Agree
1.A.3	The large majority (75% or more) of teachers are provided with opportunities for professional growth.	0	1.18	4.2	18.99	34.79	40.84	5.1	Totally Agree
1.A.4	The large majority (75% or more) of teachers use different curricular standards in the lesson.	2.52	2.69	3.87	15.97	39.66	35.29	4.93	Totally Agree
1.A.5.	The large majority (75% or more) of teachers can provide personalized education to different types of students.	0.33	1.18	5.04	18.66	37.98	36.81	5.03	Totally Agree
1.A.6.	The school can protect teachers in the same way it protects the students against e-safety threats.	1.35	2.86	8.24	21.85	30.42	35.29	4.83	Totally Agree
1.B.1.	The school can promote better education	0.672	0.34	1.18	9.08	30.59	58.15	5.43	Totally Agree
1.B.2.	Collaborations in school are based on a clear vision communicated to all the teachers.	0.34	0.5	1.68	10.08	34.12	53.28	5.37	Totally Agree
1.B.3	The school can protect teachers and students against e-safety issues such as cyberbullying, hacking, phishing, and the like.	1.35	2.69	7.4	18.66	33.95	35.97	4.89	Totally Agree
1.C.1.	It is easier to convince new generation parents to encourage children to continue education as it can promote a better life compared to seniors.	1.68	2.86	6.22	25.71	34.62	28.91	4.76	Totally Agree
1.C.2.	Collaborations of teachers are meaningful regardless of age and experience.	0.17	0	1.68	8.4	28.91	60.84	5.48	Totally Agree
1.D.1.	The benefit of education can only be reaped by families from urban societies compared to those in rural.	16.13	10.76	12.1	18.99	23.53	18.49	3.79	Agree
1.D.2.	Collaborations provided to teachers in school are meaningful despite experience, educational background, or school setting.	0.34	0.5	2.52	16.13	38.32	42.19	5.18	Totally Agree
1.E.1.	The school can provide a better life.	0.67	0.34	1.01	13.11	38.15	46.72	5.28	Totally Agree
1.E.2.	The school can promote a positive meaningful collaboration among teachers.	0.5	0.34	2.02	11.09	38.99	47.06	5.29	Totally Agree
1.E.3.	Common curriculum standards and assessment tools impact students’ achievement.	0.67	0.17	2.86	14.45	41.68	40.17	5.17	Totally Agree
1.E.4.	The school supports the innovation of instructions in a variety of ways.	0.34	0.34	2.19	13.28	38.32	45.55	5.26	Totally Agree
1.E.5.	The school can provide personalized education to different types of students.	0.84	1.85	5.04	17.98	39.33	34.96	4.98	Totally Agree

“Education in times of pandemic teaches us and our students to become more independent.”

“There are so many ways to bridge the education gap. Right now, internet connection is one of the main problems. Since students are using modular learning, we still need to supervise if the students are the ones answering the modules themselves or supported by the parents. It's like helping each other relationship. The parents are like our extensions. The government should improve internet connection and provide gadgets to the students. It was a privilege here in San Juan that students are given a tablet. And then we are how we have our own internet connection called Intranet. And then we have our own LMS learning manual system, just like a Google meet but it's in process. Once it's being perfected, that's the time it will be a requirement for us teachers to use it.”

From these statements, this only shows that education is essential for economic mobilization which can only happen if support is provided in full form. Findings revealed that public school teachers perceived that they are empowered through collaboration and are always driven by the opportunity to further innovate. However, interactions remain conventional and the digital learning opportunities are still limited.

A large majority of the statements of the education outsourced are interpreted as totally agree. There is a close disparity between those respondents who selected 5 and 6 ratings while an obvious gap can be seen in other ratings. This only goes to show that majority of the respondents agree to the statements presented in this table. Public school teachers perceived that students needs are met, the outsourcing mechanisms in school are based on needs, teaching profiles are of a good variety based on professional standards, the learning networks adopted are cohesive, parents are involved in the school and instructional resources are valuable to learning. As quoted from the interview below which confirms this findings:

“We are blessed with a principal that is very transparent when budgeting our instructional materials. We have ample school supplies and even in protecting ourselves like facemasks, face shields, sanitizers, etc. We have better procurement. From the Region, we were given a monitor, ring light, microphone. From the local government, we teachers received laptops, flash drives, and printers.”

When it comes to the resources, the Principal plays a vital role in outsourcing equipment to help facilitate the conduct of online distance learning among teachers and students. Moreover, other members of the stakeholders are also provided support such as the local government unit (LGU) who provided the printed modules for KG to grade 8 students, distributed tablets to grade 9 to 12 students for their online education delivery, and alumni also provided scholarship to students. Learning networks are also expanded through the outsourcing of the master teachers and headteachers to moderate the quality of the learning modules before distribution Table 3.

Table 3 Education Outsourced
	Indicators	Percentage Distribution (%)						Weighted Mean		Interpre-tation
		1	2	3	4	5	6
2.A.1.	The large majority (75% or more) of teachers are given input in the procurement of the instructional materials at school.	1.35	3.19	7.4	24.03	38.82	25.21		4.71		Agree
2.A.2.	Students with varying (learning and setting) needs are provided with greater choices of their own learning.	0.84	2.52	5.55	22.19	40	28.91		4.85		Totally Agree
2.B.1.	The school’s educational outsourcing is based on the current needs.	0.67	0.84	3.19	20.17	40.17	34.96		5.03		Totally Agree
2.C.1.	The school has a variety of teaching profiles according to age that has bearing on professional and reputational status.	0.5	1.51	4.2	19.83	43.53	30.42		4.96		Totally Agree
2.D.1.	The learning networks or systems used by the school bring different human resources together.	0.34	0.84	3.3	19.66	43.36	32.77		5.03		Totally Agree
2.E.1.	The school involves parents in school-based initiatives and activities.	0.5	1.01	1.68	13.61	36.81	46.39		5.24		Totally Agree
2.E.2.	The instructional resources provided by the school are valuable to students’ learning.	0.34	0.34	2.02	13.11	37.48	46.72		5.27		Totally Agree

These findings revealed that there is wide educational outsourcing as perceived by the public-school teachers. This shrinks the bureaucratic accountabilities and permits school-based management to flourish, wherefore, there is a greater reliance on self-organization. (Trends Shaping Education, 2019).

Table 4 presents the table for the school as a learning hubs scenario. All statements are perceived as totally agree. There is a small difference can be gleaned from the respondents of those who chose 5 and 6 rating scales while large difference can be seen in other indicators. Public school teachers totally agree that a network of teachers is available, has a partnership with the local community, has its own procedure to experiment on their initiatives, teachers regardless of their profile realize their value in school, multi-cultural aspects are recognized, can provide a diversified pedagogy and has procedures to outsourced educational resources for their local community.

Table 4 School As Learning Hubs
	Indicators	Percentage Distribution (%)						Weighted Mean	Interpre-tation
		1	2	3	4	5	6
3.A.1.	There is a network of teachers working in the same space (departmental meetings, mentorship, Professional Learning Community) as others.	0.17	0.84	1.68	11.26	37.31	48.74	5.31	Totally Agree
3.A.2.	The school has a strong partnership with the local community to support school educational programs.	0.17	0.84	3.523	11.26	36.98	47.23	5.26	Totally Agree
3.B.1.	The school provides a systematic experimentation procedure to develop initiatives that will have an impact on student achievement.	0.67	0.84	3.53	17.65	37.31	40	5.1	Totally Agree
3.C.1.	All teachers regardless of their experience or length of service are given their own initiatives to realize their own value in the school.	0.84	1.01	3.36	12.94	38.49	43.36	5.17	Totally Agree
3.D.1.	Educational activities (in and out of the classroom) incorporate multi-cultural aspects.	0.84	0.5	3.87	15.97	39.5	39.33	5.11	Totally Agree
3.E.1.	The school is capable of providing diversified pedagogy for students to learn better.	0.5	1.01	3.03	15.63	38.66	41.18	5.15	Totally Agree
3.E.2.	The school has policies and structures in outsourcing educational resources to its community partners.	0.5	1.01	3.87	13.95	39.66	41.01	5.14	Totally Agree

This perception shows the potential for public schools to move away from uniformity. This means that the public-school teachers perceived that they understand their needs and values that they consider important. Public school teachers perceived that their personalized pathways are strengthened by their collaborative work. They do believe that the school has a strong focus on decision-making at the local level (Trends Shaping Education, 2019).

As per the "learning as you go" scenario, public school teachers perceived that learning opportunities remain free of cost and the digital platform program permits them to assess the knowledge, skills, and attitude of the students they gained from their experience. Moreover, they also believed that digital technologies are adopted based on needs, training to prepare the teachers are ongoing, conventional teaching is slowly integrating and that the digital technology provided assured diversified learning opportunities.

These perceptions marked the decline of the established curriculum structures which dismantle the school system. The views of the teachers on this scenario had paved the way to repurpose the infrastructure of the school. This may lead to the blurring of the distinction between education, work, and leisure where its effect in the future may seem very vague to tell Table 5.

Table 5 Learning As You Go
	Indicators	Percentage Distribution (%)						Weighted Mean	Interpre-tation
		1	2	3	4	5	6
4.A.1.	Learning opportunities provided to the students at school are all free from cost.	0.67	0.34	2.35	10.25	31.26	55.13	5.37	Totally Agree
4.B.1.	The school's digital program has made it possible to assess knowledge, skills, and attitude gained from the learning experience.	0.5	1.01	2.69	13.95	37.65	44.2	5.12	Totally Agree
4.B.2.	The digital technologies are adapted based on the needs and profile of the stakeholders in the school.	0.84	0.5	5.04	15.46	36.64	41.51	5.11	Totally Agree
4.B.3	The school also includes digital infrastructure development to accommodate the present needs of the students.	1.01	1.01	4.2	16.47	16.47	38.32	5.06	Totally Agree
4.C.1.	The teachers and students are provided with regular and ongoing training to leverage the implementation of digital technology.	0.5	0.67	3.19	17.31	39.83	38.49	5.11	Totally Agree
4.D.1.	Conventional teaching is disintegrating in the school system.	3.36	5.04	10.76	26.05	31.09	23.7	4.48	Agree
4.D.2.	There is a common understanding of the importance of digital technology among the stakeholders.	0.67	0.5	2.86	17.82	43.53	34.62	5.07	Totally Agree
4.E.1	The digital technology provided by the school to the students assures learning.	0.5	1.01	4.03	17.82	36.66	39.66	5.09	Totally Agree

In the succeeding presentation of the data, the researchers identify the educational issues from the ADAPT framework. The data presented in table 6, though shows agreement, identifies a potential issue on using different curricular standards and protection against e-safety threats.

This study constructs and hypothesizes the relationship between the six variables of inclusive approach, exclusive approach, distributive justice, interactive justice, talent engagement, and talent retention based on the research literature and conducts a structural equation model analysis with LISREL to examine the relationship patterns of these six variables. From the results of the data analysis, the final model is shown in Figure 2 and Table 7.

Table 6  Asymmetry
	Indicators	Percentage Distribution (%)						Weighted Mean	SD	Interpre-tation
		1	2	3	4	5	6
1.A.1	Education is a requirement for a better life.	0.67	0.17	0.67	3.53	16.81	78.15	5.7	0.69	Totally Agree
1.A.2	The collaboration opportunity is given to a large majority (75% or more) of the teachers regardless of area of expertise, gender, educational qualifications.	0.168	0.67	2.52	14.29	38.99	43.36	5.21	0.85	Totally Agree
1.A.3	The large majority (75% or more) of teachers are provided with opportunities for professional growth.	0	1.18	4.2	18.99	34.79	40.84	5.1	0.93	Totally Agree
1.A.4	The large majority (75% or more) of teachers use different curricular standards in the lesson.	2.52	2.69	3.87	15.97	39.66	35.29	4.93	1.15	Totally Agree
1.A.5.	The large majority (75% or more) of teachers can provide personalized education to different types of students.	0.33	1.18	5.04	18.66	37.98	36.81	5.03	0.96	Totally Agree
1.A.6.	The school can protect teachers in the same way it protects the students against e-safety threats.	1.35	2.86	8.24	21.85	30.42	35.29	4.83	1.16	Totally Agree
2.A.1.	The large majority (75% or more) of teachers are given input in the procurement of the instructional materials at school.	1.35	3.19	7.4	24.03	38.82	25.21	4.71	1.1	Totally Agree
2.A.2.	Students with varying (learning and setting) needs are provided with greater choices of their own learning.	0.84	2.52	5.55	22.19	40	28.91	4.85	1.04	Totally Agree
3.A.1.	There is a network of teachers working in the same space (departmental meetings, mentorship, Professional Learning Community) as others.	0.17	0.84	1.68	11.26	37.31	48.74	5.31	0.82	Totally Agree
3.A.2.	The school has a strong partnership with the local community to support school educational programs.	0.17	0.84	3.523	11.26	36.98	47.23	5.26	0.87	Totally Agree
4.A.1.	Learning opportunities provided to the students at school are all free from cost.	0.67	0.34	2.35	10.25	31.26	55.13	5.37	0.87	Totally Agree

In Figure 2 the factor loadings between the six potential variables and their estimated parameters are 0.76, 0.83, 0.77, 0.86, and 0.82 for inclusive approach; 0.90, 0.92, 0.85, and 0.66 for exclusive approach; 0.85, 0.91, and 0.92 for distributive justice; 0.93 and 0.95 for interactive justice; 0.92, 0.92, and 0.90 for talent engagement; and 0.89, 0.93, and 0.92 for talent retention. These values range from a minimum of 0.66 to a maximum of 0.95, which is consistent with the model’s basic fitness criterion of factor loadings being no less than 0.50 and no more than 0.95 (Bagozzi & Yi, 1988). Moreover, after parameter estimation, the error variances of the model reach a significant level of 0.05, and none of them are negative, which is consistent with the basic fitness criterion of the model (Bagozzi & Yi, 1988). In terms of the model’s overall fitness, the values of the indicators are shown in Table 7, with GFI of 0.90, which is consistent with the criterion being greater than 0.80 (Doll et al., 1994). IFI, NFI, NNFI, and CFI values are 0.98, which are consistent with the criterion being greater than 0.90 (Bentler, 1988; Bentler & Bonett, 1980; Hu & Bentler, 1999). The RMSEA value is 0.076, which is consistent with the criterion being less than or equal to .08 (McDonald & Ho, 2002) and shows that the model fits well.

Table 7 Disruption
	Indicators	Percentage Distribution (%)						Weighted Mean	SD	Interpre-tation
		1	2	3	4	5	6
1.B.1.	The school can promote better education.	0.672	0.34	1.18	9.08	30.59	58.15	5.43	0.82	Totally Agree
1.B.2.	Collaborations in school are based on a clear vision communicated to all the teachers.	0.34	0.5	1.68	10.08	34.12	53.28	5.37	0.82	Totally Agree
1.B.3	The school can protect teachers and students against e-safety issues such as cyberbullying, hacking, phishing, and the like.	1.35	2.69	7.4	18.66	33.95	35.97	4.89	1.14	Totally Agree
2.B.1.	The school’s educational outsourcing is based on the current needs.	0.67	0.84	3.19	20.17	40.17	34.96	5.03	0.93	Totally Agree
3.B.1.	The school provides a systematic experimentation procedure to develop initiatives that will have an impact on student achievement.	0.67	0.84	3.53	17.65	37.31	40	5.1	0.95	Totally Agree
4.B.1.	The school's digital program has made it possible to assess knowledge, skills, and attitude gained from the learning experience.	0.5	1.01	2.69	13.95	37.65	44.2	5.12	0.91	Totally Agree
4.B.2.	The digital technologies are adapted based on the needs and profile of the stakeholders in the school.	0.84	0.5	5.04	15.46	36.64	41.51	5.11	0.97	Totally Agree
4.B.3	The school also includes digital infrastructure development to accommodate the present needs of the students.	1.01	1.01	4.2	16.47	16.47	38.32	5.06	0.98	Totally Agree

The next step is to analyze the relationship between the six potential variables. The effect variances of talent engagement and talent retention are first explored. As shown in Figure 2, the three variables with significant influence (p<0.05) on talent engagement are inclusive approach (β=0.59), distributive justice (β=0.26), and interactive justice (β=0.07). The influence of the inclusive approach is the strongest, followed by distributive justice, and then by interactive justice. This result indicates that the adoption of the inclusive approach for talent management is beneficial to member engagement, and the higher are distributive justice and interactive justice of an organization, the higher is member engagement; the higher are distributive justice and interactive justice, the higher is member engagement. An exclusive approach for talent management exerts no significant effect on talent engagement (p>0.05). The only two variables with significant influence (p<0.05) on talent retention are the inclusive approach (β=0.53) and distributive justice (β=0.20). From the standardized coefficients, it can be seen that talent management with an inclusive approach has the strongest influence on talent retention; in addition, the higher is distributional justice, the higher is talent retention; and the higher is distributive justice, the higher is talent retention. Exclusive approach and interactive justice have no significant influence on talent retention (p>0.05).

Data in the disruption and asymmetry elements of the ADAPT revealed concerns about e-safety threats protection among students and teachers. In the interview made, he explained that there is support through well-established guidelines. However, teachers and students are still susceptible as e-safety is very limited.

“Some parents do not want to use Facebook because of privacy so I have Google meet for them to use. I consider their options. Others are not capable of learning how to use Google meet instead they use Facebook. With regards to cyber threats, we refrain from posting students' names online. We were given instructions from DEPED to refrain from posting names and faces as well. We are fully aware of the DEPED memo. I believe with the policy given by the DepEd. We create an academic account just for the classroom. Our role as a teacher is not to share information with the public because it is against their privacy.”

The e-safety threats provision is limited to the way confidential information is managed. Many competencies can be reinforced apart from privacy and confidentiality. Common Sense Media (2014) presented the eight cross-curricular frameworks namely privacy security, digital footprint and reputation, self-image and identity, creative credit and copyright, relationships and communications, information literacy, cyberbullying and digital drama, and internet safety Table 8.

Table 8 Age
	Indicators	Percentage Distribution (%)						Weighted Mean	SD	Interpre-tation
		1	2	3	4	5	6
1.C.1.	It is easier to convince new generation parents to encourage children to continue education as it can promote a better life compared to seniors.	1.68	2.86	6.22	25.71	34.62	28.91	4.76	1.12	Agree
1.C.2.	Collaborations of teachers are meaningful regardless of age and experience.	0.17	0	1.68	8.4	28.91	60.84	5.48	0.74	Totally Agree
2.C.1.	The school has a variety of teaching profiles according to age that has bearing on professional and reputational status.	0.50	1.51	4.2	19.83	43.53	30.42	4.96	0.94	Totally Agree
3.C.1.	All teachers regardless of their experience or length of service are given their own initiatives to realize their own value in the school.	0.84	1.01	3.36	12.94	38.49	43.36	5.17	0.95	Totally Agree
4.C.1.	The teachers and students are provided with regular and ongoing training to leverage the implementation of digital technology.	0.5	0.67	3.19	17.31	39.83	38.49	5.11	0.9	Totally Agree

The age element of the ADAPT revealed very interesting potential issues for the future of schooling. This is the generation gap between old and new generation parents to encourage children to continue education being a ticket to improve life Table 9.

Table 9 Polarization
	Indicators	Percentage Distribution (%)						Weighted Mean	SD	Interpre-tation
		1	2	3	4	5	6
1.D.1.	The benefit of education can only be reaped by families from urban societies compared to those in rural.	16.13	10.8	12	19	24	18.5	3.79	1.71	Agree
1.D.2.	Collaborations provided to teachers in school are meaningful despite experience, educational background, or school setting.	0.34	0.5	2.5	16	38	42.2	5.18	0.87	Totally Agree
2.D.1.	The learning networks or systems used by the school bring different human resources together.	0.34	0.84	3.3	20	43	32.8	5.03	0.88	Totally Agree
3.D.1.	Educational activities (in and out of the classroom) incorporate multi-cultural aspects.	0.84	0.5	3.9	16	40	39.3	5.11	0.94	Totally Agree
4.D.1.	Conventional teaching is disintegrating in the school system.	3.36	5.04	11	26	31	23.7	4.48	1.28	Totally Agree
4.D.2.	There is a common understanding of the importance of digital technology among the stakeholders.	0.67	0.5	2.9	18	44	34.6	5.07	0.89	Totally Agree

Polarization between urban and rural schools was also seen as a potential concern in the future of schooling on the lenses of the public-school teachers. Moreover, it has been seen from the survey that there is a concern over the disintegration of conventional teaching in the school.

During the interview with the targeted teachers, they explained that urban schools have access to a bigger budget wherefore have more learning opportunities than rural schools. This is evidenced by the fact that urban schools have more opportunities to interact with the teachers in real-time as they were provided with tablets and laptops. Their internet access is favorable as well compared to their rural counterparts who remained in a modular approach to learning and are dependent on the interaction with the adults available at home. The interviewee claimed that some modules distributed to students are misleading and if they are not corrected by a qualified person, may lead to misconception and learning lag in the future`.

“And also learning modules should be quality assured. In some cases, some learning modules that were given have some misleading information. It is sad to know that learners are reading these materials and getting this information with the wrong information. What if the parents are not educated as well, they cannot help the students but agree with the manual?”

The interviewee added that urban schools, like the schools where he is connected to, have a well-established system to quality assure their modules. She explained that:

“In San Juan, there are teachers assigned in Technical Writing Group or TWG. Master teachers are required to do quality assurance on the content of learning modules. After that, it will go through Education Program Supervisors (EPS) once approved, that's the time for reproduction.”

The giving of a personalized education shows a concern in the future of schooling as perceived by the public-school teachers having the highest standard deviation among the others. There are some schools prepared for this concern. One of which is the school of the interviewee who initiated a program to address the reading gaps.

“We have this project HAPAG "Hakbang sa Pagbasa" aims to zero non-reader in San Juan. These are reading strategies that teachers can use in skills development for the Big 6 priorities namely, oral language, phonology, phonemic awareness, vocabulary instruction, fluency, and comprehension. It is supplementary reading material for students. It is initiated by the Division program but not by the Region. We give the books to students at the beginning of the school year to those who are pre-identified non-readers and parents help supervise. From time to time, we teachers follow up and I retrieved it at the end of the school year. I have non-readers last year and with project HAPAG they were able to move up to 4^th grade.”

The reading program given by the division school as explained by the interviewee is evidence that personalized education is provided to students. However, personalized education is a separate program that is loosely attached to their daily lessons. Likewise, there was no evidence to prove the existence of a bespoke program whose intention is to meaningfully address the needs of the students across the curriculum other than English Table 10.

Table 10 Trust
	Indicators	Percentage Distribution (%)						Weighted	SD	Interpre-tation
		1	2	3	4	5	6	Mean
1.E.1.	The school can provide a better life.	0.67	0.34	1.01	13.11	38.15	46.72	5.28	0.84	Totally Agree
1.E.2.	The school can promote a positive meaningful collaboration among teachers.	0.5	0.34	2.02	11.09	<38.99	47.06	5.29	0.83	Totally Agree
1.E.3.	Common curriculum standards and assessment tools impact students’ achievement.	0.67	0.17	2.86	14.45	41.68	40.17	5.17	0.87	Totally Agree
1.E.4.	The school supports the innovation of instructions in a variety of ways.	0.34	0.34	2.19	13.28	38.32	45.55	5.26	0.83	Totally Agree
1.E.5.	The school can provide personalized education to different types of students.	0.84	1.85	5.04	17.98	39.33	34.96	4.98	1.02	Totally Agree
2.E.1.	The school involves parents in school-based initiatives and activities.	0.5	1.01	1.68	13.61	36.81	46.39	5.24	0.88	Totally Agree
2.E.2.	The instructional resources provided by the school are valuable to students’ learning.	0.34	0.34	2.02	13.11	37.48	46.72	5.27	0.83	Totally Agree
3.E.1.	The school is capable of providing diversified pedagogy for students to learn better.	0.5	1.01	3.03	15.63	38.66	41.18	5.15	0.92	Totally Agree
3.E.2.	The school has policies and structures in outsourcing educational resources to its community partners.	0.5	1.01	3.87	13.95	39.66	41.01	5.14	0.93	Totally Agree
4.E.1	The digital technology provided by the school to the students assures learning.	0.5	1.01	4.03	17.82	36.66	39.66	5.09	0.95	Totally Agree

The data presented in the succeeding table draws important insights about the teacher's preparedness for the future of the school in the Philippines as far as the perception of the public school teachers in NCR is concerned.

Data from the OECD and ADAPT surveys revealed some factors that are perceived to be relevant to the teachers' preparedness for the future of schooling. These are access to resources and digital infrastructures, and the promotion of a collaborative environment. These are factors that place public school teachers at an advantageous edge towards meeting the future of schooling. Surveys and interviews confirmed that there is a high potential to outsource resources that can promote curriculum and digital learning. Access to these resources and digital infrastructures has an impact on learning as it can accelerate and change the modes by which students learn (Alshahrani et al., 2017). Interestingly, there is a political divide in the influence of access to resources in the digital world on the student-instructor relationship across cultures which could be further explored in future researches.

There is an enhanced motivation and autonomy driven by the meaningful collaboration among teachers (Banegas et al., 2013). The collaboration allowed them to re-construct resources and teaching pedagogy in informed and democratic decisions. Four factors should be looked into when looking at professional collaboration (Le et al., 2017). These factors include collaborative skills, free-riding, competence status, and friendship. These factors should be reviewed in cognizance of the main antecedent which is a strong focus on cognitive aspects of collaborative learning.

However, data also identified some other factors that may draw teachers backward when not addressed. These were identified as the (a) promotion of authentic need-based education and (b) promotion of safety in the use of the internet and lastly (c) phenomenolizing the curriculum (Diethelm et al., 2012). Although the survey results showed that teachers can promote personalized education, they are not sufficient discourse in the interview that supports further the ability to use differentiation in the lesson. It is advised to use a variety of differentiated instruction frameworks in the lesson to change the teaching and learning practices and shift the learning environment to a non-conventional setting (Bondie et al., 2019). Differentiation plays a vital role to promote challenge and progress among K-12 students (Pelayo, 2021). E-safety is crucial in the instruction which according to Edwards et al. (2016) would require the school to understand how students think about the internet so we understand how schools can protect them. The researchers would adopt the same argument for teachers to protect them equally.

Moreover, the educational reconstruction of the "real-world phenomena" is a sense of teaching context plays a crucial role in the future of schooling (Diethelm et al., 2012). The phenomenon approach would aim at motivating the students to be more engaged in the lesson, allow them to openly connect their ideas to prior knowledge, and give students more opportunities to prior knowledge (Diethelm et al., 2012; Pelayo, 2021).

Conclusion and Recommendations

In this paper, the researchers have presented the educational situations of the Philippines from the lenses of public school teachers. This allows identifying the preparedness of the teachers in the future of schooling and the implications of these on the teacher education and training. The juxtaposition of the surveys and interviews via the mixed method revealed that access to resources and digital infrastructures, and promotion of a collaborative environment are identified as opportunities that public teachers viewed top have in preparing them for the future of schooling. The readiness in the future is further capped by the promotion of authentic need-based education, promotion of safety in the use of the internet, and lastly phenomenolizing the curriculum. Researchers suggest that teachers' education and training be intensified by enhancing teachers' competencies in digitalization and e-safety; strengthening collaboration through a contextual and meaningful professional learning community as support to the teaching profession.

References

1. Adonis, M. (2020). Errors found in DepEd learning modules, TV lesson. INQUIRER, Available from .https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/1346930/errors-found-in-modules-tv.
2. Alshahrani, S., Ahmed, E., & Ward, R. (2017). The influence of online resources on the student–lecturer relationship in higher education: a comparison study. Journal of Computers in Education, 4(2), 87–106.
3. Banegas, D., Pavese, A., Velázquez, A., & Vélez, S. M. (2013). Teacher professional development through collaborative action research: Impact on foreign English-language teaching and learning.Educational Action Research,21(2), 185-201.
4. Bondie, R. S., Dahnke, C., & Zusho, A. (2019). How does changing “one-size-fits-all” to differentiated instruction affect teaching?.Review of Research in Education,43(1), 336-362.
5. Brydon-Miller, M., Prudente, M., & Aguja, S. (2017). Educational action research as transformative practice.The BERA/SAGE handbook of educational research. London, England: SAGE Publications Ltd.
6. Common Sense Media. (2014). Our K-12 Digital Citizenship Curriculum. Available from https://www.commonsensemedia.org/sites/default/files/uploads/classroom_curriculum/commonsense_digitalcitizenshipcurriculum.pdf
7. Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2017).Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage publications.
8. Diethelm, I., Hubwieser, P., & Klaus, R. (2012, November). Students, teachers and phenomena: educational reconstruction for computer science education. InProceedings of the 12th Koli Calling International Conference on Computing Education Research(pp. 164-173).
9. Edwards, S., Nolan, A., Henderson, M., Mantilla, A., Plowman, L., & Skouteris, H. (2018). Young children's everyday concepts of the internet: A platform for cyber-safety education in the early years.British journal of educational technology,49(1), 45-55.
10. OECD, O. (2019). future of education and skills 2030: OECD learning compass 2030.
11. OECD. (2019). Trends Shaping Education 2019, OECD Publishing, Paris.
12. Pelayo, R. (2021). Using five-way interaction spaces in online learning to promote engagement, challenge, and progress among K-12 students. Educational and E-Learning in Canada and Around the World, (2), 51-58.
13. Sheppard, B., (2018). Asymmetry: education will cause disparities to grow. Available at: https://blairsheppard.medium.com/asymmetry-education-will-cause-disparities-to-grow-28d7b3674df8.
14. Sheppard, B. (2020). Time to ADAPT: the world’s biggest challenges are accelerated by COVID-19. Available at: https://medium.com/@blairsheppard/time-to-adapt-the-worlds-biggest-challenges-are-accelerated-by-covid-19-a91b48aad8ce.
15. Suciu, L. (2019). Introductory Chapter: Discourse and Discourse Analysis. A Retrospective Approach.Advances in Discourse Analysis, 3.
16. Tannen, D. (2012). Discourse analysis–What speakers do in conversation.Linguistic society of America.
17. Trends Shaping Education .(2019). In Trends Shaping Education. OECD.