CARTOON by Yona Evardone.
As students enter a new academic year, one policy implemented by the Department of Education (DepEd) has garnered significant debates – Operation Baklas, also known as the “Bare Wall Policy”.
On August 3, DepEd in the Philippines introduced a controversial policy that sent shockwaves through the education sector. The "Bare Wall Policy" aimed to remove visual distractions from classroom walls to enhance the learning environment. One month has passed since its implementation, and it's time to evaluate the impact of this order.
The idea of DepEd's Bare Wall Policy is straightforward, grounded in the belief that cluttered classroom walls could be distracting for students, taking in a more conducive atmosphere for their learning ability to focus and learn effectively, without the visual noise caused by posters, charts, and decorations. This aim is undoubtedly debatable, the implementation has raised several points of consideration.
Upon its introduction, there have been mixed reactions to a policy introduced in the Philippines, which mandated the removal of unnecessary artwork and decorations from classrooms, faculty rooms, and school grounds. DepEd Order No. 21, 2023, and a statement from Vice President Sara Duterte supported this minimalist approach, aiming to reduce distractions and promote concentration. Despite initial debates, the policy was implemented nationwide.
In the school year 2023-2024, passionate debates emerged within the education community. Some supported the policy, emphasizing reduced distractions, cleaner environments, and streamlined education systems. However, others raised concerns, noting that students already face a wealth of stimuli in the digital age. They argued that removing classroom decorations might deprive students of exposure to diverse perspectives and ideas, limiting their educational experiences.
On the other side of this debate, some teachers argued that the policy stifled creativity and personalized learning environments. They contended that self-expressive displays and decorations fostered a sense of belonging and inspiration among students. The absence of visual aids could lead to decreased enthusiasm for learning. Balancing aesthetics and functionality became a main challenge for educators.
Critics also highlighted emotional and practical concerns. The removal of engaging materials might create a less inviting atmosphere, potentially impacting students' emotional well-being and hindering visual learners. Additionally, educators faced challenges in adapting to the new norm, as many relied on decorations as teaching aids. Despite cost savings, some teachers felt that the policy showed a lack of trust in their professionalism and judgement.
As students of the Philippines adapt to the DepEd Bare Wall Policy, it has undoubtedly had an impact on the educational landscape of our country. However, it still initiated a necessary conversation about the role of classrooms on Filipino pupils. Moreover, the emotional and creative aspects of education should not be overlooked. As the policy enters its second month, DepEd must engage in a comprehensive review, considering the feedback and experiences of educators, parents, and students, for us to preserve the aim of focused minds and creativity. Finding common ground that promotes effective learning while nurturing creativity and emotional well-being is essential for the future of education in the Philippines. Educators, parents, policymakers, and students need to continue this dialogue—seeking solutions that benefit the expanded development of our future generation of the Philippines.
Comentarios