THE PHILIPPINE HIGHER EDUCATION SYSTEM: CURRENT TRENDS AND DEVELOPMENTS
By: Commissioner Nona S. Ricafort,Ph.D. Commission on Higher Education Philippines Abstract This paper presents the Philippine higher education system-its current trends and developments. The following topics are discussed: (1) Governance of Philippine Higher Education Classification of Philippine Higher Education Public Universities and Colleges Private Higher Education Institutions (2) Strategic Goals for Philippine Higher Education Institutions Quality and Excellence Relevance and Responsiveness Access and Equity Efficiency and Effectiveness (3) Current Trends and Reforms in Higher Education From improving access and equity - Ladderized Education Program (LEP) - Expanded Tertiary Education, Equivalency and Accreditation Program (ETEEAP) For improving quality - Centers of Excellence (COEs)/Center of Development (CODs) - Accreditation of Programs - Institutional Monitoring And Evaluation For Quality Assurance (IQUAME) - Transnational Education (TNE) * Academic Mobility For improving efficiency and effectiveness - Autonomous and Deregulated Private Higher Education (A/D PHEIs) INTRODUCTION Higher education in contemporary Philippines is guided by philosophical orientations that put primacy on pursuit and formation of knowledge, skills, values and attitudes necessary to make the Filipino a productive member of the society. It is geared towards the pursuit
of better quality of life for all Filipinos. Philippine higher education also endeavors to harness productive capacity of the country’s human resource base towards international competitiveness. Philippine higher education goals include the following: Provision of undergraduate and graduate education with international standards of quality and excellence; Generation and diffusion of knowledge in a broad range of disciplines relevant and responsive to the dynamically changing domestic and international environments; Provision of educational access for deserving and qualified Filipinos to higher education opportunities; and Optimization of social, institutional and individual returns and benefits derived from the utilization of higher education resources.
1. GOVERNANCE IN PHILIPPINE HIGHER EDUCATION Higher education is at the apex of the Philippine educational system. College students enter higher education normally at the age of 16 to 18 years old. Students come from the basic education level for about ten years to include six years of elementary education and four years of secondary education. The structure of the Philippine educational system is shown in Figure 1.
2
FIGURE 1 The administration and supervision of the Philippine higher education rests on the Commission on Higher Education or CHED as mandated by the Higher Education Act of 1994, while basic education is with the Department of Education or DepED as stipulated in the TechVoc with TESDA and Basic Education Act of 2001.
Classification of Philippine Higher Education Institutions Colleges & Universities - as of December 31, 2007 (Main Campus) Public [State Universities & Colleges (SUCs), Local Colleges & University (LCUs) and Other Government Schools] Private TOTAL FIGURE 2 Higher education institutions in the Philippines numbered one thousand seven hundred and ten (1,710) distributed as follows: (a) state universities and colleges (SUCs) 110; (b) local colleges and universities (LCUs) 70; (c) other government schools- 16; and (d) private colleges and universities (PHEIs)-1,514. 196
1,514 1,710
Public Universities and Colleges State Universities and Colleges (SUCs) are funded by the national government and are governed by their own charters. There are increasingly rising LCUs, whose funds are coming from their local government and whose policies and programs are governed by elected Local government officials. SUCs charters ensure their autonomy and academic freedom. They are empowered to develop their own curricula, introduce competitive institutional programs, and award their own degrees. CHED ensures that SUCs adhere to the Higher Education Modernization Act (Republic Act 8292), which provides among others, the uniform composition of Governing Boards of SUCs with CHED as the Chairman.
Private Higher Education Institutions (PHEIs)
3
PHEIs are owned and administered by private individuals, groups or organizations. They are classified as sectarian and non-sectarian. Sectarian schools are usually non-stock, non-profit educational institutions owned and operated by religious orders (Catholic and Christian schools), while non-sectarian refers to those operated by private corporations, which are not affiliated to any religious organizations. Majority of the non-sectarian schools are stock corporations and only a few are non-stock, non-profit corporations, while a number of them are registered as foundations. Private higher education institutions experience some degree of freedom, only when their programs are given CHED recognition and when they have attained accreditation by FAAP. Recognition of academic programs is awarded to PHEIs who complied with the minimum requirements prescribed by CHED. About eighty (80) PHEIs were granted autonomous and deregulated status of the Commission.
2. STRATEGIC GOALS FOR PHILIPPINE HIGHER EDUCATION
The Commission on Higher Education is the governing body covering both public and private higher education institutions as well as degree-granting programs in all tertiary educational institutions in the Philippines. It was established in May 18, 1994 through Republic Act 7722 or the Higher Education Act of 1994. The Commission, pursuant to its Medium Term Higher Education Development and Investment Plan (MTHEDIP) 20012004 and its successor, the Medium-Term Plan for the Development of Philippine Higher Education (MTDPHE) 2005-2010 had set four (4) strategic goals for higher education in the country, namely: quality and excellence, relevance and responsiveness, access and equity, and efficiency and effectiveness. Access and Equity 1. Quality and Excellence – Responding to the requirement of the internationalization of higher education; upgrading of HEI programs and standards towards global competitiveness; providing a program of assistance to prepare students entering the higher education system. Major programs and projects are: international benchmarking to upgrade policies, standards and guidelines (PSGs), competency-based curricula, centers of excellence (COEs) and centers of development (CODs), autonomous and deregulated HEIs, technical panels (technical committees, task forces, technical working groups), regional quality assessment team (RQAT), CHED-PRC joint efforts, accreditation (FAAP, NNQAA), faculty development project (FACDEV), institutional quality assurance though monitoring and evaluation (IQuaME), strengthening proficiency in English of college teachers (Project SPELL), evaluation of graduate education (Project EGEP).
4
2. Relevance and Responsiveness – Responding to the diverse needs of a dynamic society; ensuring labor market responsiveness of higher education; strengthening the research and extension functions of HEIs. Major programs and projects are: national higher education research agenda (NHERA), Republica Awards, curriculum re-engineering and development, integrated research utilization program (IRUP), technology commercialization and corporatization, graduate tracer studies (Project GTS), utilization of information and communication technology, academe-industry linkages/summits, retooling and lifelong learning.
3. Access and Equity – Responding to building a just society; improvement of access of deserving students to quality higher education programs; expanding alternative modalities of higher education delivery systems. Major programs and projects are: prebaccalaureate bridging program (Project ENRICH), strengthening outside learning programs, ladderization program, interfacing of TESDA and CHED programs (EO 358), Expanded Tertiary Education Equivalency and Accreditation Program (ETEEAP, EO 330), student financial assistance programs (scholarships, student loan schemes), transnational education.
4. Efficiency and Effectiveness – Responding to resource constraints; rationalizing of public HEIs; strengthening MIS and improving labor-market information. Major programs and projects are: complementation and networking between and among public and private HEIs, strengthening institutional capability, SUCs income generating projects; normative financing in budget allocation, typology of HEIs, capability building of CHED personnel, higher education development center (HEDC)
3. CURRENT TRENDS AND REFORMS IN HIGHER EDUCATION
The Commission on Higher Education, since its establishment, has aspired to make education in the Philippines global and at par with the educational standards of highly industrialized countries. This it does by constantly reviewing the curricular offerings in the various disciplines in an attempt to make these increasingly responsive to national goals and the international quest for quality and relevance. Cross-border education has developed recently with the advent of joint degrees, twinning and distance education. The Commission supports and enhances these initiatives but without sacrificing the valuedimension involved in these.
5
Higher education has always had an important international dimension, and all these scientific and technological advances ushered in new modes of learning, greater mobility and global competition creating a new world for learning and teaching. Access 1. Executive Order 358 – Ladderized Education Program (LEP). Executive Order (EO) 358 “Institutionalizing a Ladderized Interface between Technical-Vocational Education and Training (TVET) and Higher Education (HE)” stipulates that the unified and articulation mechanism by Technical Education and Skills Development Authority (TESDA) constitutes the following: Credit transfer which involves recognition and carrying forward of credits constituting overlapping learning from as tech-voc program to degree program or vice versa Post TVET bridging program System of enhanced equivalency Adoption of a Ladderized curricula Modularized Program approach Competency-based programs Network of dual sector Colleges and Universities Accreditation of prior learning In the field of nursing a LADDERIZED education program means two (2) years of TechVoc courses (e.g. care-giving etc) and then two (2) more years of Nursing Proper. In Engineering, it is two (2) years of Tech-Voc (drafting, surveying) and three to four years of Engineering Proper. In HRM, it is three years of Tech-Voc and one year to one-and-ahalf years of HRM Proper. Figure 2 presents illustration of ladderized scheme.
6
FIGURE 3
The Ladderized Education is a mechanism that allows students and workers progression between technical vocational educational and training (TVET) and higher education (HEI) or college and vice-versa. The Technical Education and Skills Development Authority (TESDA) and the Commission on Higher Education (CHED) in consultation with the concerned sectors and stakeholders shall develop and implement a unified national qualifications framework that establishes equivalency pathways and access ramps for a ladderized system allowing for easier transitions and progressions between TVET and HE. The framework shall include as far as practicable but no limited to, the following unified qualification and articulation mechanisms: national system of credit transfer, post-TVET bridging programs, and system of enhanced equivalency. Adoption of ladderized curricula/programs, modularized program approach, competency-based programs, network of dual-sector colleges or universities, accreditation recognition of prior learning. Ladderized education opens opportunities for career and educational advancement to students and workers. Specifically, it intendeds to create seamless and borderless education and training system that will allow mobility in terms of flexible entry and exit into the educational system. At present, LEP is implemented through one or a combination of the following: conventional ladderization, transfer credit and embedment.
2. Centers of Excellence (COE) and Centers of Development (COD). CHED is strengthening the higher education institutions not only by instituting reform and monitoring quality standards through program accreditation, but also by awarding incentives and titles of COE and COD. Programs which have consistently exhibited excellent qualities in instruction, research and extensions are evaluated and rated. For programs which meet highest level of quality, a Center of Excellence (COE) title is awarded and a financial assistance is given to further improve the programs and activities of the field of study. Centers of Development (CODs) are programs that have the potentials to be the Centers of Excellence. Some selection criteria for COE and CODs include the following:
Instructional Quality (Accreditation, faculty qualification and educational resources).
7
Research and Development Extension, Outreach and Linkages Institutional Qualifications
Discipline Science and Math Education Business and Management Education Teacher Education Information Technology Education
COE 18 2 14 31
COD 22 8 5 9
TOTAL 40 10 19 40
FIGURE 4 At present, there are 109 academic programs awarded as CHED COEs and CODs in the fields of Science and Mathematics, Business and Management Education, Teacher Education and Information Technology Education. These programs have proven excellence in teaching, research and instructions all over the country. CHED has awarded them with scholarship grants, faculty development programs, laboratory and library upgrading and support for extension and instructional materials development.
3. Autonomous and Deregulated Status. CHED also recognizes the enormous contributions of private higher education institutions in the growth and development of tertiary education in the Philippines in 2001. CHED rationalized supervision of PHEIs by introducing autonomous and deregulated status. Autonomous institutions are those with Level III accreditation of programs, outstanding performance of graduates in licensure examinations, and a long tradition of integrity and untarnished reputation in the field of higher education. Deregulated status is of a lower category but leading to autonomous status. Both of these types of institutions are free from normal monitoring and evaluation of CHED offices. In total, from 2001 to 2003, the Commission has granted 40 private HEIs with autonomy status and 44 with deregulated status across the country. The grant of autonomous and deregulated status to deserving private colleges and universities is thus aimed at recognizing private HEIs that have consistently shown exemplary performance in the provision of education, research and extension services, at the same time rationalizing supervision of private HEIs through progressive deregulation.
8
4. Expanded Tertiary Education, Equivalency And Accreditation (ETEEAP) The Expanded Tertiary Education Equivalency And Accreditation Program (ETEEAP) is an educational assessment scheme which recognizes knowledge, skills and prior learning obtained by individuals from non-formal and informal education experiences. The mandate to implement the program is embodied in executive order 330 entitled “adopting the expanded tertiary education equivalency and accreditation program as an integral part of the educational system and designating the commission on higher education as the authority responsible for its implementation” issued by President Fidel V. Ramos on may 13, 1996 as an offshoot of the recommendation of the first employment summit in September 1995. By establishing equivalency competence standards and a comprehensive assessment system employing written test, interview, skills demonstration and other creative assessment methodologies, higher education institutions may administer competency – based evaluation. A panel of assessors is convened to determine candidates’ knowledge, skills, and attitudes relevant to a particular discipline, and the appropriate, convenient competency enhancement program. The candidate consequently earns the equivalent credits and the appropriate certificate or degree awarded by the deputized higher education institutions.
5. Voluntary Accreditation. To attain standards of quality over and above CHED minimum requirements, CHED supports the voluntary accreditation of programs by different accrediting bodies. Presently, there are five (5) accrediting bodies namely: Association of Christian Schools, Colleges and Universities Inc., the Philippine Accrediting Association of Schools, Colleges and Universities (PAASCU), the Philippine Association of Colleges and Universities Commission on Accreditation (PACU-COA), Accrediting Agency of Chartered Colleges and Universities in the Philippines (AACUP) and the ALCU Commission on Accreditation. The accreditation process involved 4 major steps, namely: 1) Institutional Self-Survey; 2) Preliminary Visit; 3) Formal Survey; 4) Awarding of a decision by the governing board of the accrediting agency concerned, Federation of Accrediting Agencies of the Philippines (FAAP) for private HEIs and National Network of Quality Accrediting Agencies (NNQAA) for public HEIs. Accreditation is a process for assessing and upgrading the educational quality of higher education programs through self-evaluation and peer judgment. It leads to the grant of accredited status by an accrediting agency and provides public recognition and information on educational quality (CMO # 1 Series 2005)
9
5.1 Accreditation Levels [CHED Memorandum Order (CMO) # 1, Series 2005]
Candidate Status: for programs which have undergone a preliminary survey visit and are certified by the federation/network as being capable of acquiring accredited status within two years; Level I accredited status: for programs which have been granted initial accreditation after a formal survey by the accrediting agency and duly certified by the accreditation/network, effective for a period of three years; Level II re-accredited status: for programs which have been re-accredited by the accrediting agency and duly certified by the accreditation federation/network, effective for a period of three or five years based on the appraisal of the accrediting agency;
Level III re-accredited status: for programs which have been re-accredited and have met the additional criteria/guidelines set by the federation/network for this level. Only programs that have been granted “clean” re-accreditation, meaning that no progress report or interim visit is required within the five-year accreditation period, may apply for Level III status. Level IV accredited status: accredited programs which are highly respected as very high quality academic programs in the Philippines and with prestige and authority comparable to similar programs in excellent foreign universities.
These programs must have met the following additional criteria/guidelines: Excellent outcomes inResearch as seen in the number, scope and impact if scholarly publications in referred national and international journals; Teaching and learning as proven in excellent performance of graduates and continuing assessment of student achievement; Community service and the impact of contributions to the economic and social upliftment, on both regional and national levels; Evidence of international linkages and consortia; Well developed planning processes which support quality assurance mechanisms.
10
6. Institutional Monitoring And Evaluation For Quality Assurance (IQUAME)- CMO # 15 Series of 2005 on May 25, 2005 institutionalized IQUAME as a monitoring and assessment mechanism towards quality assurance of higher education institutions in their entirety. Quality assurance is a process through which higher education institution guarantees to itself and its stakeholders that its teaching, learning and other services consistently reach a standard of excellence. Such assurance is a necessary goal for the institution itself. Increasingly, it is also necessary for publicly funded institutions to be accountable, and provide assurances, to the society and the state that they are delivering the services for which they are funded, thus ensuring that they are providing value for money. Therefore quality assurance incorporates all the processes internal to the institution, whereby quality is evaluated, maintained and improved. (Duff et al 2000). The UNESCO defines quality assurance as an all-embracing term referring to an ongoing, continuous process of evaluating (assessing, monitoring, guaranteeing, maintaining and improving) the quality of a higher education systems, institutions or programmes. The overall approach to monitoring and evaluation is developmental. CHED will work with institutions to assist them in strengthening their management of academic and administrative processes so that they are better able to achieve their educational objectives. Where there are serious weaknesses, or failures to comply with conditions attached to permits or recognitions, CHED expects remedial action to be taken by higher education institutions. Notwithstanding this, review teams will approach their engagements with institutions in a spirit of cooperation, and with the intention of supporting developments and strengthening academic management. CHED adopted IQUAME as an outcome-based approach to evaluation because of its great potential to increase both the effectiveness of the quality assurance system, and the quality and efficiency of higher education institutions. Particularly in professional fields, there is a need to demonstrate the achievement of outcomes that match international norms. Through IQUAME, HEIs are categorized as A(r), A(t), B and C.
6.1 Categories of Philippine HEIs under IQUAME Based on the IQUAME assessment higher education institutions in the country may be categorized into A(r), A(t), B or C.
Category A (r). These are institutions that undertake the full range of higher education functions, including research. Such institutions undertake advanced and extensive researches and will normally be evaluated against all the indicators in the framework.
11
To be placed in Category A (r) an institution would have to achieve scores of at least 3 in 75% of the indicators against which it was assessed, no scores less than 2, and a score of at least 3 in the research indicator.
Category A (t). These are institutions that have teaching as their core business. Although faculty will keep up to date with developments in their discipline through their personal study and scholarship. They will undertake other forms of advanced scholarships, the results of which will often merit publication in refereed journals, in fields such as professional practice and higher education pedagogy. They may undertake such activities as extension and networking, and they may house centers of excellence or development. Such institutions will be evaluated against all indicators except research capability. To be placed in Category A (t) an institution would have to achieve scores of at least 3 in 75% of the indicators, against which it was assessed, with no scores less than 2.
Category B. This category contains institutions that are in a stage of development, and which have the potential to be placed in one of the A categories at a future date. Usually, they will undertake only those activities covered by the core indicators. As they mature, they are likely to add activities covered by some of the other indicators; as they reach that stage, they may qualify for one of the A categories. While in Category B, they will normally be evaluated against the core indicators only. To be placed in Category B, following an initial application, an institution must achieve scores of at least 3 in 50% of the indicators, against which it is assessed, with no scores less than 2. To remain in the developmental category, an institution must achieve, at the next following monitoring and evaluation visit, an increase in the number of scores of at least 3, with no scores less than 2. After successful evaluation in the B category, an institution should normally apply, at the next monitoring and evaluation visit, for inclusion in the appropriate A category.
Category C. This category contains all other institutions.
7. Transnational Education - The Commission on Higher Education, through its Technical Panel for Transnational Education, formulated the new set of Policies,
12
Standards and Guidelines (PSG) for the Transnational Education (TNE), which was issued by the Commission through a CMO No. 2, Series 2008. The policies and guidelines of TNE defined the following: Scope, Extent of regulation, Procedures for registration, Mechanics of recognizing foreign higher education providers and their courses/programs offered in the country, and Mechanics of recognizing Philippine higher education institutions engaged in transnational education. The Commission on Higher Education determines and specifies the modes of transnational education programs, subject to appropriate policies, guidelines and regulations.
7.1 Categories of Transnational Education: 7.1.a Distance Education – examples include, but are not limited to, the following: 1. 2. Partners enter into an equal relationship and deliver programs via distance education, with both institutions awarding the credit or degree. The program is offered directly by an awarding institution with no local agent/franchisee/partner. The institution may be an FHEP with students in the Philippines (IB1), or a Philippine HEI with students abroad (IB2). A Philippine HEI uses programs/courses owned or created by a FHEP under a license agreement. Credit is granted by the local HEI.
3.
7.1.b Face-to-face or Conventional Mode of Education Offered Transnationally – examples include, but are not limited to, the following: 1. 2. 3. Partners enter into an equal relationship and deliver programs face-to-face, with both institutions awarding the credit or degree. Conventional programs are offered transnationally by a FHEP with a local branch in the Philippines, or a Philippine HEI with a foreign branch. Conventional programs are offered by a FHEP thru a franchiser or a local partner. Credit is granted by the FHEP.
7.1.c Blended Learning – examples include, but are not limited to, the following: 1. 2. Partners enter into an equal relationship and deliver programs using blended learning techniques, with both institutions awarding the credit or degree. Conventional programs are offered transnationally by an FHEP with a local branch in the Philippines (IIIB1), or a Philippine HEI with a foreign branch (IIIB2), using a mix of face-to-face and distance education. Conventional programs are offered by an FHEP thru a franchiser or a local partner using a mix of face-to-face and distance education. Credit is granted by the FHEP.
3.
13
8. Academic Mobility - Academic exchanges between Philippines and foreign universities have steadily increased over the last two decades. Philippine Higher Education Guide (2000 and 2005) showed that most of the country’s COEs and CODs participate actively in academic mobility programs. Majority of the students who participate in exchange programs are in four courses: Science and Mathematics, Business and Economics, Computer Sciences and Liberal Arts. Faculty exchange program is also becoming popular. There are initiatives on visiting professors, fellowships and sabbatical leave abroad. Majority of the college faculty involved in mobility programs are specialists in International Studies, Science and Technology, Engineering, Business Administration and Research. Bilateral and multilateral agreements help facilitate the growth of academic mobility. Some of these programs include the University Mobility in Asia and the Pacific (UMAP), the Abroad in Komaba Program of the University of Tokyo, the Asia and the Pacific Forum, the Global Youth Exchange Program, the ASEAN Ship for Southeast Asia, the APEC Youth Network, and the Reciprocal Government of Canada Scholarship Program. Please see Table 1 on Growth of Philippine Academic Mobility Programs in higher education.
14