8/8/2019 2-p-4-4

1/14

THE PHILIPPINE HIGHER EDUCATION SYSTEM:

CURRENT TRENDS AND DEVELOPMENTSBy: Commissioner Nona S. Ricafort,Ph.D.

Commission on Higher EducationPhilippines

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 AccreditationProgram (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

8/8/2019 2-p-4-4

2/14

of better quality of life for all Filipinos. Philippine higher education also endeavors toharness productive capacity of the countrys 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

8/8/2019 2-p-4-4

3/14

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 of1994, while basic education is with the Department of Education or DepED as stipulatedin the TechVoc with TESDA and Basic Education Act of 2001.

Classification of Philippine Higher Education Institutions

3

Colleges & Universities -as of December 31, 2007 (Main Campus)

Public[State Universities & Colleges (SUCs),

Local Colleges & University (LCUs) and Other

Government Schools]

196

Private 1,514

TOTAL 1,710

FIGURE 2

Higher education institutions in the Philippines numbered one thousand seven hundredand 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.

Public Universities and Colleges

State Universities and Colleges (SUCs) are funded by the national government and aregoverned 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 EducationModernization 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)

8/8/2019 2-p-4-4

4/14

PHEIs are owned and administered by private individuals, groups or organizations. Theyare 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 theminimum 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 tertiaryeducational 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) 2001-2004 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 inthe 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 theinternationalization 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 assurancethough monitoring and evaluation (IQuaME), strengthening proficiency in English of

college teachers (Project SPELL), evaluation of graduate education (Project EGEP).

4

8/8/2019 2-p-4-4

5/14

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 researchutilization 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 alternativemodalities 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 generatingprojects; 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 highlyindustrialized 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 hasdeveloped recently with the advent of joint degrees, twinning and distance education. The

Commission supports and enhances these initiatives but without sacrificing the value-

dimension involved in these.

5

8/8/2019 2-p-4-4

6/14

Higher education has always had an important international dimension, and all thesescientific 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 degreeprogram 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 Tech-Voc 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 yearsof Engineering Proper. In HRM, it is three years of Tech-Voc and one year to one-and-a-

half years of HRM Proper. Figure 2 presents illustration of ladderized scheme.

6

8/8/2019 2-p-4-4

7/14

FIGURE 3

The Ladderized Education is a mechanism that allows students and workers progressionbetween technical vocational educational and training (TVET) and higher education (HEI)

or college and vice-versa.

The Technical Education and Skills Development Authority (TESDA) and theCommission 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 ladderizedsystem allowing for easier transitions and progressions between TVET and HE.

The framework shall include as far as practicable but no limited to, the following unifiedqualification 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 borderlesseducation 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 exhibitedexcellent 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 activitiesof 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 educationalresources).

7

8/8/2019 2-p-4-4

8/14

Research and Development Extension, Outreach and Linkages

Institutional Qualifications

Discipline COE COD TOTAL

Science and Math Education 18 22 40

Business and Management Education 2 8 10

Teacher Education 14 5 19

Information Technology Education 31 9 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 provenexcellence 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 PHEIsby 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 toautonomous 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 thecountry.

The grant of autonomous and deregulated status to deserving private colleges anduniversities 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

8/8/2019 2-p-4-4

9/14

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. Themandate 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 theauthority 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 equivalentcredits and the appropriate certificate or degree awarded by the deputized higher

education institutions.

5. Voluntary Accreditation. To attain standards of quality over and above CHEDminimum 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 PhilippineAccrediting 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 4major 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 andNational Network of Quality Accrediting Agencies (NNQAA) for public HEIs.

Accreditation is a process for assessing and upgrading the educational quality of highereducation 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

8/8/2019 2-p-4-4

10/14

5.1Accreditation Levels [CHED Memorandum Order (CMO) # 1, Series 2005]

Candidate Status: for programs which have undergone a preliminary survey visit and arecertified by the federation/network as being capable of acquiring accredited status within

two years;

Level Iaccredited 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 metthe 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, mayapply for Level III status.

Level IV accredited status: accredited programs which are highly respected as very highquality 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 in-

Research 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

8/8/2019 2-p-4-4

11/14

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 toitself and its stakeholders that its teaching, learning and other services consistently reacha 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. Thereforequality 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 educationalobjectives. 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 theirengagements 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 thequality 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 becategorized 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 extensiveresearches and will normally be evaluated against all the indicators in the framework.

11

8/8/2019 2-p-4-4

12/14

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. Althoughfaculty 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 activitiesas 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 willnormally 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, forinclusion in the appropriate A category.

Category C. This category contains all other institutions.

7. Transnational Education - The Commission on Higher Education, through itsTechnical Panel for Transnational Education, formulated the new set of Policies,

12

8/8/2019 2-p-4-4

13/14

Standards and Guidelines (PSG) for the Transnational Education (TNE), which wasissued 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 theircourses/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.aDistance Education examples include, but are not limited to, the following:

1. Partners enter into an equal relationship and deliver programs via distanceeducation, with both institutions awarding the credit or degree.

2. 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).3. A Philippine HEI uses programs/courses owned or created by a FHEP under a

license agreement. Credit is granted by the local HEI.

7.1.b Face-to-face or Conventional Mode of Education Offered Transnationally

examples include, but are not limited to, the following:

1. Partners enter into an equal relationship and deliver programs face-to-face,

with both institutions awarding the credit or degree.2. Conventional programs are offered transnationally by a FHEP with a local

branch in the Philippines, or a Philippine HEI with a foreign branch.

3. Conventional programs are offered by a FHEP thru a franchiser or a localpartner. Credit is granted by the FHEP.

7.1.cBlended Learning examples include, but are not limited to, the following:

1. Partners enter into an equal relationship and deliver programs using blended

learning techniques, with both institutions awarding the credit or degree.

2. Conventional programs are offered transnationally by an FHEP with a localbranch in the Philippines (IIIB1), or a Philippine HEI with a foreign branch

(IIIB2), using a mix of face-to-face and distance education.

3. Conventional programs are offered by an FHEP thru a franchiser or a localpartner using a mix of face-to-face and distance education. Credit is granted

by the FHEP.

13

8/8/2019 2-p-4-4

14/14

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 countrys COEs and CODsparticipate actively in academic mobility programs. Majority of the students who

participate in exchange programs are in four courses: Science and Mathematics, Businessand 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 andTechnology, 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, theAPEC 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