450 likes | 588 Views
IFE Country Presentation September 15, 2010. PHILIPPINES. HEI Statistics. Private Higher Education Institutions: 1573 Public Higher Education Institutions: 607 State Universities & Colleges (SUC’s) 109 Main Campuses 389 Satellite Campuses Local Universities & Colleges (LUC’s): 93
E N D
IFE Country PresentationSeptember 15, 2010 PHILIPPINES
HEI Statistics • Private Higher Education Institutions: 1573 • Public Higher Education Institutions: 607 • State Universities & Colleges (SUC’s) • 109 Main Campuses • 389 Satellite Campuses • Local Universities & Colleges (LUC’s): 93 • Other Government Schools: 16
Enrollment • In 2008, HEI enrollment totaled 2,565,534 students. • Increasing trend has been recorded since 1998 with the lowest increase at about 10,000 and the highest at about 90,000 students. • Using these data, the 2010 HEI enrollment is projected between 2,585,000 – 2,745,000 students • Traditional distribution: • 34% - Public; 66% - Private
Regulatory System/Framework • Pre-School/Early Childhood Education • Local Government Unit/Department of Social Welfare & Development/Department of Education • Basic Education (Elementary & High School) • Department of Education: prescribed curricula with some differentiation among private schools arising from accreditation and/or special thrusts (e.g. science oriented, arts oriented, etc.)
Technical – Vocational: curriculum/training program design is approved by TESDA • Higher Education (College & Graduate Studies): regulated by the Commission on Higher Education through policies, standards and guidelines (PSG’s) that it issues by way of memorandum orders (CMO’s), usually given per discipline
“Program Hybridization Experiments”: • linking Technical – Vocational and College programs: ladderized programs • Ladderized master’s degree programs (faculty retooling)
Process of Offering Higher Education Programs • Government Permit Phase • HEI wishing to offer a new program must file an application in June prior to the school year when such a program is planned to start. • CHED sends a Regional Quality Assessment Team (RQAT) to the school to check compliance with (minimum) requirements • Full compliance results to the issuance of Permit to Operate the first two years (Level I-II)
School applies for permit renewal for succeeding school year(s) until the time when the first batch of students would be expected to graduate. Then it should apply instead for Government Recognition of the Program. • Every time, CHED sends an RQAT to monitor compliance with requirements. In some cases, technical panels are involved
Curriculum Structure • College Programs • General Education • Professional Education • This could have sub-strata. • Teacher Education: Area of Specialization (e.g. General Science) and Professional Education Subjects (foundation of education, teaching methodology, practicum, etc) • Business Administration: Business Core + Specialization • 1 lecture unit = at 17-18 contact hours • 1 laboratory unit = 50 hours
Graduate Programs • Foundation/Core Courses • Major Courses • Cognates Electives • Integrating Courses (Thesis/Practicum/Special Project, etc.) • Total units: • Master’s – 36 units (minimum) • Doctorate: about 60 units
Quality Assurance • The permit to government recognition process, while mandatory, is at best a minimum quality assurance mechanism. This is because compliance is only measured against minimum standards. • Program Accreditation • Voluntary • Private • Goes generally beyond the minimum standards
Accreditation • While accreditation is private and voluntary, the outcomes/results are given due recognition by CHED • Used to rationalize progressive deregulation, i.e., privileges are given to accredited programs • Exemption from Special Order requirements • Exemption from regular monitoring/evaluation • Privilege to offer new programs aligned with Level III accredited programs without prior approval (i.e., permit) • Factored in selecting Centers of Development/Excellence
Accreditation Outcomes are also used for deregulation at the institutional level. • Deregulated Schools • Autonomous Schools
Recent Development: Institutional Accreditation (2009) • Builds on program accreditation • Liberal Arts/Education/Commerce programs must be Level III Accredited • 75% of accreditation eligible programs must have at least Level I accredited status • Factors enrollment: at least 50% of population must be enrolled in accredited programs • Factors quality assurance mechanisms in place
Accreditation Agencies • Federation of Accrediting Agencies of the Philippines (FAAP) • Association of Christian Schools, Colleges and Universities Accrediting Agency Inc. (ACSCU – AAI) • Philippine Accrediting Association of Schools, Colleges and Universities (PAASCU) • Philippine Association of Colleges & Universities – Commission on Accreditation (PACU – COA)
National Network of Quality Accrediting Agencies • Accrediting Agency of Chartered Colleges & Universities of the Philippines (AACCUP) • Association of Local Colleges and Universities – Commission on Accreditation (ALCU-COA)
Accreditation Areas • Institutional/Program Goals & Objectives • Community Involvement • Faculty • Curriculum & Instruction • Laboratories • Library • Physical Plant/Facilities • Student Services • Administration
IQuAME • IQuAME – Institutional Quality Assurance Monitoring & Evaluation • Administered by CHED through a team of assessors • Areas and process are akin to those in accreditation, but the areas are clustered differently (for example, faculty profile would be under Resources). • Viewed by private schools as a duplication of voluntary accreditation.
Higher Education Issues • Quality Assurance Initiatives • Private & Voluntary Accreditation vis-à-vis IQuAME • Peers v/s Regulator • Because IQuAME is administered by the regulator (CHED), it could in fact be encouraging HEIs to “modulate” the process, thereby putting the outcomes into question. • Sustainability & Stability • Dilemma: conflicting recommendations
Role of professional organizations in the accreditation system • Comparability of standards and accreditation process across the agencies
Matching international benchmark • Total 14 years of formal education is short by 2 years • Disadvantage leading to problems: further studies abroad, recognition of degrees, employment related to degree, etc • Bologna accord • Washington accord
Where to add the two years? • 1 in elementary + 1 in high school • Cost will mostly be shouldered by government since basic education is mandatory • Already there is a shortage in classrooms and teachers • Transitional problem for private higher education since this would mean no viable enrollment intake for 1-2 years • 1 in basic education (either elementary or secondary) + 1 in college • Cost will be shouldered partly by government but families will have additional financial burden since higher education is mostly private • Less transitional problem for private higher education
Re-engineering the General Education Curriculum • At present, it is already viewed partly as addressing humanistic education and formation of good citizens and partly as filling the gaps in the basic education • With additional two years of formal school, the GEC will have to be reviewed and revised. Should it be common for all degree programs or should there be some differentiation?
There are implications: • Lesser units. Currently, the minimum is 63 units and HEIs, especially the private sectarian schools, have more (usually in Philosophy and Theology). • Opportunity to be effectively creative: address globalization concerns, among others • Retooling/retraining of faculty (those largely teaching GEC)
Re-engineering the professional courses to take advantage of enhanced student preparation • This in turn will have further faculty retraining implications • Scope and sequence of courses • Pedagogy • Student Evaluation
Implementation issues: • The changes will affect two interrelated portions of the education sector regulated by different agencies • Basic Education by Department of Education • Higher Education by the Commission on Higher Education
Faculty Development [slides from the power point presentation of Fr. Ben Nebres, Chairman of the Technical Working Group – Faculty Development Program] • However, in view of the expected developments, some details of the FDP will have to be reviewed, to provide for retooling.
Republic of the Philippines COMMISSION ON HIGHER EDUCATION Higher Education Development Program Faculty Development Program (HEDP-FDP) (2004-2010)
HEDP-FDPAccomplishment As of June 2010
HEDP-FDPAccomplishment As of June 2010
HEDP-FDPAccomplishment • Target: Not more than 30% should come from NCR.
Rationale • Previous studies like EDCOM, PCER, and lately the PTFE, underscore Faculty Development as a priority concern • Need to continue the efforts towards building the critical mass of faculty experts in higher education to train and equip students for significant and promising careers in the global market
Faculty Development from 2001-2009: (HEDP-FDP, PGMASEGS,CFDF, MAEP) No. of Grantees: 3,128 Total cost: Php1,164,222,000 STATUS
Status • Academic Year 2008-2009 Data
Presidential Task Force on Education (PTFE) Goals for post-secondary education: • Increase international competitiveness of Philippine education and industry by benchmarking towards international recognition of Philippine professionals and academic degrees and technical qualifications. • Improve the match and linkage between post-secondary education and training (technical and academic) and the needs of industry and entrepreneurship by building stable structures to link post-secondary institutions and industry and entrepreneurship
FDP II: Objectives • To upgrade the academic qualifications of higher education faculty to masters and doctorate degree levels; and • To enhance faculty performance through continuing professional education.
Targets (AY 2010-2016) Current Status on the percentage of Faculty with graduate degrees: 45%.
Strategies • Commitment of SHEIs to provide counterpart funding/scholarhips • Consortium Programs • Off-shore Programs
Modes of Delivery On-campus Distance Education
Modes of Delivery Consortium Program • allows a network or consortium of DHEIs to deliver a common program • allows faculty scholars to cross-enroll among consortium member HEIs • allows scholars to take courses that are considered expertise of the consortium school Off-shore program • learners are located outside or other than the institution that will award the degree • Selected faculty members may be brought in to the regions from outside.