CHED is almost ready to implement what has been proposed years ago. The proposal of adding another year to BS Nursing and Education courses, as far as I know, has been proposed years ago. That's why I was no longer surprised with the news reports that these courses will be extended by another year in order "to make the students globally competitive."
In the presentation of the CHED Chair of the proposed Phil. Education Highway, he said that only the Philippines has a ten-year basic education. Other countries have 12. He said that adding another year intends to "improve the quality of education."
CHED is following the so-called 10+2+3 formula. Ten for basic educ., then two years of pre-university followed by a three-year university degree. Justifying this, the Chair said that the expenses for a five-year study after basic education has the same cost with the four-year curriculum. Well, I absolutely think it's not true. Sending a child to school is not just about paying tuition fees. There are many other expenses like dorm fee, transportation allowance, plus all the extra fees in school e.g. payment for membership fee in orgs, payment for tickets which the university requires students to buy, allowance for projects which can sometimes be expensive, etc.
Definitely, adding another year may be a good idea but where to add another (basic education or college?) year is another issue here.
*************************************
Actually, the idea of adding another academic year is all right. However, to add the extra year after basic education (technically, basic educ. is from Grade one to fourth year high school) is not logical. Besides, if the goal is to make the students globally competitive and if the aim is to ensure quality graduates, then the solution shouldn't be quantitative. Quality of education is the primary problem in tertiary education in this country. If so, then it is the "quality" that should be addressed, and not merely the "quantity."
The CHED should dwell on faculty development programs or in selective hiring of faculty in the tertiary level. That, for me, is the best solution to the deteriorating quality of education in HEIs. To spend another year with unskilled and untrained instructors is just like wasting more money, more time and more opportunities. Indeed, there's no substitute for quality teaching.
Also important for CHED to deal with is the annual increase in tuition fees. Year after year, students or parents are burdened with more pesos which they have to shell out if they want their children to earn a degree. Annual tuition fee increase is insane, esp. if the students don't get to maximize learning in school.
Personally, this tuition fee increase sends more of my students to call centers in order to help their parents support their studies. Our dropping rate is increasing because call centers are here to lure the students to earning money, instead of just listening to unskilled professors' lectures.
CHED should have studied WHY students can't afford college education so they could do something about it, instead of studying what other countries have in terms of numbers which we don't have. There's nothing wrong with "being unique" (bec. only the Phils. has a ten-year basic educ. system in the world) as what CHED sarcastically describes our country's educational system. In fact, if we improve our HEI standards, we'll be proud that we can produce competitive graduates in only 14 years. No country might have done that because their students need 15 years or more to be able to compete globally.
If we focus on extending another year in college, instead of strengthening faculty and uplifting the standards of HEIs, we'll just end up solving the wrong problem. I bet, one year cannot make our graduates better. But hey, it can bring in more money to private universities at the expense of hard-working parents.
In the presentation of the CHED Chair of the proposed Phil. Education Highway, he said that only the Philippines has a ten-year basic education. Other countries have 12. He said that adding another year intends to "improve the quality of education."
CHED is following the so-called 10+2+3 formula. Ten for basic educ., then two years of pre-university followed by a three-year university degree. Justifying this, the Chair said that the expenses for a five-year study after basic education has the same cost with the four-year curriculum. Well, I absolutely think it's not true. Sending a child to school is not just about paying tuition fees. There are many other expenses like dorm fee, transportation allowance, plus all the extra fees in school e.g. payment for membership fee in orgs, payment for tickets which the university requires students to buy, allowance for projects which can sometimes be expensive, etc.
Definitely, adding another year may be a good idea but where to add another (basic education or college?) year is another issue here.
*************************************
Actually, the idea of adding another academic year is all right. However, to add the extra year after basic education (technically, basic educ. is from Grade one to fourth year high school) is not logical. Besides, if the goal is to make the students globally competitive and if the aim is to ensure quality graduates, then the solution shouldn't be quantitative. Quality of education is the primary problem in tertiary education in this country. If so, then it is the "quality" that should be addressed, and not merely the "quantity."
The CHED should dwell on faculty development programs or in selective hiring of faculty in the tertiary level. That, for me, is the best solution to the deteriorating quality of education in HEIs. To spend another year with unskilled and untrained instructors is just like wasting more money, more time and more opportunities. Indeed, there's no substitute for quality teaching.
Also important for CHED to deal with is the annual increase in tuition fees. Year after year, students or parents are burdened with more pesos which they have to shell out if they want their children to earn a degree. Annual tuition fee increase is insane, esp. if the students don't get to maximize learning in school.
Personally, this tuition fee increase sends more of my students to call centers in order to help their parents support their studies. Our dropping rate is increasing because call centers are here to lure the students to earning money, instead of just listening to unskilled professors' lectures.
CHED should have studied WHY students can't afford college education so they could do something about it, instead of studying what other countries have in terms of numbers which we don't have. There's nothing wrong with "being unique" (bec. only the Phils. has a ten-year basic educ. system in the world) as what CHED sarcastically describes our country's educational system. In fact, if we improve our HEI standards, we'll be proud that we can produce competitive graduates in only 14 years. No country might have done that because their students need 15 years or more to be able to compete globally.
If we focus on extending another year in college, instead of strengthening faculty and uplifting the standards of HEIs, we'll just end up solving the wrong problem. I bet, one year cannot make our graduates better. But hey, it can bring in more money to private universities at the expense of hard-working parents.
Comments