The technical panel on general education

In April 2009, the Commission on Higher Education (CHED) formed the Technical Panel on General Education (TPGE). The TPGE was tasked to restudy CHED’s General Education Curriculum (GEC) in the light of what the Presidential Task Force for Education (PTFE) had recommended as the “Philippine Main Education Highway.” In particular, the TPGE was mandated to recommend two related but distinct programs: a Revised General Education Curriculum (RGEC) for all undergraduate students and a two-year post-secondary Pre-University program to prepare high school graduates to go to college.

By August 2009, the TPGE was ready with a draft of the general principles governing both the RGEC and the Pre-University. Knowing that the PTFE had already consulted just about everybody in education before it came out with its “Education Highway,” the TPGE decided to consult only the major stakeholders in tertiary education.

On Aug. 19, 2009, the TPGE met the heads of all the other Technical Panels of CHED. The Technical Panels agreed that the RGEC should be the same for all college students regardless of major. The Technical Panels also unanimously endorsed the idea that the RGEC should not take more than a year for a student to finish, rather than the almost two years it currently takes.

On Oct. 7, 2009, the TPGE met with the heads of all the Boards of Examiners of the Professional Regulation Commission (PRC). The Examiners promised that future board examinations would follow the new curriculums for various professional majors that were sure to be revised to conform to the RGEC and the Pre-University.

In that Oct. 7 meeting, representatives of 90 professional organizations were also present. The organizations suggested general competencies that they wished all students would acquire before they graduated from college.

On Dec. 9, 2009, the TPGE convened a group of experienced and nationally-known educators to work on the details of the curriculum. Patricia Licuanan, then president of Miriam College and not yet the Chair of CHED, was one of the invited experts, and she contributed substantially to the designs of the RGEC and the Pre-University.

The TPGE was scheduled to meet with presidents of Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) in three regional meetings (Manila, Cebu, and Davao) in early 2010 to finalize the RGEC and the Pre-University, but due to the presidential elections, everything was put on hold.

The Aquino administration changed the terms but not the spirit of the education reform started by the PTFE. It dropped the idea of a post-high school Pre-University and decided to add the two missing years in our education cycle to high school itself. Now named Senior High School (the name might still be changed after ongoing national consultations), the years between the current Fourth Year High School and the current First Year College still follow the general philosophy of the Pre-University, namely, that many subjects that are now taught in college should be taught before college.

In particular, the government is eyeing the current college subjects that the PTFE and the various consultations identified as being on the secondary level, such as Differential Calculus, Integral Calculus, Differential Equations, Physical Chemistry, Organic Chemistry, Inorganic Chemistry, English, Filipino, Rizal, Physical Education, and Philippine History. (Some of these subjects need to be transferred to DepEd from CHED by legislation.)

Before the Aquino administration, these were the general principles agreed upon by the stakeholders consulted by the TPGE:

First, while the educational system should have 12 years of pre-university education, not all students need to go through the Pre-University or, in today’s terms, through the entire K+12 cycle. Smart students can be accelerated and exempted from the extra two years. The TPGE included only four subjects in the Pre-University: English, Filipino, Mathematics, and Science. Students exhibiting excellent skills and knowledge in these four fields should be allowed and encouraged to go directly to First Year College.

Second, the RGEC should consist of subjects in the following areas of learning: Arts and Humanities, Mathematics and Natural Sciences, and Social Sciences. Unlike the current GEC, however, these should not be taken as isolated or discipline-specific subjects. RGEC subjects should all be taught in an interdisciplinary way, with students (and teachers!) able to situate the subjects within the larger context of general education.

Third, the RGEC should include Integrating Courses, which allow students to bring together the knowledge and skills they get from most of their college subjects, as well as to form their own personal philosophies of life.

Fourth, all subjects in the RGEC should be experiential, that is, based solidly on the personal experience of the students. That means, for example, that education should be culture-based. Everything should be related to the immediate environment of the student (“immediate” refers to the family, the community, and the country). While global or timeless concerns need, of course, to be addressed, the focus should always be on the experiential and practical.

Fifth, the principle of Academic Freedom, enshrined in the Constitution, should be strictly followed. This is probably the most radical reform that the TPGE proposed during the Arroyo administration. Instead of CHED being the regulatory agency that it is now, with CHED orders being regarded as set in stone as the Ten Commandments (and as frequently violated!), schools should be able to do without feeling guilty what the Constitution says they have the right to do, namely, to choose who to teach (admission requirements), what to teach (curriculums), and how to teach (instructional strategies). Fortunately for Philippine education, Chair Licuanan, in her very first address when she assumed office, stressed the developmental rather than the regulatory nature of CHED. (To be continued)

TEACHING TIP OF THE WEEK. From Brent Vasicek comes this timely tip to bring the world into your classroom: Ask your students to write a letter to a child (of their age) in Egypt, giving advice to the child about what to do in the midst of the violence.