Thursday, November 17, 2016

TYPOLOGY OF HIGHER EDUCATION INSTITUTIONS: AN ANALYSIS



TYPOLOGY OF HIGHER EDUCATION INSTITUTIONS


This system of classifying Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) in the Philippines will changed the context of Philippine Higher Education. As stated in CHED Memorandum Order No.46, s. 2012, HEIs will focus on their mandate and their differentiated functions in achieving the national goals. Also, these typologies provision a more rational monitoring and evaluation system for quality-assurance of each HEIs. There will be also grant of support and incentives for HEIs based on their mandate which have demonstrated excellent performance. The classifications of HEIs will also open up spaces for a more intensive intervention and development programs for priority areas; and rationalization of the number and distribution of different types of HEIs for the entire country, region, province, and etc. In the end, these will improve the relevance and efficiency of the system as a whole.
As part of the Quality Assurance and Philippines Higher Education Reform Agenda, these typologies will regulate the proliferation of SUCs and LUCs that are more easily converted into universities and violate CHED Omnibus CMO. There were SUCs and LUCs that were autonomous and deregulated regardless of institutional quality performance. With these classifications, HEIs can only be granted autonomy and deregulation only if they have met the criteria for vertical classification – commitment to excellence (70%), and institutional sustainability and enhancement (30%). But, if the HEI failed to meet the set criteria, then they will be classified as regulated.
Another Quality Assurance outcome of this system will result in preventing individual HEIs from creating and pursuing more relevant programs without appropriate QA outcomes that are responsive to local and/or regional conditions. This will lessen HEIs from opening and offering programs which are mismatched and oversubscribed between needed qualifications and the competencies of Filipino graduates. Other issues in higher education addressed by this are deteriorating quality in some higher education institutions, and weak research outcomes in universities. With typology-based QA outcomes, HEIs will clearly define their purpose in higher education to ensure that they are within the standards set as per CMO 46, s. 2012. The lack of focus on research and graduate education due to lack of linkages with knowledge hubs and multiple stakeholders in the Philippine technology innovation system in a few universities for technological innovation will also be addressed by the said system.
With typology of higher education as per issuance of CMO 46, s. 2012, the HEIs who believed in themselves to be what they are not can be diminish and can offer the quality-based outcomes and services in line to their missions.


THE HORIZONTAL TYPOLOGY

            The horizontal typology of Higher Education Institutions is based on the differentiated functions of the HEIs in line with the development of the national goals. The quality of HEIs in this typology is premised on the HEIs alignment and consistency of the learning environment with the HEIs Vision, Mission, and Goals. This classification is a very good system of differentiating HEIs with their stated mandate. In this horizontal typology, all HEIs are deemed classified as the same or equal and in turn will diminish the prevailing perception that a university-earned degree as screen for competencies is better than degree earned provided by other types of HEIs. For, there are HEIs which are not universities but are producing highly qualified professionals. Also, others would agree that there are professional institutes and colleges that are best and have demonstrated quality in their programs. Therefore, it is not an issue whether someone is a graduate of a university, a college, or an institute, but rather it is about the function of the HEI in the development of professionals in line with their mandates.  
As described in the CMO 46, s. 2012, and the horizontal type of HEIs have different roles to play in the national development of the Philippines.  The Professional institutions are focused on developing professionals who have technical knowledge and skills in the field that will contribute to nation building. The attainment of this mandate by a Professional institute is through having degree programs that will develop specialized skills, full-time faculty members, appropriate learning resources and support structures, build sustaining linkages with the community and have outreach programs to ensure the development of relevant academic and extension programs as well as the application of their learning outcomes.  In the Philippines, there are plenty of Professional Institutes providers of higher education. Many of these Institutes believed in themselves what they are that they are not. For example, they are the best, they are like this.., and the question is who said that they are the best?  One way or another, the establishment of this kind of classification will eventually control the proliferation of commercialized higher education institutions in the country. Someone who is planning to put up higher education provider institution should firmly adhere to the standards set by the Commission on Higher Education to ensure quality of graduates.
The Colleges which contribute to nation building by developing educational experiences and adults with technical knowledge and skills is also focused on becoming responsive to the needs of the communities they serve. In particular, Colleges should participate in development activities and community extension programs that would contextualize the knowledge of their students. In the attainment of the mandate, the Colleges should have a degree programs characterized by a core curriculum, full-time faculty members, specific and appropriate learning resources and support structures, linkages with the communities, and outreach programs that will further develop students’ knowledge and skills contextualizing their knowledge within actual social and human experiences. This classification will turn Colleges to be performing their mandate not only in academic productivity but community responsiveness as well. HEIs typed as College will have to contribute to the development of the community they are serving as part of the development of their students’ knowledge and as one of the minimum requirements for Colleges.  Also, this classification will minimize duplication of functions and programs offered by HEIs. Knowing the Vision, Mission, and Goals of the HEIs, the Commission on Higher Education will likely identify functional HEIs to the needs of their communities and excellent programs offered as well as oversubscribed programs. Hopefully, by 2017 as the year for review of all Colleges and HEIs, there will be a clear findings and list of HEIs and how responsive they are to the development of the needs of the country. What will happen to the unresponsive HEIs? Will there be sanctions for disobeying HEIs? It would be good if there will be closure of low-performing HEIs and those HEIs who cannot sustain learning resources, no linkages with private sectors and industries, and are just existing for business.
Universities contribute to nation building by developing trained experts in the various technical and disciplinal areas by emphasizing the development new knowledge through research and development. In order to attain its mandate, universities should have comprehensive range of degree programs in all levels, full-time faculty members with at least 30% that are involved in research, comprehensive learning resources and support structures, linkages with international research institutions to ensure that research activities of the universities are in the current global standards, and outreach programs that will allow the students, faculty, and staff to apply the new generated knowledge to address specific problems. This classification in some ways put a well-defined function of a university product-an expert in the field he or she has chosen. Also, an HEI given the name “university” should have to prove with its contemporaries meeting the requirements and standards set by the Commission on Higher Education, otherwise, this HEI shall apply for a classification fitting for its performance and quality outcomes. The classification will ensure that HEI classified as “university” has demonstrated and has met the requirements for universities with the evidences of their data and documents submitted as per application. The typology of higher education institutions as part of the Higher Education Reform Agenda in the Philippines is one of the best way to address the deteriorating quality of HEIs. To be typed as University by CHED is an achievement of that HEI. From this classification of HEI, people will know which is which. Of the many existing HEIs in the country bearing “university” in their name, by 2017, probably CHED will have the names of those HEIs who successfully meet the requirements for the said classification. CHED should be determined in pursuing this so as to address the country’s deteriorating quality of higher education. Recognized and typed the HEI as “university” only if they deserved and have demonstrated and meet certain standards as evidenced by their kind of outcomes and data. People will benefit from this and in the end the country will be known in the field of education. For HEIs like those which will be typed as universities will be true to their mandates and have linkages with other research hubs in the various parts the world. These HEIs will have to maintain their classification so as their requirements and will eventually produce quality outcomes maintain a high quality standard of higher education. That will only be possible, only if the ideal requirements for an HEI are manifested by the institution. Now, what about those who cannot? Will there be punishment or disciplinary measures for those who will not follow the CMO 46, s. 2012? 
This horizontal typology is again one of the best ways to address some of the issues in Higher Education mentioned earlier. Recognizing the differentiated functions of the HEIs and their mandate in the development of national goals, this classification will ensure quality assurance in Philippine Higher Education more specifically if this is implemented, monitored and evaluated periodically. This will make the Philippines get back on track to its education goals and Philippine Higher Education way up on its neighboring countries.

THE VERTICAL TYPLOGY

            The vertical classification is based on HEIs demonstrated quality of the learning services and outcomes, and the development of culture.  All these are related to the HEIs level of program excellence and institutional quality.
            This classification will make and sustain the best higher education institutions in the country. For example, an HEI to be granted with a rank higher than from their current position shall have excellent programs and institutional sustainability. In this case, to be typed as deregulated or autonomous as per evaluation, an HEI should have demonstrated commitment to excellence and institutional sustainability enhancement. It would be a little bit tough for those HEIs who crisis on the purpose of their institution and are just there for business. But for HEIs whose purpose of their establishments are clear, then it would be a challenge for them to continue demonstrating excellence and quality in their institutions.  HEIs have to prove their quality through their outcomes and data to be granted with the kind of classification in this vertical typology. For example, to be autonomous, then, demonstrate criteria for autonomous or to be typed as deregulated, then, demonstrate criteria for deregulated HEIs. So, if by evaluation the HEI has met the criteria then they will be typed as such classification, but if not, then the HEI will be under the regulated status.
            CHED has to be ready by 2017. Many if not most of the Higher Education providers will fall under regulated status. Knowing the kind of flourishing HEIs in the country, CHED has to be prepared and firmed for this typology-based standard. For, the Commission’s goals in the issuance of CMO 46, s. 2012 will only be achieved only if these are strictly implemented.
            In addition, people will benefit from this vertical classification. This will give the society and the country in the end the best HEIs as per evaluation by CHED. The interest of the many will be protected and ensured by this typology. For, an HEI cannot just claim and believed that they are autonomous or deregulated. There will be questions that can be asked like, who have granted them their status? How did they attain that classification? Did they meet the Commission on Higher Education’s criteria and standards? Again, it will be toughed and an exciting challenge to all HEIs in proving their worth in this type of typology.
            To be given the horizontal type, HEIs shall apply and meet the minimum requirements for each classification. While excellence of programs and institutional sustainability have to be met in order to be granted such type in the vertical typology. Hopefully, CHED will not only review the submitted documents and evidences by the HEI but, will also visit and evaluate the institutions’ facilities, learning resources, and support structures. This is to ensure that HEIs horizontal types are strictly compliant with the requirements for quality assurance (QA). Similarly, the grant of vertical classifications shall be strictly observed in all HEIs regardless of if they are chartered institutions. Thus, being classified as autonomous or deregulated HEIs which are often associated with incentives, privileges, and other benefits will be ensured and be endowed only for qualified and deserving higher education institutions. With this, typology-based quality assurance scheme for HEIs, CHED will eventually uplift the quality of higher education in the country in few years to come of its implementation.

            
Submitted by:
Mr. Dennis Mark A. Dela Cruz

Submitted to:
Dr. Catherine Q. Castañeda

No comments:

Post a Comment