Name  : Mochamad Yusuf Rasyidi Agung Sidayu

Course : Educ305. “ The legal basis of Philippine Education”

Answer : Comprehensive assignment for the all available modules of the subject

Professor : Dr. Lolita D Rodrigues Ph.D



Part: 2


By :MYR Agung Sidayu





The  purpose of a  part 2 of this  assignment  is to continue exploring my understanding about the Modern Philippine Educational Systems, presented to Professor Lolita D Rodrigues  in partial fullfillment of the requiremens for completing  educ305 “ The legal basis of Philippine education”, which the final proctoral examinantion has been undertaken on  12 July 2004.


This assignment would not have been possible without the support of the professor who prodived the detail explanation about the Philippine education through the available modules which was uploaded in the Mindanao State University online website, and it was the source of the inspiration and incentive to begin undertanding the modern educational Systems in the Republic of Philippines.


This assignment is divided into three parts, which are ;


  • Part one; Introduction about Education, explaining about the definition of education, the important and the objectives of education in general, and of course the kinds of education-page 4 – 21, has been submitted in the first assignment
  • Part two;  Education in the Republic of Philippines, explaining the historical perspective of the Philippines education, the Philosophy of Philippines, page 22 – 66, already submitted and will be continued in this  attachment[1]
  • Part three; The legal basis of Philippines education and The Organization of Philippine education and its all aspects.will be completed in the third part of assignment.s


Unlike all assignments about Ma’had Al-Zaytun and its educational activities. The contents of this assignment are adopted from some of the available information about Philippines education, which are covered the whole tasks and questions submitted by the Professor through the avialble modules of EDUC305 “ THE LEGAL BASIS OF PHILIPPINES EDUCATION”.


The contents of this assignment are as follow :

9.2.      The Philosophy of Philippine Education, the Historical Perspective

9.2.1. Marcos Ideology[2]

9.2.2. Executive order and Constitutional Provision for education under Marcos Presidential

  • Executive order No.202, 1969
  • 1973 Constitutional Provisions for Education
  • Batas Pambansa blg 232

9.2.3. Under the Corazon Aquino’s presidential era

  • The situation before Marcos down
  • Marcos Inheritance
  • The Corazon Aquino’s problems
  • Educational Provision of 1987 Constitution
  • Educational objectives in the medium-term plan

9.2.4. Under President Ramos Administration

  • The story about Fidel V Ramos
  • The emerging Educational Philosophy


  • The new philosophy of education under the Ramos administration
  • The underlying educational Philosophy
    1. Philosophy of basic education
    2. Philosophy of Technical and Vocational Education
    3. Philosophy of Higher Education
  • Affordable Quality
  • Accessibility
  • Academic freedom
  • Advancement of learning and research
  • Development of responsible leadership
  • Enrichment of the Filipino Historical and Cultural Heritage


9.2.5. Under President Joseph E Estrada administration    The story about Joseph E Estrada

–      Early life

–      Vice Presidency

–      Presidency

–      Post-Presidency    Education for all    Executive Order No.46    PCER emerges with nine doable reform proposals

  • Establishment of the National Coordinating Council for Education (NCCE)
    • Re-orienting the Premises for Financing Higher Education
    • Establishment of a One-Year Pre-Baccalaureate System
    • Faculty Development at the Tertiary Level
    • Strengthening Teacher Competencies at the Basic Education Level
      • Expanding the Options for Medium of Instruction in Grade I through the Use of the Regional Lingua Franca or the Vernacular
      • Continued Implementation of the Bilingual Education Policy (BEP)
      • English will continue to be taught as a separate subject in all grades
      • Establishing Common Standard for Accreditation per Discipline    Education philosophy under Incumbent President Gloria M Arroyo, will be completed on the third assignment as soon as possible


I am sure that my outstanding knowledge about the Philippines Education systems is more than enough and, but I hope that this assignment and the undertaken final examination satisfy  Professor and the incomple status of the subject can be changed and replaced with the final grade. However I aware that the final decision is ultimatey depend on the final Professor’s consideration.


Jakarta : 3 September 2004


MYR Agung Sidayu

9.2.      Education Philosophy in the New Society of Philippines

9.2.1. President Ferdinand E. Marcos Ideology

The modern Philippines began from the late Ferdinand E. Marcos[3] presidential 1966 – 1986, at the time He and the Philippine top leaders crafted an ideology for Filipinos, although he did not claim timelessness nor permanence for the ideology; He meant to submit it for scrutiny and further refinement by Scholars and academicians, professionals, political leaders, legislators, educators, and by the people themselves through various interactions with circumstances and events. Its was influenced The Philosophy of Philippine education at the time.

The ideology was espoused by Ferdinand E. Marcos was covered the following essential elements[4] :

  1. A Commitment to a set of Fundamental Values
  2. A Theory of Society
  3. A Concept of alternative future; and
  4. A Program of action

Despite the main purpose of the above ideology was to be a protection of Filipinos from Communist ideology which was increased in the whole Philippines at that time, but the above essential elements became the foundation of modern Philippine’s ideology which was influenced Filipinos until present time, although the setting socio-cultural has been changed following the changing world. In accordance with his ideology Marcos stated :

“ What I have done, therefore is to initiate the ideological discussion. From here on, I invite our academicians and scholars, intellectuals and writers, political and business leaders, and the leaders of workers and the peasantry, our youth, especially, to begin a self-conscious examination of our values, our beliefs, our ways of life, in effect, the totality of our nationhood. An ideology is built on experience and reflection; it is, in fact, a summation of collective knowledge.

It is a process of discovery and recognition. It is finally the wellspring of our actions. In this respect, every man has a philosophy, whether conscious or unconscious, and every people has an ideology, whether articulated or not. Modern national existence requires us to be conscious of and articulate about our ideology. To be without an articulated ideology is to move half- asleep in a complex and crisis-ridden world- in sum to perish.

I have proposed here the guidelines –  the elements of an ideology –  This is but the first step. Our people must now flesh out the structure — Let us begin “

Like his Indonesian counterpart Haji Muhamad Soeharto[5] who lead Indonesia for 32 years with his Garis Besar Haluan Negara, President Marcos  laid – down the Philosophical underpinnings of the new society of Philippines and of course an educational philosophy, at least in his two decades un interrupted power. And it is very difficult to eliminate this ideology after more than 18 years with four Presidential era from Qurazon Aquiono to the present President Gloria M Arroyo. Frankly speaking , the golden age of both Indonesian and Philippines was under the leadership of President Soeharto and President Ferdinand E Marcos.

Marcos considered Values as representing Man’s aspirations for himself, his society and the world in general. He posited that opposing ideologies converge toward the same set of values, namely, freedom, liberty, equality, democracy, and so forth. Such convergence in the ethical realm suggest, according to him, that human societies are held together by common aspirations. Marcos asserted that the essence of the Filipinos social values was originally communal with a strong concern for others as shown in the Filipino’s sense of PAKIKIPAGKAPWA TAO[6].  Success is shares; one’s success is his family’s success and his community’s pride, On the other hand, one’s shame is borne by his entire kin.

9.2.2. Executive order and Constitutional Provision for education under Marcos Presidential


  • Executive order No.202, 1969

In 1969 President Marcos issued an executive order, which was well known as Executive Order No.202, with the main purpose to create The Presidential Commission to study Philippine Education or PCSPE, which at that time headed by the then Minister of Education Onofre D Corpus. The first result of this order was the issuance of the Presidential decree 6-a which embodied into the Law the PCSPE – identified goals and objectives of Philippine Education as follows :

  1. To achieve and maintain and accelerating rate of economic development and social progress.
  2. To assure the maximum participation of all the people in the attainment and enjoyment of the benefits of such growth, and
  3. To strengthen national consciousness and promote desirable cultural values in a changing worlds.

According to the above mentioned goals and objectives , the educational system aims to :

  • Provide for a broad general education that will assist each individual, in the peculiar ecology of his own society to :
  1. Attain his potential as human being
  2. Enhance the range and quality of individual and group participation in the basic function of society, and
  3. Acquire the essential educational foundation for his development into a productive and versatile citizen
  4. To trains the nation’s manpower in the middle level skills required for national development
  5. Develop the high level professions that will provide leadership for the nation, advance knowledge edge through research, and apply new knowledge for improving the quality of human life; and
  6. Respond effectively to changing needs and conditions of the nation through a system of educational planning and evaluation[7]
  • 1973 Constitutional Provisions for Education

The most important development in the Country under Marcos power was the framing and ratification of the 1973  Constitution that installed a parliamentary style of Government. Marcos considered that the 1935  Constitution  as a vestige of colonialism and was no longer to relevant to the society he started to build. This constitution proclaimed (Proclamation 1102) by President Marcos on 17 January 1973, after two days referendum of citizen’s assemblies.

Before the above proclamation, on September 21, 1972, Marcos issued Proclamation 1081, declaring martial law over the entire country[8]. Under the president’s command, the military arrested opposition figures. Weapons were confiscated, and “private armies” connected with prominent politicians and other figures were broken up. Newspapers were shut down, and the mass media were brought under tight control. With the stroke of a pen, Marcos closed the Philippine Congress and assumed its legislative responsibilities. During the 1972-81 martial law period, Marcos, invested with dictatorial powers, issued hundreds of presidential decrees, many of which were never published.

The President was elected from the Members of the National Assembly (the legislative) to a six-year term and could be re-elected to an unlimited number of terms. In addition, upon election, the President ceased to be a member of the National Assembly. During term, the President was not allowed to be a member of a political party or hold any other office. The President was chief executive and head of state.
The Prime Minister was also elected from the Members of the National Assembly for a term of six years. The Prime Minister was the head of government and Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces. The 1973 Constitution was amended in 1976. These amendments indicate that the office of President and Prime Minister could be held by a single individual and that the President would be elected by the nation rather than from within the National Assembly by the National Assembly. The National Assembly was the legislative. Officials were also elected to a six year term.[9]

  • The educational provisions of the 1973 Constitution are as follows :


  • Section 8.
  1. All educational institutions shall be under the supervision of and subject to regulation by the State. The State shall establish and maintain a complete, adequate, and integrated system of education relevant to goals of national development.
  2. All institutions of higher learning shall enjoy academic freedom.
  3. The study of the Constitution shall be part of the curricula in all schools.
  4. All educational institutions shall aim to inculcate love of country, teach the duties of citizenship, and develop moral character, personal discipline, and scientific, technological, and vocational efficiency.
  5. The State shall maintain a system of free public elementary education and, in areas where finances permit, establish and maintain a system of free public education at least up to the secondary level.
  6. The State shall provide citizenship and vocational training to adult citizens and out-of-school youth, and create and maintain scholarships for poor and deserving students.
  7. Educational institutions, other than those established by religious orders, mission boards, and charitable organizations, shall be owned solely by citizens of the Philippines, or corporations or associations sixty per centum of the capital of which is owned by such citizens. The control and administration of educational institutions shall be vested in citizens of the Philippines. No education institution shall be established exclusively for aliens, and no group of aliens shall comprise more than one-third of the enrollment of any school. The provisions of this subsection shall not apply to schools established for foreign diplomatic personnel and their dependents and, unless otherwise provided by law, for other foreign temporary resident.
  8. At the option expressed in writing by the parents or guardians, and without cost to them and the government, religion shall be taught to their children or wards in public elementary and high schools as may be provided by law.
  • Batas Pambansa blg 232

The foregoing became the basis for drawing up the landmark educational legislation, Batas Pambansa blg 232 chp.2, Declaration of Basic State Policy and Objectives, which was better know as the Educational act of 1982, the law covered both formal and non formal education at all levels, and will be discussed later in this assignment. The law carried over the national goals and educational objectives stated earlier in the PCSPE and P.D. 6-a, with an elaboration as follows :

Section 3. Declaration of Basic Policy

 It is the policy of the State to established and maintain a complete, adequate and integrated system of education relevant to the goals of national development. Toward this end, the government shall ensure, within the context of a free and democratic system, maximum contribution of the educational system to the attainment of the following national developmental goals:

1. To achieve and maintain an accelerating rate of economic development and social progress;

2. To ensure the maximum participation of all the people in the attainment and enjoyment of the benefits of such growth; and

3. To achieve and strengthen national unity and consciousness and preserve, develop and promote desirable cultural, moral and spiritual values in a changing world.

The State shall promote the right of every individual to relevant quality education, regardless of sex, age, creed, socio-economic status, physical and mental conditions, racial or ethnic origin, political or other affiliation. The State shall therefore promote and maintain equality of access to education as well as the enjoyment of the benefits of education by all its citizens.

The state shall promote the right of the nation’s cultural communities in the exercise of their right to develop themselves within the context of their cultures, customs, traditions, interest and belief, and recognizes education as an instrument for their maximum participation in national development and in ensuring their involvement in achieving national unity.[10]

As a further elaboration of the educational objectives, section 4 of educational Act of 1982 states :

Section 4. Declaration of Objectives – The educational system aim to:

1. Provide for a broad general education that will assist each individuals in the peculiar ecology of his own society, to

(a) attain his potentials as a human being;

(b) enhance the range and quality of individual and group participation in the basic functions of society; and

(c) acquire the essential educational foundation of his development into a productive and versatile citizen;

2. Train the nation’s manpower in the middle-level skills for national development;

3. Develop the profession that will provide leadership for the nation in the advancement of knowledge for improving the quality of human life; and

4. Respond effectively to changing needs and conditions of the nation through a system of educational planning and evaluation.

Towards the realization of these objectives, and pursuant to the Constitution, all educational institutions shall aim to inculcate love of country, teach the duties of citizenship, and develop moral character, personal discipline, and scientific, technological, and vocational efficiency.

Furthermore, the educational system shall reach out to educationally deprived communities, in order to give meaningful reality to their membership in the national society, to enrich their civic participation in the community and national life, and to unify all Filipinos into a free and just nation.

The philosophy of Philippine education under the Marcos presidential era is as follows[11] :

  • Individual as a useful member of society
  • Education for all
  • Emphasis on research
  • Responsiveness to changing needs and conditions
  • Non formal education
  • Optional religious instruction
  • State supervision and control of schools

9.2.3. Under the Corazon Aquino’s presidential era[12]

·         The situation before Marcos down

The snap election were held on January 7, 1986, after the votes were counted, it was declared that Marcos won. He took his new oath of office, and proceeded to govern as President with a new mandate from the people.

Corazon C Aquino, widow of Slain Benigno Aquino did not take her “ defeat” lying down. She filed a protest against what she considered as a rigged election, particularly in the tallying of election returns. Huge protest rallies were mounted; Cory became a  rallying figure even as she called for civil disobedience. The crucial moment  came when the Secretary of National Defense, Juan Ponce Enrile, and the Assistant Chief of Staff and Chief of the Constabulary Gen. Videl V Ramos, decided to bolt from the Marcos Government. Upon hearing this, hordes of demonstrators shifted to EDSA[13] in front of the Department of National Defense Headquarters in Camp Crame into what general Ramos called as the “ people Power Revolotion” on February 22-25, 1986. Members of Churches and several non governmental Organization came out en masse in support of Enrile and Ramos. Jaime Cardinal Sin rallied all Catholics to be at EDSA[14].

Finally Cory. Who had sought temporary refuge from the massive turbulence in a convent in the Visayas, was declared by Ramos and Enrile as their choice of new President to succeed Marcos. Before long, Cory took her oath of office to become a new President, she immediately set up a revolutionary government. A revolutionary constitution was speedily written, and of course the entire government machinery was declared up for a thorough reorganization.

  • Marcos Inheritance

Marcos inflicted immeasurable damage on democratic values, for examples :

  • He offered the Filipino people economic progress and national dignity, but the results were dictatorship, poverty, militarized politics and a politicized military, and greatly increased dependence on foreign governments and banks.
  • His New Society was supposed to eliminate corruption, but when Marcos fled the country in 1986, his suitcases contained, according to a United States customs agent, jewels, luxury items, and twenty-four gold bricks. Estimates of Marcos’s wealth ran from a low of US$3 billion to a high of US$30 billion, and even after his death in 1989, no one knew the true value of his estate, perhaps not even his widow.

President Marcos’s worst nightmare came true when Corazon Aquino used the power of popular opinion to bring him down him and his  Dictatorship. Aquino then inherited a very distorted economy. The Philippines owed about US$28 billion to foreign creditors. Borrowed money had not promoted development, and most of it had been wasted on showcase projects along Manila Bay, or had disappeared into the pockets and offshore accounts of the Marcos and Romualdez families and their friends and partners. Many Filipinos believed that they would be morally justified in renouncing the foreign debt on grounds that the banks should have known what the Marcoses were doing with the money.

Even Cardinal Jaime Sin declared it “morally wrong” to pay foreign creditors when Filipino children were hungry. Aquino, however, resolutely pledged to pay the debt. Otherwise, the nation would be cut off from the credit it needed. Although the Philippines could pay the interest on the debt every year, it could not pay the principal. This never-ending debt naturally inflamed Filipino nationalism. A Freedom From Debt Coalition advocated using the money to help the unemployed instead of sending the hard currency abroad.

·         The Corazon Aquino’s problems

President Corazon C. Aquino had public support but no political organization, whereas the old-line politico Salvador H. “Doy” Laurel had an organization but little popular support. After difficult negotiations, Laurel agreed to run for vice president on a ticket with Aquino.  Aquino won on February 7, 1986, but the margin of victory will never be known, for the election was marred by gross fraud, intimidation, ballot box stuffing, and falsified tabulation.

The Aquino Government was a coalition between the old political elites during Marcos power, Enrile, who was then minister of defense, and Fidel V. Ramos, the acting Armed Forces of the Philippines chief of staff. Both men had served Marcos loyally for many years. Enrile and Ramos conceived of the new government as a coalition in which they would have important roles to play.

The coalition, however, began unraveling almost immediately. Enrile thought that Aquino should declare her government “revolutionary,” because that would mean that the 1986 elections were illegitimate and that new presidential elections would be held soon. When Aquino made it clear that she intended to serve out her entire six-year term, Enrile and Laurel set out to undermine her. Ramos took a cautiously ambivalent position but ultimately supported Aquino. Without his loyalty, Aquino would not have survived the many coup attempts she successfully put down.

Enrile was out of the government, but Laurel remained in, despite his vocal, public criticism of Aquino. She relieved him of his duties as minister of foreign affairs on September 16, 1987, but could not remove him from the vice presidency. A month later, Laurel publicly declared his willingness to lead the country if a coup succeeded in ousting Aquino. The next year, he told the press that the presidency “requires a higher level of competence” than that shown by Aquino.

The disintegration of the original Aquino-Laurel-Enrile coalition was only part of a bigger problem: The entire cabinet, government, and, some would say, even the entire nation, were permeated with factionalism. Aquino also had difficulty dealing with the military. The first serious dispute between Aquino and the military concerned the wisdom of a cease-fire with the New People’s Army. Aquino held high hopes that the communists could be coaxed down from the hills and reconciled to democratic participation if their legitimate grievances were addressed. She believed that Marcos had driven many people to support the New People’s Army.

  • Educational Provision of 1987 Constitution

A new minister of Education appointed by President Aquino, Dr. Lourdes R Quisumbing[15] was the Minister at that time who did not waste time to re organize the education ministry.

Mean while, a new constitution was drafted by a 50 member constitutional assembly headed by Cecilia-Palma, former Chief Justice of the supreme court, the constitution was ratified on February 2, 1987 to become a new constitution of Philippine, and its provisions foe education are as follows :

Section 1.

The State shall protect and promote the right of all citizens to quality education at all levels and shall take appropriate steps to make such education accessible to all.

Sec. 2. The State shall:

(1) Establish, maintain, and support a complete, adequate, and integrated system of education relevant to the needs of the people and society;

(2) Establish and maintain a system of free public education in the elementary and high school levels. Without limiting the natural right of parents to rear their children, elementary education is compulsory for all children of school age;

(3) Establish and maintain a system of scholarship grants, student loan programs, subsidies, and other incentives which shall be available to deserving students in both public and private schools, especially to the underprivileged;

(4) Encourage non-formal, informal, and indigenous learning systems, as well as self-learning, independent, and out-of-school study programs particularly those that respect to community needs; and

(5) Provide adult citizens, the disabled, and out-of-school youth with training in civics, vocational efficiency, and other skills.

  • Educational objectives in the medium-term plan

The National Economic and Development Authority Medium-Term Development Plan, 1987-92 reflected Aquino’s campaign themes:

  1. elimination of structures of privilege and monopolization of the economy;
  2. decentralization of power and decision making; and reduction of unemployment and mass poverty, particularly in rural areas. The private sector was described as both the “initiator” and “prime mover” of the country’s development; hence, the government was “to encourage and support private initiative,” and state participation in the economy was to be minimized and decentralized.
  3. Goals included alleviation of poverty, generation of more productive employment, promotion of equity and social justice, and attainment of sustainable economic growth.

Goals were to be achieved through agrarian reforms; strengthening the collective bargaining process; undertaking rural, labor-intensive infrastructure projects; providing social services; and expanding education and skill training. Nevertheless, as with previous plans, the goals and objectives were to be realized, trickle-down fashion, as the consequence of achieving a sustainable economic growth, albeit a growth more focused on the agricultural .

The new educational objectives in the education and manpower development sector are :

  • To improve the quality and increase the relevance of education and training.
  • To increase access to disadvantages groups in all educational areas
  • To accelerate the development of middle and high level manpower required by economic recovery and sustainable growth as well as enhance their employ-ability, productivity and self reliance
  • To inculcate values needed in social transformation and renewal
  • To preserve, enrich and propagate the nation’s desirable cultural heritage and legacy
  • To raise the level of awareness, interest and participation in sports and cultural activities, and;
  • To maintain an educational system that truly Filipino in orientation, open to constructive ideas from everywhere, but alert to influences inimical to national dignity.

9.2.4. Under President Ramos Administration

  • The story about Fidel V Ramos

No one could be happier than former President Fidel Ramos in 1996, the crowning jewel of his six-year administration. The economy was growing by six percent, a sharp turnaround from the previous year which has been hit by a rice shortage. In September of that year, the government and the Moro National Liberation Front (MNLF)[16] inked a peace pact, which was to end the 24-year Muslim rebellion in the south. In November, the country hosted what was described as the most successful Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit, participated in by 21 countries.
Then came the Asian economic crisis in 1997. But President Ramos’ strong economic fundamentals made sure the Philippines would be least affected by the slump. True enough, the Philippine economy still grew by over two percent in that year, while other ASEAN countries suffered recessions. Ramos wanted the country to become a newly industrialized economy by the year 2000, but his term was good only until 1998. He could only watch his successor, President Joseph Estrada, take his own economic path.

Ramos assumed the presidency from the dark, figuratively. He was the chosen successor of former President Corazon Aquino, whose term was plagued by 7 coup attempts by the right-wing faction of the military, and a crippling energy crisis. In 1992, the energy problem was so critical, most houses spent dark nights. But light was restored when Ramos became the country’s first Protestant president. He initiated numerous multi-billion energy projects that would answer the need for electricity of even the biggest businesses in Subic, Laguna, Cavite, and Bataan.

He traveled extensively abroad, to entice foreign investors. In the provinces, he was an active speaker in both government and private projects. His term saw the rise of huge infrastructure projects such as the anti-lahar mega-dike in Pampanga, the roads leading to Subic, bridges, flyovers, energy plants, government buildings, and the MRT railway.

His constant hectic schedule drew complaints from members of the Malacañang Press Corps who could not cope up with him. His focus on poverty eradication led to the demolition of the Smokey Mountain garbage site, which was replaced with resettlement buildings. So important was he to the economy that his reported heart attack caused jitters among stock traders in the early part of 1997.

Of course, Ramos also drew flak for many of his controversial measures. In his peace accord with the MNLF, he was accused of giving Mindanao to the Muslims, of graft and corruption in his infrastructure projects, and of selling the country to foreigners in his investment programs. But he denied all of these, and disclosed vital information to the press.

The end of his term saw mounting opposition to such proposals as his national ID system. An attempt to tinker with the Constitution brought fears that he would stay in power even after his term ended in 1998. Instead, Ramos chose to step down and give way to President Estrada, who, after only two years, would be the first Philippine president to be impeached.

Fidel Ramos was born in Lingayen, Pangasinan on March 18, 1928 to former Foreign Affairs Secretary Narciso Ramos and Angela Valdez. He graduated valedictorian from elementary school, and attended the UP High School, before enrolling in the Philippine Military Academy (PMA) where he earned a scholarship to the US Military Academy in West Point. While in the US, he also obtained a Masters Degree in Civil Engineering in University of Illinois[17].
In 1952, he joined the Philippine Army and became part of the Philippine Expeditionary Force in 1952 during the Korean War. In the 1960s, he was Chief of Staff of the Philippine Civil Action Group in Vietnam. From there, he quickly rose from the ranks to head the Philippine Constabulary, and later on, the Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces.

In 1986, together with then Defense Secretary Juan Ponce Enrile[18], Ramos sparked the People Power Revolution that toppled the Marcos dictatorship. He then helped former President Corazon Aquino overcome the seven coup attempts led by now Senator Gregorio Honasan. In 1992, Aquino anointed her as her candidate for the presidential elections.

  • The emerging Educational Philosophy


Under the form of President Fidel V. Ramos, 1992-1998, a flurry of educational reforms, at the initiative of the Philippine Congress, is being rushed to completion. On August 25, 1994, President Ramos signed into law a number of bills purportedly designed to improve the quality of Philippine education. In his speech for the occasion, he had this to say:

Today, we break new ground, and aim for higher goals in the Filipino’s continuing search for means by which to win the future. We stand at the frontier of major and far-reaching improvements in education. We leave behind the darkness of ignorance and backwardness causes by the lack of quality education. Ahead beckons a horizon of hope and opportunity for a greater number of our people.[19]

He went on to say that while growth in material terms is necessary and gainful, such material growth cannot be achieved without a corresponding effort to increase the people’s intellectual capacity and moral strength. He emphasized that this is the task of education which, is the right of every citizen to receive, and the responsibility of government to provide.

He recalled the bills he signed into law earlier since February 1994, namely:

  1. The science and technology scholarship law which will finance annually the education of 3,500 poor, talented and deserving students to be part of a pool of the country’s man-power in S and T which he perceived as the “main battleground of the future”.
  2. The law on dual-tech training which institutionalizes an innovation in technical-vocational training through a combination of in-school and in-plant training;
  3. The law that abolishes the National College Entrance Examination (NCEE);
  4. The TESDA law which establishes the Technical Education and Skills Development Authority; and
  5. The law establishing the Commission on Higher Education (CHED).

The four new laws which the President signed on August 25 were (1) the law creating the legal education board; (2) the law establishing centers of excellence in teacher education; (3) the law lengthening the school calendar to 220 days a year; and (4) the law amending Section 25 of the Education Act of 1982 to allow non-stock educational corporations to change their status to stock corporations and to exempt family-administered pre-school institutions from the requirements to incorporate.

In the legislative pipeline, as of this writing, is Senate Bill No.1391 creating the Department of Basic Education to administer elementary and high school education considered as basic education.

Three of these pieces of legislations, the CHED law, the TESDA law and the Basic Education bill, will have split the Department of Education, Culture and Sports (DECS) into three bodies each having different “parent” offices. The Commission on Higher Education will be attached to the Office of the President. The TESDA will be an authority similar to the NEDA responsible to a governing board with 13 members of which five are members of the President’s Cabinet. The proposed Department of Basic Education to be headed by a Secretary will be what remains of the former DECS; two of its structural arms will have been removed—the Bureau of Higher Education and the Bureau of Technical and Vocational Education which have been absorbed by the CHED and the TESDA, respectively

  • The new philosophy of education under the Ramos administration

The new philosophy of education under the Ramos administration is as follows:

The closing year of the century find us beset by seemingly intractable problems of poverty and inequity. Social and economic development has not kept pace with the wants and hopes of a young and impatient people. At the same time, all around us in our region of the world, countries are growing rapidly, propelled largely by the energy of private enterprise. The Philippines lags behind most of them.

But the problems conceal some real achievements and opportunities that, it sustained, could lead a society into an era of stability and prosperity. Among these are an open democratic system that is diffusing economic and political power to the countryside, a growing private sector that is becoming more sensitive to the need for faster social development even as it strives for greater efficiency and a population that has a passion for education. The aim in EDCOM is to make education a tool for attaining the goals of social justice, unity, freedom and prosperity.

It is believed that educational should produce a Filipino who respects human rights, whose personal discipline is guided by spiritual ad moral values, who can think critically and creatively, who can exercise responsible his rights and duties as a citizen, whose mind is informed by science and reason, and whose mind is in formed by knowledge of Philippine history and cultural heritage.

Refocus education  that it may attain the following :

  1. Universal basic education which will make ever citizen functionally literate and numerate.
  2. Formation of those skills and knowledge necessary to make the individual a productive member of society.
  3. Development of high level professional who will search after new knowledge, instruct the young and provide leadership in the various fields or disciplines required by a dynamic economy.

To achieve these goals, it is  need to redefine the objectives, makes Philippine educational institutions and muster the will to support education to the fullest extent possible.[20]

The EDCOM report reiterates that “basic education is the right of every citizen,” that the constitution requires the higher budgetary priority to education, and that quality education be made available to every citizen.[21]

  • The underlying educational Philosophy
  1. Philosophy of basic education

In the explanatory note to the basic educational bill, basic education would consist of the 10 year elementary and secondary education with an option to have 11 years upon the addition of grades 7 in 1998 to be determined by an ad hoc legislative – executive body to be vested for the purpose.

Basic education is seen as a means to:

    • Distribute national resources equitably.
    • It is the thinking of Congress that providing basic education for the great majority of people living in the rural communities

–      will enhance rural development.

–      Household will be more productive

–      People will acquire skills they need to become more self reliant

–      They will have a better access to information

–      They will develop personal discipline and inter-personal skills

–      They will be better able to appreciate their environment and exploit resources available to them.

–      They will be better able to participate in the various activities in a democratic society.

However basic education cannot be designed to produce prepared graduates who can succeed in the mainstream of competitive production in this globalization era. It can provide only the fundamental skills needed for further education in College or elsewhere. Therefore the Technical and Vocational education should be considered.

  1. Philosophy of technical-Vocational Education

The Philosophy of Technical and Vocational Education stated on SEC. 2. Declaration of Policy, Republic Act No. 7796, 1994, as follows :

–      I t is hereby declared the policy of the State to provide relevant, accessible, high quality and efficient technical education and skills development in support of the development of high quality Filipino middle-level manpower responsive to and in accordance with Philippine development goals and priorities.

–      The State shall encourage active participation of various concerned sectors, particularly private
enterprises, being direct participants in and immediate beneficiaries of a trained and skilled workforce, in providing technical education and skills development opportunities.

Whereas the objectives of the Technical and Vocational Education states on the SEC. 3. Statement of Goals and Objectives. - It is the goal and objective of this Act to:

  • Promote and strengthen the quality of technical education and skills development programs to attain international competitiveness;
  • Focus technical education and skills development on meeting the changing demands for quality middle-level manpower;
  • Encourage critical and creative thinking by disseminating the scientific and technical knowledge  base of middle-level manpower development programs;
  • Recognize and encourage the complementary roles of public and private institutions in technical education and skills development and training systems; and
  • ·          Inculcate desirable values through the development of moral character with emphasis on work ethic, self-discipline, self-reliance and nationalism.[22]

The  old term “ Technical – Vocational Education” has been given a new name, which was “ technical Education and Skills development” both term have the same meaning. The fundamental philosophy that threads through the policy statement and the stated objectives of TESD pertains to rationalizing the programs of technical, Vocational and technological Schools in line with the man power need of Industry. These programs are at the post high school, or tertiary level but non degree granting, the duration range from 6 months to 3 years, and must be Internationally competitive.

  1. Philosophy of Higher Education

The declaration of Policy of Republic Act No. 7722, 1999, Article 3. Declaration of Policy –  requires The State shall protect, foster and promote the right of all citizens to affordable quality education at all levels and shall take appropriate steps to ensure that education shall be accessible to all.

It also specifies :

  1. That The State shall likewise ensure and protect academic freedom and
  2. shall promote its exercise and observance for
  • the continuing learning and research,
  • the development of responsible and effective leadership,
  • the education of high-level and middle-level professionals, and
  • the enrichment of our historical and cultural heritage.

It also mandates , State–supported institutions of higher learning shall gear their programs to national, regional or local development plans. Finally, all institutions of higher learning shall exemplify through their physical and natural surrounding the dignity and beauty of, as well as their pride in the intellectual and scholarly life[23].

  • Affordable Quality

The Concept of affordable quality in all level of education as a right of every Filipino citizen is a reiteration of earlier statements. Affordability at the Tertiary level is a mandate which, if earnestly pursued, will require increasing state subsidies for the programs of higher education institutions. Quality higher education is costly, and most parents cannot afford the increasingly high cost of increasingly better quality higher education, unless the economy affords them much higher income than what they now earn. In other words, there are two requirements that would make quality higher education affordable to all Filipinos, namely :

    1. Substantial Government subsidy, to include the private schools which enroll the bigger number of college level students
    2. A Prosperous economy the benefits of which are equitably shared among all.
  • Accessibility

Affordable quality higher education, may not necessarily be accessible to all, only those who are deemed qualified and who meet admission requirements in the various degree programs may have right of access to higher education. Moreover, it would not be wise to perpetuate the free market in higher education, including anyone can enter any course program in the name of academic freedom.

  • Academic Freedom


The mandated assurance and protection of academic freedom has become a classic tenet of Filipino educational philosophy. Academic freedom was meant only for state supported institution of higher learning in the 1935 Constitution. Now, it applies to private colleges and University as well. The responsibility of ensuring and protecting academic freedom now devolves upon the commission of higher education (CHED).

  • Advancement of Learning and research


This is one of the traditional functions of higher education, part of the classic trilogy of instruction, research and extension. This function, however, has been relatively low-key and even neglected in the past, also at present. Part of the reason is lack of funds for research projects and for the publication of the results. So, while the frontiers of learning has been pushed aggressively in the more advanced countries, the Philippines was the convenient dumping ground for  books is low-priority in higher education. It has been so much easier to import western books, a habit which started with American colonization when the public schools all over the united states. For one thing, there were no Pilipino writers of English textbooks until the Osias readers appeared. Camilo oasis was among the first Filipino pensionados sent to study in the united states. Moreover, there were no local publishing houses at the time.

–      Development of responsible leadership.

This goes hand-in-hand with the education of high-level and middle-level professionals. It is from the country’s pool of professionals that leaders emerge. Responsible leadership, however, is a function of higher education and society itself. It has been well said that society gets the leadership it deserver. A corrupt society gets corrupt leaders because it rubs off its corruption on even the most idealistic leaders unless they have the courage and determination to resist the temptation to be corrupted.

The development of responsible leadership is, therefore a tremendous challenge for the new commission on higher education to bring to closer reality. It will require nothing less than for them who are involved in it to be exemplars of responsible leadership.

What is responsible leadership? The law does not give it a definition. In fact, of the three laws that restructure the educational system into three systems, the higher education law is the only one without a definition of terms. Nevertheless, it is worthwhile to have a basis for understanding in the meaning of responsible leadership, especially in a society where the concept of responsibility is dominated and dwarfed by self-interest abetted by political and family patronage.

–      Enrichment of the Filipino historical and cultural heritage.

This is the last mandate of the higher education law. What is to be enriched? What exactly is the Filipino’s historical heritage? What is his cultural heritage?

In the first place, Philippine historical accounts are full inaccuracies and distortions. The use of “Filipino” has itself been questioned by discerning critics who say that the term is in honor of king Philippe II of Spain, and is not appropriate for a people who abetted such oppression or gave it royal permissiveness. These critics also think that the people who antedated the colonizers and were deprived inclusion within the term, Filipino, but were called indio, instead, cannot be party to the Spanish decision to honor one of their kings.

There are many things unique about the Filipino culture, his way of speaking, of relating with other peoples, and of going about what he has to do, whether in the home, in church, in mosque, in school, in the workplace on in the playing field, the Filipino is distinguishable. He has developed cultural traits and institutions which have become parts of his traditions, rituals and lifestyle. He sings even when he sad. He defers to the pursuing his goals in life. He can be taken for his word of honor. His ability to adjust, even to adversity, is the object of praise even from those who have employed Filipino workers abroad. In the field of arts, he has natural aptitude for appreciating and depicting, beauty, dance, good music and artistry in visual or verbal form.

Thus, Higher education, as much as the other level of education, has the twin responsibility of (1) preserving and strengthening the best of the amalgamated Philippine culture and (2) reforming those that have become derisive and inimical to Filipino honor and dignity.

9.2.5. Education under Estrada Administration   The Story about Joseph Estrada


Joseph Estrada, original name Joseph Marcelo Ejercito, and widely known as Erap (born April 19, 1937) is a popular film actor in the Philippines and was the 13th President of the Republic of the Philippines from June 30, 1998 to January 20, 2001.

–      Early life

Born in Manila, he dropped out of college to pursue acting, which so displeased his family that he was forced to adopt the surname Estrada. As an actor he acquired the nickname Erap (from the reversed spelling of pare, Filipino slang for ‘pal’). He often played heroes of the downtrodden classes, which gained him the admiration of a lot of the nation’s many impoverished citizens and thus later proved advantageous to his political career. He was the mayor of San Juan municipality in Metro Manila between 1969 and 1986.

After Corazon Aquino assumed the presidency, following the ouster of Ferdinand Marcos in the EDSA Revolution of 1986, President Aquino removed all officials of the local government and replaced them with her appointed officers-in-charge. Estrada was then removed from his position as mayor. He ran and won a seat in the Senate the following year.

–      Vice-Presidency

In the 1992 presidential election Estrada initially intended to run for President but later decided to be the running mate of Eduardo Cojuangco of the Nationalist People’s Coalition. Estrada won the vice-presidency although Cojuangco was defeated by Fidel Ramos of the LAKAS party. Shortly after the inauguration of Ramos, he appointed Estrada to head the Presidential Anti-Crime Commission (PACC) even though Estrada was from the political opposition.

–      Presidency

In the 1998 presidential election, Estrada ran and soundly won as President over his closest rival, Jose De Venecia. Estrada’s running mate, Edgardo Angara, was defeated by Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo. During the campaign, Estrada’s political rivals tried but failed to discredit him while publicizing his womanizing, drinking and gambling.

Estrada was inaugurated on June 30, 1998. However, his presidency was soon dogged by charges of plunder and corruption, and he was rumored to spend long hours drinking with shady characters. In October 2000, an acknowledged gambling racketeer, Luis Singson, governor of Ilocos Sur, alleged that he had personally given Estrada the sum of 400 million pesos as payoff from illegal gambling profits. Singson’s allegation caused an uproar all over the nation, which culminated in Estrada’s impeachment by the House of Representatives in November of 2000.

He was the first Philippine President be impeached. The articles of impeachment were then transmitted to the Senate and an impeachment court was formed, with the Chief Justice, Hilario Davide, Jr., as presiding officer.

During the trial, the prosecution (composed of congressmen and private prosecutors) presented witnesses and evidence to the impeachment court regarding Estrada’s involvement in illegal gambling and his maintenance of secret bank accounts. However, the president’s brilliant legal team (composed of a former chief justice, former congressman, former solicitor-general and other lawyers) was quick to deny these allegations and did its best to destroy the claims of the witnesses during cross-examination.

On January 16, 2001, the impeachment court, whose majority were political allies of Estrada, voted not to open an envelope that was said to contain incriminating evidence against the president. The prosecution panel walked out of the impeachment court in protest of this vote. That night, anti-Estrada protesters gathered on the historical EDSA highway. A political turmoil ensued and the clamor for Estrada’s resignation became stronger than ever.

On January 19, 2001, the Armed Forces of the Philippines, seeing the political upheaval throughout the country, decided to withdraw its support from the president and transfer its allegiance to the vice-president. Without military support, and with mass resignations from his cabinet, Estrada’s government quickly fell.

On January 20, 2001, the Supreme Court declared the presidency vacant and the Chief Justice swore in the constitutional successor, Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, as the 14th President of the Republic. Estrada and his family were quickly evacuated from the presidential palace. The overthrow of Estrada has been popularly known as EDSA II.

–      Post-presidency

Estrada returned to his old home in San Juan where he constantly maintained that he never resigned and therefore implying that Arroyo’s government was illegitimate, despite the fact that the international community recognized Arroyo’s succession and that all government offices, the military and the national police acknowledged Arroyo as the new president.
The new government charged him with plunder and had him arrested in April. Estrada’s supporters among the poor marched straight to the presidential palace and demanded Estrada’s release and reinstatement as president. Violence erupted and the government declared a state of rebellion. Many of Estrada’s supporters, even the politicians who were accused of provoking the anti-government protests, were arrested. The government called out the military and was able to quash the rebellion.

Estrada is currently detained in a military facility outside of Manila and is still facing the charges of plunder and corruption. Under Filipino law, plunder has a maximum penalty of death or life imprisonment so Estrada is fighting hard to be acquitted of those charges.

He supported his best friend, fellow actor Fernando Poe, Jr., in the presidential election of 2004 against incumbent Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, in which Poe lost. Estrada’s trial is far from over as numerous witnesses and evidence have been presented by the prosecution and a fierce repudiation is expected from Estrada’s lawyers. The verdict may not come out for many years.   Education for All

Although many Filipino experts stated that under the Estrada administration, the country is back on its sickbed, and of course Philippine need leaders outside the administration to bring it back to its robust state, but in my own opinion the grand scenario of Philippine development plan, including educational agenda has been planned and tried to be implemented during his short time Presidency. It is unfair to judge his administration without considered what he has done and will do for Philippine, just because of his impeachment.

Joseph E Estrada was the only Philippine president who  approached the issue of education with more pragmatism than any of his predecessors. In his inaugural address, President Joseph Ejercito Estrada boldly pronounced: “Hindi kayang bigyan ng edukasyon ang lahat ng kabataang Pilipino, tulad ng itinatadhana ng Saligang Batas.” (We cannot provide education for all Filipino youth, as promised by the Constitution.)

The apparent pessimism of that statement, however, is belied by a commitment President Estrada made in the same speech: “Sa abot ng aking makakaya, bibigyan natin ang masa ng disenteng tahanan.…Pag-aaralin natin ang kanilang mga anak.” (To the best of my ability, we will give the masses decent homes.…We will put their children through school.)[24]

Although the focus was Agricultural development, but the whole aspects of Education was the high priority of the National development of President Estrada administration, which is the only machine to succeed his anti poverty and high productive man power programs.

The Estrada administration reiterates and supports the orientation of lifelong “ Education for all “, including education for the disabled and disadvantage sectors of society. they have consistently pursued the implementation of the plan of action for “ Education for all “ in close with Government and non Government organizations. There was an action plan which strongly supports the implementation of Science education programs under “ Education for all “, which most of the educational action plan during Estrada administration was reasonably adopted from the former President Fidel V Ramos.

In order to maximize and succeed the main objective of his administration, education and training was included in his medium term development;

  • Targeting development programs toward certain areas or groups that suffer from persistent poverty. The focus of such programs should be on investments that expand the opportunities of the individuals to pull themselves out of poverty. Such interventions may include compensating poor households of the direct and indirect costs of educating their children, providing basic health services, creating links to markets as outlets for farm productions, reducing travel time to off-farm jobs and schools, and designing effective micro-credit schemes;
  • Easing skills differentials. Very often inequality is largely driven by overall skills differentials among the poor and the non-poor. Educational reforms that aim to help people climb the skill ladder and enhance their lifetime earnings potential should be included in the proposed action plan. The goal should be to achieve broader and more equal access to secondary schooling. This may require scholarships for poorer students. It will also require focused efforts to ensure that a highly skilled, particularly in science and technology, labor force is available to support a globally integrated economy; and
  • Instituting programs to help households manage insecurity. Unemployment, disability, and old age are all-important causes of poverty in industrial and developing countries alike, and of deeper poverty for the poor. The mechanisms of coping with insecurity involve some combination of private savings, informal support systems, and employer obligations. The action plan will need to include such mechanisms.

Robert E Penauin[25] wrote that Estrada even went a step further when he appealed to Congress to “find a way to convert pork into tuition subsidies in both public and private schools.” Whether Congress will heed his appeal is uncertain. Its members are currently entitled to a Countryside Development Fund, Congressional Initiative Allocations, and Public Works Allocations, an aggregate amount of 30.5 billion pesos more popularly known as pork barrel. President Estrada has repeatedly announced his intention of abolishing the congressional pork barrel-earning the ire of a sizeable section of Congress.

Still, President Estrada’s statement reveals his unmistakable commitment to an education system worthy of the hopes of millions who voted for probably the most popular president since Magsaysay. Whether that commitment holds can only be assessed at the end of Estrada’s term. For the moment, the discourse on the issue, given the new president’s realistic perspective, will have to proceed beyond the rhetoric of “education for all”-or EFA, in the language of the academic world.

Unfortunately he finally impeached because of the political unfair competition, and of course he cannot implemented what he and his cabinet members would like to do for better Philippine, especially in education for all program action. The most important thing to be remembered was his innovative idea for national education “Debt for Education “ which has been proposed by the Secretary of Education to the UNESCO.   Executive order No.46

President Estrada issued an Executive Order No.46 , establishing The Presidential Commission on Educational Reform (PCER), with the main purpose to fulfill its mandate which is mainly that of defining a budget-feasible program of reform and identify executive priority policy recommendations and items for a legislative agenda on education.

PCER, a body strengthened by the coordinative efforts of its members and their representatives to each Working Committee, has run effectively despite modest wherewithal.  Not only the coordination is noteworthy; PCER is composed of some of the best, the brightest and the most respected personalities in various sectors of Philippine society.  PCER regular and Working committee meetings are always to be looked forward to. In order to understand more about the above executive order and its main objective, I try  to put  the full text of the order as follow;



WHEREAS, in the early 1990’s the Congressional commission on Education (EDCOM) submitted its findings to the Philippine Congress on the education system and made several policy recommendations. Most of those policy recommendations have been translated into educational laws but other important recommendations remain to be acted upon;

WHEREAS, it has been more than five years since the EDCOM’s report and recommendation, and many important changes have taken place since then in education, culture and science;
WHEREAS, a country’s investment in human capital is crucial to its economic and social development;
WHEREAS, under the 10-point action plan of the Estrada Presidency, it is mandated to create a Presidential Commission on Educational reform (PCER), to define a budget-feasible program of reform, and identify executive priority policy recommendations and items for a legislative agenda on education.
WHEREAS, the PCER is a multi-sectoral body comprised of representatives from government line agencies, public and private schools at all levels, teachers, private industry, NGOs, and other concerned sectors;
NOW, THEREFORE, I, JOSEPH EJERCITO ESTRADA, President of the Philippines, by virtue of the powers vested in me by law, do hereby order:

SECTION 1. Presidential Commission on Educational Reform (PCER)
There is hereby established the Presidential Commission on Educational Reform (PCER), under the Office of the President, which shall be a multi-sectoral body comprised of representatives from government line agencies, the University of the Philippines, the Open University – University of the Philippines; public and private schools at all levels; teachers; the agriculture and industry sectors; the information technology sector; state colleges and universities; and other concerned sectors.

SEC.2. Structure

  1. The Commission will be chaired by a person with outstanding record in education and of proven integrity appointed by the President for the duration of the life of the Commission. Members of the Commission will include the Secretary of Education, Culture and Sports; the Chairman of the Commission on Higher Education; the Director-General of the Technical Education Skills Development Authority; the Director-General of the National Economic Development Authority; a representative of the Philippine Chamber of Commerce and Industry and a representative from private agriculture; representatives each from the Department of Interior and Local Government; Department of Science and Technology, The University of the Philippines, Department of Finance, the state colleges and universities; superintendents; public and private school teachers; private and public school associations.
    The Education Committee Chairmen of the Upper and Lower Houses will be invited to attend meetings ex-officio either personally or through their representatives.
  2. There will be a Secretariat, headed by a full time Executive Director for the purpose, housed within DECS, and staffed by individuals seconded by DECS, CHED and TESDA.
  3. There will be a working committee to assist the Executive Director in the design and conduct of the education sector analysis composed of a senior representative of concerned Departments, agencies and private sector constituencies.

SEC.  3.   Coverage

The Commission shall be given one year to define a comprehensive  and a budget-feasible program of reform in the following areas:

  • Curricula, teaching methods, instructional media, education technologies, textbooks, language policy and school calendar in use at the elementary and secondary levels, using international benchmarks.
  • Modernization of science laboratories, improvement of science and mathematics education and the feasibility of establishing regional centers of excellence in science education.
  • Upgrading of computer classrooms, computing facilities and internet access in all schools that meet eligibility standards for administering such programs
  • Expansion, modernization and standardization of our vocational and technical institutions, especially polytechnic colleges and universities.
  • Distance learning and continuing education programs, especially for adults and out-of-school youth, with a view towards possible eventual accreditation.
  • Tuition financing schemes intended to bring the effective purchasing power of students in line with the real costs of tertiary education.
  • Programs, resources and facilities of state universities and colleges, other than UP, with the intention of rationalizing their academic offering and aligning them with employer requirements in their respective areas.
  • Governance, organization, programs, resources, and facilities of the University of the Philippines, with a view towards developing its flagships campus in Diliman into one of the top ten universities in Asia in time for the UP Centennial in 2008.
  • Other priority areas of concern in education that arise from the research and consultations conducted by the Commission.

SEC. 4.  Process.

The report and the recommendation for both executive policy and legislative action will be drawn from an analysis by the Commission of the Philippine educational system, based on research of existing studies and other secondary sources of data, on extensive consultations with different sectors, and on interviews with key persons in the system.
SEC.  5.   Time Frame


The Commission will start its work upon the signing of this Executive Order, and submit its final report and recommendations to the Office of the President of the Philippines one-year thereafter. The Commission will automatically be dissolved upon the submission of its report.
SEC.  6.   Operating Requirements

The Department of Education, Culture and Sports (DECS) shall provide the sum of P4M annually to be sourced from its existing budget for the operating requirements of Presidential Commission on Educational Reform (PCER) including the payment of compensation of its Chairman/Members in the form of honoraria or per diem on a monthly basis as follows:
One (1) Chairman at P10, 000.00
Eighteen (18) Members at P3, 000.00 each
One (1) Executive Director
(on secondment basis) at  P20, 000.00

SEC. 7. Effectivity

This Executive Order shall take effect immediately.
DONE in the City of Manila this 7th day of December in the year of Our Lord, Nineteen Hundred and Ninety-Eight,[26]   PCER emerges with nine doable reform proposals

After 13 grueling months of extensive review of past education studies and plans, specifically the EDCOM, the Medium Term Philippine Development Plan (MTPDP 1999-2004), Philippines Education Sector Study (1998) and `Education for All’ Assessments (EFA 2000), among others; marathon meetings and workshops; and consultations with key persons in the system, the Presidential Commission on Educational Reform (PCER) has identified nine (9) recommendations, seen as ripe for reform.   The reform proposals were formulated based on the clustered priority areas of concern as specified tin Executive Order 46 dated 07 December 1998, later on conflated into six (6), as follows:  financing; governance; information technology, science, math and other technologies; medium of instruction; quality assurance; and teacher development and welfare.

In no particular order of priority or chronology of presentation, following are the nine (9) reform proposals which are deemed as doable, implementable and budget-feasible:

  • Establishment of the National Coordinating Council for Education (NCCE)

The trifocalization of the education sector into DECS, CHED, and TESDA in 1992 has allowed the departments concerned to focus more sharply on their respective mandates.  Over time, however, a growing need has been felt  for greater coordination among departments.  A proposal is to create the National Coordinating Council of Education (NCCE).  The time is ripe for such a body to be formed in order to resolve trans-subsectoral concerns e.g. as an assessment mechanism and articulation between levels, and a more harmonized approach to total education planning and resource allocation. Lately, the three bodies mentioned have been meeting informally to address concerns that have surfaced, e.g., “possibilities of overlapping, duplicating, disjointed plans and policies, priorities and concerns, as the case may be.”   A draft of the relevant Executive Order has been made.

Rationalization, within a Moratorium Period, of the Creation and Conversion, of State Universities and Colleges

A memorandum from the President of the Republic of the Philippines acknowledging PCER’s recommendation to enforce the moratorium as above was issued on October 7, 1999.  That memorandum addressed to the CHED Chairman states that the current administration `will not in any way support the creation of new SUCs and the conversion/ upgrading of existing state colleges into universities.”  A moratorium on the establishment of new branches/extensions of existing SUCs will likewise be supported.  Within the Moratorium period the following will be implemented:

  • Work with legislature to enforce and maintain the moratorium initiated by President Estrada on the creation and conversion of new state colleges or universities and satellite campuses.  This moratorium will be in force until such time as a rationalization plan and guidelines for creation and conversion of state colleges can be endorsed to Congress and officially enacted into law by them.
  • Activate and strengthen the task force created by CHED to study the rationalization of higher education programs to make the system more coherent.  Representatives from both Houses of Congress (Senate and House Committees on Education), NEDA, DBM and SUCs, among others, should constitute this task force.  The review should be completed and ready for presentation to Congress within two years of the acceptance of this recommendation.
  • The task force will have to consider the following activities in the formulation of the plan.
  1. Delineation of the functions of PHEIs towards the complementation of programs and course offerings with their private counterparts, among others;
  2. Review earlier studies, guidelines, and efforts at rationalization by DECS, the National Board of Education, and by CHED;
  3. Conduct of a baseline study of PHEIs;
  4.  Development of an MIS in CHED that will serve as basis for the formulation of policies;
  5. Review of enabling instruments and charters of PHEIs to address all     technical inconsistencies and serve as basis for proposed legislation;
  6. Development of a model for the rationalization of PHEIs that accounts for best practices in other countries;
  7. Formulation of a strategic action and investment plan for the restructuring of PHEIs; and
  8. Review of the PHEI system of governance and the re-engineering of the CHED into an authority for strategic development; of empowering CHED further.
  9.  Supervision and monitoring of the proposed reorientation of the premises for financing higher education, as contained in the proposal following this one.
  10. Introduce the proposed scheme for reorienting the premises for financing higher education as contained in the following proposal, including a fixed budget for personnel services and operating expenses from DBM,  increasing the budget for student assistance from DBM, and schemes for increasing revenue, including the raising of tuition fees.  Monitor, adjust and amend the scheme, learning from the experience of its implementation.
  11. Finalize a rationalization plan for public higher education.  Establish within it the guidelines for the creation, conversion, expansion, privatization, merging, or phasing out of State Universities and Colleges.
  12. Submit plan and guidelines to the President and to Congress for appropriate executive and legislative action.
  13. Upon approval of Congress of the necessary legislation, end the moratorium and apply the guidelines on existing requests for creation or conversion.  Apply also the guidelines for merging, phasing out, and privatization to streamline and rationalize the existing network of SUCs.

If feasible, the concept and the process of rationalization of institutions might also be applied to the vocational/technical education sector.

  • Re-orienting the Premises for Financing Higher Education

The use of the large allocations of the government budget for public higher education is perceived to be inefficient and equitable.  Budgets are allocated to state colleges and universities on the basis of incremental expenditures, without much regard for the basic rationale by which these institutions were established.  Clearly the rationalization must be based on a system of financing these institutions which reflect fulfillment of student demand, equity of access, and program considerations, as well as greater accountability and efficiency. Following reform measures and implementation strategies are being recommended for adoption by the government to restructure the financing mechanism for existing state colleges and universities:

A.    Establish a 3-line budget support system (Personal Services, MOOE and Student Assistance) for SUCs.

  1. The national government will maintain and establish, on the basis of current expenditures, the same support subsidy for PS and MOOE to each SUC for a period of five years, say within 2001-2006.
    1. During this period, the PS line will increase only as required by standard salary and cost of living increases as decided by the national government.  No additional plantilla positions will be created.  However, revenue generated by the SUC from any other source can be used to hire contractual non-plantilla positions as scales determined by them, and may also use their additional revenue for salary supplements and other incentive schemes for plantilla position holders.
    2. During this period, the MOOE budget line will go down in direct proportion to the PS budget slowly going up because of salary increases.  The remainder of the MOOE budget required to continue or expand operation will have to come from revenue generated from other sources.
    3. All capital and development budget requirements will have to be raised entirely from revenues generated outside of the DBM SUC support mechanism.
  1. In addition to the fixed support subsidy over the next five years, the DBM will establish a third budget line for Student Assistance.
    1. In the first year, an additional amount equivalent to 10% of the combined PS and MOOE budget will be allocated to the Student Assistance Budget line.  This will be used entirely to enable students via scholarship, voucher, loan or other schemes to absorb significantly higher tuition fees (at least for those entering in the first year) to be concurrently established.
    2. In the second year, the Student Assistance Budget line will be doubled, enabling gradual introduction of an even higher tuition structure to be put into place with expanded scholarships.  Gradually the scholarship/voucher/ assistance schemes will be based more and more on need or parents’ income, so that equity of access is assured for those capable of pursuing higher degrees.
    3. In the third, fourth, and fifth years, the Student Assistance  Budget will continue to be proportionately increased, as tuition fees begin to approximate costs, students continue to have access through generous student assistance, and the institution increases its tuition revenue to cover more and more salary supplements, MOOE requirements, and capital outlays.

B. Institutionalize in each SUC a Scheme of Cost Recovery and Maximum  Utilization of Assets to augment their operating and capital outlay budgets.


  1. Increase tuition and other school fees to a more realistic level.  This will be supported by a corresponding adequate amount of student assistance available, either to all students equally, or eventually to students depending upon family income, using the same principles as the UP socialized tuition fee scheme for example, where students coming from financially-capable families shall pay the  larger share of the  cost or tuition structure.
  2. Prepare and implement business or development plans relative to the use of idle lands and properties; where feasible, this can be done in partnership with the private sector.  Alternatively contracts can be entered into with individuals or institutions competent in business. This scheme will enable the presidents of SUCs to focus on their basic function, which is to educate and not to do business.
  3. Explore other means of generating revenue, either agriculturally or industrially, or enterpreneurially, in line with existing resources and capabilities of the institution.
  4. Systematize fund raising activities (both on an ongoing basis and via special events) and the seeking of donor support, locally, nationally, and internationally, from the corporate sector, alumni, institutions and individuals.  Funds raised can be for general support, or specific projects or departments, or particular capital outlay priorities.
  5. Seek funding from the LGU-IRA to help SUCs finance the studies of students in their respective locality, provided local government support is not secured as the expense of taking away from basic education.
  • Establishment of a One-Year Pre-Baccalaureate System

Decreasing NCEE (now NSAT) scores, deteriorating mathematical ability and low achievement/scholastic levels, on the whole, have been attributed to inadequate schooling at the basic education level.  The ten-year pre-college preparation has appeared to be inadequate either for higher education or work.  To address this problem, one of the recommendations of PCER is to propose a bridging year between high school and college.  A national testing instrument will be proposed, to serve as a determinant of whether a student needs to undergo the pre-baccalaureate scheme in order to equip him/her well enough to undertake more challenging university work.  The Commission stressed that unlike NCEE, the proposed testing instrument will not be a hindering factor to a student’s dream of pursuing a college degree.

The scheme will not apply to short courses, but institutions may voluntarily administer corresponding equivalency tests for higher level technical courses, if they deem it appropriate. With the pre-baccalaureate system, in addition to being fairer to technical vocational education, it is flexible such that those who could or would not opt to undertake pre-baccalaureate courses, will still have a choice to take tech voc courses which could be considered/credited by means of an equivalency test as a preparatory course to higher degree technical courses, e.g., engineering, etc.

Further, the scheme is meant to be a learning assistance package, which will include foundation or pre-requisite courses consisting of a minimum of 36 units and a maximum of 42 units with core courses in language, science and mathematics.  Prior to the implementation of the pre-baccalaureate scheme, an articulation of curriculum will be done by CHED, DECS and TESDA to avoid repetitive teaching of course contents.

The Commission on Higher Education (CHED) shall have the responsibility of monitoring the proposed pre-baccalaureate scheme including the monitoring of its implementation.  Assuming that CHED has adequately designed and prepared for the program, and the higher education institutions have been adequately informed and subsequently have prepared their courses and implementation mechanisms, and the standardized assessment and placement instruments have been finalized and pilot tested, the pre-baccalaureate scheme will take effect, hopefully in school year 2001-2002.

  • Faculty Development at the Tertiary Level

The proposal aims to enhance faculty’s capability by encouraging them to complete at least a master’s  in their respective areas of specialization.

Efforts will be directed towards increasing the number of tertiary-level teachers who possess a Master’s degree (at present only 33% out of 80,000 have such a degree).  An increment of 37% is desired for the master’s degree holders.  By so doing, it is hoped that the level of teaching and research capabilities will be raised specifically in the following areas: Science, Mathematics, Engineering and Information Technology, Business and Management, English, Social Sciences, History and Values Education.

To achieve the above target, CHED will identify the schools and programs that will form the network to implement the faculty development program.  A consortia within the network will also be encouraged to widen the reach of various master’s/doctoral programs. COEs and CODs will be commissioned to become program providers, e.g. development of modules for master’s programs, which may be either thesis or non-thesis, full-time or part-time study, conveniently scheduled on weekends and vacation breaks.   The scheme is expected to reach teachers in the different regions. Cross-registration will also be encouraged.

  • Strengthening Teacher Competencies at the Basic Education Level

Envisioning a quintessential teacher imbued with a passion for academic excellence, highest standards of values and virtues, and at the same time abreast with the global changes around him/her, PCER recommends the implementation of Project TEACH or Teacher Empowerment to Achieve Competence and Humaneness.  With the objective of strengthening competencies of teachers who are already in the field (in-service level), the project aims to develop the teacher as:

  • An IT teacher, who is adept at using new learning technologies as a means of enhancing the teaching learning process
  • A reading teacher
  • A critical/ analytical and creative thinker, and
  • A Valuew educationa teacher imbued with the ideals of integrity, honesty and patriotism and the like
  • Project TEACH are the following integrated key ideas:
  1. Every teacher must be a reading teacher. S/he must be a values education teacher as well and one that is a critical/analytical and creative thinker herself/himself.  S/he must be aware of how to use IT as an effective tool for the teaching and learning  proses, Teachers must be so trained as to process these qualities In-service training
  2. (INSET) programs must be research-based, implying that means must be exerted to ensure that there is an empirical basis for designing a particular training program, e.g., doing a Technical Needs Analysis (TNA).  Although this is assumed to be a basic concern, in reality, this is not always done
  3. INSET programs must be supportive of efforts towards achieving  ‘decentralization.’  Such programs could be under the care and supervision of each of the 143 Schools Division Superintendents across the country; thus training could be carried out simultaneously.
  4. As regards budget, in addition to the 5% of the Maintenance and Other Operating Expenses (MOOE) which by tradition is earmarked for INSET programs, it will be left to the discretion of the Regional Directors (RDs) and Superintendents to determine what training packages they can do given their limited budget.  Likewise, other funding sources will have to be identified, both at the operating level of the divisions, and at a central coordination and monitoring level
  5. Engaging in a tie-up with the National Educators Academy of the Philippines (NEAP) and with existing Teacher Education Institutions (TEIs) and Centers of Excellence (COEs) is expected.
  6. The training programs will focus on the four KRAs and will be designed to reach out in stages, according to the readiness of particular divisions to launch this, until the total target of 419,954 public school teachers all over the country.  Private school teachers will be encouraged to participate and attend these training sessions as well.

To effectively implement Project TEACH, the following are the proposed strategies to be done in four (4) phases:

  • 1st Phase

A .The Teacher Education Council or TEC will be commissioned to carry out the proposed Project TEACH. It is envisioned that TEACH will be its flagship project.  The TEC will immediately build on past efforts to identify capable teacher training institutions and set criteria to choose COEs/CODs for teacher education that have expertise in any or all of the four KRAs.  In line with this, TEC would be given the following additional functions:

  1. Set policies, criteria and guidelines executed through memos and other means to ensure the efficient and smooth operation of project TEACH.
  2.  Draw up innovative funding schemes to further advance the development/implementation of Project TEACH.
  3. Facilitate the provision of financial and human resource support.

B.TEC will formulate the criteria for the selection of INSET curriculum prototypes.

C.    The superintendents in 143 schools divisions will conduct a needs-based assessment.  Results of this will be considered in the choice of a prototype suitable to a particular region/division/district.

D.   TEC will gather prototypes of on-going training programs in any of the 4 KRAs from all COEs and CODs.  The use of instructional technology and distance education modules in these prototypes will be encouraged.  From the gathered data, the TEC, together with the 143 Schools Division Superintendents, the 18 COEs, 3 CODs and experts, will choose a few prototypes, preferably those that are two-pronged.  The first prong will integrate the 3 KRAs namely: 1) reading/comprehension, 2) critical/analytical and creative thinker, and 3) Values Education.  The second will be concentrated on using new learning technologies.

  • 2nd Phase

A.  The prototypes will then be pilot tested in the COEs of the 16 regions with 40 teachers (20 for elementary and 20 for high school public and private) per region

B. Results of the pilot test will be evaluated to further modify/improve the prototype based on feedback from the teacher-participants through consultations and interactions

  • 3rd Phase (The First Cycle of the INSET Program )

A.    Project TEACH will then be launched on a nationwide basis, starting with those divisions that have identified the necessary financial resources, the target teachers’ clusters, the cooperating COEs and TEIs, and the most appropriate prototypes on the basis of their needs analysis

  • Activities and Timetable for Project TEACH


1.COEs and CODs, as Level 1 Core Trainors, will commence training of TEIs that will
      eventually become Level 2 core trainors.
2. The TEIs, as Level 2 Core Trainors, will then begin training of Districts, which will eventually become Level 3 Core Trainors.
3. Districts will then train public and private school teachers in Level 3 of Project TEACH.


Semestral break
SY 2001-2002

Summer 2002
(first two weeks of April)

Summer 2002
(first three weeks of

  • 4th Phase

As in the first cycle of Project TEACH, Levels 2 and 3 training will again take place, to be held during semestral breaks and summer breaks of schools, respectively, for two cycles ending in year 2004.  Divisions that were not ready to start implementation during the third phase may start their implementation in this phase, benefiting from the lessons learned from the experience of the first batch of divisions.

Project TEACH is principally an in-service training program.  Although not an integral part of the project itself, it is hoped that pre-service teacher training or education will nevertheless also be influenced by the principal goals and methodologies of this project.  The involvement of CODs and TEIs should result in their review of their own teacher education curricula to strengthen their content in the four KRAs, and to use more and more the pedagogies and technologies of instructional technology.

  • Expanding the Options for Medium of Instruction in Grade I through the Use of the Regional Lingua Franca or the Vernacular

The linguistic diversity of the Philippines should be a cause to unify the country; however, it is itself the cause of difficulty in achieving unification.  Various sources of heterogeneity characterize the Philippine multilingual situation, as they do other nations.  These are ethnic, linguistic and cultural diversity, different levels of economic development, different social structures, availability and quality of education, etc. Mixed with issues of nationalism/nationhood and economic development, the language situation in the country has become complex.

There are at least 100 vernacular languages in the Philippines. It is not practicable to adopt all of them as the medium of instruction in localities where they are spoken and used until they are ready for the purpose, i.e., at least if there are qualified teachers and quality instructional materials.  The Local Government Units (LGU’s) and the Indigenous Cultural Communities (ICC’s) of other ethno-linguistic areas could be encouraged to carry out programs and projects such that they could develop the necessary resources to be able to implement vernacular teaching in the primary grades in their respective areas. Vernacularization will support the goal of functional literacy in marginal Philippine communities (Castillo and Ruda 1994).

Pushing for vernacular use in the primary grades, at least, in Grade I, seems the practical thing to do.  UNESCO’s stand in favor of the use of Mother Tongue instruction is worth mentioning.  UNESCO Regional Director for Asia Victor Ordoñez (1998) has stated that “it is part of our [UNESCO’s] task to protect and celebrate the diversity … between cultures and not homogenize it to the point that we lose our individual identities.” UNESCO has been known to be a staunch supporter of the idea of developing functional literacy through the vernacular.

As early as the 1930’s, there already were attempts at pushing for vernacular use (by Gov. George Butte).  He was of the belief that the literate would be better citizens since they would know more about their duties and responsibilities and would get better acquainted with the community problems.  The vernacular was the language that, to him, would ensure the development of literacy.

The Philippine Community School Movement and the Vernacular experiments in Iloilo in the early 1950’s, are but some of the Philippine studies whose results favored the use of vernacular instruction in the primary grades
Language has been closely linked to economic development.  It will be recalled how progressive nations, like Japan, now realize the value of learning English, the acknowledged language of world trade.  Indonesia had also had to choose as its national language one, which was not spoken natively by even at least 10% of its population.  The choice of Bahasa Malay was one based on `economic realities’; at the time, this language was used in the commerce and trade between Indonesia and Malaysia.

Recognition of the economic, cognitive and social advantage of bilingualism/multilingualism further supports the continued push for bilingual/ multilingual education. These are advantages denied to the minority students who are forced by circumstances to abandon their first language as they learn a second. (Arias and Casanova 1993).

The foregoing provide a strong rationale for the proposed recommendation regarding the medium of instruction in the Philippines.  Following are the PCER’s recommended reforms

  • Continued Implementation of the Bilingual Education Policy (BEP

The Bilingual Education Curriculum prescribed by the Department of Education, Culture and Sports (DECS) shall be the minimum standard to be followed by all schools.  However, they can adopt a mix of more Filipino and or English depending on the capabilities and needs of students

In order to facilitate learning, it is proposed that the following reforms in the medium of instruction (MOI) for basic education be implemented:

a.    Where applicable, i.e. where there exists a strong support system, use the regional lingua franca or vernacular as MOI for grade 1. English and Filipino shall be taught as separate subjects . A strong support system for the use of a regional lingua franca or vernacular implies the existence of the following conditions:

  • Prepared teachers:  Teacher education institutions should have curricular programs to educate future teachers in the use of a regional lingua franca or the vernacular in teaching
  • Tested teaching materials:  Development, education and training of a cadre of writers or instructional materials in the regional lingua franca or vernacular and consequent writing and pilot testing of such materials; and
  • Logistical support:  Continuous financial support for the program and administrative monitoring of its implementation

B. For Grade 2 and up, the BEP will be applied, i.e. the subjects Science and Mathematics will be taught in English, with the rest of the courses to be taught in Filipino. However, Science and Mathematics may be taught in Filipino provided that there will be strong support for the writing of instructional materials in Filipino and intense training of Science and Mathematics teachers in

  • English will continue to be taught as a separate subject in all grades

Languages, including Regional Lingua Franca (RLF) that already have initial instructional/reading materials may be used as MOI to develop basic literacy.  Successful implementation of the above proposal will require the fulfillment of the following conditions :

  1. The Department of Education should issue a Memorandum Order re-affirming the bilingual education policy but introducing the use of the regional lingua franca or vernacular in Grade One and in literacy programmes, when necessary conditions are in place.  It should in addition draw up a strategic master plan and proposed implementation scheme for the guidance of divisions and language groups, particularly those in the non-Tagalog areas.  Orientation and training sessions will have to be conducted at all levels of the DECS hierarchy
  2. The timing and speed of implementation will depend upon the capability, initiative, and readiness of each division or cluster of divisions comprising a language group. Each division/cluster will have to plan and implement a comprehensive program which will include the development and testing of materials and the training of Grade One teachers, literacy workers and supervisors involved.  Local government units (LGUs) and the Indigenous Cultural Community Councils (ICCs) of ethno-linguistic groups could be encouraged to collaborate and provide resources for this effort.  Not all of the  over 100 vernacular languages in the Philippines will be quickly ready to be adopted in schools, although vernacularization will support the goal of functional literacy in marginal Philippine communities (Castillo and Ruda 1994).   Once the division/cluster is ready, it should inform DECS who, upon assessing its readiness, will then officially authorize the implementation of the change.
  3. In the meantime, the central office at DECS could set up a monitoring and support system to assist divisions interested in a rapid implementation of the policy.  The creation of a separate agency, which would only bloat the bureaucracy and budgetary requirements, is not necessary

A separate budgetary allocation, which may have to become a regular allocation in succeeding annual budgets, is however necessary tosupport the necessary aspects of preparation for implementation.  Both the DBM process and other local, national, and international sources of possible funding should be thoroughly explored.  Such a budget is seen to provide for the following:

  • A fund should be available to which divisions/language groups can apply to finance  (a) the development and testing, and eventual periodic revision, of instructional materials in the lingua franca or vernacular, (b) the training of Grade One teachers, literacy workers, and supervisors involved, and (c) the monitoring and evaluation of the pilot test phase and the full implementation phase of the program
  • A central office for information dissemination to generate and maintain public and media support for the policy change
  • An evaluation mechanism to undertake periodic evaluation of student retention and progress, including impact of the policy change on the student proficiency in English and Filipino. Teachers, principals, division supervisors, school superintendents and DECS regional directors should be included in this evaluation system Resources to conduct orientation and training sessions for DECS administrators at all levels, and for teacher training institutions
  • Establishment of the National Educational Evaluation and Testing System (NEETS            


Establishing a unified testing system is the goal of this proposal. Recognizing the importance of assessment results as a source of a core of decisions on crucial items like curricular reforms, refocusing educational philosophy, new directions and the like, the Commission felt that putting all assessment efforts under a common strand will ensure more effective dissemination and utilization of educational assessment and evaluation results.  Hence, the establishment of the NEETS.

The NEETS will take care of assessment in all levels i.e., basic education, post secondary technical and vocational education and tertiary education.  It shall concern itself with the following activities


The development of other types of assessment tools for different purposes (apart from assessment tools in the nature of NEAT and NSAT) e.g., other types of aptitude tests, personality tests, intelligence tests, placement tests, diagnostic tests

The evaluation of basic education such that it will provide worthy inputs to tertiary education.  For example, evaluation information will be used for (selective) admission or placement purposes.  The evaluation results will likewise yield feedback information to the bureaus responsible for basic education

The conduct of research on areas that bear on assessment of student learning and teaching and development of database in all levels Assistance to schools, upon their request, in developing their capability to assess and evaluate students

  • Establishing Common Standard for Accreditation per Discipline

Four (4) groups perform accreditation programs: PAASCU (Philippine Accrediting Association of Schools, Colleges and Universities); PACUCOA (Philippine Association of Colleges and Universities-Commission on Accreditation); ACSC-AA (Association of Christian Schools and Colleges Accrediting Agency); and AACCUP (Accrediting Agency of Chartered Colleges and Universities in the Philippines).  Their clientele are as follows: PAASCU, the Catholic schools; PACUCOA, the non-sectarian schools; ACSC-AA, the non-Catholic schools; and AACCUP, the public higher institutions, i.e., the state universities and colleges.  They, except AACCUP, have now since 1977, been federated under FAAP (Federation of Accrediting Agencies in the Philippines, a non-stock, non-profit, and non-governmental organization designed to upgrade the quality of education through accreditation.  AACCUP has joined FAAP only since 1995

Owing to charges of “forum shopping,” and the clamor for private sector involvement in accreditation, especially for the fields of Information Technology and Engineering, it is proposed that the present accreditation system be rationalized, thus;

  1. There should be a cooperative re-structuring such that a common set of accreditation standards, criteria and procedures will be adopted for each particular program for all schools.  The focus of the accreditation will be programs, not whole schools.
  2. Industry and business professionals, especially in Information    Technology and Engineering shall be included in the development and implementation of accreditation standards and programs
  3. Government, through CHED, shall officially recognize the accreditation process, giving it due subsidy.  CHED shall have a more active oversight of the accrediting system and should be the official certifying agency of the programs accredited by the different accrediting agencies

The reform proposals are embodied in a one-volume report to be presented to the House of Representatives, Senate and the President for corresponding legislative and/or executive action. Entitled:  Philippine Agenda for Educational Reform:  The PCER Report, the report was finally unveiled to the public on April 10, 2000  in a turn-over ceremony held in Malacañang, with no less than his Excellency President Joseph Ejercito Estrada as Guest of Honor, along with key personalities in the education system, heads of government agencies, non-government organizations, education associations and legislators. It is expected that the reforms will be implemented within the next two years.

As mentioned earlier, PCER was created by virtue of Executive Order 46, in line with the administration’s 10-point agenda to come up with a comprehensive  and budget-feasible program to strengthen the education system in the country. The Commission was composed of the top echelons from DECS, CHED, TESDA, DOST, NEDA and other government agencies, public/private educational associations and educational institutions and was chaired by Victor Ordoñez, concurrently UNESCO Regional Director for Asia, with Emma Castillo as executive director.  The Commission was given a year to finish its task.[27]

Finally the educational philosophy under the Estrada presidency was to develop a prepared man power and to reduce poverty, education  for all is education which is affordable for all Filipino, they have or they have not, unfortunately Estrada cannot continue his innovative paradigms only two year of his presidency time.

[1] The first assignment has been submitted through Dr. Cahar A Cali via email attachment

[2] Some of the contents has been submitted in the first part (Page 4 – 7)

[3] in full Ferdinand Edralin Marcos   Philippine lawyer and politician who, as head of state from 1966 to 1986, established an authoritarian regime in the Philippines that came under criticism for corruption and for its suppression of democratic processes. Marcos attended school in Manila and studied law in the late 1930s at the University of the Philippines.

[4] Toward a Filipino Ideology, Fisrt Edition, 1972

[5] President Soeharto lead Indonesia from 1966 – 1997, succeeded  by Prof. Dr. BJ.Habibie

[6]Pakikipagkapwa-Tao (regard for others). Filipinos are open to others and feel one with others. regard others with dignity and respect, and deal with them as fellow human beings. Pakikipagkapwa-tao is manifested in a basic sense of justice and fairness, and in concern for others. It is demonstrated in the Filipino’s ability to empathize with others, in helpfulness and generosity in times of need (pakikiramay), in the practice of bayanihan or mutual assistance, and in the famous Filipino hospitality. In indonesia we called it, as GOTONG ROYONG; please read  my assignment entitled “ Democratic and participatory planning in Education “ page 5. Submitted to Dr. Cyntia M Filipinas.

[7] Presidential Decree No.6-a, The first 107 Presidential Decree, Compiled and eduted by F.D. Finpin ( Manila: Cacho Hermanos,Inc, 1973),pp 42-49

[8] On January 17, 1981, Marcos issued Proclamation 2045, formally ending martial law. Some controls were loosened, but the ensuing New Republic proved to be a superficially liberalized version of the crony-dominated New Society. Predictably, Marcos won an overwhelming victory in the June 1981 presidential election, boycotted by the main opposition groups, in which his opponents were nonentities.

[9] My focus for the 1973 constition is not for a political perspective but educational , so the above explanation is just for my understanding about the effect and condition before and after 1973 contistution, which was the legal bases also for the Marcos dictatorship

[10] Batas Pambansa bl 232, section 3 chapter 2

[11] Will be discussed further on the later part of this asiignment

[12] ‘Corazon Cojuangco Aquino (born January 25, 1933), widely known as Cory Aquino”’, was president of the Philippines from 1986 to 1992. She was the wife of the popular opposition senator Benigno Aquino Jr., and when he was assassinated at Manila airport on his return from exile in 1983, Cory Aquino became the focus of the opposition to the dictatorship of President Ferdinand Marcos. Born Maria Coraz n Sumulong Cojuangco in Manila, in 1955 she married Benigno Aquino Jr., who had just been elected mayor of Concepci n in Tarlac province at the age of 22. He rose to be governor and senator, then under the Marcos regime was arrested, sentenced to death, and exiled. She accompanied him into exile in 1980. After his death she entered politics as head of the Laban coalition, and stood against Ferdinand Marcos in the presidential election of February 1986. Both Marcos and Aquino claimed to have won, and held rival inaugurations on February 25, but Marcos then fled in the face of huge popular demonstrations and the refusal of the military to intervene against them.
Despite her enormous personal popularity and that of the new democratic constitution approved in a 1987 referendum, she continued to face repeated military coup attempts and communist insurrection. She was succeeded as president on June 30, 1992 by General Fidel Ramos, Marcos’s armed forces chief, whose defection to the Aquino party had proved crucial to the Popular Revolution.

[13] B. Aquino’s death then triggered the revolution. Enough is enough. It was time for Ferdinand Marcos to go. Then three years after the assassination, a mass of people gathered in the Epifanio de los Santos Avenue. Their immediate objective was to prevent the armed conflict between the AFP men loyal to the president and the AFP men under the minister of National Defense, Juan Ponce Enrile and the head of the Philippine Constabulary, General Fidel V. Ramos. The mass of people that gathered in EDSA, side by side, with rosaries and other sacramentals in their hands, offered the soldiers (those on the side of the president) of the advancing tanks peace by giving them flowers and rosaries and water. The message was clear: we are all Filipinos, and we need not fight each other. We are a nation of the same blood, of the same race. It is not each other we should fight. We should fight the one and true enemy of our land, the man who had cheated and deceived all of us, the man who is in Malacaang.

[14]  The February 1986 uprising, also called People’s Power , that ousted President Ferdinard E. Marcos. EDSA stands for Epifanio de los Santos, a ring road around Manila that was the site of confrontation between pro-Marcos and anti- Marcos forces. the people protested the massive election fraud during the Snap Presidential Elections held during the first week of February 1986.  Many supporters of Corazon Aquino were not able to vote because their names were allegedly deleted from the registered voter’s list.  Members of the Commission on Election walked-out from their work because according to them, then president Ferdinand Marcos were forcing them to declare him the winner.

[15] Dr R Lourdes Quisumbing, formerly on the UNESCO Executive Board before appointed as Education Minister in the Philippines; she was Professor at Miriam College, Quezon City. For many years, she has been active in the field of international and values education. Lourdes Quisumbing has combined several careers in her life, both nationally and internationally. Lourdes R. Quisumbing gained her Ph.D. while devoting herself to her family, her husband and their nine children, then served as the Secretary of Education in the Philippines during the administration of Cory Aquino, and subsequently Secretary General of the Philippine UNESCO National Commission. She was elected Philippine Representative to the UNESCO as Member of the Executive Board in Paris. She continues to be active in the educational institutions in her country heading a team of experts to evaluate graduate centers all over the Philippines and conducts training workshops for teachers in Asia-Pacific.

[16] MNLF is one of a few Islamic Movement organization in Mindanao, lead by Jailed  Professor  Nurmisuari  former ARMM Governor

[17] Fidel V Ramos received an honorary Doctor (DHC) from Mindanao State University

[18] A remarkable man like Juan Ponce Enrile cannot be better than a man who is willing to serve his country. He got the name “Action Agad Enrile” in 1965, when he first entered government service as the Undersecretary of Finance and concurrently acting Insurance Commissioner and Commissioner of Customs. Then, he was appointed Secretary of Finance and acting Chairman of the monetary Board from 1966-68; Secretary of Justice from 1968-70; and Secretary of National Defense from 1970-86. During his 20-year service in the executive branch of government, Mr. Enrile took at various times the roles of Chairman of the Philippine National Bank, National Investment Development Corporation, Philippine Coconut Authority, National Police Commission, United Planters Corporation. Other men would be satisfied with these exceptional deeds, but Juan Ponce Enrile, unlike other men, would desire to do more for his country.

The EDSA Revolution of 1986 inscribed a lasting note to the Philippine’s history books and Enrile’s public life. After the boisterous snap elections of February 7, 1986, and amidst the lengthy exigency and paralysis that gripped the country following the assassination of former Sen. Ninoy Aquino, he retracted his support for the Marcos government and assisted in leading the military revolt that triggered the victorious People Power Revolution. With then Armed Forces Chief of Staff Fidel Ramos, they assemble the ranks of the Philippine military behind the rebellion. After four days of confrontation on EDSA, during which an ocean of citizen flooded the streets to participate in the revolt, the Marcos administration crumbled. Juan Ponce Enrile was a crucial part and a vital point in the course of the Filipinos’ success against the Marcos Regime. (The EDSA website)

[19] President Fidel V Ramos “ reforms for Quality Education” Bulletin today, August 28, 1994.p.11

[20] Making educational work; An agenda for reforms, report to Congress of the Congressional Commission on Education, December 28, 1991. pp 1-2

[21] Ibid,p.3


[23] Section 3, Republic Act N0.7722, 1994

[24] Robert A Pinauin, Beyond the rhetoric of education for all, and agenda for the Estrada administration

[25] Robert A Pinauin, Beyond the rhetoric of education for all, and agenda for the Estrada administration

[26] Adopted from various online sources in the internet

[27] Compiled from PCER website

Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: