[OPINION] CHED's proposed 'reframed' GE would be a loss not just for students, but for the entire nation
“Sayang lang ang oras sa GE” is something one might expect to hear from a Filipino college student, exhausted from the semester’s 36 units and the two-hour commute to campus on top of it. General Education classes, as the stereotype goes, seem to have heavier workloads than major subjects—a burden to students eager to just finish their degree and finally earn their own money.
But it’s not something we should hear from the Commission on Higher Education, which, out of all institutions, should know better. It is CHED that we expect to understand the crucial role of these GE classes, and to advocate for their inclusion in the tertiary curriculum.
Its proposed “reframing” of the GE curriculum has faced mounting criticism since it was first drafted in April. Educators nationwide have sounded the alarm on its plan to reduce the current 36 units to 18. Notably, current subjects on ethics, literature, history, and arts appreciation will be integrated across only six GE courses: Professional Communication; Global Trends and Emerging Technologies; Data, Evidence, and Ethics in a Knowledge-Driven Society; Rizal and Philippine Studies; Labor Education; and an Institutional Course.
If passed, this would be the most extensive restructuring of the college GE curriculum since the implementation of the enhanced K-12 in 2013.
CHED defended its proposal in an online public hearing on May 5, attended by over 4,700 viewers on Facebook Live and 1,400 on Zoom. This overhaul didn’t come out of nowhere, said Cinderella Benitez-Jaro, the commission’s executive director. “In 1996, college students in the Philippines were required to complete 63 units of general education. By 2013, when the K-12 reform took effect, that number had been reduced to 36 units… [The proposal] is a trajectory that was set more than a decade ago.”
Jonathan Macayan, co-chair of the Technical Panel for General Education, clarified that ethics, arts, and social sciences “were not removed” but “reframed.” The courses, he added, will also become more output-based and student-centric. “The central question that guided us in developing this was not, ‘What courses should we preserve?’” he said in the hearing. “But rather, the central question that we tried to satisfy is, ‘What kind of Filipino graduate must every degree program produce and how can GE contribute to that?’”
Macayan added, “The GE outcomes describe graduates who can think critically and integratively, reason scientifically and ethically, communicate effectively, engage civically and nationally, act responsibly towards society, culture, and environment, navigate digital and technological spaces, and continue learning across the lifespan.”
But this, too, has always been the GE program’s goal. Perhaps it’s not far-fetched to assume that dissolving the subjects focused on developing these very skills—among them stand-alone subjects on literature and Philippine history—might end up having the opposite effect.
Of course, what’s in between the lines of an “outcomes-based” education is the pruning of students not to be better learners, but more effective employees. “It’s market-based education,” said Paolo Bolaños, the former chair of the University of Santo Tomas Department of Philosophy, who was present at the online hearing. “Which outcomes are we satisfying?”
Bolaños further criticized ethics being folded into the more general Data, Evidence, and Ethics course: “What is ethics now? Ethics is reduced to a response to fake news and a tool for managing data. That’s what ethics is in the current GE or in the proposed GE.”
Some may argue that these dissolved—or “strengthened” and “reframed”—subjects have no practical contribution towards the student’s career of choice. What might a nurse or engineer do with ethics or the arts, when their time is better served studying skills necessary for their jobs? Why else would we get a college degree if not for employment?
Ateneo De Manila University, in a position paper submitted to CHED, argued that reframed GEs “[move] the lever away from holistic human development, which is long term, to one that caters only to work demands, which is short term.”
“'Creative imagination' as well as 'empathy development' are also essential in holistic learner development,” the university added, “especially in a world that is increasingly dominated by technology where human agency and creativity are highly challenged and where human interaction can become transactional and robotic.”
After all, these learners will grow up not only to be part of the workforce, but also their own families, communities, and the nation. Their job title, while certainly crucial, is not the only thing that comprises their identity. Foregoing learning the humanities is foregoing learning what makes us human.
"A graduate who can use technology but cannot ask what technology does to human dignity remains poorly educated," Philippine Normal University professors Allen Espinosa, Levi Elipane, Heidi Macahilig, Nikolee Marie Serafico-Reyes, Arlyne Marasigan, and Leah Amor Cortez wrote in a Philstar.com commentary. The solution, they asserted, is not to dissolve or compress GE courses, but to teach them better.
The humanities department of the University of the Philippines Los Baños shared the sentiment in their official statement: “Within this policy framework, the value of education is assessed based on its responsiveness to industry and the economy. This is how easily universities become mere extensions of labor production systems rather than spaces for cultivating critically engaged citizens.”
It is possible that under this reframed GE, college graduates may get better employment opportunities. But it is also possible that they toil day and night, unable to understand more deeply why prices rise while wages remain low, simply accepting that this is just how the world works. They lose the ability to be critical of the status quo, to imagine otherwise—a better life, a fairer world.
“The humanities have historically stood alongside workers, marginalized communities, and social movements in critiquing exploitative systems and imagining just futures,” UPLB’s DHum wrote in its statement. “Weakening these disciplines has implications not only for academic institutions but also for the broader struggles for social justice, democratic participation, and cultural flourishing. The erosion of humanities subjects, therefore, impoverishes the moral foundations necessary for nation-building.”
While CHED assures that higher education institutions have the discretion to offer more GE courses, they set the maximum number of GE units to 36—per the Higher Education Act of 1994, CHED is mandated to only set minimum, not maximum, requirements.
Silliman University College of Arts and Sciences dean Alana Leilani Narciso argued in the public hearing that because universities are not mandated to offer these other GE subjects, they have the choice to exclude them completely. This, according to a separate statement by the Student Council Alliance of the Philippines, may result “in a two-tiered system in which access to comprehensive, humanities-rich education becomes uneven.” SCAP also called for a clear transition plan for possibly displaced GE teachers.
During the hearing, Victor Aguilan, convenor of the Council of Teachers and Staff of Colleges and Universities of the Philippines, pointed out that CHED is required by the Philippine Education Act of 1982 to involve the Department of Labor and Employment should curriculum restructuring affect the employment of teachers. CHED responded that current GE teachers can be retrained to teach reframed GEs—but why must teachers, already overworked and undersupported, carry the burden of a decision made without their consultation?
On May 7, CHED said in a statement that the reframed GE proposal is not yet final and is subject to change after consultations with stakeholders.
A student right now may not see the importance of these courses, if only because they are hyper-focused on passing them. But it is the skills they learned from GEs that they will take once they clock out, and even after they retire. It warrants an additional sense of urgency given dwindling literacy rates, with 88% of upcoming Grade 7 students unable to read at the same level. Findings from last year’s National Achievement Test reveal that only about 14 in every 1,000 Grade 10 students, and 4 in every 1,000 Grade 12 students, demonstrate proficiency in problem-solving, communication, and data analysis. The fake news epidemic shows no signs of slowing down; our senators are wholeheartedly sharing AI-generated media. No better time than now has the humanities proved its real-life application.
CHED has the unique power to directly shape the ways of thinking of future generations—while global marketability is an alluring prospect, it bears repeating that the goal of education has always been more holistic than that.
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not reflect the opinions of PhilSTAR L!fe, its parent company and affiliates, or its staff.