International Journal of Science and Research (IJSR) ISSN (Online): 2319-7064 Impact Factor (2012): 3.358 Volume 4 Issue 1, January 2015 www.ijsr.net Licensed Under Creative Commons Attribution CC BY Higher Education Policy in the Philippines: An Analysis Julian B. Nangpuhan II 1 1 Ifugao State University, Lamut, Ifugao, Philippines Abstract: This paper examined the Philippine higher education (HE) system focusing on the Long-Term Higher Education Development Plan (LTHEDP) implemented from 2001 to 2010. The LTHEDP 2001-2010 seeks to address the perennial problems of HE. The Plan also seeks to prepare the Philippines in embracing developmental opportunities for the twenty-first century such as globalization, information and communication technology, and the changing avenues for a knowledge-based economy. Within the LTHEDP Plan, the Philippine government implemented a policy of resource rationalization for the government-funded state universities and colleges (SUCs). The resource rationalization policy aims to limit the obligation of the government in financing higher education institutions (HEIs). Review and analysis of the present HE system reveals that the annual expenditure of the Philippine government in HE is not enough. As compared to other countries in Asia, the Philippines allocates a small percentage of funds for HE development initiatives. Findings further reveal that there is lack of prioritization in allocating public funds between and among educational institutions in the country. This paper recommends an appropriate level of expenditure for HE by the Philippine government to further improve human capital and boost national development. Keywords: higher education, national development, financial policy 1. Introduction The Philippines has been averaging at about 5% in economic growth rate. In 2013 however, according to Philippine National Statistical Coordination Board, its average rate of 7.2% in terms of economic growth in GDP is remarkable. This notable rise is being attributed to the increase in investor confidence for the administration of Pres. Benigno Aquino III and it is hoped to be sustained beyond his term in 2016. The perceived challenge to this growing economy is its preparedness in the so-called ASEAN Economic Community to start in 2015 where the region will be sharing its resources to generate the same standard quality of service, skill, and produce. Part of this integration is not just purely economic in nature but it involves mainly every agency including the education sector. The Philippines has fully embraced new educational structure since 2013 to be at par with other countries as contained in Republic Act No. 10533 or the Enhanced Basic Education Act of 2013. The new system as shown in Figure 1 covers 1-year compulsory and mandatory preparatory education or kindergarten education for children. After kindergarten, the child has to finish 12 years of compulsory basic education broken down into 6 years of elementary education, 4 years of junior high school, and 2 years of senior high school. After graduating from high school, a student may opt to enroll in a 2-year vocational non-degree program or directly proceed to a baccalaureate degree program which normally takes 4 years. Education in the Philippines is being supervised by the following agencies: Department of Education (DepEd) assumes control of elementary and secondary education; Technical Education Skills Development Authority (TESDA) assumes control of vocational education at the post-secondary level; and Commission on Higher Education (CHED) assumes control of the college/university level. At present, a total of 2,299 higher education institutions (HEIs) are operating in the Philippines where 656 are public and 1,643 are private HEIs (CHED, 2013). Figure 1: New Philippine Education System Source: Philippine Qualifications Framework, 2011 Investments in HE are crucial towards greater productivity, growth, and technological development in an expanding global market (Coombs, 1994:606; Nag, 2011; World Bank, 2012b:5). The benefits derived from HE are evident in the context of globalization, shift towards knowledge economies, and poverty reduction (WB, 2012b:5-6). For instance, a study in the United States found that raising the average level of schooling in the male labor force by one year increases the growth rate of GNP by as much as one percent (Addo, 2010:84). In the case of Korea, the average monthly income of university graduates increased 40 times between 1960 and 2000 (Lee, 2002: 198). Therefore, education can potentially maximize national development in the long term. However, investments in HE seems to be limited in the Philippines for over a decade already. The government recently implemented new HE policy with a goal of rationalizing government spending while trying to impose measures of improving the quality of HE. Rationalization Paper ID: SUB15822 2396