Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 23

Chapter One Introduction

Background of the Study Education is indeed an indispensable factor in the development of a sustainable economy. In this regard, every state pursues to equip their people with the necessary skills to help in building the nation. This can only be done, of course, by proper training in educational institutions. In order to give every citizen the opportunity to have education, the state provided it for free with the establishment of public elementary and also secondary schools. This is in line with Article XIV, Section I of the 1987 Constitution which requires the State to protect and promote the right of all citizens to quality education at all levels and to take all appropriate steps to make such education accessible to all. In adherence to this constitutional mandate, the government has established state universities to absorb the majority of the Filipino high school graduates and to give them an opportunity to have a good future. In these state universities, tuition fees are apparently cheaper than those of private universities and this is so because the target enrollees of these state-owned universities and colleges are the have-nots. Since education is said to be an essential factor in the nation-building, supposedly, the education sector should be receiving the major share of the government budget. However, this is not the case. Apparently, the 2011 budget of the state universities and colleges has been decreased by the government and now it is under deliberation in congress for scrutiny and approval. This paper entitled, The effect of the budget allocation of the government to state universities and colleges in metro manila, aims to determine the

consequences of the insufficient budget allocation to state universities and colleges. Brief History The Philippine Educational System is a clear example of a boat sailing in a body of changes and challenges. It has in fact followed the same pattern of education as that of the rest of the world. It has passed through various stages of development and undergone dramatic changes depicted in the various era of educational evolution. Its long years of exposure and contact with the Spaniards, Americans, and Japanese have created a spectrum of educational variations and lines of emphasis. The impact of the three colonizers is still reflected on the present-day educational systems thinking and practices. The Educational Decree of 1863 made possible the establishment of a complete secondary and collegiate levels of instruction; the provision for government supervision and control of these schools; and the establishment of teacher training institutions (Estioko, 1994). For almost 333 years, the Spaniards were successful enough propagating Christianity, thus making the country as the only nation in Asia practicing the Catholic religion. The Americans, for their part, laid down the foundation of a democratic system of education through Act No. 74. The coming of the Thomasites not only facilitated the gradual easing of feelings of rancor and animosity of the Filipinos towards the new colonizers but also has infused in them the spirit of democracy and progress as well as fair play (Martin, 1980). More importantly, with academic English Language and Literature as their focus, the American influence on the Filipino mentality has made the Philippines as the third largest English speaking nation in the world. The countrys exposure to the Japanese, though short-lived (1942-1945) has made the people realize the countrys position as a member of the East-Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere, the true meaning of establishment of a New Order in the Sphere (Martin, 1980).

Higher education in most developed countries and some less developed countries has undergone considerable transformation. Many of them have adopted selected aspects of the American model. But, the only country whose higher education system was modeled almost totally upon the American model is the Republic of the Philippines. This was a natural, and indeed perhaps inevitable, consequence of almost a half century of American presence in the Philippines. During this period, roughly the first half of the 20th century, American officials there established public institutions that formed the core of what later became public colleges and universities. In structure, organization, degrees, curricula, teaching methods,

governance, faculty roles, and in other ways higher education in the Philippines resembled that in America as it grew and developed, in private as well as public institutions. This was further assured when, in 1902, the Americans required what all teaching in colleges and universities be in the English language including hat in established institutions which had previously taught in the Spanish language. The Spanish, who occupied the Philippines as a colonial power for three and one-third centuries, established several private colleges and universities but no tax supported higher education. The Spanish-American War of 1698 centered on Cuba but it also resulted in the U.S. displacing the Spanish in the Philippines. As soon as hostilities subsided, the U.S. set about establishing free public elementary and secondary education and developing plans for self government. By 1901, the United States government had established elections of local municipal officials and a national legislature. In 1934 the American Congress approved Commonwealth status for the islands with complete independence to

come in 1946. In 1935 the Philippines people approved a constitution and became a Commonwealth and in July 4 1946, the country gained complete independence. From the beginning, United States policy emphasized the importance of literacy. Soldiers who had battled in the Philippines in 1898 become teachers and later more than 1,000 civilian teachers were brought from the U.S. to the islands to staff the newly established public elementary schools. The development of higher education came more slowly. The University of the Philippines was established in 1908, and in 1909 its College of Agriculture 40 miles southeast of Manila was added. Although teachers from the U.S. staffed the public schools initially, the American government recognized the need for a trained cadre of Filipino teachers and in 1901 established Philippine Normal School (in Manila), which is today the Philippine Normal College. Between 1901 and 1926, eight regional normal schools were established to train teachers for the public schools, Initially, all nine of the normal school accepted elementary schools graduate to prepare for teaching. In 1928, the Philippine Normal School began to accept only secondary school graduates for two years of teacher preparation and later all of the other eight normal schools followed. Except for the University of the Philippines, the only baccalaureate degree granting institutions up until World War II were private institutions. In 1949, the Philippine Normal College became four-year institutions and began to grant bachelors degrees. The major emphasis in education during the American presence in the Philippines was on elementary and secondary education and particularly occupational preparation. Beginning in 1901, farm schools, technical and trade schools, rural high schools, and other vocational schools were established throughout the islands. Most of these included elementary and secondary

programs but some also offered post-secondary vocational training of less-thancollege level. In the Philippines, public higher education developed slowly and late. As noted, the University of the Philippines was the bachelors degree granting public institution until 1949 when the Philippine Normal College became a four-year institution. In addition to the private colleges and universities established during the Spanish reignall by religious ordersa considerable number of private colleges was established during the American period (1898-1946). Most of them closed during the Japanese occupation in World War II but reopened soon after liberation. The pent-up demand for college education at the end of the World War II resulted in the rapid establishment of private colleges. Some of these were established by religious groups but some were established as non-sectarian institutions including a number as profit making ventures. As in America, many of these were business schools and other occupationally oriented schools, but some of them were liberal arts and general institutions. Many of the general and liberal arts colleges, universities, medical schools, law schools and other institutions that make up the higher education system of the country were established for profit. But the profit-making potential of general and liberal arts institutions is declining. Today, the Philippine School system is said to be one of the largest in the world. The Congressional Commission on Education Study, popularly known as the EDCOM Report disclosed that enrolment at all levels was 16.5 million as of 1991. Recent statistics from the Department of Education (DepEd) alone reveals that as of Curriculum Year 2000-2001, the combined enrolment size in the basic education system 19,138,635 indicating the dramatic increase in and demand for education in the country. This is the resulting scenario of the countrys Education for All policy and the explicit provision of the 1987 Philippine Constitution, to wit:

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. Further, 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. With only 10 years of pre-university education, the shortest in East Asia (as compared to the longest, 13, of countries like Japan, Hong Kong, Singapore, Brunei Darussalam, Malaysia, Sri Lanka, and Cambodia) (Manila Times, 1994), the Philippines follows the 6-4-4 Plan of education. The 6 years elementary schooling and the 4 years of secondary education are under the control, regulation and supervision of the Department of Education (DepEd). The concept of resource dependency explains why the Education Department exercises supervision and regulation over 7,444 private schools in the country as compared to its power to control, regulate and supervise the operations of 40,336 public elementary and secondary schools (DepEd Fact Sheet, 2001). The Congressional Commission on Education (EDCOM) Report provided the impetus for Congress to pass RA 7722 and RA 7796 in 1994 creating the Commission on Higher Education (CHED) and the Technical Education and Skills Development Authority (TESDA), respectively. The tri-focalization approach in the management of the present-day education in the Philippines refocused the DepEds (RA 9155) mandate to basic education which covers elementary, secondary and non-formal education. TESDA now administers the post secondary, middle-level manpower training and development while CHED is responsible for higher education.

Related Articles According to Walfish (2001), 25 percent of the student-age population in this former American colony is enrolled in higher education, one of the highest proportions in developing countries in Asia. He stated that educators agree that even as neighbors like Malaysia, Singapore, and Thailand have strengthened their economies through investments in higher education over the past two decades, Philippine colleges are not meeting the needs of students or the country's economic development and only a handful of universities approach the best international standards, and they are increasingly off limits to all but the rich. He commented that higher education is very basic. Students typically enter college at the age of 16 or 17, having had only 10 years of schooling, not 11 or 12 as in other countries. Additionally, faculty are not well-trained; in the entire higher-education system, only about 8 percent of instructors have doctorates, according to government statistics, compared with 67 percent of fulltime faculty members at American postsecondary institutions. Further, he said that many students--at least 60 percent, judging from figures from the government's Commission on Higher Education--drop out before graduating, often because of financial difficulties. Plenty of others graduate, but don't pass the country's licensing examinations. Charles B. Currin, lead education specialist with the Asian Development Bank in Manila, sums up the progress of students through colleges and universities: "One thousand enter the first year, 300 graduate, 50 take the exam, 20 pass." The result is that while Malaysia and Singapore are building up their corps of engineers and information-technology professionals, the Philippines is churning out graduates who wind up doing work far below the level for which they were supposed to have been trained.

In an excerpt from School Reform in the New World (1996), Navarro, in her paper Educational Reform in the 21st Century identified the following global reforms in both the lower and higher education levels. Decisions made by educational planners and classroom teachers are articulated as curriculum policies and structure, implementation strategies, evaluation procedures and research activities. The way these decisions are made and formulated is based on specific variables operating in the internal and external environments of the education sector. The so-called internal and external enablers, as used by Ornstein and Hunkins (1988) have made reforms in the Philippines possible and have rendered these reforms theoretically grounded. These enablers are gathered and culled by educational agencies from school records, research outputs, textbooks and references and other empirically grounded documents available in the field. External Enablers include legislation, public opinion, education studies, technological advances, societal demands, and industry demands. Internal Enablers, on other hand, refer to research findings, national testing, new leadership, accreditation, cross-country evaluation and available funds. According (Bullough et al.,1996) to educational systems face multiple and diverse problems, among them, that of resources. Schools and school systems are being challenged to develop new educational paradigms that will ensure survival and stability and at the same time effect the four pillars of education (Delors, 1996), namely, learning to know, learning to do, learning to be and learning to live together. Such a tall order according to Trow (1994), calls for soft managerialism, which refers to the maximum effective use of available resources. On the other hand, hard managerialism involves redirecting program efforts through the adoption of new management systems, which call for a high degree of openness in school sectors and a kind of systems thinking characterized by alignment of delivery and attunement of values and value systems. In so doing, educational systems become more responsive and resilient (El-Khawas, 2001); capable of preserving and strengthening quality

(Thorens,1996) and effecting reconstruction efforts (Castillo, 1987); and pursuing quality, equality and equity, institutional diversity, regional development, flexible curricula, stable financing, evaluation and innovation, governability, social relevance and internationalization (Gomez, 1999; Holtta & Malkki, 2000). Apparently, in the recent news concerning the SUCs budget, An estimated 1,200 students walked out of their classes on Friday from various schools in Metro Manila to protest the inadequate state subsidy" for state colleges and universities (SUCs), denouncing the Aquino administration for its abandonment of the education sector." Meanwhile, simultaneous actions also took place in other schools outside Metro Manila, organized by the National Union of Students of the Philippines (NUSP), against the states abandonment of its responsibility to ensure quality and accessible education for the youth." Several hundred students walked out of their classes in Ilocos, Baguio, Bicol, Cebu, Iloilo, and Davao, among others, to join the nationwide protest action, according to NUSP. In his August 24 address to Congress, Aquino stated that P23.4 billion had been allocated for the countrys 112 state universities and colleges (SUCs) in 2011, a figure 1.7 percent lower than the P23.8 billion budget for 2010. We are gradually reducing the subsidy to SUCs to push them toward becoming self-sufficient and financially independent, given their ability to raise their income and to utilize it for their programs and projects," said Aquino in his 2011 budget message. But in a Thursday press release, the Department of Budget and Management (DBM) said that the budget for SUCs is actually higher by P2.4 billion or 11.3% as compared to its budget in 2010, primarily due to the implementation of the Salary Standardization Law III."

Still, the budget allotted for SUCs is clearly inadequate for their operations, said Kabataan party list (KPL) Rep. Raymond Mong" Palatino, who also joined the rally. Students gathered at the University of Santo Tomas (UST) in the early afternoon and marched across Chino Roces bridge to Mendiola, where a police barricade was waiting. A brief scuffle ensued as students pushed down barbed-wire barricades, although they didnt go beyond the closed gates of the Mendiola peace arc, which blocked the road to Malacaang. At least 20 policemen were deployed to the rally, which culminated with the burning by protesters of an effigy of President Benigno Aquino III. Overall, the demonstration was largely peaceful, said the organizers. Students from the University of the Philippines (UP) Diliman, UP Manila, the Philippine Normal University (PNU), and the Polytechnic University of the Philippines (PUP) took the lead in the Metro Manila action, along with militant youth organizations such as the League of Filipino Students and Anakbayan. UP and PNU are among the top five SUCs set to receive the largest budget cuts. The budgets for UP and PNU will be reduced by P1.39 billion, a decrease of 20.11 percent from 2010 to 2011; and P91.35 million, a 23.59 percent decrease, respectively. The other three schools in the list are Aurora State College of Technology, with a 22.21 percent budget decrease; Cerilles State College, with its budget slashed by 21.95 percent, and the University of Southeastern Philippines, with a budget cut of 20.03 percent. Dwindling state subsidy The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) recommends that six percent of a countrys gross domestic product (GDP) be allotted to the education sector. Based on the UNESCO standard, and measured against the Philippines GDP for 2009, the budget for the education sector should be around P460 billion. However, the Aquino administration has allocated P207.3 billion for the Department of Education and P23.4 billion for SUCs, a total of only P230.7 billion. Also, according to KPL data, the real value" of state subsidy for education has dwindled steadily over the past decade, based on the 2000 consumer price index. Conversely, the total revenue generated by SUCs from tuition and other student fees has sharply risen, from P1.16 billion in 10

2000 to P7.78 billion in 2010, according to KPL. The party lists figures show that a decade ago, only 6.6 percent of SUCs budget came from the students; today, the tuition and other fees paid by students account for 22.1 percent of the budget of SUCs. These measures by school administrations to internally generate their own income are a betrayal" of students, UP Student Regent Cori Co said. Aquino throws around euphemisms like self-sufficiency and financial independence to cloak the governments shortcomings in passing on its responsibility to private entities, at the risk of limiting public access to quality education," stated the Philippine Collegian, UPs official publication, in an editorial distributed during the rally. Tertiary education as a right Budget secretary Florencio Abad explained in a statement however that with scarce public funds available, the government had to prioritize closing the resource gaps in basic education, among others." He further added that in as much as they want to add more subsidies for SUCs, however, the government is compelled to fund other important needs such as the basic education. Incidentally, the present administration has increased the DepEd budget from P185.5 billion in 2010 to P207.3 billion in 2011. On the other hand, students disagree saying that there should be no distinction between basic and tertiary education because both are for public good. Moreover, they said that higher education should not be merely a privilege for those who can afford it, but should be accessible to the poor.


Chapter Two Presentation of Data

In Metro Manila, there are eight state universities and colleges namely Eulogio Amang Rodriguez Institute of Science and Technology (EARIST), Marikina Polytechnic College (MPC), Philippine Normal University (PNU), Philippine State College of Aeronautics (PSCA), Rizal Technological University (RTU), Technological University of the Philippines (TUP), Polytechnic University of the Philippines (PUP), and the University of the Philippines System (UP). The researchers purposely limited its scope to SUCs in Metro Manila because SUCs in Metro Manila are experiencing substantially the same situation with those of SUCs outside Metro Manila. Table 1
EARIST 120,000,000 Budget Allocation 115,000,000 110,000,000 105,000,000 100,000,000 95,000,000 90,000,000 85,000,000 2008 2009 2010 EARIST

Table 1 shows the budget allocation of Eulogio Amang Rodriguez Institute Science of Technology. In 2008, the budget was P 96, 7555, 000. 00. In 2009, it was increased to P 114, 651, 000.00. However, in 2010, the budget was decreased by P 1, 757, 000.00 and currently, the budget allocated is P 112, 894, 000.00.


Table 2
MPC 70,000,000 Budget Allocation 60,000,000 50,000,000 40,000,000 30,000,000 20,000,000 10,000,000 0 2008 2009 2010 MPC

Table 2 shows that the budget allocation for Marikina Polytechnic College from 2008 to 2010. In 2008, the budget allocated was P 51, 518, 000. 00. In 2009, it was increased to P57, 340, 000.00. In 2010, it was increased again to P 65, 694, 000. 00. Table 3
PNU 70,000,000 Budget Allocation 60,000,000 50,000,000 40,000,000 30,000,000 20,000,000 10,000,000 0 2008 2009 2010 PNU

Table 3 shows the budget allocated from year 2008 to 2010 in Philippine Normal University. In 2008 the budget allocated was P 277, 959, 000. 00. In


2008, it slightly increased to P 284, 931, 000. 00. From the budget allocated in year 2009, it was increased again to P 378, 233, 000.00. Table 4
PSCA 61,000,000 Budget Allocation 60,000,000 59,000,000 58,000,000 57,000,000 56,000,000 55,000,000 54,000,000 2008 2009 2010 PSCA

Table 4 shows the budget allocated to PSCA. In the year 2008, the budget allocated was P 60, 181, 000. 00. It was decreased to P 57, 375, 000. 00 in the year 2009. In 2010, the budget was decreased again to P 56, 462, 000. 00. Table 5

RTU 160,000,000 158,000,000 156,000,000 154,000,000 152,000,000 150,000,000 148,000,000 146,000,000 144,000,000 142,000,000 140,000,000 2008 2009 2010

Budget Allocation


Table 5 shows how the budget decreased from 2008 to 2010. It started with a budget of P 157, 644, 000. 00 in 2008. It was decreased to P 148, 939,


000. 00 in 2009. In 2010, the budget was decreased again to P 146, 665, 000. 00. Table 6
TUP 450,000,000 400,000,000 350,000,000 300,000,000 250,000,000 200,000,000 150,000,000 100,000,000 50,000,000 0 2008 2009 2010

Budget Allocation


This table shows the budget allocated in Technological University of the Philippines from 2008 to 2010. The budget allocated in 2008 was P 319, 459, 000. 00. In 2009, it was increased to P 384, 265, 000. In 2010, the budget allocated slightly decreased to P 6, 916, 801, 000. 00 Table 7
UP 7,200,000,000 Budget Allocation 7,000,000,000 6,800,000,000 6,600,000,000 6,400,000,000 6,200,000,000 6,000,000,000 5,800,000,000 2008 2009 2010 UP

This table shows the budget allocated to the University of The Philippines from year 2008 to 2010. The budget allocated in 2008 was P 6, 232, 649, 000.


00. In 2009, the budget allocated was increased to P 7, 058, 087, 000. 00. However, in 2010, the budget was slightly decreased to P 6, 916, 801. 000. 00. Table 8

Table 8 shows the budget allocated from year 2008 to 2010. In 2008 the budget allocated was P 544, 560, 000. 00. In 2009, it was increased to P 665, 391, 000.00. However, this year, it slightly decreased to P 640, 447, 000. 00. In sum, there are only two state universities who have an increased budget in 2010: the Marikina Polytechnic College and Philippine Normal University. The rest had their budget decreased.


Table 9
9000000000 8800000000 8600000000 8400000000 8200000000 8000000000 7800000000 7600000000 7400000000 7200000000 7000000000 2008 2009 2010 Budget

This table shows the budget allocation of the government to state universities and colleges from 2008-2010. Based from this, there was a sudden increase in the budget during 2009 and afterwards, it slightly decreased in 2010. However, apparently, the 2011 budget for state universities and colleges is being cut. Consequently, it has been receiving strong opposition from public school students from the different state universities. Economic Issues The economic issue involved in this study is the effect of the insufficient budget of the university to the quality of education of state universities. There is no problem if public tertiary schools are being funded well just like in the United States. But the reality is that their budget is not enough and as a consequence, the quality of education that public school students need is being compromised.

Budget Allocation


Relevance of the Topic Our topic aims to assess if the appropriation of budget to State Universities and Colleges is sufficient to the needs of the SUCs especially the scholars of our country. It will determine the effects of an insufficient budget allotted to state universities and colleges to the quality of education that they provide to students. Our study can be used by the Executive branch, legislators and administrative officials of SUCs if the allocated budget of the national government is sufficient. The executive branch is the one who proposes the budget for the SUCs. The legislators/lawmakers are the one who deliberate and approve the budget for its scrutinization. The administrative officials are the one who manages for its use and disbursement. Our study is relevant in todays issue, the 2011 budget of the SUCs has been decreased by the executive branch and is now subject to the approval of Congress. Problems and Solutions While the Philippine Constitution upholds the right of every citizen to have free access to education, such constitutional provision is becoming a mere text not having any truthfulness. The Philippine government is supposed to provide free education to all Filipinos especially to the poor but at the same time, not compromising its quality. However, the apparent situation of state universities


and colleges suggest that the government overlooks what their needs really are. And this can be seen by the budget appropriations for them. As presented above, in year 2010, the budget of state universities in Metro Manila has decreased and in year 2011, the budget is still being cut to the point of dismay of many students. This decreasing budget for SUCs creates a negative impact. For purposes of this study, the researchers have determined five facets that are being affected by the low budget allocated to SUCs. Facilities An insufficient budget results to poor facilities. In state universities and colleges, their facilities are not at par with those of private universities. A typical SUC has substandard comfort rooms and relatively small class rooms with no proper ventilation. In the University of the Philippines, the undergraduate chemistry laboratories have filthy-looking sinks and chipped tables; paint peels in dimly lit halls. Titos Anacleto O. Quibuyen, the chairman of the Institute of Chemistry expressed his frustration saying that while they are teaching largely theoretically, they do not have the kit or the facilities to do their experiments. He added that UP is short of research equipment although it is the countrys best research university. He lamented that their equipment is good only for ten students. Further, some of the instruments for determining a substance's chemical structure are so scarce that researchers have to line up to use them, and others, like nuclear magnetic resonance spectrometers, which most professional organic chemists would use several times a day, are absent.


Faculty It is said that if you want to be the best, you need to be taught by the best. This suggests that the importance of a competent faculty is undeniable. However, the support from the government is apparently lacking as to the teachers welfare. One of the biggest complaints in public tertiary education: Government-assigned faculty salaries are not competitive; so many teachers must supplement their income by moonlighting. When what faculty members can earn at a consulting job is three times what they can earn at the university, the result is to neglect their teaching. And this situation greatly affects the students. Low salaries also prompt competent faculty members to transfer to private schools; worse, they opt to have teaching stints abroad in search of a greener pasture. Tuition fees With the rising cost of education in private schools, students look forward to enrolling at the state-run universities and colleges, but with the budget cut, these SUCs have no other recourse but to also increase tuition to compensate for its meager budget. This means higher cost of education in public schools. To augment its meager budget, the University of the Philippines has increased fees in graduate courses; laboratory fees from P50 to P600 in specific colleges (departments); and imposed exorbitant fees like late registration fee and change of matriculation fee. After 13 years of implementation of the Socialized Tuition and Financial Assistance Program (STFAP), tuition in UP increased from P17 to P300 per unit with 83.6 percent of the students ending up paying full tuition. With this scheme, the university has generated P340.767 million in 2003 and P341.226 million in 2004. A primer from the Office of the Student Regent-University of the Philippines and the Katipunan ng mga Mag-aaral sa UP (KASAMA sa UP) 20

reveals proposals to increase laboratory fees in UPs units in Diliman, Manila and Mindanao. At the College of Mass Communications in UP Diliman, there are plans to increase laboratory fees in Film subjects from P100 to P400, but in one particular subject the increase is P2,000. In UP Manila, the dental laboratory fee is seen to increase from P2,500 to P11,000. In this regard, they say that The Iskolar ng Bayan has now become a paying scholar. Academic Programs A meager budget results to closure of degree programs being offered to students. Such a situation is tantamount to depriving Filipino students of their right to achieve their chosen profession. Student Enrollment Public schools tend to have a bigger student population than private universities due to cheaper tuition fee rate. However, because of the budget cut of SUCs, enrollment in public schools seem to become smaller. Since there is insufficient budget for SUCs, the result is the imposition of higher tuition fee rate and with this, poor students tend to just drop out and not pursue their education anymore. This, of course, reduces the number of expected enrollees of state universities and colleges. Also, a meager budget would prompt SUC administrators to limit their enrollment in order to ensure that each student will get a slice of the budget.


Solution The only way to solve the problems presented above is to increase the budget allocated to state universities and colleges. There shall be no distinction to SUCs and public secondary and elementary schools. If SUCs budget is not higher than public secondary and elementary schools, then it shall be equal to them.

Chapter Three Summary and Conclusion

Indeed, education is an indispensable factor in the growth of the nation. Consequently, it needs full support from the government through appropriate budget allocation. This is the ideal set-up. On the contrary, the reality is that public schools particularly state universities and colleges are lacking full support from the government as they experience cuts from their budget. Such results to dismal problems in their facilities, faculty, tuition fees, academic programs and student enrollment and these problems affect, of course, no other than the poor Filipino students who are eagerly hoping for a brighter future.


Chapter Four Bibliography

Cardozier, V., & Texas Univ., A. (1985). Philippine Higher Education: Expansion in the Public Sector. Higher Education Series Topical Paper 8501. Retrieved from ERIC database. United Nations Educational, S. (2006). Higher Education in South-East Asia. Online Submission, Retrieved from ERIC database. de Guzman, A. (2003). The Dynamics of Educational Reforms in the Philippine Basic and Higher Education Sectors. Asia Pacific Education Review, 4(1), 39-50. Retrieved from ERIC database. Walfish, D. (2001). Higher Education in the Philippines: Lots of Access, Little Quality. Chronicle of Higher Education, 48 (2), A60. Retrieved from Academic Source Complete database.