THE COMMISSION on Higher Education (CHED) Memorandum Order (CMO) No. 20, series of 2013, which mandates a restructuring of the current General Education Curriculum (GEC), has been met with criticisms by the faculty of the Loyola Schools (LS).

In compliance with the Kindergarten to Grade 12 (K-12) program, the CMO has called for a reduction of units from the current GEC of universities.

The original 63 units for humanities and social sciences courses, and 51 units for mathematics, science and engineering courses, has now been reduced to 36 required units for all majors.

The new GEC has also called for the demotion of basic remedial courses to the senior high school level in order to introduce interdisciplinary courses into the revised GEC.

Under the Ateneo curriculum, this means that subjects such as Communication in English 1 (En 11) and Sining ng Pakikipagtalastasan sa Filipino 1 (Fil 11) will instead be taught at either Grade 11 or 12.

According to Appendix F of the CMO, the GEC will take effect “when the first batch of Grade 12 students graduate,” or earlier than 2018.

Displacement

The possible relocation of college professors to the senior high school level, as well as the dismissal of faculty brought about by the new GEC, has been a major concern of the various affected departments in the Ateneo.

In an interview with The GUIDON, Vice President for the LS John Paul Vergara, PhD, clarified that discussions are still ongoing between the LS and the Ateneo Senior High School on how best to handle the changes in the core curriculum.

He mentioned the possibility that “[the faculty’s load of classes] will be [split] between the college and the high school.”

Vergara said the Ateneo is currently undergoing a core curriculum review, where adjustments are being made “not just [regarding] the K12, but incorporating the new CHED curriculum as well.”

In addition, Vergara has clarified that despite the changes that the new GEC brings, no departments will be abolished or downsized.

“[Other universities] might be planning [to abolish departments], but I certainly don’t [have any plans to do that]. We value the languages here [in the Ateneo],” he said.

According to Filipino Department Chair Joseph Salazar, PhD, members of the Filipino Department have expressed their desire to stay within the university system.

“Though there are jobs waiting in senior high school, the CHED seems unmindful of how the organizational and administrative structure [in the university] will become detrimental for former university teachers whose academic lives are attuned towards research and not teaching alone,” he said.

Salazar added, “The abandonment or even suspension of research activities of University faculty is counter-productive not only to the intellectualization of Filipino, but to intellectualization itself.”

Salazar emphasized that the skills and training that members of his department possess are different from those required for teaching senior high school.

In an interview with The GUIDON, University President Jose Ramon Villarin, SJ said that the Ateneo has no intentions to layoff its tenured faculty, who will be prioritized once the revised GEC takes effect.

​“If there will be [dismissals], it will be on part-time or contractual faculty assignments,” Villarin explained.

Removal of subjects

Among the 36 units included in the revised GEC, none have been dedicated for the Filipino subject. However, Article I, Section 3 of the CMO states that “the general education courses may be taught in English or Filipino.”

The Filipino Department has expressed its disdain over the removal of unitsdedicated for Filipino subjects.

“Hindi lamang midyum ng pagtuturo ang Filipino. Isa itong disiplina. Lumilikha ito ng sariling larangan ng karunungan na nagtatampok sa pagka-Filipino sa anumang usapin sa loob at labas ng akademya (Filipino is not just a medium of instruction. It is a discipline. It creates its own field of learning that features Filipino in any discourse inside and outside academics),” read a statement released June 21 on the department’s official Facebook page.

The statement also emphasized Filipino as an integral component in education, and that it must be continued at the university and graduate level.

In addition, Salazar noted that the CMO identifies Filipino as “just another language.”

“This revised version of the curriculum does not take into consideration the history of Filipino and its unrealized role in the development of nationalism, local knowledge and the perpetuation of power of the ingglesero (English-speaker),” he said.

He added that the reduction of Filipino into a medium of instruction would only make it difficult for scholars of Filipino dialects and languages to justify the legitimacy of their academic disciplines.

“If the [new] CHED curriculum is implemented in Ateneo, we will only be contributing to the development of a more arrogant and out-of-touch middle class. The removal of Filipino as a subject will only aggravate the alienation of our students from the localities in which their power is situated,” said Salazar.

Lack of direction

The CHED memo states that universities have the prerogative to teach the new courses in either English or Filipino.

However, in the same statement released on June 23, CHED said that public consultations will be held regarding the recommendation of requiring at least nine units of the new GEC to be taught in Filipino.

The recommendation came from a CHED technical panel; according to CHED, the panel must present its findings to the commission once public consultations are completed.

According to Salazar, this move by CHED illustrates a lack of direction in transitioning to the new curriculum, which results to a number of problems, such as the fund for training professors to teach interdisciplinary courses.

He added that the Ateneo should be mindful of other universities that can only comply with the CMO because they do not have the flexibility that the Ateneo has.

“The nationwide implementation of the curriculum should be backed by a more prescriptive plan that lays out contingencies that takes into account the finances, resources and capabilities of each and every university and college in the country,” he explained.

For English Department Associate Chair Danilo Reyes, his concern over the new curriculum proposed by CHED is the lack of clarity during the transition from a disciplinary to an interdisciplinary approach.

“The problems have translated to the massive retrenchment of teachers, closure of certain academic departments, the lack of teacher training, need for funds, the possible bankruptcy of schools and colleges,” he said.

Reyes, however, said that many teachers are still interested to follow a comprehensive plan for transition.

“The interest has something to do with concrete steps on how to carry it out, with well-defined principles, clear targets, phases, specific strategies and ample resources,” he explained.

In addition, Vergara said that the Ateneo is willing to extend a hand to other universities who have difficulty transitioning to the new curriculum, but that it will be a complicated process.

“I’m pretty sure we will find a fair solution that is workable for our departments. [The new GEC] is workable for Ateneo. I understand how it might not be workable for other universities… As much as I’d like to help in that regard, it’s really a more complicated question, and I’d like to participate in that as much as possible,” he said.