On May 15, 2013, President Benigno Aquino III signed Republic Act (RA) No. 10533, otherwise known as the Enhanced Basic Education Act of 2013, into law. This aligned a key component of the Philippine education system with international standards—moving from a 10-year pre-university cycle to a 12-year pre-university cycle commonly used worldwide.

The additional two years of secondary schooling created is encapsulated in the new Senior High School (SHS) system. Due to the program’s desire for both a more extensive and specialized upper secondary education, the Department of Education (DepEd)’s curriculum, which has three career tracks or strands, contains many new subjects rarely taught in high schools in the country.

The SHS core curriculum is effectively composed of subjects that were once part of the Commission on Higher Education’s (CHED) general education curriculum (GEC), as mandated by CHED Memorandum Order (CMO) No. 59, series of 1996. CHED, thus, has had to make revisions. Despite the Ateneo’s autonomy, it cannot simply ignore the new GEC—it must adapt to it. This presents various challenges to the Loyola Schools (LS).

Changing the core

The challenge begins with the 1996 GEC itself. Before the K-12 program was implemented, universities had to ensure that tertiary courses of study leading to a bachelor’s degree in four years would have 63 units’ worth of subjects. This was back when higher education institutions (HEIs), not high schools, usually ended up with the burden of preparing the students for international standards they would face when they had graduated.

But School of Humanities (SOH) Dean Maria Luz Vilches, PhD, stresses that the Ateneo education—with its liberal arts tradition—does not only prepare its students for discipline-related work. This outlook further dictates how the university structures its own core curriculum.

“I always think that the reason we have a large [core curriculum] is that we’re forming people,” Vilches says. “So if [Ateneo graduates are] given this kind of work, they will not shy away from it even if that is not their training, but they’re able to grapple with it, based on the foundation they had in their Ateneo education.“

Vice President for the LS John Paul Vergara, PhD, lists the challenges that the LS now faces: Compliance with both the new subjects in the GEC and the anticipated changes in each major’s curriculum, as well as the uneven tackling of basic subjects in high schools nationwide. He points out that the handling of the required topics in SHS will be different across institutions. Thus, while universities may now take a less introductory approach to subjects, they need also to account for such uneven treatment.

To facilitate the university’s response on the matter, School of Science and Engineering (SOSE) Dean Evangeline Bautista, PhD, says that the core curriculum committee went through a process. What they did initially, she says, was to select four or five professors per school. These people were put together and then were separated into four or five groups, with the objective of each group being to come up with a proposed curriculum. These groups presented their own versions of what they thought would be the best core curriculum for the university. From there, they came up with one proposal, which they gave last April and May 2015 to the faculty at large. What has followed since then has been mostly feedback.

Bautista says that the second draft was expected to be presented on Faculty Day but did not push through. She explains that formulating a new core curriculum itself needs to go through a number of levels before it can be approved and implemented. The school council must first give its approval. Then the board of trustees, which she points out meets only four times a year, must assent to it as well; this means that the university has to time it in such a way that it coincides with those times. Lastly, the core curriculum has to go through CHED because it is a major curriculum change. Vergara expects it will be fully implemented in school year 2018-2019.

Across disciplines

Though the changes in the CHED core curriculum have yet to be finalized, the uniform 36 units—in place of the 63 units (51 for science, technology, engineering, and mathematics courses)—seem to push for a more multi-disciplinary approach to general education.

There are external and internal factors guiding the eight subjects outlined in CMO No. 20 s. 2013. Primary among these is the accessibility of information in a “technology-driven world order,” which thus requires “big-picture thinking”—the ability to look at a problem from different perspectives, but also as a larger whole—and a more critical and analytical approach to the world.

“I expect that many of the subjects in the core curriculum will be affected by this renewed thrust towards interdisciplinarity,” admits Vergara. According to him, interdisciplinarity, which guides the new CHED GEC, is in line with the principles of the Ateneo’s core curriculum. Interdisciplinary courses, where multiple departments and disciplines are, have already been present in the Loyola Schools prior to this announcement.

Vilches says that interdisciplinarity has been part of the thrust of the Ateneo for a long time, emphasized by the presence of an interdisciplinary studies department. Aside from this, Vilches points out that degrees like BS Communications Technology Management and BS Management of Applied Chemistry are proof of the already-present interdisciplinarity in the Ateneo.

As for the current core subjects, a few indeed may be considered interdisciplinary, most especially Sci10 or “Science and Society.” As the final course of the natural science core curriculum for non-science majors—although certain science majors may be required to take this subject, as well—its goal is to synthesize the different natural science classes taken and contextualize them in the modern world.

A balancing act

Most of the subjects now required in CHED’s GEC are similar to Sci10 because, as Vergara says, many of the topics–like the first few natural science classes–have theoretically been devolved to the high school. However, he goes on to say, “In practice, the actual implementation in the handling of these topics is expected to be uneven across the different high schools.”

This may be another reason why certain courses could stay in the core curriculum despite not being required by CHED. School of Social Sciences (SOSS) Dean Fernando Aldaba, PhD, explains that this may create a problem for certain courses. Because of the standardization of 36 required units in the GEC, the different technical panels of CHED—whose policies, standards, and guidelines dictate whether a graduate may truly be considered well-versed enough in their respective field–may add more required discipline-related courses.

Bautista says this is not in line with CHED’s supposed desire to be outcomes-based. With an outcomes-based curriculum, universities would have more autonomy. As long as their graduates satisfy desired outcomes, the program would be acceptable regardless of the number of units or classes offered.

“They said they will be going that way; unfortunately, they’re not. They’re still prescribing units; they’re still prescribing courses. We should be okay with an outcomes-based curriculum coming from CHED because we know we do produce good graduates, but that’s not how it is,” she says.

She worries that this may have a negative impact on certain courses, many in SOSE in particular. Because of the lower number of core units, she says, the technical panel for engineering believes that many of the previously five-year courses may be cut down to four-year courses in other universities.

“Can I stay competitive if my BS Math program is five years, while all the other BS Math programs are only four years? Eventually, will they be able to see that even if we have a five-year program, we still produce very good students?” she asks. Nevertheless, she says, she understands the importance of the core curriculum.

Anna Mendiola, the acting dean of the John Gokongwei School of Management (JGSOM), agrees. According to her, JGSOM majors need to be well-rounded, and the many core units help with that. More than that, however, the “heart,” the spirit of “men and women for and with others,” is what separates the business graduates of the Ateneo from the rest.

Vilches takes this one step further, saying, “The Ateneo education has always been really, not so much direct preparation for work. It’s really preparation for life.” Because of the formation they underwent in the Ateneo, she says, graduates are able to do work even if it is, strictly speaking, not the discipline they had entered. She mentions talking to BS Interdisciplinary Studies graduates who are now working in the corporate world, even if they had taken something different while at university. She says that students often ask what the best courses are to take prior to taking up medicine or law.

“Any of the courses can be best preparation,” she says. “So that is our brand; that’s our trademark.”

Facing forward

K-12, in many ways, has become an opportunity to implement changes far beyond just adding two years to basic education. Interdisciplinarity is just one of the new trends that are emerging and fighting for a place in the new system. It is clear that in light of all of these, a review of the core curriculum is necessary and welcomed.

Vergara says that, if the changes are implemented properly, Philippine graduates will be able to “tackle issues and problems in an integrative way and navigate different domains even as they practice their respective professions.” He says that the Ateneo has always aligned with this vision, while also hoping to form the leaders and catalysts in the country, through the optimal mix of major and core curriculum.

Despite the issues all these changes may bring about, it is clear that all the deans of the Loyola Schools have high hopes for K-12. The challenge, then, is to turn these visions into actual results.