2017: Another great year for education policy

ONE of the important laws passed this 2017 and may also be regarded as a landmark legislation in the Philippines is the Universal Access to Quality Tertiary Education Act, or Republic Act 10931. This law started as a “free education in SUCs bill” but has expanded into a law that includes subsidy and assistance to students in the private colleges and universities. This law now makes education in the state universities and colleges, or SUCs, free; provides education subsidy to all students, including those enrolled in the private higher education institutions; and provides budget for student loans. Remarkably, this is the only law so far that truly seeks to operationalize the constitutional mandate of complementarity between public and private educational institu

reform under the new law is the state funding of private higher education.

State funding of private education

Some policymakers are still averse to the idea of state funding for private education. One of the strongest arguments against it is the principle that government funds and property shall be used solely for government or public purposes. This is found in PD 1445, the decree in 1978 that created the Government Auditing Code of the Philippines. Another major argument against it is that appropriating funds for private education is like an abdication of the government’s duty to provide education for the Filipino youth.

Despite the strong opposition to state funding of private education in general, the following are some of the laws that actually support participation of the private sector in the delivery of education:

Art II, Section 20, 1987 Philippine Constitution. The State recognizes the indispensable role of the private sector, encourages private enterprise, and provides incentives to needed investments.

Art XIV, Section 4, 1987 Philippine Constitution. The State recognizes the complementary roles of public and private institutions in the educational system and shall exercise reasonable supervision and regulation of all educational institutions.

Batas Pambansa 232, or the Education Act of 1982, Section 33. Declaration of Policy - It is hereby declared to be the policy of the State that the national government shall of educational programs pursuant to goals of education as declared in the Constitution. Towards this end, the government shall: (2) Encourage and stimulate private support to and other assistance measures.

RA 10533, or the K to 12 Law, Section 10. The DepED shall engage the services of private education institutions and non-DepED schools offering senior high school through the programs under Re - cial arrangements formulated by the DepED and the Department of Budget and Management (DBM) based on the principles of publicprivate partnership.

RA 7718, “An Act Amending Certain Sections of RA 6957, entitled An Act Authorizing the Financing, Construction, Operation and Maintenance of Infrastructure Projects by the Private Sector and for Other Purposes,” Section 1. It is the declared policy of the State to recognize the indispensable role of the private sector as the main engine for national growth and development and provide the most appropriate incentives to mobilize private resources for the - tion, operation and maintenance of infrastructure and development projects normally financed and undertaken by the government. - cial incentives as provided by law, shall include providing a climate of minimum government regula government undertakings in support of the private sector. Education is a public good But the soundest counter-argument against disqualification of private education institutions from state funding remains that the delivery of education is a public good and the same does not lose its character as such even when it is delivered through private entities. In fact, the of private education is that when the private sector participates in the delivery of education to a portion of the State’s population, it actually eases the cost and burden from the State in the performance of its duty to its citizenry.

Privatization of higher education?

There is this fear that when higher education is “privatized”, it will become more expensive; reduce access of the poor and the marginalized; and that quality higher education will remain a privilege of the advantaged in the society. While to some extent this fear has some basis, we should not forget that the concept of privatization of education is viewed in two ways: One is where private money is used to fund public education; and another where public money is used to fund private education. In both, there are pitfalls involved.

private individuals and entities (including private schools) are used to fund public education in the SUCs. Over the years, issues such as over of public funds; poor facilities and resources; low quality of education; and even corruption and misappropriation of public funds continue to hound this view of “privatization” of public higher education.

This is the reason why, there is a growingpublic interestin exploring the second view of privatization which is expanding the State- fundingto include students in private higher education institutions. According to the Organisation for Economic Co- operation and Development or the OECD, part of that interest in broadening the responsibility for schools beyond the State is to provide greater choice for parents and students and to stimulate creativity and innovation within the educational institution themselves, and provide more space for academic freedom in running its affairs. Also, it is well- recognized that more students and parents prefer a privately- managed higher educational institution over a State school because they believe it provides better quality of education, it provides an environment more conducive to learning, and it has better educationpolicies and practices.

But still, majority of parents cannot afford to send their children to private higher educational institutions and only the advantaged are able to do so. According to the OECD report in 2015, this leads come from private and public schools. Students in the private schools are said to have better opportunities for development and growth, and gainful employment after school, while those from public schools have limited opportunities to succeed.

Avoiding Stratification in Education

Stratification means creating “classes” of students according to their socio-economic backgrounds. Families who belong to the higher economic statusare likely to send their children to a private school, while those who come from lower socio-economic levels are constrained to attend free public education. And because those who attend private education have better resources and better learning environment, they have better life prospects than their counterparts in public education.

Thus, the need for government to economic classes in order to avoid in education opportunities for all students, regardless of their socioeconomic backgrounds. According to the same OECD report, the level of public funding of private education has a direct correlation in the countries where privately managed schools receive higher proportions of public funding, there is less privately managed schools.

It seems that the Philippines is headed towards the right direction in allowing state funding of private higher education despite challenges and opposition to this concept widely recognized even in highly developed nations like the OECD member-countries. With Student Financial Assistance System for Tertiary Education, or the UNIFAST Law under RA 10931, there are many ways to allow state funding of private higher education of students through vouchers, scholarships, and loans. If implemented properly, students regardless of socio-economic background will have equity in education opportunities from quality educational institutions in both public and private sectors.

An increased state funding of private higher education would also spur quality initiatives in all higher educational institutions (HEIs), both public and private, as they “compete” for students in terms of quality of education services. This would result in more highperforming HEIs. Parents and students would be given the freedom of choice of HEIs without being limited by their socio-economic background. There would be less - sible higher education, and most of all—real equity in quality higher education for the Filipino youth.

It is hoped that the momentum created by the enactment of RA 10931, or the Universal Access to Quality Tertiary Education Act, be sustained in the year 2018 and the years to come.

Happy New Year!