Global standards for higher education (Second of four parts)

Last week, I started sharing with you, dear readers, my speech on the topic “the Role of CHED in Setting Global Standards for Higher Education in the Philippines” during the Mindanao State University-Iligan Institute of Technology (MSU-IIT) Institute Symposia and Fora on July 9, 2010 with the theme “Looking Global ……. Taking Actions . . .” This is the second part of that discussion.

In developing the curricular requirements for each program, the OPS reviews related documents and standards that serve as inputs to the discussion of the Technical Panels. The basic document used would be the previous PSG, sample curricula of known and acknowledged local and foreign Universities offering the same program, industry recommendations and internationally accepted standards advocated by foreign regulatory and developmental bodies. To cite as an example, the current Maritime Education minimum curricular requirements is based on learning objectives required by the International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers (STCW). The Standard was adopted by member countries of the International Maritime Organization. The 1978 STCW Convention was the first to establish basic requirements on training, certification and watchkeeping for seafarers on an international level. Previously the standards of officers and ratings were established by individual governments, usually without reference to practices in other countries. As a result standards and procedures varied widely, even though shipping is the most international of all industries. This means that educational institutions in the country offering maritime programs meet the learning requirements of the STCW and would result in the immediate recognition and acceptance of our maritime graduates to work in any international company that would be in need of their services.

Another example would be the model followed by the Information Technology/ Computing discipline. The country is not a signatory to any international agreement on the computing field, however, the Technical Panel for Information Technology Education has always used as reference the Curricular Recommendations of the Association for Computing Machinery for the undergraduate programs in IT. The Association for Computing Machinery, or ACM, is a learned society for computing. It was founded in 1947 as the world’s first scientific and educational computing society and is the recognized authority of academics in the field.
At the minimum, the TP for Information Technology Education incorporates the learning objectives required not only for the needs of the local industry but of a “universal” IT professional.

The third example would be in the field of Accountancy. The Technical Panel for accountancy took into consideration and complied with the requirements set forth by the United National Council of Trade and Development (UNCTAD) in developing the minimum curricular requirements for Accountancy.

In addition to the process of reviewing and adopting global standards the Commission also pursued a project on benchmarking and comparative study on policies and standards in priority disciplines in Asia, Europe and the USA. Several Technical Panel members were sent to various countries to conduct the visits submit reports on possible programs and projects that the Commission could undertake to keep our universities at par with our foreign counterparts in terms of instruction, research and extension and linkages.

QUALITY ASSURANCE (PROGRAM AND INSTITUTIONAL BASED)
The implementation of minimum policies and standards would be worthless if the Commission does not institute programs that would ensure that the schools are complying with the standards. Although the policies and standards are presented in detail specially the curricular requirements, the CHED still needs a mechanism to ensure that the courses are delivered to achieve the learning objectives. To do this the, the Office of Programs and Standards and the CHED Regional Offices conduct periodic monitoring and evaluation activities. The schools are monitored based on a set of standards that are outlined in the specific PSG (policies, standards and guidelines) covering the program. There is a plan to review the monitoring and evaluation instrument to reflect not only inputs and quantitative data but also outcomes and other qualitative data that encourages schools to go beyond the minimum requirements and target specific development activities and goals for a certain period of time. These targets or outcomes would be the basis for future monitoring activities of CHED.

Beyond the minimum standards, one of the showcase projects of CHED is the implementation of the Centers of Excellence Project. The Centers of Excellence Project is currently in the second batch of implementation. The COE project was first introduced in 1996 and since then has produced a substantial number of COE and COD recipients. The CHED recognizes programs that have exhibited quality and excellence in their areas of specialization. The COEs are given financial grants and other benefits such as partial autonomy and priority as CHED partners in other developmental programs and projects. The programs identified as COEs and CODs are at par with the best in the world and through this project, the Commission expects that more universities would strive to attain COE and COD status and raise their standards and be equal among their peers in the international community. –FELIZARDO Y. FRANCISCO, Manila Times

To be continued next week

dirfyf@yahoo.com