Position Paper on Typology in Education
Michelle A. Ventura
Structures and Organization of Higher Education in the Philippines (DEASOHEPN)
Position Paper Subject: Towards Rationalizing Philippine Higher Education by Dr. Allan B. Bernardo
I. Background of the Issue A. A significant number of reasons and purposes have been articulated concerning the creation of typologies or classification scheme both in the Philippines and abroad since the 1960s. In the House Bill number 363 of the 15th Congress, introduced by Hon. Marcelino A. Teodoro, it was explained that the provision of a definite system for determining the number and distribution of different types of HEIs is necessary in rationalizing the SUCs and all other Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) in the Philippines for allocating resources and for developing interventions for various types of HEIs . Another, and one of the original reasons, is to develop support in research on higher education by providing sound/viable basis for classifying an increasing number of HEIs which on the part of policy-makers will enable them to target policies and programs to categories of similar and related institutions. For students, they will be better able to identify the appropriate institutions for them and make better informed choices. Business and industries would be able to determine which institutions to partner with. A typology that helps HEIs position themselves in the academic market was proposed by Zemsky and Massy (cited in Finn 1998). The mushroom-like proliferation of public HEIs charging extremely cheap tuition and fees but are actually substandard in terms of the quality of academic learning they offer to students is an addition to the concerns. Since these public HEIs offer basically same programs with the private HEIs, despite this aspect on quality, private HEIs are given unfair competition. As a result, there is an influx of students to public HEIs, thus, a greater demand for subsidized higher education and the sad outcome
Structures and Organization of Higher Education in the Philippines (DEASOHEPN)
Position Paper Subject: Towards Rationalizing Philippine Higher Education by Dr. Allan B. Bernardo
I. Background of the Issue A. A significant number of reasons and purposes have been articulated concerning the creation of typologies or classification scheme both in the Philippines and abroad since the 1960s. In the House Bill number 363 of the 15th Congress, introduced by Hon. Marcelino A. Teodoro, it was explained that the provision of a definite system for determining the number and distribution of different types of HEIs is necessary in rationalizing the SUCs and all other Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) in the Philippines for allocating resources and for developing interventions for various types of HEIs . Another, and one of the original reasons, is to develop support in research on higher education by providing sound/viable basis for classifying an increasing number of HEIs which on the part of policy-makers will enable them to target policies and programs to categories of similar and related institutions. For students, they will be better able to identify the appropriate institutions for them and make better informed choices. Business and industries would be able to determine which institutions to partner with. A typology that helps HEIs position themselves in the academic market was proposed by Zemsky and Massy (cited in Finn 1998). The mushroom-like proliferation of public HEIs charging extremely cheap tuition and fees but are actually substandard in terms of the quality of academic learning they offer to students is an addition to the concerns. Since these public HEIs offer basically same programs with the private HEIs, despite this aspect on quality, private HEIs are given unfair competition. As a result, there is an influx of students to public HEIs, thus, a greater demand for subsidized higher education and the sad outcome
References: www.ched.gov.ph/chedwww/index.php/.../CHED-00000003.PDF http://www.nifu.no/Norway/Publications/2006/CHINC_internediate%203.pdf http://www.scribd.com/doc/50759057/3/Why-Do-We-Need-A-Typology-of-Higher-Education-institutions2. © CHEPS | MJ, DW | 2004 18.11.04 2 Overview presentation Carnegie Classification US and UK typologies Rationale for a typology Methodological issues Socrates Project CEIHE I Socrates Project CEIHE II Cooperation Switzerland – CEIHE II CHEPS | MJ, DW | 2004 18.11.04 3 Carnegie Classification (US) 1973: http://taborasj.wordpress.com/2012/01/24/official-ceap-paper-on-cheds-proposed-outcomes-and-typology-based-quality-assurance/ http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?storycode=407620 phil.baty@tsleducation.com