Position Paper on Typology in Education Essay

A. Ventura Structures and Organization of high(prenominal) information in the Philippines (DEASOHEPN) Position Paper qualified Towards Rationalizing Philippine Higher facts of life by Dr. Allan B. Bernardo I. Background of the Issue A. A authoritative calculate of reasons and purposes harbour been articulated furbish uping the humans of typologies or variety stratagem two in the Philippines and abroad since the 1960s. In the habitation Bill descend 363 of the 15th Congress, introduced by Hon. Marcelino A.Teodoro, it was explained that the provision of a definite clay for determining the number and diffusion of contrary types of HEIs is necessary in rationalizing the SUCs and on the whole new(prenominal) Higher tuition Institutions (HEIs) in the Philippines for tout ensembleocating resources and for growing interventions for various types of HEIs . A nonher, and superstar of the original reasons, is to let on support in look for on higher statement by provid ing estimable/viable pedestal for classifying an increasing number of HEIs which on the part of policy-makers leave alone enable them to target policies and programs to categories of homogeneous and related launchings.For students, they matter be better able to secern the appropriate institutions for them and make better inform choices. Business and industries would be able to watch which institutions to partner with. A typology that sponsors HEIs position themselves in the academic market was proposed by Zemsky and Massy (cited in Finn 1998). The mushroom-like proliferation of customary HEIs charging extremely cheap study and fees set upd be actually inferior in name of the quality of academic learning they offer to students is an addition to the concerns.Since these general HEIs offer prefatoryally same programs with the head-to-head HEIs, despite this aspect on quality, personal HEIs be switchn unfair competition. As a outlet, thither is an inflow of st udents to public HEIs, thus, a crackinger demand for subsidise higher education and the sad solution is that all of these, at the expense of basic education. B. accord to Dr. Bernardo (1998), a motley scheme should be seful and could be utilized in order to obtain solid statistical values/data on the distri nonwithstandingion of resistent types of HEIs in selected or designate regions of the terra firma. This could be used as a reference by CHED in rationalizing standards and qualification directmental interventions necessary to improve the bequest status or condition of our HEIs. To give concrete examples, he enumerated few parameters which includes library holdings, look output signals of faculty, faculty development programs, investigate programs development, to name a few.According to Dr. Bernardo, a certain caveat should be heeded if wholly to further refine the current typology universe used. He likewise proposed the adoption of a typology by the explosive charge itself for quality purposes. Dr. Bernardo opposes the perspicacity of many a(prenominal) of the discussants that says Philippine universities cannot be typed for reasons that SUCs eat been established for a variety of reasons such(prenominal) as politically while private tames be established religiously and academically. Dr.Bernardo stresses that purge in the United States where the Carnegie 2000 is being employed, most colleges exist as a answer of land grants, some argon state-funded and some which are funded for religious purposes. Dr. Bernardo adds to the fact that indeed, scarce typing HEIs is difficult that is why check to him, there should be a opine of the non-quantitative aspects of typing. He stated that musical accompaniment is not solely limited to marine seek entirely as a weigh of fact, a significant number of funding exists for various types of social science investigate, proficient and rude research.He reiterated that there are so many fu nding for research worldwide but an institution emphatically and logically needfully to position itself offset if it desires to be a Research University. II. Zemsky and Massy (Finn 1998) proposes a typology that helps HEIs position themselves in the academic market. According to Teichler (2003), the various HEIs may be sort out in terms of types which may be contemplateed as points in a spectrum.This manner that in the compartmentalization scheme, related types differ in terms of certain dimensions and that it is master(prenominal) to note that the relationships among types is regarded as a just dimension, emphasizing quality or status. Shulman give tongue to that the Carnegie 2000 mixture of Higher Education Institutions was primitively intended to support research in higher education but was afterward on used for unintended purposes such as to establish rankings of HEIs, make decisions close institutional funding and guide tryst of grant programs.Phil Baty , editor of the Times Higher Education Rankings, and editor at plumping of Times Higher Education describe that in Europe the introduction of classification in HEI created some fear that Europe-wide university classification entrust hamstring institutions since for a long-time it has been hai direct as an antidote to traditional league tables a transparent and fair way to equality a universitys cognitive operation with that of its peers. As a result there was an influx of criticisms raised intimately U-Map, the European Com bursters project to categorise e very(prenominal) European university at a lower billet a private classification system.Critics have warned that the plan could stump universities, limiting if not disrupting their development during this stream of globalization accompanied by quick change which commences to a dramatic reorganise of the student market across Europe. beam of light prop, professor of higher education at the University of Strathclyde, organise d a conference on U-Map under the title Towards a Classification of European Higher Education. His whimsey and findings parallels that of Fr.Roderick Salazar when he told Times Higher Education that while the system could have open-and-shut benefits in promoting diversity and raising the incorrupts global profile as the European Higher Education there had to be a proper confer about its potential effects. He added that this token project which the European ministers of education and the European Commission have endorsed called for a great financial expense in the country, but unfortunately, not enough discussion about it have been conducted in the UK.U-Map emerged from an August 2005 report, institutional Profiles Towards a Typology of Higher Education Institutions in Europe, part of a project led by the Centre for Higher Education Policy Studies at the University of Twente in the Netherlands. The U-Map aggroup said the system ordain not rank institutions league table-style, but will position them on a number of dimensions, each representing an aspect of function and performance. This stand is similar to the point of view of the discussants and critics of Dr. Bernardo.In the European system, six dimensions have been proposed the educational profile (looking at full stop levels and the subject areas covered) the student profile (including do enrolments and part-time numbers) research involvement (measuring research income, peer- refreshened outlets and the like) involvement in knowledge enchant (judged by elements such as patents and licensing income) supranational orientation (including a measure for foreign academic staff) and regional orientation. Professor Land said that the classification would have run benefits which includes allowing one to compare like with like.He clarified that an authority would not compare Harvard University with Broken-Neck College, Missouri, for example and therefore it will provide information that is more(prenom inal) useful and relevant. However, he added that there were pros and cons, as there will always be unintended consequences. Thus, he suggested that once an institution had been categorized, funding agencies and some other stakeholders could start treating it according to that classification. As he mentioned, universities big businessman not like to be categorized, or have their wings stocked in any direction. It is expected that if you are entrepreneurial, you will not want to be pigeonholed.For that reason, the classifications would need to be kept under review since higher education sectors are not static, and Europes several(prenominal)(a) institutions change their status and missions. This is a special K opinion among authorities in education both in the Philippines and abroad. The challenges of globalization and increase competition have led to institutions development new and innovative draws in areas where antecedently there had not been demand. This is true not comp letely in Europe, the United States but to a fault in Asia including the Philippines. These continuing changes may affect an institutions place in the system.Pam Tatlow, chief executive of the one million million million+ think-tank, said that the proposed classifications have all the supreme factors of any league table and will not at all help or contribute to the European research base or European juncture institutions to compete globally. Professor Land besides said that U-Map could possibly have significant effects on the student market. For example, UK students might start to see courses taught in English in Europe as a better option. They may see that it is cheaper to do a similar degree course with a better reputation in Sweden than in the UK. It alters the rules of engagement. Wendy Piatt, its director-general of the Russell Group of large research-intensive institutions was more positive when she welcomed publications that improved information for students in order to move away from immovable hierarchies to capture huge and positive diversity. besides she that there is a need to turn back for more details to determine on the dot how useful the classification will be. Frederick So Pada, one of the consultants of PASUC, saw certain similarities and disparities on the program offerings and enrollment per program tete-a-tete charter mandate and areas of specialization employ the SUC Leveling criteria.He likewise state that although he does not question the result of the study on typology, he was strike to know that some universities were inappropriately classified. In other words, their classification did not add up their actual behavior. III. Considering the various point of views presented, I would say that adopting a typology for the Philippine HEIs is sound but I agree with the opinion of Fr. Roderick Salazar when he said that we moldiness constantly be conscious and too-careful to see that the typology we are using is not final and acc urate.Therefore, it must not be used immediately as it is as basis for planning. We should be prepared and a lot open in reservation our cause revisions or modifications for such classification in order to tailor-fit it to the call for of our local anesthetic HEIs. This is considering what some of the experts, both locals and foreigners have accounted, that is, the Carnegie 2000 has its own set of flaws or weaknesses which showed up since its finishing in the United States. As a result, it yielded some criticisms or negative comments with the years. I likewise agree with some other comment Fr.Salazar gave when he reminded the discussants in one of the fora he attended that at some point, instead of merely focusing on rationalizing our higher education, our HEIs should instead get in the job of being and becoming what the institution was originally called to be. Dr. Bernardo also had a similar opinion when he said that the concern does not lie much on how CHED rationalizes the university system by type but more on the quality of that HEI. It in reality does not matter whether an institution is a Doctoral Research University, a change institution a technological/agricultural College or a Community College.If it is delicate in doing what it should be doing, then so be it. Otherwise, all it has to do is to treat to seek to improve in all aspects. Most schools in the Philippines start very modestly and grow into institutions that eventually develop and turn out to become what our country perfectly involve at that circumstance time considering its nature or resources. A very good example of this is the UP Los Banos, which up to present, continues to serve not only the countrys agricultural needs but even those of our neighboring countries needs as well.We cannot deny the fact that our Philippine HEIs have a lot of gain to undergo but the way this outcomes and typology is proposed, it would render much disappointments and negativity in the higher educat ion community if such a system as the Carnegie is to be introduced as it is. It would be best to introduce it prospectively for all new colleges and all new universities. It would also be helpful to allow several models of universities, and not just the one-size-fits-all university type which in fact doesnt fit many long-practicing universities in the country.Dr. Allan Bernardo clearly explained on how the granting of the HEI types, would be possible to evaluate the HEI outputs based on HEI types. Schools would choose their types based on the review of their own respective missions. A school which originally aims to serve based on a mission to respond to the needs of an LGU community would choose to be a community college. A school that was created to importantly contribute to the development of technical skills of our mess would choose to be a schoolmaster college.Thus, the resulting outputs of a particular HEI based on type would be a result of realigning itself as stated on i ts mission/vision. Because of this, those institutions who would like to focus on master development neednot trouble about research and research publication in peer-reviewed journals. Therefore investments in institutional development would be better placed based on type/classification. The output quality would then be thrifty according to the inputs according to type. Assessment would be gruesome and confusing.This education sector pertain would as a result qualify to become what originally it was called and created to be, that is an excellent HEI. alone making use of parameters such as how many laboratories are existing, academic degrees, facilities that are inputted into an instructional system as the primary(prenominal) tool for valueing an institutional type, is definitely not a very reliable basis for classification. One has to take the trouble to assess an instructional system in terms of what it actually produces, not on a one-time study, but it has to be a semiperma nent assessment if it wishes to be accurate and reliable.