By ANDREA JOYCE LUCAS

The College of Engineering and the College of Social Sciences and Philosophy stand across each other along the Academic Oval, like two pieces of a matched set. It is as if their symmetry suggests the equal importance of the sciences and the humanities to UP. 

The General Education (GE) program stands testament to this, the core of UP's liberal education. Ever since its establishment in 1958 by then UP President Vicente Sinco, the GE was expected to become a unifying element that would maintain UP’s sense of nationalism and service to the community.

But now everything that the GE program stands for is in jeopardy, as reforms to the GE program have rapidly gained ground in UP, with all campuses but UP Diliman adopting the administration's proposed GE reforms. Once implemented, the reforms would reduce the current number of required GE courses to a minimum of 21 units.

The GE reforms promised to strengthen research in keeping with the demand for a “globally competitive” tertiary education. For all its promises of so-called “progress,” and like all changes in the university brought about by an obsession with “internationalization,” it looks like these reforms come with a very dear price.

A Case of Identity

Under the current GE program, UP students are required to take 45 units of GE courses, of which up to 9 units are prescribed, while the remaining slots are free choice. GE courses fall under three domains: the arts and humanities (AH), social sciences and philosophy (SSP), and math, science and technology (MST). The program was designed to broaden the students’ intellectual horizons, balance nationalism and internationalism and integrate knowledge and skills through an interdisciplinary approach.

The implementation of the GE program in 1958 marked the beginning of the GE program's long history. The first Filipino UP President, Rafael Palma, made academic freedom the highlight of his term, encouraging discussions about issues pertinent to the country. His successor, Jorge Bocobo, further entrenched nationalist ideals through promoting culture. Even as UP increasingly required academic units in its curricula, the university sought to establish a liberal identity. When President Sinco first implemented the GE program, it stood by the same principles and advocated for the humanization of UP’s brand of education.

But the GE program has never been perfect, and the university's most progressive faculty responded to challenges of keeping UP education relevant and empowering. Undergoing several changes throughout the years, the GE program came to represent the soul of UP—shaping awareness and fostering critical thinking about the issues within and outside the university.

As early as the Martial Law years, UP students began taking courses such as PI 100, The Life and Works of Jose Rizal. Some course offerings at this time also adopted Filipino as the medium of instruction. The GE program became a means to unite the constituent units of UP. There was a need to reaffirm UP’s liberal orientation and bounce back from fascist interventions and the chilling effect of the Marcos dictatorship.

Contradictions

The GE reforms however now present an absurd proposal—to trim down the number of GE subjects to internationalize and rationalize education, as opposed to UP education's current and more liberal slant.

The establishment of a GE program in the university rests on the idea of holistic learning. Its framework was designed in such a way that the intellect is disciplined for its own sake and for its own highest culture, which is how John Henry Cardinal Newman, author of “The Idea of a University,” defines what university life should be like. A university student should not be confined merely to his chosen field.

In the case of UP, this means the iskolar ng bayan must look beyond personal gain or professional development and develop a sense of obligation to serve the nation. “[GE] cannot be detached from our local struggle and national aspirations as a people,” explained the Congress of Teachers/Educators for Nationalism and Democracy (CONTEND) in a statement.

However, the trend to specialize has arisen because of the demands of globalization. In order to be competitive workers, professionals must forgo holistic development and trade for the acquisition of more marketable skills that are useful in the assembly lines of the global supply chain. After having achieved such a level of skill, professionals have little choice but to be drawn into the global market and the multinational big businesses that run it.

Taking Charge

The proposed GE reforms are not the only manifestation of the crisis in education caused by the demand to specialize and go global. This problem is also manifested in other issues, such as the K to 12 program. Militant youth groups such as Anakbayan and the League of Filipino Students have criticized the new educational system as a neoliberal mechanism to pander to the global labor market. “Higit na iniaayon ng mga ito ang edukasyon sa imperyalistang globalisasyon at dayuhang kapital,” the group said in a statement.

This is where a nationalist GE program could have made a difference. “[The] GE is myopically revisioned [by the proposed reforms] as a burden to be endured by students in their quest for a diploma. [But] in the University’s history, GE has proven itself as the only opportunity for all students to acquire the furniture of the mind,” explained CONTEND. Instead of being slaves to the demands of globalization, a well-oriented GE program could steer students into becoming professionals who will choose to heed the call to serve the nation.

“The ontological foundations of the GE curriculum [should not be just a] diploma mill, but training grounds for the next leaders of the country and henceforth the world. We are not creating robots that will only fall short to the hands of the market but Iskolars who will change the world,” said the UP Diliman University Student Council in a statement. ●

Published in print in the Collegian’s April 29, 2016 issue, with the headline “Identity Crisis: The Proposed GE Reform as Threat to UP Education’s Nationalist Aspirations.”