Beyond the backlash, free higher education stands strong

In the last State of the Nation Address (SONA), President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. reinforced his administration’s full support for free higher education. This is the second straight SONA where PBBM highlighted CHED’s flagship program.

This landmark social legislation, which was enacted though RA 10931 or the Universal Access to Quality Higher Education (UAQTE) on Aug. 3, 2017 by president Rodrigo Roa Duterte, has undoubtedly given hope and changed the lives of millions of Filipinos.

As PBBM said, “Taon-taon, mahigit dalawang milyong estudyante ang nakakapag-aral ng libreng kolehiyo sa bansa. Mula umpisa ng Administrasyong ito, dinagdagan pa natin ng dalawang daan at animnapung libong estudyante ang nakinabang dito (Every year, more than two million students study for free in universities. Under this administration, we added more than 260,000 student-beneficiaries to the program).”

He also assured those who are going to university that significant funding is ready for free public higher education, including subsidies and financial assistance to needy students. The President pledged P60 billion for free public higher education in 2026.

The President also mentioned that our participation rate and completion rate is second only to Singapore in the region and urged parents to send their children to university.

We have been told by development planners after the post-war period that countries must invest in primary and secondary education in order to produce the critical workforce for national development. This may be the reason why our Constitution provides for a system of free public education only in the elementary and high school levels. We needed to pass RA 10931 to provide free education in the tertiary level.

But this old development prescription is no longer sufficient. Over the past decade, comparative country studies of the World Bank have concluded that:

“The economic returns for tertiary education graduates are the highest in the entire educational system – an estimated 17 percent increase in earnings as compared with 10 percent for primary and seven percent for secondary education.”  (World Bank, 2023)

The World Bank added that “tertiary education is instrumental in fostering growth, reducing poverty and boosting shared prosperity. A highly skilled workforce, with lifelong access to a solid post-secondary education, is a prerequisite for innovation and growth: well-educated people are more employable and productive, earn higher wages and cope with economic shocks better.”

Clearly, government support for higher education is no longer an option but a requirement for the country’s development. However, there are still critics who continue to question the free higher education policy. A former budget secretary turned finance secretary said that the program was costly and unsustainable right after PBBM vowed to continue the program in his 2023 SONA.

Interestingly, the Second Congressional Commission on Education (EDCOM II) in its report entitled “Higher Education: Correcting Inequities, Improving Quality in Higher Education” did not mention the increasing participation rate resulting from free higher education nor cited the data and policy thrust of the President.

CHED-UNIFAST data show that the participation rate (percentage of university age students who are enrolled in university) in higher education has dramatically increased from 26.6 percent (2017) to 47 percent (2024), largely due to the promise of free tuition and miscellaneous fees in state and local universities. This participation rate is the highest in our history. The UNESCO Institute of Statistics in 2023 noted that the Philippines is second only to Singapore in participation rate in the ASEAN region.

As more Filipinos enter university, do more Filipinos complete their education? Some of the critics have pointed out that more than 40 percent of Filipino students do not finish their education. What they conveniently fail to mention is that our Gross Graduation Rate (GGR) from First Degree Programs (56.88 percent) is actually higher than that of Malaysia, Thailand, Indonesia and Vietnam, and second only to Singapore in the ASEAN region. Our GGR is higher than that of Norther Africa and West Asia (29 percent), Latin America and the Caribbean (22 percent) and the world average (27 percent).

Now here is an even more interesting fact. According to CHED-UNIFAST data, those who get additional government subsidy through the Tertiary Education Subsidy and Tulong Dunong Program have completion rates of 78 percent, which is way higher than the national average.

Why was this not mentioned in the EDCOM II Report?  Maybe because the EDCOM II talked of “Miseducation: The Failed System of Philippine Education” in its Year One Report and started with the premise that higher education was part of a failed system.

I don’t imagine that neither EDCOM II co-chairs Sherwin Gatchalian and Mark Go were unfamiliar with these data. Gatchalian was one of the original authors of the Free Higher Education bill when he was still a congressman. Mark Go taught at the University of the Philippines and fully appreciates the value of public education.

Could it be because some of the technical people in the EDCOM Secretariat continue to be adamantly against free higher education, notwithstanding the high enrolment and completion statistics, plus all the family success stories since the implementation of RA 10931?

Now that the President has continued to vow support, can the critics stop finding fault and start looking for ways to help keep higher education accessible to Filipinos? There is so much more to do. And while P60 billion looks big, the free higher education law is severely underfunded and needs the support of everyone.