The Revised Polytechnic University of the Philippines (PUP) Charter, also referred to as the Senate Bill 2037, directs the country's largest state university in terms of student population to the pedestal as it keeps up to its pursuit for further academic excellence as an educational institution.  Also commonly tagged as the NPU Bill which aims to assign PUP as the National Polytechnic University to further actualize its ideals, the said legislative endeavor is once more being worked on for its fervent ratification despite the challenging circumstances imposed by the COVID-19 pandemic to industries including the academe.

As reported, Senator Juan Edgardo Angara, the Senate Bill's author, expressed that it is timely and relevant for PUP to elevate its designation as NPU so as to help equip the university with addressing its dire need to improve its mandate of providing quality education and competitive learning ground for its students who are currently being supported by the tax of the masses.

The university's dynamic growth, next to its production of topnotchers in numerous licensure exams through the years, make up for its merit which is material in considering the ratification of the NPU bill. But on September 4, 2019, President Rodrigo Duterte vetoed the bill for the reason of a need for a reassessment to be done in terms of the institution's performance ranking among the country's state universities and colleges (SUCs).

With PUP's fiscal autonomy on the line, the supposed approval of the bill is also expected to impact the national government monetarily. 

"The proposed provision on appropriations would also have a fiscal impact on the government, which may be avoided only if the PUP budget would continue to be subject to the need of prioritization and the usual budgetary and monitoring processes," Duterte said in his letter.

However, Duterte further expressed his lack of concern towards the university once it got shut down upon his command. Posing threats towards critical and progressive students who are calling for academic freedom and end of impunity during his term.

Nonetheless, such initiative cements PUP's position towards being one of the leading state universities on a nationwide level that can potentially produce prospective industry figureheads. But just like any other socio-political issues in the institution, the said bill is not without contestions. In fact, it created uproars among the students of the university as it was deemed to serve more ill than value for the PUPian community concurrently. This adds fuel to the fire as PUPian employees produced by the institution have been known to be subject to a neoliberal educational policy that has caused the generation of cheap labor in the job market for the past years--hence, the term "first choice of employers" being associated with them. Having said that, this supposed development of the university charter might not be the most sufficient aid for the succeeding students of PUP, along with these reasons.

Revitalizing the Workforce's Leadership Aptitude

In response to the call of reassessing its overall performance as an academic institution leading the NPU Bill to get vetoed, PUP launched through its official Facebook page on September 27 its Leadership and Management Program (Project LAMP), an initiative that aims to develop the ability of its current and prospective academic and non-academic executives to fulfill their respective supervisory and leadership tasks and responsibilities within the university.

Incumbent university President Manuel Muhi formally opened the said program, emphasizing the significance of incepting a training program that molds the leaders beneath the characters of the institution's officers.

"Ang mahusay na lider ay pinanday, nilubog sa tubig, dinarang sa apoy. In short—hinubog..." President Muhi said in his speech.

Filled with various integrative courses, the said project is said to focus on the university's middle managers, designees with supervisory responsibility, and those who are designated by their sector vice presidents toward and their needs to initiate re-entry action programs in their individual professions.

The morning session of the said program was graced by two keynote speakers. First was a former congressman and representative of the Indigenous People Sector of the 10th Congress of the Philippines and the current CHED Commissioner Dr. Ronald Adamat who talked about the context of "Higher Education and National Development in a VUCA World". 

According to him, in the midst of a changing environment, HEIs are still the most visible contributor to the national development of any country. With leaders having the primary function of mentoring and managers having the responsibility of operating, both leadership and management skills are integral to university executives especially on volatility, uncertainty, complexity, and ambiguity (VUCA) situations as they are deemed to be reliable aspects in transforming human resources and the workforce of the future and achieving organizational goals.

"An accomplished leader is someone who did not only leave a legacy but who has also trained his successor to be a leader better than he is," he said.

On the other hand, former CHED Commissioner and dean of National College of Public Administration and Governance Dr. Alex B. Brillantes Jr. expounded the context of "Phronetic Leadership in Higher Education".

Aimed at knowledge co-creation, he said that the further elevation of PUP demands the need for leaders with ethics, accountability, and integrity. As much as reform frameworks are concerned, coopertition and localization in the field of research and publication must also be sought after. This effort, among others, will lead to the institution's creation of phronetic leaders--the ones desired by the 21st century teeming with practical wisdom, experiential knowledge, ethically sound wit, integrity, honesty, and way of life. 

Absolute Access to Free Education 

One of the provisions of the NPU Bill states that:

Sec. 10, par. D: "Fix the tuition fees and other necessary school charges, such as but not limited to matriculation fees, graduation fees, and laboratory fees, as their respective boards may deem proper to impose after due consultations with the involved sectors"

Since its inception in 1904, PUP currently has over 20 campuses that attend to the needs of more than 70,000 students. And over the years, various anti-student policies were abolished due to a progressive mob that casts community effort. In 2007, thousands of PUP students marched from Sta. Mesa to Pasig to express their dissent to a supposed tuition fee hike from PHP 12 to PHP 75. In 2010, another collective movement was initiated to overthrow the apparent increase in tuition fees from PHP 12 to PHP 200. 

The socialized tuition fee scheme and the standardization of tuition fees for LGU-funded PUP campuses, to add up, were both abolished in 2013 and 2014, respectively. In 2015, the specious PHP 16,000 tuition fee hike for incoming senior high school students in the university, alongside memorabilia fee (PHP 1,200) and alumni fee (PHP 500), were further exterminated. And finally, in 2017, PUPian students had absolutely attained free tuition fees in the institution.

Hitherto, this call for a free education that is not subject to any conditions has been front and center to the demands of the students. But the NPU bill suggests the collection of 'necessary' school charges which will be utilized for the utmost development of the educational institution. 

As much as the intention presented for doing so appears to be fair, the very fact that the students will be obliged to pay a certain amount to afford the services offered by the university heavily counters the aforementioned demand. And since this provision does not clearly state the fees which must only be required to be settled, the discretion to define the expenses to be charged to the students will solely be left to the university. And this ambiguity can be a point of reference to possible anomalies and overcharges that may ensue within the PUP community in the long run. 

Furthermore, the bill also states that:

Sec. 8, par. K: "He shall grant permission for the use of the building and premises of the university for academic, professional, and scientific conventions, for student and related activities and to fix the fee thereof."

Since some of the activities conducted by students and organizations are not freely accessible currently, NPU Bill will only intensify the strain in affording fundamental services and performing significant movements for the community within the university--thereby directly retaliating PUP's directive of quality education for all.

Furthermore, the PHP 11.6 billion CHED budget cut in 2020 imposed constraints for premier SUCs such as the University of the Philippines (U.P) and PUP. With that, the construction of further infrastructures which will add up to the conduciveness of these institutions as learning facilities cannot be absolutely guaranteed, since the completion of such endeavors will more likely be extended, if not halted. Thus, a bill seeking an increment in the financial distress of academic institutions can be deemed to be untimely. 

Propitious Facilities and Infrastructures

Another provision provided by the NPU Bill states that:

Sec. 10, par. Q: "Enter into joint ventures with business and industry for the profitable development and management of the economic assets of the college or institutions…"

Since the goal of this legislative endeavor is to elevate the university as a promising educational institution that fosters a professional learning space for its students, the same is desired to be achieved by adhering to privatization and corporatization so as to ensure that the additional stockholders will be able to give opportunities for PUP to effectuate its goals in the long run. 

However, the prospective impacts of privatization and corporatization to the whole of the PUP community must also be sought after. Evidently, PUP's reputation is marked with progressiveness with tons of changes for the welfare of the students being made possible by the collective efforts of concerned associations within the university. But the intent to give private entities the privilege of having authority in the institution which they can leverage can endanger the pre-existing customs of the school's primary stakeholders. 

With the concerned bill being enacted, the institution's curriculum will gradually be affected, since the arrival of these new key players can invade the effective academic curriculum of PUP. The changes, which may rapidly be infused to the university, may not be sustained by the current conditions of the institution that is only about to take a leap in such a massive transformation. 

Instead of giving a platform to student body governments and organizations in the event of disputes, the administration's agenda might be shifted towards amplifying the individual ventures to be pushed through by these private industries.

Furthermore, the bill also states that:

Sec. 10, par. W: "Privatize, where most advantageous to the institution, management and non-academic services such as health, food, building, or grounds or property maintenance and similar such other objectives."

This clause emphasizes that privatizing both academic and non-academic services of the university is a way of systematizing the flow of operations within the institution. Unlike that which ran for the past decades, commercializing distinct establishments within PUP can impose order and maximization of resources such as time and space to promote conduciveness.

But the choice itself is costly, unsustainable, and may not be compatible as well to the circumstances and the demands of the community within the university. By doing so, additional fees have to be pooled so that the said vision will be attained. And without apt internal controls and financial planning, excessive charges may further burden certain key players in the institutions such as the food concessionaires who were, to start with, already incurring rent expenses during their tenure in PUP for the past years. 

Democratic Rights and Policies

The NPU Bill, which suggests a thorough Charter amendment for the university, was created without proper consultation with PUP's Board of Regents. And by assessing the clauses included in the said bill, a lack of specific provisions for distinct stakeholders of the institution may be observed. This reflects a flawed process for the institution since it will be unjust for the ones who will be directly and indirectly affected by these resolutions to be excluded from the dialogue.

There were no provisions directly pertaining to the rights of councils and publications in relevance to the NPU bill. This fact serves as another point of concern regarding the possible breach in the fundamental entitlements of these organizations which, at the moment, were already being perpetrated indirectly as manifested by the lack of ample support from the administration. 

This further stretches for the benefit of the students at the university. With the lack of clauses within the bill concerning the protection of their rights, anti-democratic policies might ensue when demanded by necessity. Knowing that increased involvement by private entities as stockholders in the institution can grant them greater power over the rest of the stakeholders, this fear is not too distant from being true.  

Performance Ranking Among SUCs

In 2019, it was revealed that PUP's SUC Level downgraded from Level 4 to Level 2 for the period covered 2012 to 2016, under the first term of then-President Emanuel de Guzman. 

This is indicated by the university's lack of course offerings that are remarked as a Center of Excellence or Center of Development by the Commission on Higher Education (CHED). Also, there are only select programs within the educational institution that are recognized with a Certificate of Program Compliance (COPC) by the said government agency. 

This stands as another ground for discussion as it may raise questions regarding the footing of PUP compared with the other SUCs that were also striving to actualize the same mandate. Notwithstanding the reputable performance of the university as reflected by its history, it must also be considered that it is free from any ill reactions coming from other higher educational institutions (HEIs) so as to maintain the objectivity and rationality of the said bill.

Furthermore, alongside the students, parents, and industry partners, regulating bodies such as the Professional Regulatory Commission (PRC) and accrediting organizations like the Accrediting Agency for Chartered Colleges and Universities of the Philippines (AACCUP), Association of Local Colleges and Universities Commission on Accreditation (ALCUCOA), among others were not invited to a public hearing for possible consultations in the proposed amendments by the bill. 

It further shows that the clauses included in the said charter revision were more likely to be narrowed down to attend to the demands of private entities, which serve as the key players on the intent to privatize, corporatize, and commercialize the university--leaving the current industrial profile of PUP as an academic institution unassessed.

With the pitfalls of this legislative endeavor being identified, it is clear that the ultimate goal of the NPU Bill, which is to strengthen the institution's fiscal autonomy and its place in the field of the academe, is necessary but its technicalities prevent itself from being holistically beneficial for the university and its stakeholders. Critical issues on a socio-political level, which will be detrimental to the welfare of the entire community, are bound to ensue with the attempt to privatize, commercialize, and corporatize PUP. Thus, what is being sought for instead is a charter reform that will lead the education system to be nationalistic, scientific, and mass-oriented. 

With or without this bill under discussion, students of the university have long been clamoring for a budget increase to actualize the quality education that PUP had as its mandate. Thus, the resolution to these conflicts being addressed poses a challenge for the institution's administration to engage themselves with the student leaders as the latter attempt to raise the students' demands to the former and submit counter-proposals to initiate the necessary revisions in the bill. Doing so will ensure that the prospective charter of the academic institution becomes one that is made by and for its primary stakeholders above all else.

Report by John Vincent Dela Cruz
Design by Allaizah Domiquil

 This free site is ad-supported. Learn more
​