On halving college GE units: DOST-NRCP urges broader consultations on CHED’s proposed curriculum reframing

When Mr. Jack Daniels Varias enrolled in the Biology program at the University of the Philippines Los Baños (UPLB), he expected college to deepen the knowledge and skills he had gained from Senior High School (SHS). Like many freshmen, he looked forward to subjects that would prepare him for his chosen profession. Instead, he found several General Education (GE) subjects that felt familiar.

“Back then, I did not expect to take heavy GE subjects as a Biology student because some were not directly related to my field. However, I also acknowledge that GE subjects remain crucial in developing our foundation, critical thinking, and ethical values,” he said.

Another third-year Biology student, Ms. Fiona Colleen Alvarez, shared a different but equally important perspective. While she recognizes the value of General Education, she felt that the number of GE subjects competed with the time she could have spent strengthening the competencies required for her major.

“I was hoping for subjects that would further develop my skills before my practicum this year. I wanted to be as prepared as possible, but I felt I still needed more opportunities to strengthen those competencies,” she said.

Although their experiences differ, Jack and Fiona’s sentiments reflect two concerns that continue to shape discussions on higher education reform. How can colleges reduce unnecessary repetition with Senior High School while ensuring students receive both the broad education needed to become responsible citizens and the specialized training required for their future professions?

This question has become central to the conversation in education sector, following the release of the Commission on Higher Education’s (CHED) draft Policies, Standards, and Guidelines (PSG) for the Reframed General Education Curriculum on May 6, 2026. Among its most significant proposals is the reduction of the current 36-unit General Education requirement to 18 units through six interdisciplinary courses. The reframing seeks to align higher education with the K to 12 curriculum by eliminating overlapping competencies from Senior High School. Consequently, it gives higher education institutions more flexibility to strengthen disciplinary learning, research, and hands-on learning.

For students like Fiona, the proposal suggests more opportunities to strengthen professional competencies before graduation. For students like Jack, however, any curriculum reform should continue to preserve General Education’s role in developing critical thinking, ethical judgment, civic responsibility, and a broader understanding of society alongside technical expertise.

Understanding CHED’s proposed General Education reframing

General Education has long served as the common academic foundation for undergraduate students regardless of their degree programs. Through courses in communication, mathematics, science, the humanities, social sciences, and ethics, it seeks to complement disciplinary training by cultivating analytical thinking, ethical reasoning, effective communication, and civic consciousness. Rather than preparing students solely for a profession, General Education aims to develop graduates capable of understanding complex societal issues beyond their areas of specialization.

Under CHED Memorandum Order No. 20, series of 2013, undergraduate students complete 36 units of General Education. The draft PSG proposes reducing this to 18 units by reorganizing existing courses into six interdisciplinary subjects: Professional Communication; Global Trends and Emerging Technologies; Data, Evidence, and Ethics in a Knowledge-Driven Society; Rizal and Philippine Studies; Labor Education; and an Institutional Course.

CHED Technical Panel for General Education Chairperson Edizon Fermin explained that the proposal seeks to ensure higher education institutions focus on intended learning outcomes while responding to the changing needs of today’s learners. He noted that by reducing unnecessary overlap with competencies already expected from Senior High School graduates, colleges would gain greater flexibility to strengthen disciplinary learning, undergraduate research, experiential learning, and other high-impact educational opportunities.

The proposal has generated diverse responses from higher education institutions, faculty organizations, professional associations, and students.

Some stakeholders view the reform as an opportunity to streamline the curriculum, maximize learning time, and provide students with greater opportunities to strengthen discipline-specific competencies. Others caution that curriculum reforms affecting millions of learners require careful planning, adequate transition periods, and extensive consultation to ensure that General Education continues to cultivate analytical thinking, ethical judgment, civic responsibility, creativity, and interdisciplinary understanding.

DOST-NRCP calls for broader, evidence-based consultations

Among the organizations that contributed to the discussion is the Department of Science and Technology–National Research Council of the Philippines (DOST-NRCP), which encouraged broader consultations and further evidence-based assessment before the proposed curriculum is finalized.

On June 25, 2026, NRCP President Dr. Michael Angelo B. Promentilla transmitted the Council’s position paper to Senator Sherwin T. Gatchalian through the Senate Committee on Higher, Technical, and Vocational Education.

As the government’s advisory body on research and development, NRCP consolidated multidisciplinary insights from its experts to formulate evidence-based recommendations on the proposed reform.

The Council acknowledged CHED’s objective of reducing curriculum overlap and strengthening the alignment between Senior High School and higher education. However, it emphasized that reforms of this scale should undergo broader consultation and further study before implementation to better understand their long-term implications for Philippine higher education.

Per NRCP’s position paper, reducing General Education requirements may unintentionally reinforce a labor-export paradigm by prioritizing workforce demands over the country’s long-term development needs. It also warned that fewer General Education courses could weaken liberal and interdisciplinary education by limiting opportunities for students to develop ethical judgment, creativity, civic consciousness, and the ability to integrate knowledge across disciplines.

The Council further expressed concern that the proposal may not sufficiently address the country’s continuing learning crisis and cautioned against fragmented governance that could narrow higher education’s broader mission.

To address these concerns, NRCP recommended extending consultations before finalizing the curriculum. It also urged CHED to conduct evidence-based studies on the proposal’s long-term effects, strengthen civic and research-oriented learning, preserve essential mathematics competencies, and ensure that reforms respond to both national priorities and global developments.

“In the spirit of inter-agency cooperation, NRCP recommends extending the consultation phase to allow for a more inclusive, multi-sectoral dialogue. We believe this additional space for collaboration will further enrich the curriculum’s framework, ensuring it remains robust and socially grounded,” Dr. Promentilla stated in the transmitted position paper.

With implementation deferred to Academic Year 2027–2028, the extended consultation period provides government agencies, higher education institutions, faculty organizations, students, researchers, and other stakeholders additional opportunity to examine the proposal through dialogue, shared expertise, and evidence. (Rose D. Dagupen//S&T Media Services)