Jump to content

Free Tuition For State Universities And Colleges


Recommended Posts

 

How many poor but deserving students are there? Very few, kasi maraming poor but konti lang ang deserving.

 

If free tuition in SUCs is paid for from taxpayers' money, then it should be open to all, poor, middle class and rich people alike but only to the deserving -- those who have the intelligence,the commitment to study and the perseverance to finish the course.

 

It should not be considered a right, but a privilege.

 

From your assumption, then I guess the majority of students who can avail the free tuition from SUCs belong to the middle class and the super rich (taipans). So how can students (coming from poor and indigent families) with just average intellect get their college education?

Edited by paddy
Link to comment

If you say yes to free education when your budget secretary says that you can't afford to pay for free education, it means you either borrow money elsewhere (debt) or cut budgets of other branches of government. I can almost see state universities depleting their MOB when the cash runs dry.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment

 

From your assumption, then I guess the majority of students who can avail the free tuition from SUCs belong to the middle class and the super rich (taipans). So how can students (coming from poor and indigent families) with just average intellect get their college education?

honestly we all know that there's a huge percentage of the student population who aren't all that serious with their studies. it's simply stupid to allot already scarce government funds to subsidize education costs for these students. poverty is a challenge but it doesn't necessarily mean ignorance or just having average intellect. education is mostly hard work and consistency in studying rather than pure inherent intelligence. we've already seen a lot of rags to riches stories where some poor unknown beats the odds and eventually graduates and succeeds in life. education is indeed a right but only to a certain degree. like in other countries, free education is only until high school. anything other than that is a priviledge, and if you're not gifted financially then you do have to work for it. the reason why they instigated the senior highschool system is to address the poor's issue of education. they're extending highschool and equipping studings graduating from senior high with enough knowledge to enable them to hold their own as part of the formal workforce. generally companies should then accept these new graduates as qualified workers unlike before. a college diploma then would only be a plus or for specialized positions requiring such diploma.

Link to comment

I'm not against the administration of P.Duterte. In fact, I regarded himself (Du30) as the lesser evil among the candidates (though I voted Binay). And I am one of his silent cheerer who indirectly shouts whenever he accomplished any of his promises. But in the event a questionable move has taken place, expect a hefty reactions from his critics and I am one of them.

 

Recently, he signed the bill or the R.A 10931 (dated August 3, 2017) or the Universal Access To Quality Tertiary Education Act. It promotes and provides free tuition and other school fees in State Universities and Colleges and State-run Technical Vocational Institutions. It also establishes the tertiary education subsidy and student loan program, strengthens the unified student financial assistance system for tertiary education and appropriating funds.

 

Undoubtedly, none of his economic advisers has affixed his / her signature on the said act for obvious reasons. Or probably they're not authorized to do so(?) But that's beside the point, the main issue here is the seemingly unpreparedness and ended up this “bigay-bawi” style of the president for some reason. Yes, free tuition fee will probably be implemented this SY 2017-2018 but how about the budget for next SY 2018-2019 and the subsequent school years?

 

It seems like they're not even sure where to get the funds.

 

In the 2018 National Expenditure Program, neither Special Provisions 2 nor 6 were reiterated, while the provision on free tuition and the HESP in Special Provision 1 was removed.

 

"President Duterte’s economic managers consistently opposed the bill, then he himself subjected the P8.3 Billion allocation in the 2017 budget to conditional implementation. And now, funds that are supposed to continue the free college program in 2018 are missing from his proposed budget," Tinio said.

 

Rep. France Castro, for her part, said the government should increase budget allocation for free tuition.

"Instead of removing funds for free tuition and other school fees, the administration should even increase the allocation to ensure that tertiary education remains free in 2018 and that more youth can avail of it," she said.

"It should even substantially increase SUCs' budgets to ensure that what they offer is indeed quality education. But now we see that the President's promise to make higher education free is just a bigay-bawi," she added. Castro urged his fellow lawmakers at the Congress to bring back the provision for free tuition for undergraduate and medical students in 2018 budget. More here.

 

 

 

Budget Secretary Diokno, Finance Secretary Carlos Dominguez III, and Socioeconomic Planning Secretary Ernesto Pernia earlier said the law, if passed, would benefit mostly middle-class to high-income students who make up the majority of college students.

Such a policy could kickstart an exodus of students from private colleges and universities to state-run ones, which could ultimately affect the overall quality of tertiary education. (READ: Free tuition in state colleges: When CHED officials clash)

Duterte's economic managers had preferred to provide more funding for the Unified Student Financial Assistance System for Tertiary Education (UniFAST) which strengthens, expands, and harmonizes existing financial assistance programs for students.

Malacañang said Duterte also considered his administration's other big expenses when deciding whether or not to approve the free tuition bill.

He had to weigh the cost of the bill with the cost of the rehabilitation of Marawi City and programs for overseas Filipino workers (OFWs), said Presidential Communications Assistant Secretary Marie Banaag.

 

 

 

Link to comment

Personally i will say NO to free tuition in SUCs but YES to student loan. Students who availed the loan will be required to work for the government for 2 to 3 yrs to pay off the loan. The kind of work will be aligned with the course they took up.

Link to comment

Nothing is lost yet. Our dear president can use his executive power to impose implementing rules and guidelines on the Law. He can channel most of the funds to promote careers and enhance the household income of deserving students from the most indigent family / background. This can be coordinated with the DTI, POEA so they can be high wage earners and net contributors to the economy. The idea is to uplift the families they belong to.

Link to comment

 

From your assumption, then I guess the majority of students who can avail the free tuition from SUCs belong to the middle class and the super rich (taipans).

 

Middle class lang. The super rich send their children to exclusive private universities.

 

Yes, the majority who benefit will be the middle class. So what?! They are Filipino citizens, too, right? They are from tax-paying families to boot.

 

So how can students (coming from poor and indigent families) with just average intellect get their college education?

 

Student loans, scholarships, study-now-pay-later, study-while-you-work, etc.... whatever you can think of, it's been done before.

 

 

You get free tuition privileges if you are intelligent enough AND committed enough in order to deserve it. No matter what your economic status. Anything wrong with that?

Edited by camiar
Link to comment

 

 

Middle class lang. The super rich send their children to exclusive private universities.

 

Yes, the majority who benefit will be the middle class. So what?! They are Filipino citizens, too, right? They are from tax-paying families to boot.

 

 

 

There's the problem right there. It will not address the educational needs of poor average-intellect Filipinos.

Link to comment

 

Middle class lang. The super rich send their children to exclusive private universities.

 

 

I have known super rich families sending their children to SUCs to study. They have passed the exams and hence they are qualified by law and avail free tuition.

Edited by paddy
Link to comment

 

There's the problem right there. It will not address the educational needs of poor average-intellect Filipinos.

 

It should address the educational need of the Filipino nation.

 

That means ALL Filipinos.

 

Average intelligence???? Why would you invest people's hard-earned taxes on average-intellect students? You should invest on the above-average intelligent students who have the right attitude and perseverance.

Edited by camiar
Link to comment

 

 

I have known super rich families sending their children to SUCs to study. They have passed the exams and hence they are qualified by law and avail free tuition.

 

In UP, yes. So what?

 

It's an honor to pass the UP admission test.

 

Anybody who pass the UPCAT deserves to study in UP -- rich or poor.

 

Pero konti lang sa mga anak ng super-rich ang kayang pumasa sa UPCAT.

Edited by camiar
Link to comment

 

It should address the educational need of the Filipino nation.

 

That means ALL Filipinos.

 

Average intelligence???? Why would you invest people's hard-earned taxes on average-intellect students? You should invest on the above-average intelligent students who have the right attitude and perseverance.

 

Because the vast majority of poor Filipinos (and Filipinos in general) have a rather average level of intellectual capacity. How do I know? I was a teacher for 10 years and have witnessed the "the decline" in action.

 

If you're going to invest on "above-average intelligent students," they only constitute a minority and many of them are unlikely to come from poor families anyway. Therefore, how does that "address the educational need of the Filipino nation. That means ALL Filipinos."

Edited by stealthfighter
Link to comment

If our government can enact a law requiring ALL parents to send their kids (from ages 4 up to 18) to school (public or private, depending on financial capabilities), will it improve our nation's intellect? And if the government prioritizes the grassroots education (K1 to K12) by allotting most of the education budget to these sector, will it benefit Filipinos more? And if whatever budget is left be given to the SUCs, will this be more fair in general?

 

I dream of young Aetas in the mountain provinces having their own school right in their community... giving them a fighting chance and the opportunity to get quality education and gain entry to some of our prestigious SUCs... :)

Link to comment

 

Because the vast majority of poor Filipinos (and Filipinos in general) have a rather average level of intellectual capacity. How do I know? I was a teacher for 10 years and have witnessed the "the decline" in action.

 

If you're going to invest on "above-average intelligent students," they only constitute a minority and many of them are unlikely to come from poor families anyway. Therefore, how does that "address the educational need of the Filipino nation. That means ALL Filipinos."

It benefits all Filipinos if we wisely invest on Filipino students who have the qualifications to give the best return on our investment, instead of wasting them on a lot of average students who don't really care if they learn something or not.

Link to comment

 

 

I have known super rich families sending their children to SUCs to study. They have passed the exams and hence they are qualified by law and avail free tuition.

Super rich families nowadays dont send their children in Philippine universities whether SUC or Private.

 

They send their children abroad.

 

Yan ay kung pag uusapan naten ay Super Rich. Ganern na ngayon.

Link to comment

It benefits all Filipinos if we wisely invest on Filipino students who have the qualifications to give the best return on our investment, instead of wasting them on a lot of average students who don't really care if they learn something or not.

 

The problem here is simple math. As I have mentioned, only a minority of Filipino students "have the qualifications to give the best return on our investment." The remaining majority are comprised of either students who are not bad but just don't have an exceptional intellectual capacity, or students who practically don't care about learning. If we are going to invest only on students who "have the qualifications to give the best return on our investment" then it's not going to be any different from the current system we have right now which disproportionately benefits people who are already in the middle or high class of the society (where most though not all intelligent students tend to come from).

Link to comment

There is a huge confusion with the function of education in this country. I believe that the administration needs to set the example to change that. Many indigent families send their kids to school in order to give them better opportunities and uplift their status from poverty. Keeping the youth off the streets and making sure that their lives are NOT WASTED are defined clearly by the president himself in his anti-drugs campaign.

 

This Drugs Campaign is commendable worldwide because of President Duterte's leadership in defining his reason that we are a poor country and children are the basic means to protect and uplift the basic family institution, which is at the core of his policy. The sooner these children attain productivity, the better for the country.

 

The poor show of street rally of young people at the SONA is a warning against productivity. Families do not send their children to school to make them street parliamentarians and revolutionaries who may eventually turn violent. The youth is void of experience and in this case, they lack common sense or simple feedback on the history of their political (Maoist) stance.

I mean China's modern progress is centred on accommodating industrial opportunity that demolished this Labor power structure. Yes, it was this Labor power block that destroyed sustainability of industrial factories in countries like the USA and the Philippines. Filipinos do not have local jobs due to the unreasonable dictatorship of Labor which denies everybody opportunities. They were the reasons why many factories closed and the destruction of a lot of established industries. This administration got industrial pledges for new factories but this cannot materialize under a condition of street unrest and Organized Labor resisting infusion of Capital in the guise of nationalism. These street activities are simply counterproductive to government effort.

 

In the meantime students in schools are confused as to the reason why they get an education. These students fail to see that they have an opportunity to move out of being stuck in a lifelong career as laborers. These students fail to see that their families are being pulled down into poverty and permanently cemented in a Labor status, under the power and influence of Union leaders who have been poor students and cannot establish any form of lucrative work outside socialism.

Link to comment

this is one of the many options:

 

Source funds for free tertiary education from 3 underperforming agencies – Nograles

http://news.mb.com.ph/2017/08/10/source-funds-for-free-tertiary-education-from-3underperforming-agencies-nograles/

 

Funding for free tertiary education should be sourced from three underperforming government agencies, House Appropriations Chairman and Davao City 1st District Rep. Karlo Nograles said Thursday.

 

http://news.mb.com.ph/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/REP.-KARLO-NOGRALES.jpg

Rep. Karlo Nograles
(MANILA BULLETIN)

 

Nograles identified the Departments of Information and Communications (DICT), of Transportation (DOTr), and of Agrarian Reform (DAR) as the agencies he believes can absorb the budget cuts for the sake of the implementation of Republic Act (RA) 10931, the “Universal Access to Quality Tertiary Education Act.”
He described the three government agencies as “low in absorptive capacity” and “sluggish in the enforcement of projects and programs.”
RA 10931 provides tuition-free education in 114 State Universities and Colleges (SUCs), 16 Local Universities and Colleges (LUCs) accredited by Commission on Higher Education (CHED) and 122 Technical-Vocational Institutions (TVIs) under the Technical Education and Skills Development Authority (TESDA).

Nograles said that at least P37.5 billion worth of funds could be sourced from these three departments and act as a “standby fund” once the free college education program is fully implemented.
He noted that during the budget briefing of the DICT, he found out that the agency has P2.7 billion of unused appropriations in 2016 and another P2.695 billion in unused appropriations in 2017.
“These funds will expire on December 31, 2017 and I doubt very much if DICT will be able to utilize these funds before the year ends,” the congressman said, adding that another P5 billion and P30 billion can be sourced from the respective budgets of DAR and the DOTr.
Edited by daphne loves derby
Link to comment

 

The problem here is simple math. As I have mentioned, only a minority of Filipino students "have the qualifications to give the best return on our investment." The remaining majority are comprised of either students who are not bad but just don't have an exceptional intellectual capacity, or students who practically don't care about learning. If we are going to invest only on students who "have the qualifications to give the best return on our investment" then it's not going to be any different from the current system we have right now which disproportionately benefits people who are already in the middle or high class of the society (where most though not all intelligent students tend to come from).

Your logic is flawed.

 

What you don't seem to understand is that free college education is a privilege, not a right.

 

You don't seem to understand simple math, as well. See the simple math calculations below:

 

There are approximately 10 million Filipinos between 17 to 21 years old. About 7 Million of them are from poor families and 3 million are from middle and upper class. If 10% of poor students are deserving and 20% of middle and upper class meets the same academic criteria, then we will have to give free education to 1.3 million deserving Filipino college students, more than half of which (700,000 vs 600,000) are from poor families. Mas marami pa rin sa makikinabang ay mahihirap.

 

Take note:

 

Tuition Fees for acceptable quality college education for these 1.3 million students alone will already cost the government at least PhP 65 Billion pesos investment per year.

Edited by camiar
Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...