Strengthening the Foundation: The College of Arts and Letter’s Reinforced

Curriculum
By Earl Angelo D. Acuña

The recent change in the education system of the Philippines in the form of
K to 12 really shake things up. Not only that it revamps the primary and
secondary approach in teaching but it also caused the tertiary education
policies to align itself for that new program.
Under the Commission on Higher Education (CHED) Memorandum order 20,
series of 2013 dubbed as the “General Education Curriculum: Holistic Understandings,
Intellectual and Civic Competencies” the former 63 units allocated for “General
Subjects” has been slimmed down to 36 units as the commission pointed that majority
of the advance subjects was already taken in the senior high-school. A greater focus on
the skills that are needed in the university level was also part of the said policy.
The latest batch of College of Arts and Letter’s freshmen is an example of those to
have a first taste of the new curriculum. Becoming part of it, I often heard the notion
from the senior students regarding this new revision in the course, describing it as a
totally new approach and often they wondered that we are already be taking the major
subjects that they just only take in their latter year on the course. With that, I began to
think as to what extent this new curriculum will benefit the students or does it cause
more harm than good? Does the faculty ready for that change? How about the students?
Critics have insisted that the schools were not yet ready for this new program
citing the lack of facilities and enough time for the instructors to study the revised
lessons. This is a strong blow on the policy makers as failing to prepare can lead to the
failure on the implementation of the curriculum. This was actually evident in the case of
CAL as many facilities are still lacking or in some instances, there’s an established
facility but it is ailing for a refurbishment.
For some it is ironic that the pioneering batch of K to 12 will be entering college
with a similarly experimental program. Taking this into account, I think that it is more
ironic to use the old curriculum to the first graduates of k-12 as the whole essence of
adding two years to their study time. Imagine them taking the same subjects that they
have already taken. I think it is reasonable to have a complementary program so that it
will have a more positive impact on the students and this will also add up to the success
of the K to 12 program.
The beefed up core subjects was a very beneficial move, in the current curriculum
that the College of Arts and Letters implements, instead of having many topics tied into
one semester it will be focusing on each thus providing a more cohesive knowledge
imparted to the students. Though some may argue that the comprehensive sets of
subjects will equate to a more money that the students will be spending to fulfill the
requirements of the course. Though it is pretty subjective as I believe that this sentiment
was not yet proven to be true or it will be the opposite that will likely to happen due to
the fact that each subjects will be focusing on a certain topic rather that exploring an
entire array of matter and some subjects was already removed on the new curriculum.
The reinforcement of the new curriculum in the College of Arts and Letter’s was
an overdue change. For us to keep up with the latest standards and stiff competition
among others into the field, we need to have a strong foundation to be able to have an
upper hand on it. Needless to say, it was a welcome change to prioritize Quality over the
Quantity as it is a poor testament to be tagged as “Jack of all trades, master of none. “