A Service of Leibniz-Informationszentrum econstor Wirtschaft Leibniz Information Centre Make Your Publications Visible. zbw for Economics Manasan, Rosario G.; Parel, Danileen Kristel C. Working Paper Review and Assessment of Programs Offered by State Universities and Colleges PIDS Discussion Paper Series, No. 2014-29 Provided in Cooperation with: Philippine Institute for Development Studies (PIDS), Philippines Suggested Citation: Manasan, Rosario G.; Parel, Danileen Kristel C. (2014) : Review and Assessment of Programs Offered by State Universities and Colleges, PIDS Discussion Paper Series, No. 2014-29, Philippine Institute for Development Studies (PIDS), Makati City This Version is available at: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/127003 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. personal and scholarly purposes. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle You are not to copy documents for public or commercial Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, If the documents have been made available under an Open gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence. www.econstor.eu Philippine Institute for Development Studies Surian sa mga Pag-aaral Pangkaunlaran ng Pilipinas Review and Assessment of Programs Offered by State Universities and Colleges Rosario G. Manasan and Danileen Kristel C. Parel DISCUSSION PAPER SERIES NO. 2014-29 (Revised) The PIDS Discussion Paper Series constitutes studies that are preliminary and subject to further revisions. They are be- ing circulated in a limited number of cop- ies only for purposes of soliciting com- ments and suggestions for further refine- ments. The studies under the Series are unedited and unreviewed. The views and opinions expressed are those of the author(s) and do not neces- sarily reflect those of the Institute. Not for quotation without permission from the author(s) and the Institute. November 2014 For comments, suggestions or further inquiries please contact: The Research Information Staff, Philippine Institute for Development Studies 5th Floor, NEDA sa Makati Building, 106 Amorsolo Street, Legaspi Village, Makati City, Philippines Tel Nos: (63-2) 8942584 and 8935705; Fax No: (63-2) 8939589; E-mail: [email protected] Or visit our website at http://www.pids.gov.ph REVIEW AND ASSESSMENT OF PROGRAMS OFFERED BY STATE UNIVERSITIES AND COLLEGES Rosario G. Manasan Danileen Kristel C. Parel Philippine Institute for Development Studies Department of Budget and Management 6 November 2014 Revised version Table of Contents List of Tables ii List of Figures iii List of Appendix Tables iii List of Appendix Figures x List of Acronyms xii Executive Summary xiii 1. INTRODUCTION 1 2. ASSESSMENT OF PROGRAMS OFFERED BY SUCs IN SELECTED REGIONS 2 2.1. Program Offerings vis-à-vis Mandates 2 2.2. Program Duplication 7 2.3. Quality of Instruction 13 3. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 34 Bibliography 37 Appendix Tables and Figures 56 i List of Tables Page Table 1. Percentage distribution of programs offered and total SUC enrollment vis-à-vis its mandate, NOrSU, 2005-2011 2 Table 2. Percentage distribution of programs offered and total SUC enrollment vis-à-vis its mandate, JRMSU, 2005-2011 3 Table 3. Percentage distribution of programs offered and total SUC enrollment vis-à-vis its mandate, SLSU, 2005-2011 3 Table 4. Percentage distribution of programs offered and total SUC enrollment vis-à-vis its mandate, BISU, 2005-2011 4 Table 5. Percentage distribution of programs offered and total SUC enrollment vis-à-vis its mandate, SDSSU, 2005-2011 4 Table 6a. Percent distribution of SUC program offering in selected region, 2005-2011 9 Table 6b. Percent distribution of SUC program offering in selected region, 2005-2011 9 Table 6c. Percent distribution of SUC program offering in selected region, 2005-2011 10 Table 6d. Percent distribution of SUC program offering in selected region, 2005-2011 10 Table 6e. Percent distribution of SUC program offering in selected region, 2005-2011 11 Table 7. Average passing rates in Professional Board Examinations, All HEIs, 2004-2011 14 Table 8. List of SUCs with passing rates less than the national passing for at least 3 years from 2004-2011 17 Table 9. List of SUCs with zero passing For at least 3 years from 2004-2011 22 Table 10. Passing rate in Licensure Examination for Teachers in secondary education, 2004-2011 25 ii List of Figures Page Figure 1. Percent distribution of HEIs classified as to passing rate in agriculture PBE, 2004-2011 15 Figure 2. Percent distribution of HEIs classified as to passing rate in accountancy PBE, 2004-2011 16 List of Appendix Tables Appendix Table 1a. Percentage distribution of programs offered by SUC and total SUC enrollment vis-à-vis its mandate, Region I 57 Appendix Table 1b. Percentage distribution of programs offered by SUC and total SUC enrollment vis-à-vis its mandate, Region I 57 Appendix Table 2a. Percentage distribution of programs offered by SUC and total SUC enrollment vis-à-vis its mandate, Region II 58 Appendix Table 2b. Percentage distribution of programs offered by SUC and total SUC enrollment vis-à-vis its mandate, Region II 58 Appendix Table 3a. Percentage distribution of programs offered by SUC and total SUC enrollment vis-à-vis its mandate, Region III 59 Appendix Table 3b. Percentage distribution of programs offered by SUC and total SUC enrollment vis-à-vis its mandate, Region III 59 Appendix Table 3c. Percentage distribution of programs offered by SUC and total SUC enrollment vis-à-vis its mandate, Region III 60 Appendix Table 3d. Percentage distribution of programs offered by SUC and total SUC enrollment vis-à-vis its mandate, Region III 60 Appendix Table 3e. Percentage distribution of programs offered by SUC and total SUC enrollment vis-à-vis its mandate, Region III 61 Appendix Table 4a. Percentage distribution of programs offered by SUC and total SUC enrollment vis-à-vis its mandate, Region IV-A 61 Appendix Table 4b. Percentage distribution of programs offered by SUC and total SUC enrollment vis-à-vis its mandate, Region IV-A 62 Appendix Table 4c. Percentage distribution of programs offered by SUC and total SUC enrollment vis-à-vis its mandate, Region IV-A 62 iii Page Appendix Table 4d. Percentage distribution of programs offered by SUC and total SUC enrollment vis-à-vis its mandate, Region IV-A 63 Appendix Table 5a. Percentage distribution of programs offered by SUC and total SUC enrollment vis-à-vis its mandate, Region IV-B 63 Appendix Table 5b. Percentage distribution of programs offered by SUC and total SUC enrollment vis-à-vis its mandate, Region IV-B 64 Appendix Table 6a. Percentage distribution of programs offered by SUC and total SUC enrollment vis-à-vis its mandate, Region V 64 Appendix Table 6b. Percentage distribution of programs offered by SUC and total SUC enrollment vis-à-vis its mandate, Region V 65 Appendix Table 6c. Percentage distribution of programs offered by SUC and total SUC enrollment vis-à-vis its mandate, Region V 65 Appendix Table 7a. Percentage distribution of programs offered by SUC and total SUC enrollment vis-à-vis its mandate, Region VI 66 Appendix Table 7b. Percentage distribution of programs offered by SUC and total SUC enrollment vis-à-vis its mandate, Region VI 66 Appendix Table 7c. Percentage distribution of programs offered by SUC and total SUC enrollment vis-à-vis its mandate, Region VI 67 Appendix Table 7d. Percentage distribution of programs offered by SUC and total SUC enrollment vis-à-vis its mandate, Region VI 67 Appendix Table 7e. Percentage distribution of programs offered by SUC and total SUC enrollment vis-à-vis its mandate, Region VI 68 Appendix Table 8a. Percentage distribution of programs offered by SUC and total SUC enrollment vis-à-vis its mandate, Region VII 68 Appendix Table 8b. Percentage distribution of programs offered by SUC and total SUC enrollment vis-à-vis its mandate, Region VII 69 Appendix Table 9a. Percentage distribution of programs offered by SUC and total SUC enrollment vis-à-vis its mandate, Region VIII 69 Appendix Table 9b. Percentage distribution of programs offered by SUC and total SUC enrollment vis-à-vis its mandate, Region VIII 70 Appendix Table 9c. Percentage distribution of programs offered by SUC and total SUC enrollment vis-à-vis its mandate, Region VIII 70 iv Page Appendix Table 9d. Percentage distribution of programs offered by SUC and total SUC enrollment vis-à-vis its mandate, Region VIII 71 Appendix Table 10a. Percentage distribution of programs offered by SUC and total SUC enrollment vis-à-vis its mandate, Region IX 71 Appendix Table 10b. Percentage distribution of programs offered by SUC and total SUC enrollment vis-à-vis its mandate, Region IX 72 Appendix Table 11a. Percentage distribution of programs offered by SUC and total SUC enrollment vis-à-vis its mandate, Region X 72 Appendix Table 11b. Percentage distribution of programs offered by SUC and total SUC enrollment vis-à-vis its mandate, Region X 73 Appendix Table 12a. Percentage distribution of programs offered by SUC and total SUC enrollment vis-à-vis its mandate, Region XI 73 Appendix Table 12b. Percentage distribution of programs offered by SUC and total SUC enrollment vis-à-vis its mandate, Region XI 74 Appendix Table 13a.