Private educational institutions have slammed a proposed law banning enforcement of the “no permit, no exam” policy, saying it could be tantamount to a death warrant of the private education sector.
They implored lawmakers to reconsider passage passage of the bill that would subsequently compromise their financial viability, force them to cut corners in their operations, and cause systemic damage to the private education sector.
In separate statements, the industry players expressed their collective outrage and indignation over the congressional bills that seek to ban the policy and asked that lawmakers listened to them as well.
The oppositors consisted of COCOPEA’s member-organizations — the Catholic Educational Association of the Philippines (CEAP), Philippine Association of Colleges and Universities (PACU), Association of Christian Schools, Colleges, and Universities (ACSCU), Philippine Association of Private Schools, College, and Universities (PAPSCU), Unified TVET of the Philippines Inc. (UniTVET) – as well as the Association of Private School Administrators – Division of the City of San Fernando, Pampanga (APSA), the Davao Association of Private Schools and Administrators (DAPRISA), the Federation of Associations of Private Schools and Administrators (FAPSA), and the National Alliance of Private Schools Philippines (NAPSPHIL).
“The effects of the proposed policy will be both immediate and long-term,” the groups warned. It will cause systemic damage to the private education sector, violate the complementarity of the public and private education sectors, and lead to less accessible quality education in the country,” the groups said.
Senate Bill 1359, which covers educational institutions, from elementary to tertiary and short-term vocational courses, was awaiting reconciliation with its counterparts House Bill 7584 that covers basic private institutions and HB 6483 that covers higher education institutions both public and private.
Deliberations at the bicameral conference committee are likely to take place soon.
The COCOPEA alone has 3,622 educational and learning institutions among its member schools, colleges, and universities, covering more than 1.7 million students in both the basic education and higher education levels across the country.
The effects of the proposed law will be destructive, according to the statements, which urge the deferment of the bicam sessions to allow
for more consultations with all stakeholders.
The “No Permit, No Exam” policy prevents students who have not paid their tuition and other fees from taking major examinations. On the
surface, banning it could be seen as a compassionate move that protects the interests of the students.
But private schools, unlike public schools whose operations are provided for by the government and enjoy substantial budget allocation
among all line agencies, rely on timely payments by their students to finance their day-to-day activities.
Banning the policy would “disrupt fee collection, which jeopardizes operational sustainability, timely payment of salaries and wages of
school personnel and school viability. It would also lead to the down-sizing of operations, trigger closures, lead to the unemployment
of personnel, and increase pressure on a strained public school system,” the statements said.
Department of Education Order 15 s. 2010 already provides the mechanism to help lighten the burden of students’ families, by
allowing schools to offer installment plans and accept deferred payments. This is already being implemented by private schools.
“The proposed bill discourages current practices of offering flexible payment options and leaves private schools with limited alternatives
that may lead to conflicts between the private education sector and its stakeholders,” the groups’ statements said.
This was especially true during the pandemic. The schools also pointed out that while the pandemic has given them serious blows with the drop
in enrollments, they have stayed true to the commitment to deliver the best education to their students.
“Private schools have always adjusted in order to make private education accessible, especially during the pandemic. Private schools
have been offering low down payment and monthly payment schemes, extending payment deadlines and accepting promissory notes, giving
discounts, and expanding scholarship opportunities,” the schools said.
Finally, the schools said, the proposal violates the complementarity between the public and private education sectors. “It increases the
imbalance between public and private education sectors by further restricting the private education sector in their ability to determine
their operations and finances, while the public sector enjoys increasing budgetary provisions under the Universal Access to Quality
Education Act and other laws.”
Nonetheless, the schools said they were ready to “engage in productive dialogue towards crafting the most responsive policy for the growth
and sustainability of Philippine education.
