14/05/2026
[Official Position of the Philippine Social Science Council on CHED’s Proposed Reframing of the General Education Curriculum]
The Philippine Social Science Council (PSSC)—the national organization of professional social science associations and research and instructional institutions—expresses its unequivocal disagreement with the proposed reframing of the General Education (GE) curriculum. We urge the Commission on Higher Education (CHED) to re-examine its proposal and reopen public consultations toward a more inclusive and consultative GE policy.
While we recognize CHED’s efforts to innovate the Philippine higher education system, the attempt to “decongest” the academic load of Filipino students undermines the vital role of the social sciences and humanities in shaping national development and social transformation.
The Context of the Proposed GE Reframing
The proposed reframing emerged from the findings of the Second Congressional Commission on Education (EDCOM II), which highlighted a high number of GE units in higher education. In its proposal, CHED, through its Technical Panel on GE, cited “curriculum redundancies” between Senior High School and college courses, asserting a need to “reframe the GE program toward greater coherence, progressiveness, and responsiveness.”
Under this framework, the GE curriculum would be reduced to 18 units, placing a heavy emphasis on employability and industry needs. This shift lessens the role of the social sciences and humanities in forming socially aware and critically engaged citizens. Consequently, essential courses—including Philippine History, Literature, Art Appreciation, Psychology, and Ethics—face removal from the core curricula, which also weakens communication education and diminishes opportunities to develop critical information analysis and reflective civic engagement that these courses help cultivate.
Institutional and Professional Impact
Furthermore, many social science and humanities departments, particularly those with specialized enrollments, rely on GE offerings to sustain faculty teaching loads and departmental operations. Reducing these courses may lead to:
Significant reduction in teaching loads.
Displacement of both part-time and full-time faculty members.
Widespread unemployment among social science and humanities educators.
Curriculum Evaluation and Consultation Concerns
Beyond its substantive implications, the proposal also raises serious procedural and evidentiary concerns. To date, there appears to be no publicly available evaluation of the current General Education curriculum that could justify the proposed reframing. Without such an assessment, the proposal lacks a clear basis for determining what problems exist in the current curriculum, why the current courses should be removed, and how the proposed revisions would better serve Filipino students. This concern is further compounded by the limited consultation with technical working panels prior to the official dissemination of the draft proposal.
Our Position
As a nationwide council, the PSSC echoes the collective call of our member-organizations in opposing this reframing for three primary reasons:
Contradiction of CHED’s Mandate
The proposal runs counter to CHED’s mandate of “promoting relevant and quality higher education.” The GE curriculum enriches university life by developing critical thinking and ethical reasoning. Social science courses are fundamental, not supplementary. Reframing the curriculum solely to satisfy market forces will hinder the development of the social sciences in the Philippines.
Education Beyond Market Rationality
As argued by our colleagues in the Psychological Association of the Philippines (PAP-TPSIG, 2026) and the Philippines Communication Society (PCS, 2026), this reframing must be viewed within the context of the structural transformation of universities in favor of individualism and the rise of divisive populist tides in broader society. Following Wendy Brown’s (2015) analysis, in a time when engaged citizenship is much needed, reforms like the GE reframing subordinate education to economic rationality, producing subjects oriented strictly toward market value. However, the social sciences and humanities remain the “conscience and soul of education” (UPLB DSS, 2026). Universities must remain spaces that cultivate democratic engagement and social transformation (PUP CSSD, 2026).
The Need for Democratic Dialogue
Philippine education continues to face persistent gaps and challenges in access, inequality, reform and fragmentation, and technical improvement and civic formation. We draw from the wisdom of the former PSSC Chair, Dr. Allan B.I. Bernardo (2008), regarding such paradoxes. It is a moral and intellectual imperative that policymakers engage in democratic dialogue to interrogate the root causes of these paradoxes. We require a practical solution that encourages genuine reforms which are grounded in meaningful democratic dialogue, participatory governance, and holistic citizenship—principles that the proposal cannot currently uphold.
Recommendations
The PSSC is united with the Filipino social science community in its call to maintain the social sciences and humanities at the core of higher education. We respectfully call upon CHED to:
1. Host and ensure a series of genuine, deliberative consultations between the CHED Technical Panel on GE and key stakeholders.
2. Assess the effectiveness of the current GE program through national student surveys, public town halls, and feedback mechanisms.
3. Review position papers and official statements from academic groups and professional organizations regarding the reframing.
4. Seek alternative curriculum designs from teaching experts, university networks, and curriculum specialists.
5. Collaborate with organizations like the PSSC to discuss the prospects of interdisciplinarity in public policy and education.
6. Address labor impacts by consulting with faculty unions and university administrators to prevent mass displacement.
7. Rationalize the existing funding resources of the Commission and State Universities and Colleges (SUCs) to support the institutional reforms needed to strengthen the social sciences.
While we oppose the current proposal, the PSSC remains open to working with CHED toward reforms that strengthen the role of higher education in democratic citizenship, critical inquiry, and national development.
References
Bernardo, A. B. I. (2008). Social scientists and educationists: Bridging cultural divides. In A. B. I. Bernardo (Ed.), The paradoxes of Philippine education and education reform: Social science perspectives (pp. 1–21). Philippine Social Science Council.
Brown, W. (2015). Undoing the demos: Neoliberalism’s stealth revolution. Zone Books. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt17kk9p8
Philippine Association of Psychologists Teaching Psychology Special Interest Group. (2026). Statement on the proposed reframed General Education curriculum [Facebook post]. Facebook. https://www.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=pfbid02AFmMRrawXpmbDogtr1EJqmgVh7y4AGRhQerNcxhPWVxe38PK4Mtv6CrXjBjkZfRul&id=100063892214710&_rdr
Polytechnic University of the Philippines College of Social Sciences and Development. (2026). Statement on the proposed General Education reforms [Facebook post]. Facebook. https://www.facebook.com/share/p/1G8qfj6dcZ/
University of the Philippines Los Baños Department of Social Sciences. (2026). Statement on the proposed General Education reforms [Facebook post]. Facebook. https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=pfbid074KxtwwnbC6MDuXVquJ9BwhCGCWhapwMVXX2j2ZPGERXL66SS3G1iERASgEiWg8xl&id=100057160581995
