Republic of the Philippines
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Quezon Ci

“ifteenth Congress
First Regular Session

304

NO.

Subscitted by the Committee on Higher and Technical Education oa 20 ocr 2010

Re: House Bill No. _

Recommending its approval, in substitution of House Bill Nos. 1417 & 2844

Sponsors: Representatives Juan Edgacdo M. Angara & Teodoro A. Casitio

Mr. Speaker
The Committee on Higher and Technical Educatioa, to which were reterred:

House Bill No. 1417, introduced by Rep. Piyde Henry A. Teves, entitled:
“AN ACT TO PENALIZ
MANDATING STUDE

ENROLL IN A.
DISCRETION,

JNIVERSITIES OR COLLEGES IN FORC !NG AND
'S UNDER COURS HAi REQUIRE BOARD EXAMS TO.
INTER UPON THE SCHOOL'S PERSONAL CHOICE AND

House Bill No, 2844, introduced by Reps. Teodoro A Casiiio, Nery Javier Colmenares,
Raymond V. Palatino, Dante Antonio L. Tinio, Rafael V. Mariano, Luzviminda C. Ilagan and
Emerenciana De Jesus entitled:

“AN ACT PROTECTING THE RIGHT OF STUDENTS OF COURSES REQUIRING
LICENSING EXAMINATIONS TO ENROLL IN REVIEW CENTERS OF THEIR CHOICE.
AND PROVIDING PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS THEREOF,”
has considered the same and recommends that the attached House Bill No. 8546 ’
entitled:

“AN ACT
PROTECTING THE, RIGHT OF STUDENTS ENROLLED IN COURSES REQUIRING
LICENSING EXAMINATIONS 10 ENROLL IN REVIEW CENTERS OF THEIR CHOICE”

approved in substitution of House Bill Nos. 1417 and 2844 and with Representatives
oduro A, Casifiv, Nery Javier Colmenares, Pryde Henry Teves, Raymond V. Palatino, Dante



erenciana De Jesus and Juan

da 0, Hagan and Em

Antonio L. Tinio, Rafeel V. Mariano, Luzvim'
ardo M. Angara as authors thereof,

Respecifully submitted,

JUAN PDGARDO M. ANGARA

Committee on Higher &
Technical Education

THE HONORABLE SPEAKER
HOU! F REPRESENTATIVES,

Quezon City



Republic of the Philippines
House of Representatives
Quezon City

Fifteenth Congress
First Regular Session

HOUSE BILL NO. 3546

Introduced by Representatives Teodoro A. Casifio, Nery Javier
Colmenares, Pryde Henry A. Teves, Raymond V. Palatino, Antonio L. Tinio,
Rafael V. Mariano, Luzviminda C. llagan, Emerenciana A. De Jesus and
Juan Edgardo M. Angara

AN ACT
PROTECTING THE RIGHT OF STUDENTS ENROLLED IN COURSES
REQUIRING PROFESSIONAL LICENSING EXAMINATIONS TO ENROLL IN
REVIEW CENTERS OF THEIR CHOICE AND PROVIDING PENALTIES FOR
VIOLATIONS THEREOF

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
Philippines in Congress assembled:

SECTION 1. Short Title. This Act shall be known as “Protection of Students’

Right to Enroll in Review Centers Act of 2010.”

SEC. 2. Declaration of Policy. It is the declared policy of the State to promote

*

and protect the right to education as enshrined in the Philippine Constitution.

While the State recognizes the complementary roles of public and private

a

institutions in the enhancement and strengthening of the educational system, it

~

is also the responsibility of the state to ensure the protection of students

against possible abuses by Higher Educational Institutions (HEIs) in relation to

2

the right of students to choose their review centers.
10 SEC. 3. Coverage. This Act shall cover all public and private HEls, including
11 local colleges and universities, offering courses that require professional

12 licensure examinations.


| SEC. 4. Unlawful Acts. In recognition of the student's freedom to choose
2 his/her review center, the following acts by HEls shall be considered unlawful:

3 1, Compelling students enrolled in courses requiring professional
4 examinations to take review classes, which are not part of the curriculum,
3 in a review center of the HEI's choice;

6 2. Making such review classes a prerequisite for graduation or completion

of the course;

Forcing students to enroll in a review center of the school's choice, and to
9 pay the corresponding fees that include transportation and board and
10 lodging; and
ll 4. Withholding the transcript of scholastic records, diploma, certification or
12 any essential document of the student to be used in support of the
13 application for the professional licensure examinations so as to compel
M4 the students to attend a review center of the HEI's choice.
15 SEC. 5. Penalties. Any HEI official or employee, including deans, coordinators,
16 advisers, deans, professors and other concerned individuals found guilty of
17 violating any of the unlawful acts enumerated in Section 4 of this Act shall
18 suffer the penalty of prision correccional or imprisonment from six (6) months
19 and one (1) day to six (6) years and a fine of Seven Hundred Fifty Thousand
20 Pesos (P750,000.00).He/She shall also be suspended from his/her office and
21 his/her professional license be revoked.
22 In addition, the Commission on Higher Education (CHED) may impose
23 disciplinaty sanctions against a HEI official or employee violating this Act
24 pursuant to Section 13 of Republic Act No. 7722, otherwise known as the

25 Higher Education Modernization Act of 1994.


(2) Forcing the students to enter into a stipulation by means of subscribing into a sort of a
package deal that comprises of the school’s own selection of review center,
transportation and board and lodging while the students are left with no option but to
provide the required payment.

(3) Forcing students to take review class unless it is part of the school’s curriculum.

Section 4. Penalties - Any person violating Section 3 of this Act including coordinators,
advisers, deans, professors and other concerned individual shall be penalized by a fine of
750,000 and an automatic suspension from his/her office or revocation of his/her professional

license.

Section 5. Repealing Clause ~ Any law, presidential deeree or issuance, executive order, letter
of instruction, administrative order, administrative memorandum, rule or regulation contrary to

or inconsistent with the provisions of this Acts hereby repealed, modified or amended
accordingly,

Section 6. Effectivity Clause ~ This Act shall take effect fifteen (15) days after its publication in

at least two (2) newspapers of general circulation.

Approved,


Republic of the Philippines
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Quezon City

FIFTEENTH CONGRESS

ist Regular Session

HOUSE BILL No.__2844

intoduced by Keps. TEDDY A. CASINO, NERI JAVIER COLMENARES,
KAYMOND V. PALATINO, ANTONIO L. TINIO, RAFAEL V. MARIANO,
LOZVIMINDA C, ILAGAN and EMERENCIANA A. DE JESUS

EXPLANATORY NO’

Phe controversial aussing board exam of 2006 brought to the fore not only the problem of
cheating conducted by some nursing review centers but other irregularities as well.

Among these are the exorbitant fees collected by aursing schools for the inclusion of

board exam review sessions in thew curriculum. In many cases, these fees are collected as 4

s requiring professional licensing

exammanons 1s for students t0 be forced (© pay for review sessions in a particular review

center of the school's choice, ‘These review sessions are often counted as required subjects,
pat have to be earned.

requirement for graduation, A common practice in cou

with costesponding, um

While 10s unperuve to ensure dae students pass their board exams, an exclusive parmership
between u oursing school and a review center is unnecessary and often results in a collusion 1
charge higher, unjustifiable fees from students and their parents. This is especially true in a
situation where students aze Bot piven the chance to choose review centers that are more
accessible tnd affordable to chem. Li the first place, review courses are supposed co be optional
and do noc form part of the curriculum.

This bill ainis preeasely to prorect the rights of students to choose their owa review centers.
Any sebool which compels us students (0 take board review classes or study in a particular
review center will be penalized and their permit to operate revoked. Also, the withholding of
any essential scholastic document by the school co pressure the students into enrolling in a
particular review cencer will be deemed unlawful.

Llc last Congtess as House Bill no, 2380 and later substitated and approved on Third Reading
as House Bill no. GS-41, ebis, lation unfortunately did noc become a law due to the absence of
4 coumexpart bill in Senace

Innniecliate passage o€ dis bill is eae

ly soughe



“YEDDY A. CASINO
Bayan Muna Party-list

Fol Voy
ol LOA 3
NERLJAV( ER COLM ARS RAYM! V. PALATINO~
aan Pasty-lise

Ngayan Mana Parey-li

erase ores

Lt
NTONIO TINO PAEL V. M.
ACT Pargy-list ‘Anakpawis Party-list

. ACS

~ Lap — p
LUZYIMINDA C. iigtan EMERENCIANAA. DE JESUS
7Gabriela Women’s Party Gabriela Women’s Party



Republic of the Philippines
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Quezon City

FIFTEENTH CONGRESS
First Regular Session m

2844

HOUSE BILL No.

Inuoduced by Reps. TEDDY A. CASINO, NERI JAVIER COLMENARES,
RAYMOND V. PALATINO, ANTONIO L. TINIO, RAFAEL V. MARIANO,
LUZVIMINDA C. [LAGAN and EMERENCIANA A, DE JESUS

AN ACT
PROTECTING THE RIGHT OF STUDENTS OF COURSES REQUIRING
PROFESSIONAL LICENSING EXAMINATIONS TO ENROLL IN REVIEW
CENTERS OF THEIR CHOICE AND PROVIDING PENALTIES FOR
VIOLATIONS THEREOF

Be if emasted by the Senate and the House of Representatives of the Philippines in Congress assembled:

SECTION 1. Declaration of Policies. It is the declated policy of the State to promote and
protect the right to education as enshrined in the Philippine Constitution, While the State
recognizes the complimentary roles of public and private institutions in the enhancement and
steengthening of the educational system, it is also the responsibility of the state to ensure the

protection of students against possible abuses by Higher Educational Institutions in the interest
of profit.

SECTION 2. Coverage. ‘his Act shall cover all public and private HEIs, including local

colleges and universities, offering courses that require professional licensure examinations,

SECTION 3. Unlawful acts. In recognition of the student’s freedom to choose his/her
review center, the following acts by HEIs shall be considered unlawful: ‘

1. Compelling stidents enrolled in courses requiring professional examinations to take
review classes in a review center of the HEI’s choice;

Sy

Making such review classes as prerequisites for graduation or completion of the course;
and

Withholding the transcript of scholastic records, diploma, certification or any essential
document of the student to be used in support of the application for the professional
licensure examinations so as to compel the students co attend a review center of the
HEP choice



SECTION 4. Penalties. Any HEI official or employee found guilry of viclating any of che
unlawfol acts enumerated in Section 3 of this Act shall suffer the penalty of prision correctional ox
imprisonment from six (6) months and one (1) day to six (6) yeass.

In addidon, the Commission on Higher Rdueation (CHED) may impose disciplinary sanctions
againse a HE official or employee violating this Act purseanr to Section 13 of Republic Act No.
7722, otherwise known as the Higher Edecerion Modernization Act of 1994.

SECTION 2. Implementing Rules and Regulations. The CHED shall be tasked to
issue the implementing rules and reguladons af this Act wichin thicty (30) days after this law

takes effect

SECTION 6. Separability Clause. Show'd any provision herein be declared unconstitutional,
the same shall noc affect the validity of the othe: provisions of this Act.

SECTION 7. Repealing Clause. All laws, rules and regulations inconsisteat with the
provisions of this Act are hexeby amended, modified or zepealed accordingly.

Chanse. Vhis act
1G:

Section 8. Ejfectivi
publicauon in the OF
Philippines.

hall cake effect fifteen (15) days after its
ete O: in ovo (2) newspapers of geners} circulation in the



Republic of the Philippines
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Quezon City

Fifteenth (15") Congress
First Regular Session
-)
House Bill No, __ 1417

Introduced by HON. PRYDE HENRY A.

AN ACT TO PENALIZE UNIVERSITIES OR COLLEGES IN FORCING AND
MANDATING STUDENTS UNDER COURSES THAT REQUIRE BOARD EXAMS TO
ENROLL IN A REVIEW CENTER UPON THE SCHOOL’S PERSONAL CHOICE AND

DISCRETION

EXPLANATORY NOTE

Educa

ihe lives of others and for leaving your community and world

deter than yor: fouind it

“Me

arion Wright Edelman,

Article Il, Section 13 of the 1987 Constitution provides that the government recognizes
the vital role of the youth in-nation building, and shall promote and protect their physical, moral,

spiritual, intellectual, and social well-be'

g It shall inculeate in the youth patriotism and

nationalism, and encourage thei involvement in public and civic affairs.

The different officials unde

d the impo

of education in molding the youth's

¢

aeter and values, AS a corroboration and evidence with the aforementioned principle, the

governmen

inost of our yearly budget in education,

science and technology. We cannot



ay the fact that education is the most basic key for social progress and total human liberation

and development.

Schools, more importantly the colleges and universities, are endowed with great
responsibility and duty to promote an incessant development and preservation of learning, The
excellent quality and attributes of the coordinators, advisers, deans and professors will be
reflected and measured with the kind of students that they are capable of producing. But what if
corruption and gluttony starts with the school’s administrators and officials? It may sound absurd

but this happens in the real world.

There are cases where universities and colleges are performing things that are entirely
opposite ( their ideal purpose i.e. to take full advantage of their authority and perceive their

undertaking like a business rather than as a profession.

This bill is concluded to penalize universities and colleges in forcing and mandating
students under courses that require board exams like Nursing, Accountancy, Engineering and

others to enroll in @ review center upon the school’s personal choice and discretion. Some

universities

and colleges compel their students to submit into a contract by means of subscribing
into a sort of a packaye deal that includes the school’s own selection of review center,
transportation and board and lodging while the students are left with no choice but to give the
necessary payment. Jn this method. the schools are dealing end tying up with different review

centers in order to get any percentage of payment from a particular student.

This kind o!

tion should be immediately prevented in order to bail out schools from

being prone to corruption and dirty transactions. The

school shall be a location for knowledge
and wisdom development and mus

be deprived from being an establishment of dishonesty and
cheating. With the aid of this law, the right of the students to

y the gift of democracy by way
of choos

ig, their own review class will be put into assurance.

For this reason

pessage of this bill is eamestiy sought.

PRYPH HENRY TEVES



2 Republic of the Philippines
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Quezon City

Fifteenth (15) Congress
First Regular Session

House Bill No, 1417

Introduced by HON, PRYDE HENRY A. TEVES

AN ACT TO PENALIZE UNIVERSITIES OR COLLEGES IN FORCING AND
MANDATING STUDENTS UNDER COURSES THAT REQUIRE BOARD EXAMS TO
ENROLL IN A REVIEW CENTER UPON THE SCHOOL’S PERSONAL CHOICE AND
DISCRETION

Be it enacted by the Senate and the House of Representatives of the Philippines in Congress
assembled.

Section 1. Short Title. — This act shall be referred to as “Protection of Students’ Right Act of
2010".

Section 2. Declaration of Policy. - The State recognizes the vital role of the youth in nation-
building and shall promote and protect their physical, moral, spiritual, intellectual, and social
well-being. It shall inculcate in the youth patriotism and nationalism, and encourage their
involvement in public and civic affairs. The State shall give priority to education as it provides

an indispensable effect in the economy's position.

Section 3, Prohibited Ac

(2). Compelling the students to enroll at a review center chosen by the school.


SECTION 4. Penalties. Any HET official or employee found guilty of violating any of the

unlawful acts enumerated in Section 3 of this Act shall suffer the penalry of prision correctional o-
imprisonment from six (6) months and one (1) day to six (6) years.

dn addition, che Commission on Higher Education (CHED) may impose disciplinary sanctions
against a FILE] official or employee violating this Act pursuant to Section 13 of Republic Act No.
7722, otherwise known as the Higher Education Modernization Act of 1994.

SECTION 4. Implementing Rules and Regulations, The CHED shall be tasked to

issue the implementing rules and regulations of this Act within thirty (30) days after this law
takes effect,

Piece atric valor) ced UWENet
Be ceslia Rica

m santas
provisions of chis Act are hereby amended, modified ox sa

Section 8. Effectivity Clause. ‘Vhis act shall take effect fifteen (15) days after its
publication in the Official Gazerre or in nwo 2) newspapers of general circulation in the
Philippines,



FACT SHEET
Substitute Bill to House Bill Nos. 1417 & 2844

AN ACT PROTECTING THE RIGHT OF STUDENTS ENROLLED
IN COURSES REQUIRING PROFESSIONAL LICENSING
EXAMINATIONS TO ENROLL IN REVIEW CENTERS OF THEIR
CHOICE AND PROVIDING PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS
THEREOF

Introduced by: Reps. TEODORO A. CASINO & PRYDE HENRY A. TEVES

Committee Referral: COMMITTEE ON HIGHER AND TECHNICAL EDUCATION
Committee Chairperson: JUAN EDGARDO M. ANGARA

Objectives:

+ To protect the right of students to choose which review center to enroll in
for preparation for the licensure examinations.

To eliminate the practice of some schools of compelling their graduates
to enroll in a particular review center and withholding their scholastic
documents if they refuse to do so.

Key Provisions:

* Protects the right of students to enroll in review centers of their choice by
enumerating the acts which are considered violative of students’ rights.

* Provides penalties for violations of the unlawful acts enumerated therein
* Covers all public and private HEls, including local colleges’ and
universities, offering courses that require professional licensure
examinations.
Related Laws:
 Batas Pambansa 232 (Education Act of 1982)

e Republic Act 8292 (Higher Education Modernization Act of 1994)
 RA7722 (CHED Charter)


Republic of the Philippines
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Quezon City, Metro Manila

MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE COMMITTEE ON HIGHER AND TECHNICAL EDUCATION
HELD ON SEPTEMBER 15, 2010 (WEDNESDAY), 9:36 A.M., CONFERENCE ROOMS 1 & 2, R.V.
MITRA BLDG., HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, QUEZON CITY

|. CALL TO ORDER

Rep. Juan Edgardo M. Angara, Chair of the Committee on Higher and Technical Education
(CHTE) and the Presiding Officer, called the meeting to order at 9:40 A.M.

MH. ROLL CALL

Upon motion of Rep. Luis R. Villafuerte, duly seconded by Rep. Mark Aeron H. Sambar, the
Committee dispensed with the roll call

lll, APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING

Likewise, the Committee dispensed with the reading of the minutes of the August 25, 2010
meeting and approved the same.

IV. ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF GUESTS/RESOURCE PERSONS:

Upon instructions of the Presiding Officer, the Committee Secretary acknowledged the
guests and resource persons from the Commission on Higher Education (CHED), Technical
Education and Skills Development Authority (TESDA), Coordinating Council of Private Educational
Associations (COCOPEA), Philippine Association of Colleges and Universities (PACU) and officials
from the Camarines Sur Polytechnic College.

V. CONSIDERATION OF THE FOLLOWING LOCAL BILLS:

The Committee proceeded to discuss various local measures pertaining to state universities
and colleges (SUCs) and technical-vocational (tech-voc) schools.

Rep. Angara informed the Committee Members that the measures for deliberation have been
approved on third reading during the 14” Congress. He explained that as a rule, it would be smooth
sailing for the bills since they had gone through extensive deliberations in the past unless there are
vehement objections.

At this juncture, Rep. Villafuerte moved for the omnibus approval of bills on the establishment
or renaming of SUCs, conversion into SUCs and establishment of technical-vocational training
centers. Thereafter, the body approved the following: HB 735, which calls for the establishment of a
state college in the City of Talisay, Province of Cebu to be known as the Talisay City State College
(Rep. Eduardo R. Gullas); HB 200, which seeks to separate the Camarines Sur Polytechnic
College — Naga City Campus (formerly Bicol College of Arts and Trades) in the Cily of Naga,
Province of Camarines Sur from the Camarines Sur Polytechnic College in Nabua, Camarines Sur
and to convert it into a state college to be known as the Bicol State College of Applied Sciences and
Technology (Rep. Villafuerte); HB 1768, which proposes to convert the Catanduanes State
Colleges in the Province of Catanduanes into a state university to be known as the Catanduanes
State University (Rep. Cesar V. Sarmiento): HB 1814, which converts the Negros State College of
Agriculture (NSCA) in the City of Kabankalan, Province of Negros Occidental into a state university
to be known as the Central Philippine State University (CPSU) (Reps. Mercedes K. Alvarez, Ignacio
T. Arroyo Jr. & Alfredo Abelardo B. Benitez); HB 1922, which converts the Cordova Public College in

1


the Municipality of Cordova, Province of Cebu into a state college to be known as the Cordova State
College of Science and Technology (Rep. Gabriel R. Quisumbing); HB 2113, which converts the
Quirino State College (QSC) in the Municipality of Diffun, Province of Quirino into a state university:
to be known as the Quirino State University (QSU) and integrates therewith the Quirino Polytechnic
College (QPC) in the Municipality of Cabarroquis and Maddela Institute of Technology (MIT) in the
Municipality of Maddela, both municipalities located in the Province of Quirino (Rep. Dakila Carlo E.

Cua); and HB 2632, which seeks to convert the lloilo State College of Fisheries into a state
university to be known as the lloilo State University of Fisheries, Science and Technology and
integrates thereto the Western Visayas College of Science and Technology's Barotac Nuevo and

Dumangas Campuses and the Passi Trade School (Rep. Ferjenel G. Biron),

The body also approved the renaming of the Southern Philippines Agribusiness and Marine
Aquatic School of Technology (SPAMAST), into Davao Del Sur State College (DSSC), as contained
in HB 799, filed by Rep. Marc Douglas C. Cagas IV.

As regards the approved tech-voc bills, these include HB 751, which provides for the
establishment of a Technical Education and Skills Development Center in the City of San Jose Del
Monte, Bulacan), and HB 1398, which provides for the establishment of the Technical Education and
Skills Development Authority (TESDA) Training and Accreditation Center in the City of Cagayan De
Oro Located at Barangay Camaman-an. The two bills were authored by Rep. Arturo B. Robes and
Rep. Rufus 8. Rodriguez, respectively

Upon motion of Rep. Villafuerte, duly seconded, the body further approved HB 1863
authored by Rep. Arnulfo P. Fuentebella. The bill proposes to rationalize the Board of Regents of the
Partido State University, amending for the purpose Republic Act No. 9029 (Creating the Partido
State University)

Vi. CONSIDERATION OF THE FOLLOWING MEASURES: 1) HB 112 - AN ACT
STRENGTHENING THE LADDERIZED INTERFACE BETWEEN TECHNICAL-VOCATIONAL
EDUCATION AND TRAINING (TVET) AND HIGHER EDUCATION (Rep. N. Gonzales); AND 2)
HB 836 ~ AN ACT STRENGTHENING THE LADDERIZED INTERFACE BETWEEN TECHNICAL-
VOCATIONAL EDUCATION AND TRAINING (TVET) AND HIGHER EDUCATION (Rep. Villar};
AND HB 1503 - AN ACT STRENGTHENING THE LADDERIZED INTERFACE BETWEEN
TECHNICAL-VOCATIONAL EDUCATION AND TRAINING (TVET) AND HIGHER EDUCATION
(Rep. Teodoro)

Prior to the sponsorship speech of Majority Leader Neptali M. Gonzales Il, the Committee
Chair informed the Committee Members that the ladderized education bill has been approved on
third reading by the previous Congress, but has remained pending with the Senate. Once again, he
reminded the body that by tradition, there should only be one hearing on the bill.

When called to sponsor his bill, Rep. Gonzales stated that every Filipino dreams of finishing
his or her studies for the reason that the avenues for advancement would be plenty for a person
armed with a solid education. However, he said, a large percentage of graduates from colleges and
universities who are filled with hopes of gainful employment and advancement usually find out that
there are a few jobs related to their course of choice.

Rep. Gonzales stressed that a stop-gap or long-term measure is needed to eliminate the
problem of structural unemployment or job-skill mismatch in the industry. This, he said, can be
solved by institutionalizing the ladderized education program that allows those who are studying in or
have graduated from technical-vocational (tech-voc) courses to earn a college degree to ensure
‘opportunities for employment.

The author of HB 112 further stated that the ladderized education program was introduced
in the educational system through Executive Order 358, which was signed on September 14, 2004
He explained that the bill seeks to provide avenues for the advancement of students and workers in
education and career by crealing a seamless and borderless education system that allows mobility
in terms of flexible entry and exit in the educational system. He further said that the proposed law
provides tech-voe graduates to obtain 2 college degree by earning equivalent credits from his tech-

2



voc course. Through this mechanism, he continued, the principle of access to education enshrined in
the Constitution is made available to all.

Expressing his support to the bill, Rep. Villafuerte stated that the bill should be approved
immediately because it addresses a very significant gap in the education system. This bill, he said,
will help solve the education-job mismatch that the country is experiencing

Rep. Bemadette Herrera-Dy, who seconded the motion of Rep. Villafuerte, underscored the
need to fast-track the approval of the bill after noting that the ladderized education program was not
fully implemented by the previous CHED Chair despite the fact that there is already an executive
order. Ifit becomes a law, she said, no department or agency can stop its implementation.

On the part of the resource persons, CHED Director Felizardo Francisco posed no objection
to the provisions of the measure. He assured the body that the CHED will coordinate with TESDA in
the implementation of the program to straighten out some areas pertaining to qualifications of faculty
members, trainers, curriculum design, and training delivery, among others

Likewise, TESDA Executive Director Irene Isaac supported the passage of the measure. She
explained that technical vocation and education training (TVET) by itself is a viable career option, but
added that ladderized education provides TVET trainees and workers with opportunities for career
‘and educational progression. She further said that the program will also facilitate the establishment
of a seamiless and borderless education system that allows mobility in terms of flexible entry and exit
into the educational system.

With no further comments nor objection, the Chair declared the bill consolidating HBs 112,
836 and 1503 approved for reporting out, with Reps. Villafuerte, Herrera-Dy, Alvarez, Pryde Henry
Teves, Sambar, Linabelle Ruth R. Villarica and Maximo 8. Rodriguez as co-authors.

Vil. CONSIDERATION OF HB 1417 - AN ACTTO PENALIZE UNIVERSITIES OR
COLLEGES IN FORCING AND MANDATING STUDENTS UNDER COURSES THAT

REQUIRE BOARD THAT REQUIRE BOARD EXAMS TO ENROLL IN A REVIEW CENTER

UPON THE SCHOOL'S PERSONAL CHOICE AND DISCRETION (Rep. Teves); and HB 2844

AN ACT PROTECTING THE RIGHT OF STUDENTS OF COURSES REQUIRING

PROFESSIONAL LICENSING EXAMINATIONS TO ENROLL IN REVIEW CENTERS OF THEIR
CHOICE AND PROVIDING PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS THEREOF (Reps. Casifio, Palatino,
Tinio, Mariano, Magan and De Jesus).

In his sponsorship speech, Rep. Teves stated that the issues mentioned in his bill have long
been thoroughly discussed since the 14" Congress. He lamented that the issues concerning higher
education inslitulions (HEIs) have become worst with the complaints that some HEIs do not just
choose the review centers where students will enroll, but also the airlines that will transport the
students and the dormitories where the students will be housed during the review, He added that
there were reports that some professors have formed their own review centers and compelled their
students to enroll there.

The author of H8 1417 further argued that if the student's foundation is weak, he will not
pass the board examination even if he attends review classes. Therefore, Rep. Teves said, the
solution is for the schoo! to be strict in its admission and retention policies so that those who have no
chance of passing the course will really be rejected by the system. He added that forcing students to
enroll in review centers is tantamount to requiring their parents to spend more money without
guarantee of passing the board examination due to weak foundation.

Expressing alarm aver the said practice of making arrangements with review centers, Rep.
Teves said that it has become a racket made by unscrupulous people operating schools, including
professors.

Atty. Joseph Noel Estrada, who represented the Philippine Association Colleges and
Universities (PACU), lamented that there is no law regulating the establishment and operation of
review centers. Explaining the predicament of schools, he said that the schools have shown their
concern over the welfare of students by exercising their mandate and screening, selecting and
evaluating the legitimacy of review centers in good faith.

3



The Commitee Chair informed the resource person from PACU that there are also bills
empowering the CHED to regulate the establishment and operation of review centers.

For her part, Atty. Carmelita Yadao-Sison of the CHED mentioned that the Commission
already initiated the regulation of review centers by issuing a memorandum order on the matter and
the review centers have started to comply with the requirements. In 2006, she continued, the CHED
had issued a directive to schools that they should not compel their students to enroll in review
centers preferred by them, but by students. She related that the CHED had intervened in many
cases where students had complained of being forced to enroll in review centers of the school's
choice oF their Wanscripts and other school records were withheld for failure to enroll in review
centers chosen by the schools. However, she said, the Supreme Court ruling that the CHED has no
jurisdiction over review centers prevented the Commission from pursuing its initiatives.

Moreover, Aty. Yadao-Sison noted that under the bill, the schools can exercise their
autonomy if the review classes are part of the curriculum. Hence, she said, the students are made
aware right from the start that they have to attend review classes.

Rep. Teves remarked that there is no problem if the review classes will form part of the
curriculum because the parents will be aware before enrollment that they will have to shell out
money for review classes, which are usually paid on a per unit basis.

This prompted the Committee Chair to state that if the review classes are made part of the
curticulum, then the CHED can lay down the guidelines since it has jurisdiction over schools,
Thereatter, the Committee decided to approve the bills following the motion made by Rep. Alvarez,
duly seconded by Rep. Daryl Grace J. Abayon.

Meanwhile, Rep. Casifio informed the Committee Members that HB 2844 was the bill that
was approved on third reading during the 14" Congress. He recommended that the new provisions
introduced in the bill of Rep. Teves be added to his bill. He also expressed hope that the
consolidated bill will be the first to be reported out by the Committee.

At this juncture, the Presiding Officer assured Rep. Casifio that the measure will be reported
out immediately.

IV. CONSIDERATION OF HB 1504 - AN ACT GRANTING DISCOUNTS TO
UNDERPRIVILEGED COLLEGE STUDENTS ON BASIC AND EDUCATION SERVICES
(Rep. Teodoro)

Despite the absence of the author of HB 1504, the Committee decided to hear the
comments of the various stakeholders.

Ms. Celia O. Carlos, chairperson for national affairs of the Drugstore Association of the
Philippines (DSAP), lauded the intent of the bill. However, she informed the body that drugstores are
experiencing difficulties with the passage of Expanded Senior Citizens Act because there is a 20
percent discount for senior citizens, the value-added tax cannot be passed on to them because the
{olal discount reaches 28.67 percent. She said the drugstores are losing money because of their
small mark-up. Aside from senior citizens and persons with disability, Ms. Carlos informed the body
that public school teachers and underprivileged college students are also wishing to get discount
She expressed her sentiment that drugstores are being legislated out of business.

Nevertheless, Ms. Carlos emphasized that there is no problem with giving discounts for as
long as the discounts will go back to drugstore owners through tax credits. She explained that in @
tax deduction, for every one peso discount that drugstore owners will give, only 30 centavos will be
given back to them by the government while the 70 centavos will come from their own pockets. She
appealed to the lawmakers to allow the grant of tax credits instead of tax deduction unless the
discounts will apply only to generic drugs which are a lot cheaper than the branded medicines, B’
doing this, she said, the government can promote the use of generic alternatives and at the sam:
time, help the.local pharmaceutical industry.

Al this point, the Commitlee Chair reiterated that the tax aspect is beyond the jurisdiction ¢
the CHTE. He informed the resource person that the measure will be referred to the Committee ©
Vays and Means for approval of the tax provision of the bill.



pabdeeis

____ Mr. Napoleon Imperial, who represented the National Economic and Development Authority
(NEDA), informed the Committee that the agency will submit a formal position paper to the body. in
the meantime, he expressed his objection to the definition of ‘underprivileged’ in the bill. He
remarked that said definition is considered extravagant or too high at the level of P100,000.00 family
income ceiling. He pointed out that based on the 2006 Family Income Expenditure Survey (FIES),
the said Income level already belongs to families in the sixth income level . This means, he
continued, that the bill will have as beneficiaries more than haif of all the families with college
students in the Philippines. Still using the 2006 FIES data, Mr. Imperial pointed out that the NEDA
estimates a subsidy incidence of approximately P120 million per year from the proposed five percent
discount on food establishments, medicines, textbooks, school supplies and tuition fees. He
projected that P80 million of this subsidy would come from the tuition fee discounts. For this reason,
he urged the body to check the FIES data and to adjust the definition of certain technical terms
based on inflationary level and statistical considerations.

However, when asked by Rep. Casifio to cite the gross annual income that could be
considered by NEDA as a determining factor for a student to qualify as underprivileged, Mr. imperial
could not give a definite answer. He requested the Committee to give him time to consult the
National Statistical Coordinating Board to det the annual income based on the 2006 FIES.

In relation to this, Rep. Casifio stressed that it was doliberate on the part of the author not to
mention poor students because the poor have a very technical definition according to incomes. He
stated that majority of poor families cannot even send their children to college. He pointed out that
being underprivileged is definitely above the poverty rate because majority of families who live below
the poverty level cannot afford to. send their children to school.

When asked by the Presiding Chair to comment on the bill, Atty. Julito Vitriolo of the CHEO
lauded the objectives of the bill. However, he underscored the need to determine the cut-off rate of
the threshold income level to ensure that the students will not only get discounts, but their chances
of finishing their studies will be high

Likewise, he informed the body that the CHED scholarship programs use the P300,000.000
income level as the cut-off rate for the reason that the success rates of students will be affected if
the income threshold is lowered. He maintained that while students may be able to get scholarships
and discounts, it is also possible that they cannot continue their studies because of certain
difficulties. Hence, he underscored the importance of sustainability and provision of support
mechanisms. He added that the implementation mechanism of the bill should be studied further to
determine how many of the 2.6 million students in higher education will get the discounts.

The Committee Chair noted that the bill is very important and timely. However, he stated that
while the bill provides benefits to underprivileged students, it also has limitations such as when the
student fails in the majority of subjects or stops schooling for one year.

Atty. Vitriolo said the schools can submit the list of qualified students since they have the
records of stuclents who are qualified. An ID system or some kind of database can also be utilized,
he added.
Agreeing with the Committee Chair, Rep. Tinga suggested that the measure cover not only
underprivileged college students, but ail students as well

On the part of the COCOPEA, Executive Director Patricio Dionio promised to submit a
position paper to the Committee.

Upon motion of Rep.Casifio, duly seconded by Rep. Ma, Georgina De Venecia, the
Committee decided to create a technical working group (TWG) to hear the positions of the other
stakeholders and to thresh out the issues raised concerning the bill

V. OTHER MATTERS

The Committee Chair announced the designation of the Chairs of the following subcommittees:
Rep. Casifio, Subcommittee on Technical Vocational Education and Skills Development; Rep.
Villarica, Sucommittee on Private higher Education: Rep. Eulogio “Amang” R. Magsaysay,
Subcommittee on Teachers and Non-Teaching Personnel's Welfare; Rep. Emil |. Ong,

5


Gapiins

Subcommittee on Student's welfare; Rep. Aurora E. Cerilles, Subcommittee on Distance Learning
and Alternative Methods of Education; Rep. Loreto Leo S. Campos, Subcommittee on LGU-
Operated Tentiary/Post-Secondary Educational Institutions; Rep. Franklin P. Bautista, Subcommittee

on Scholarships; and Rep. Teodoro, Subcommittee on Oversight.
‘The Chair further stated that he is the Chair of the Subcommittee on State Universities and

Colleges.

VI. ADJOURNMENT
There being no other matters to be discussed, the meeting was adjourned at 11:13 A.M.

ae
FRANCE@ MELANIE U:MAURICIO

Supervising Legislative Staff Officer |!

Certified Correct
Vorantes Cat hy

dt ENAIDA B. CENIDO

Committee Secretary, CHTE

Noted by.
1s

t owen
REP. JUAN EDGARDO M. ANGARA
CHTE Chair Presiding Officer


1) COMMITTEE REPORT ON THE SUBSTITUTE BILL TO HOUSE BILL
NOS. 1417 & 2844 - An Act Protecting the Right of Students Enrolled in Courses
Requiring Licensing Examinations to Enroll in Review Centers of Their Choice; and

2) COMMITTEE REPORT ON HB 26:
Name of Lazi Agricultural School in
Province of Siquijor into Lazi Technical

97 with amendments ~ An Act Changing the
Barangay Tigbawan, Municipality of Lazi,
Institute

wr the Members of the

jittee on Higher & Te

ical Educatic

MAJORITY:

Rep. Juan Edgardo M. Angara

Rep. Teodoro A. Casifio

nN

Rep. Linabelle Ruth R. Villarica

Rep. Eulogio “Amang” R.
Magsaysay

pet
On/

Rep. Emil L. Ong

~e<f— yy}

Rep. Aurora E. Cerilles

om

Rep. Loreto Leo S$. Ocampos

Rep. Franklin P. Bautista

Rep. Marcelino R. Teodoro

Rep. Bernadette R. Herrera-Dy

Rep. Maximo B. Dalog

Rep. Roy M. Loyola

Rep. Sigftido R. Tinga

“irom se



Rep. Cesar V. Sarmiento

Rep. Irvin M. Alcala

Rep. Rene L. Relampagos

Rep. Paolo Everardo S. Javier

Rep. Mark Llandro L. Mendoza

Rep. Ma. Georgina P.
De Venecia

Rep. Isidro $. Rodriguez, Jr.

Rep. Mercedes K. Alvarez

Rep. Edgar S. San Luis

Rep. Josefina M. Joson

Rep. Pryde Henry A. Teves

Rep. Mary Mitzi L. Cajayon

Rep. Rommel C. Amatong

Rep. Jane T. Castro

Rep. Lord Allan Jay Q. Velasco

Rep. Mark Aeron H. Sambar

Rep. Catalina Leonen-Pizarro

Rep. Jose Benjamin A. Benaldo



Rep. Eleandro Jesus F.
Madrona

Rep. Jonathan Cabilao Yambao

Rep. Florencio T. Flores, Jr.

Rep. Rolando G. Andaya, Jr.

Rep. Romeo M. Jalosjos, Jr.

Rep. Ma. Rachel J. Arenas

Rep. Raymond V. Palatino

Rep. Daryl Grace J. Abayon

Rep. Ma. Carmen Zamora-Apsay

Jr.

Rep. Mariano Michael M. Velarde,
a!

Rep. Thelma Z. Almario

Rep. Pablo John F. Garcia

Rep. Romeo M. Acop

Rep. Pedro P. Romualdo

Rep. Salvador H. Escudero III

Rep. Vicente F. Belmonte, Jr.

Rep. Christopher S. Co

ae

Rep. Jorge T. Almonte



Rep. Mariano C. Piamonte

MRF (lo ae)

MINORITY:

Rep. Gloria M. Macapagal-
Arroyo

Rep. Aurelio “Dong” D.
Gonzales, Jr.

Rep. Diosdado “Dato” M.
Arroyo

Rep. Victor F. Ortega

Rep. Maria Milagros “Mitos” H.
Magsaysay

Rep. Ignacio T. Arroyo, Jr.

EX-OFFICIO MEMBERS:

Speaker Feliciano Belmonte, Jr.

Deputy Speaker Raul A. Daza

Deputy Speaker Lorenzo R. Tajiada
iL

Deputy Speaker Arnulfo P.
Fuentebella

Deputy Speaker Jesus Crispin C.
Remulla_.

Deputy Speaker Maria Isabelle G.
Climaco

Majority Leader Neptali M.
Gonzales II