What Parents Need to Know About CHED's Reframed GE Delay

Published on the Philippine News Agency site on May 14, 2026, the Commission on Higher Education (CHED) has suspended the implementation of its proposed Reframed General Education Curriculum (RGEC).

“We came to a decision that there will be no GE implementation across all programs this school year,” CHED Chairperson Shirley Agrupis said, adding that the postponement would give policymakers more time to study concerns raised by various sectors.

“The target of this will be 2028, so that this will give us time to study and then listen more to the different stakeholders,” according to Agrupis.

Originally scheduled for rollout in Academic Year 2026-2027, the revised curriculum will now be deferred until 2028 to allow for further consultations and review. The announcement was framed as a delay, not a cancellation, and it was tied to stakeholder opposition and consultation.

In a media briefing, Agrupis announced the decision following an inter-agency meeting involving CHED, the Department of Education (DepEd), the Teacher Education Council (TEC), and the Second Congressional Commission on Education (EDCOM2).

CHED first released the draft reforms in early May 2026, then later announced a postponement after receiving widespread criticism and position papers from universities and faculty groups. The revised plan would reduce GE (General Education) units from 36 to 18, a move that became a main point of contention. 

In addition, it includes setting the maximum requirement at 36 GE units for autonomous universities. The Higher Education Act of 1994 stipulates that CHED is only required to set minimum requirements.

The commission has argued that the changes aim to streamline college curricula and address overlaps between Senior High School and higher education. However, critics say the proposal risks weakening the Humanities and Social Sciences while prioritizing employability over holistic education. 

Agrupis clarified that even teacher education programs will not undergo pilot testing this year. 

"This is to give us time, especially the technical panel and the Department of Education, to analyze and study the different manifestations well because we understand where they are coming from," she said. 

The delay appears to be driven by calls for broader consultation, review of the policy’s academic impact, and concern that the reform was moving too quickly. Local news reports also note that several faculty and academic groups welcomed the postponement, while others continued pushing CHED to scrap the proposal entirely.

Among the vocal critics is the General Education Movement (GEM), which has warned that reducing GE units could lead to the removal or dilution of courses that cultivate critical thinking, ethical reasoning, historical awareness, and civic engagement. According to PhilStar, Agrupis held a dialogue with GEM and other stakeholders last month. 

Professor Jonathan Geronimo, one of GEM's convenors, argued that the issue goes beyond curriculum restructuring. 

"CHED continues to frame the issue as a matter of technical adjustments and consultation management, when the real issue is the neoliberal restructuring of higher education, threats to the livelihood of tens of thousands of educators, and the systematic weakening of critical, nationalist, and humanistic education," he said. 

Geronimo further argued that the proposed cuts reflect a broader trend toward treating education primarily as preparation for the labor market. 

"The reduction of GE is part of a wider effort to narrow education into technical training for market needs while marginalizing disciplines that cultivate historical consciousness, ethical reasoning, and critical social analysis," he said. 

The concerns raised by educators have also been echoed by some of the country's leading academic institutions. 

In a position paper submitted to CHED, Ateneo de Manila University questioned the assumptions underlying the proposed reforms, particularly the belief that students entering college have already mastered the competencies intended to be developed during basic education.

The university noted that many Filipino students continue to struggle with learning gaps and still require opportunities to strengthen critical thinking, communication, ethical reasoning, and civic engagement through General Education courses. Ateneo emphasized that higher education should not be viewed solely as preparation for employment. Rather, universities play a crucial role in forming individuals who can engage thoughtfully with society, participate in democratic life, and contribute to nation-building. 

Meanwhile, University of the Philippines (UP) professors have called on CHED to scrap the proposed RGEC in its entirety, arguing that it threatens academic freedom and was developed without sufficient consultation or evidence-based assessment.

According to UP professors, “The proposal should be scrapped because it is an attack on the academic freedom of colleges and universities.” The University of Santo Tomas (UST), on the other hand, has urged CHED to respect institutional autonomy as it reviews the proposed RGEC. 

According to The Varsitarian, UST’s official student publication, UST argued that curriculum reforms should strengthen—not diminish—“the formative, humanistic, civic, ethical, and intellectual purpose of higher education.” In a statement, UST detailed, “The University trusts that CHED will reconsider the implementation… ensuring that any revision to the General Education Curriculum genuinely strengthens – rather than diminishes – the quality, depth, and transformative character of Philippine higher education.”  

UST's academic units also voiced concerns over the proposed reforms. The Department of Creative Writing emphasized the humanities' vital role in shaping individuals, warning that their removal would diminish students' opportunities for self-reflection and a deeper understanding of what it means to be human. Echoing this sentiment, the Department of Literature called on CHED to restore Literature and the Humanities as core General Education courses, while the College of Science urged the commission to broaden stakeholder consultations and pursue reforms that promote a more holistic and interdisciplinary approach to higher education.  

The debate has also reached the country's cultural sector. According to a report by the Philippine Daily Inquirer, National Artist for Film and Broadcast Arts Kidlat Tahimik announced that he was relinquishing his National Artist title and returning his medallion in protest of the proposed curriculum changes. 

Speaking before youth leaders at a forum in Baguio City's Teachers Camp, the acclaimed filmmaker, whose real name is Eric de Guia, described his decision as an act of protest against what he sees as the increasing emphasis on producing graduates for the labor market at the expense of broader intellectual and cultural development. 

In a letter dated June 15 addressed to Agrupis, Tahimik criticized the RGEC for seeking to produce graduates with "easy-to-quantify skills in job fairs," calling it "a regression backward to our colonial-imposed education."

He also linked the proposed reforms to the country's colonial educational history, particularly the influence of the Thomasite system introduced during the American occupation. 

"To me, the total assimilation of Philippine education into this Thomasite philosophy was so successful, it continues today," Tahimik wrote. "The colonial policy had a less visible aim—by homogenizing the youth for maximizing GDP, the natives would also be easier to govern. And yes, easier to employ—by calibrating our islander kids' brains toward competitive competencies." 

Language advocacy group Tanggol Wika has likewise renewed its call for the restoration of Filipino and Panitikan as core courses in higher education, arguing that these subjects are essential in fostering nationalism, communication skills, cultural identity, and social consciousness among students. 

While many stakeholders welcomed CHED's decision to postpone the implementation of the RGEC, they stressed that consultations alone would not resolve the fundamental issues surrounding the proposal. 

"We welcome any reopening of discussion, but consultation alone is not enough," Geronimo said. "As long as CHED refuses to abandon the framework of GE reduction and market-oriented restructuring, educators and students will continue to organize and broaden the struggle for nationalist, scientific, and mass-oriented education." 

In a public Facebook post urging CHED to provide enlightenment, the author wrote, “As someone who grew up in the arts, I have never viewed literature, philosophy, history, ethics, and the humanities as decorative subjects. These are the disciplines that help societies understand themselves. So when CHED speaks about employability,  I find myself wondering whether the conversation has become too narrow. Because education is not only an economic project. It is also a cultural one.” 

One of the readers commented, “Art and culture are not luxuries that we can simply set aside in the name of efficiency or employability. They are the soul of a nation—the stories we tell, the values we carry, and the collective memory that reminds us who we are as a people. Education should not abandon these disciplines; rather, it should strengthen them further. Literature, history, philosophy, and the arts teach us empathy, critical thinking, creativity, and identity—qualities no machine can replicate and no industry trend can replace.” 

With implementation now pushed back to 2028, the debate over the future of General Education remains far from settled. What began as a proposal to streamline the curriculum has evolved into a broader national conversation about the purpose of higher education itself—whether universities should primarily prepare students for employment, or continue to nurture critical thinkers, engaged citizens, and culturally grounded Filipinos.