Making college access a lot more equal

In 2017, the Philippines passed the Universal Access to Quality Tertiary Education Act, more commonly known as the “Free Tuition Law.” For many families, it was a dream fulfilled: sending a child to a state university or local college no longer meant crippling expenses.

But many years later, the reality proves to be more complex. Free tuition removed one barrier, but it didn’t erase deeper inequalities. Many poor students remain shut out of the country’s top public universities. Why? Because free tuition alone cannot level a playing field tilted by geography, poverty, and unequal preparation in basic education.

This is where affirmative action comes in. Simply put, affirmative action means proactive support for students from disadvantaged backgrounds—whether they are poor, from rural or indigenous communities, persons with disabilities, or groups historically excluded from higher education.

Affirmative action can take many forms, including reserved slots, bridging programs to help underprepared students, financial aid beyond tuition, and outreach to remote schools.

As part of the Second Congressional Commission on Education (Edcom 2), we had the privilege of conducting the first nationwide survey of colleges and universities on affirmative action. We reached over 500 higher education institutions (HEIs) nationwide, from big state universities to small local colleges and private schools.

The results are striking: approximately 77 percent of sampled state universities and colleges (SUCs) reported having at least one affirmative action policy. By contrast, less than half of local universities and colleges (LUCs) and private HEIs have such policies.

Apart from this, coverage remains uneven. SUCs tend to focus on admitting low-income students, indigenous peoples, and persons with disabilities. LUCs do better on disability inclusion. Private schools mostly limit their efforts to scholarships and gender equity.

Support programs also vary a lot. Career counseling and mental health services are common, but bridging programs—which can help students succeed once admitted—are quite rare. Worse, very few schools track whether affirmative action students graduate or land good jobs.

Based on initial feedback we got from higher education officials and stakeholders, our results mirror the lived experience of HEIs on the ground. But while the idea of equity is gaining ground, the practice of affirmative action remains spotty and fragmented.

What can be done. Our survey points to several urgent steps. First, it’s time to properly study the rationale for a national affirmative action framework. The Commission on Higher Education and Congress, for example, might set clear targets for inclusion, such as a minimum share of enrollees from the poorest households.

Second, schools need to collect better data, tracking who benefits from affirmative action, whether they graduate, and how they fare in the job market.

Third, bridging and support programs must be expanded in the form of summer courses, tutoring, and mentoring.

Fourth, universities should adopt proactive outreach by collaborating with public high schools, waiving application fees, and coaching students for entrance exams.

Fifth, financial aid must extend beyond tuition; the Tertiary Education Subsidy, for example, should likely be expanded, as food, housing, and transport costs remain heavy burdens for poor students.

No doubt many HEIs are already doing one or more of these policy suggestions. But the point is that such efforts are currently uncoordinated across the country.

The bigger picture. We are under no illusion that affirmative action can fix everything. The real root of the problem is inequality in basic education (K–12), where many poor students drop out or finish unprepared.

But this doesn’t mean that affirmative action has no place in our society, or that it will do nothing to make the playing field a bit more equal. While we work to fix basic education, we must ensure that those who beat the odds aren’t shut out at the next gate. The University of the Philippines (UP), for example, is taking affirmative action a lot more seriously in its admissions process.

Some fear affirmative action lowers standards. In reality, it raises the bar—by giving everyone a fair chance to meet them. If we’re serious about higher education as an equalizer, affirmative action must move from patchwork to policy.

—————-

Jan Carlo Punongbayan is an assistant professor at the UP School of Economics and an Ateneo–Edcom 2 fellow. Jefferson Arapoc is an associate professor at the University of the Philippines Los Baños’ Department of Economics.