CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

Background of the Study

The universities are in the position to provide the best services to the community

if they have concerns for continuous improvement in the quality of their services (Dorri,

Yarmohammadian, & Nadi, 2012). Improvement of academic quality in higher education

is always considered a top priority in many universities around the world

(Yarmohammadian, Mozaffary, & Esfahani, 2011).

Around the world, higher education is under pressure to change. It is growing fast

and its contribution to economic success is seen as vital. The universities and other

institutions are expected to create knowledge. They improve equity and respond to

student needs more efficiently. They are increasingly competing for students, research

funds, and academic staff. This is the case in both the private sector and public sector

internationally (OECD, 2003).

The universities of the world are considered the new horizons in every aspect of

learning. Higher education delivers real and substantial benefits to the country. These

benefits include opening the door to better opportunities and life chances for individuals;

sustaining cutting-edge skills for the employers and ensure the country`s economy with

the necessary knowledge for long-term growth (Snowden & Halsall, 2016). Dorri,

Yarmohammadian, & Nadi (2012) note that universities or higher education institutions

that provide favorable responses to social needs.

Public and private universities around the world are remarkable social systems

that provide the social needs of the stakeholders of education. As social systems, they

1
requisites of “goal attainment” which give strategic direction of academic institutions. It

also embodies the “adaptation function” of academic institutions to mobilize resources to

attain goals and attain the “integration function” towards the reproduction of the “latency

function” of the social systems, for them to sustain over a long period of time, as well as

to diffuse potential risks (T. Parsons, cited in Devereux, 1961) that hamper the attainment

of the school strategic goals for value creation (Porter, 1986, 2016; Fayol, 1929) (cited in

Bieger, 2015; Drucker, 1956; Daft, 2010). And these values are represented by the

variables of the Institutional Sustainability Assessment – Self-Evaluation Documents

(ISA the IRR of CMO No. 46, s. 2012, and ISA-SED, 2017) of the Commission of

Higher Education (CHED). Failure of the university to deliver the ISA-SED values

makes them “dysfunctional” to the value creation of the state.

Successful implementation of ISA-SED values makes universities functional to

the value creation of the state (Merton, 1949, 1967). The ISA-SED variables therefore, in

systemic language, are the favorable responses of the universities to the social needs of

the nation`s human capital.

According to the study of Syrjala, Leipamaa-Leskinen, & Laaksonen (2015),

although generally all people have basic needs such as air, water, food, and shelter,

scientists are less unanimous about whether people have needs beyond these necessities

(Kasser, 2002). Indeed, prior researches prioritize these biological needs, starting from

Maslow`s (1970) hierarchy of needs, where only after a person has satisfied the lower

level, more social needs tend to get satisfied.

These social needs are the needs for uniqueness (Snyder & Fromkin, 1980;

Syrjala, Leipamaa-Leskinen, & Laaksonen, 2015). People need to belong (Baumeister &

2
Leary, 1995). They aspire for self determination (Deci & Ryan, 2000), assimilation,

differentiation (Brewer, 1991), and social identity (Tajfel, 1981). Social needs are found

beyond the basic necessities which can be acquired through knowledge or having

obtained higher level of education. Education per se can be acquired by different means;

however, formal education, particularly college, graduate, or post-graduate education, is

important in building the national core competencies. These core competencies create

value for society.

In order to improve the academic quality of higher education institutions, there is

a need to adopt at least a model of management. One of the models which can be

adopted to improve the quality of higher education institutions is a value chain model.

According to Michael Porter (1985), the idea of value chain is based on the process

approach to organization development (Gabriel, 2006).

Sison et al., (2000) view the value chain of a university as a network of activities

centered around teaching, research, and community service, and around an individualized

educational package of learning opportunities. The focus of analysis is confined only to

the private sector. The public university system has not been subjected to any value

chain analysis. This study of value chain for Cebu Technological University (CTU) is an

attempt to examine a state university system using the value chain model to achieve

sustainable competitive positioning, i.e., perform activities beyond the business as usual

strategy (Porter, 2008).

This researcher therefore intends to examine the competitive positioning of CTU

and to come up with an informed recommendation for the CTU administration to

consider for a sustained strategic positioning.

3
 The CTU system is composed of several campuses in the Province of Cebu.

There is the main campus in Cebu City. There are also the eight external campuses

which are located in Argao, Barili, Carmen, Daanbantayan, Danao, Moalboal, and

Tuburan. There is the third cluster of the CTU system known as the extension campuses

in Dumanjug, Malaboyoc, Samboan, Oslob, San Fernando, Naga, Cebu Mountain, San

Remegio, Bantayan, Pinamungajan, and Tabogon. External campuses are funded through

the Congress and General Appropriation Act. The extension campuses are funded by the

Local Government Units (LGUs) of the municipality where the campus is located, except

salaries of the human capital. Thus, extension campuses are jointly operated by CTU and

the LGUs.

The geographic spread of the CTU–System–locations across the Cebu Province is

indeed very challenging for school administrators and the students. It is therefore

interesting to find out how the exiting CTU leadership has built a competitive

convergence using its own cognitive and management devices that somehow preserve its

own distinctive value creation and sustain its own competitive advantage over other state

universities in the area.

Hopefully, the findings of this study will provide a value chain data set for the

enhancement of the university`s operational effectiveness in all the tasks that go into the

primary and secondary activities of the education processes, as well as for strategic

positioning of CTU.

From some literature reviews, it is evident that past researches have been done on

the importance of technology, on management tools of schools, on quality of education,

and on value chain in private schools. There is no comparative study on the value chain

4
of state universities which incorporate strategies to attain competitive advantage

(Perumal, 2013). This study then examines the primary and secondary aspects

appropriate to value chain in a state university system.

Compared with that of previous value chain analyses of higher education

institutions the gap of this study is found in the examination of the value chain processes

of a public higher education for quality education particularly on the level of

accreditation among the SUCs.

This study focuses on the value chain activities of CTU, its performance based on

the accreditation results of Accrediting Agency of Chartered Colleges and Universities of

the Philippines (AACCUP). The status or level of accreditation of CTU is being

compared with that of all other state universities and colleges of the country since they

are similar in terms of budget sources which is the General Appropriation Act (GAA), a

yearly budget appropriation by Congress. The fiscal matters of a government agency or

state university for this matter, the Department of Budget and Management (DBM) has

the sole jurisdiction to control the proper disbursing of the budget allocation. Another

source of income of the university is tuition fee, and the state universities and colleges are

entitled to have Income Generating Projects (IGPs).

However, in 2017, congress promulgated a law, the Republic Act No. 10931

otherwise known as the “Universal Access to Quality Tertiary Education Act of 2017”

which provides free tuition fee and other fees to the students of state university or

college. The tuition fees and other fees of the students are being subsidized by the

national budget through the Commission on Higher Education (CHED). The law

enforces the intentions to promote social justice and the advancement of national building

5
recognizing the inalienable right of all Filipinos to quality education and thus protects

and promotes the right of all Filipino students to accessible quality education (IRR of RA

No. 10931).

All SUCs except University of the Philippines (UP) are regulated (Section 25,

Article VI, CMO No. 46, s. 2012) by the CHED; however, providing free tuition and

other fees of the state universities may not hold forever considering that the country’s

financial status is unstable. The University of the Philippines is a state university; the

students in this institution also enjoy free tuition and other fees. The law on universal

access to tertiary education provides free tuition and other fees to the tertiary students; the

more the state requires the SUCs must provide quality education (Section 1, Article XIV

of 1987 Philippine Constitution) not just to give education. The State must promote and

protect (1) quality education, that education that is of high academic standards, (2)

affordable education, that is, education is financially within the reach not just of the

wealthy, and (3) education that is relevant to the needs of people and society (Bernas,

1997). With this constitutional mandate, the tertiary education providers have to maintain

high academic standards (1987 Constitution and CMO 46, s. 2012). In line with the

constitutional and statutory mandating the State through the CHED if it finds the higher

learning institution does not perform in accordance to the required academic standards, it

may render a closure order of a certain program or even the whole school.

Looking into a value chain analysis of an educational institution, until this date,

there is no study or published study on value chain analysis of a state university or state

college; only in private university (Sison et al., 2000) in the Philippines. There are value

chain studies of public universities or schools in other countries but not in the

6
Philippines. Hence, this study is going to analyze or show some value chain activities of

CTU which would prove that it is competitive or comparable with other SUCs in the

country.

Aside from establishing its competitive advantage, it is also important to assess

the quality of academic standards (Section 1, Article XIV, 1987 Constitution of the

Philippines) or quality assurance framework (Section 6, CMO No. 46, s. 2012) of the

institution. In assessing the quality standard or quality assurance of a state university, the

CHED authorized an accrediting agency which is the Accrediting Agency of Chartered

Colleges and Universities in the Philippines (AACCUP).

The CHED defines quality as the alignment and consistency of the learning

environment with the institution`s vision, mission, and goals demonstrated by exceptional

learning and service outcomes and the development of a culture of quality. This

definition highlights the three perspectives of quality:

Quality as “fitness for purpose” is generally used by international bodies for

assessment and accreditation. This perspective requires the translation of the institution`s

vision, mission, and goals into learning outcomes, programs, and systems. Quality as

“Exceptional” means either being distinctive, exceeding very high standards, or

conformation to standards based on a system of comparability using criteria and ratings.

Quality as “developing a culture of quality” is the transformational dimension of the

CHED notion of quality (Section 6, CMO No. 46, s. 2012).

The AACCUP agency has formulated an instrument which looks into the state

universities and colleges`10 areas of operation as follows: Area I vision, mission, goals

and objectives; Area II faculty; Area III Curriculum and Instruction; Area IV support to

7
students; Area V Research; Area VI Extension and Community Involvement; Area VII

Library; Area VIII Physical Plant and Facilities; Area IX Laboratories; and Area X

Administration. All areas have different parameters, criteria, and scoring systems. These

10 areas of AACCUP instrument are patterned to that of CMO No. 46, s. 2012 which

covers the areas of governance and management, quality of teaching and learning, quality

of professional exposure, research and creative works, support for students, and relations

with the community.

The AACCUP instrument is approved by CHED to accredit or evaluate the

quality of academic standard of state universities and colleges which is based on the

mandate of CMO No. 46 s. 2012. The guidelines for the implementation of CMO No. 46

s. 2012 on the policy-standard to enhance quality assurance (QA) in Philippine higher

education through outcomes-based and typology-based QA provided the Institutional

Sustainability Assessment (ISA) of HEIs.

While the latest Institutional Sustainability Assessment Self-Evaluation

Document (ISA—SED) published in 2017 was published by CHED by virtue of CEB

Resolution No. 066-2017, the CHED approved the revised IS-SED during its 485th

Management Committee and Commission en banc meeting held on January 24, 2017.

The assessment frameworks of ISA (2012) and ISA-SED (2017) by CHED are the

same which cover the areas of governance and management, quality of teaching and

learning, quality of professional exposure, research and creative works, support for

students, and relations with the community. The basis of evaluation by using either the

ISA (2012), IS-SED (2017), or the AACCUP instrument, all having the same source, has

8
the same purpose which is to evaluate the quality academic standards and quality

assurance for sustainability of the higher education institutions.

Professional education provided by tertiary institutions such as technology

education, engineering, business management, teacher education, and social sciences is

an important driver for economic growth and for building a new commercial reality.

Since no social science research has done a value chain study on state universities

(Nyaungwa, 2016), this researcher is motivated to investigate concerns about the value

chain model in the context of a state university system.

Statement of the Problem

This study investigates the present state of accreditation results of state

universities and colleges in the Philippines and that of CTU based on the AACCUP

accreditation standard. It also examines the performance of CTU with respect to the

value chain activities being established and implemented in CTU for competitive

positioning. Included in this examination of the value chain processes of CTU is the

manner in which some value chain processes will create values to its clients in terms of

the quality of its students with respect to technical skills or competence and the overall

competitive positioning of the CTU system. Some quantitative research questions are

specifically asked:

1. What is the extent or level of performance among CTU main, external,

and extension campuses with respect to the institutional value chain sustainable

activities?

9
 2. Is there a significant difference between the accreditation results of the

State Universities and Colleges (SUCs) and CTU based on the AACCUP

accreditation results?

3. Is there a significant difference among the CTU main, external, and

extension campuses with respect to the seven-year-period accreditation performance

level?

4. Is there a significant difference among the CTU main, external, and

extension campuses with respect to the level of value chain performance by Key

Result Areas?

These questions serve as the organizing themes of this study.

Hypotheses

1. There is no significant difference between the accreditation results

of the State Universities and Colleges (SUCs) and CTU based on the AACCUP

accreditation results.

2. There is no significant difference among the CTU main, external,

and extension campuses with respect to the seven-year-period accreditation

performance level?

3. There is no significant difference among the CTU main, external,

and extension campuses with respect to the level of value chain performance by

key result areas.

10
Significance of the Study

This study entitled “Value Chain Activities for Competitive Positioning of Cebu

Technological University Among Philippine State Universities and Colleges” is expected

to benefit the state universities and colleges (SUCs), the Commission on Higher

Education (CHED), and the private higher education institutions. It is expected to build

or foster quality assurance of education and contribute to the improvement of

administration and activities that add value to the existing operation of higher education

institution. The study particularly benefits the following:

Cebu Technological University. The findings or outcomes of this study provide

CTU with sources of information for it to continue to make innovation on value adding

activities. The University’s performance in board examination showed positive results as

a whole. If compared with other state universities and colleges and private higher

learning institutions, CTU needs to exert more efforts to improve performance in the

value-chain activities of the school.

Silliman University Graduate School. The research outcomes or findings of this

study may contribute some information pertaining to value chain and competitive

positioning studies. This study may offer some methodological examples to other

graduate students who may want to study value chain and competitive advantage issues.

Commission on Higher Education (CHED). The findings may benefit CHED

because a lot of information may be gathered in this study with regard to the standards

that are prescribed in CMO No. 46 s. 2012. This standard provides quality assurance in

outcomes-based education for the tertiary institutions. The findings of this study may

11
offer relevant information regarding the best practices of a state university. There might

be some activities of the university which CHED may replicate in other higher education

institutions.

SPAG. The study provides confirmation on the practice and curriculum contents

of Ph.D. in Social Sciences, particularly on the use of scientific approaches to governance

and social processes. Also, this study offers SPAG students the opportunity to

experience value chain in action in a state university or state college.

Scope and Limitations

This study focuses on the value chain activities of Cebu Technological University

system in the sense of CMO No. 46, s. 2012; ISA-SED, 2017 which campuses are located

in the city, in some municipalities, and in island municipalities of the province of Cebu.

The study particularly looks into the state of accreditation results of CTU and the state of

accreditation results of SUCs in the Philippines based on the status of AACCUP

accreditation levels. The institutional standards adopted and implemented this

competitive positioning of the CTU.

This study looks particularly on the accreditation level of CTU and the hundred

other state universities and colleges in the country starting from the year 2010 to 2017.

The study does not compare specifically the technological state universities and colleges

in the country even though it is the flagship program of CTU, but it looks on the overall

performance of all SUCs in the country using the AACCUP accreditation results since

most of the SUCs are offering similar programs with CTU. Even though the SUCs in the

12
country have similarities in their program offerings, the CTU has been known for its

niche which is technological education. The nature of technological education of CTU is

both a program offering and a mode of delivering knowledge or skills. It is not possible

to depart or separate the two since some programs are offered whether they are

technology education or not, usually they are delivered either with the utilization of

technology or with the aid of computer.

Definition of Terms

Value Chain refers to the primary and support activities and the margin in terms

of quality technology education graduates. Primary activities are composed of Inbound

Logistics, Operations, Outbound Logistics, Social Marketing and Sales, and Education

Service. The support activities are composed of Firm Infrastructure, Human Resource

Management, Technology, and Procurement (Porter, 1985). As applied to higher

education, it refers to what Pathak and Pathak (2010) describe as a reconfigured value

chain in higher education in view of making a discrete distinction between various actors

and activities in the value chain in light of CMO No. 46, s. 2012; ISA-SED, 2017. The

model includes tangible aspects of value chain that could be analyzed for innovation or

upgrading which create visible or quantifiable value in higher education paradigm shifts.

Positioning is an organized system for finding windows in the mind of the

customer through an effective communication in terms of what value the school can offer

to its clients. It is finding something to be first in the mind of customers (Ries & Trout,

1992; Kotler, 2011). As applied to this study, positioning is to set a strategic direction

that pushes CTU education to be first in the mind of its prospective clients.

13
 State University refers to the University which has its own charter and under the

supervision of CHED or an independent institution such as accrediting agencies; budget

comes from the General Appropriations Act (GAA) and the tuition and miscellaneous

fees from the students. A state university is usually funded by the national budget for the

expenses of its operation, facilities, instruction, research, and extension activities. The

tuition fee is used to pay other obligations such as faculty development, curriculum

development, part-time instructors, administrative cost, student development, and school

facilities maintenance (CMO No. 20 s. of 2011).

External Campuses refers to all campuses created under the CTU system in

accordance with the CTU Charter (RA No. 9744).

Extension Campuses are created and established in accordance with the RA No.

9744, and are placed under the CTU system.

14
 CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

This chapter presents the related literature, the theoretical framework, and the

conceptual framework. The review of related literature involves an examination of

value-chain based school institutions of the world - America, Britain, Germany and

Europe in general. The study on value-chain as applied to Philippine school is included.

The theoretical framework focuses on system theories and the generic value chain

concept.

Related Literature

An appreciation of value chain application to some universities of the world is

given a space in this study to build a perspective of value chain model applicable to the

education industry. In highly developed economies of the world, stratified Higher

Education Institutions (HEIs) within states are stratified with respect to resource

generation and the ability to recruit students and talented faculty. As state maintains at

least one HEI that is acknowledged to be the “flagship” University in active research and

best student selection processes, state universities invest more on faculty development

and research development to achieve the title. “Flagship” state universities in America

enjoy greater share of the resources on a per student ratio than other higher education

institutions in America. Bound, Braga, Khanna, and Turner (2012), for example, note

15
that intense competition among public universities for a bigger share over a particular

market segment takes place at the state and national levels. And about a total of 630

four-year colleges and universities have to compete in order to survive (Eckel and King,

2004).

In Germany, education service is largely served by the public university system.

Generally, students seeking admission into undergraduate studies do not pay tuition. If,

indeed, fees are required, students pay minimal “semester fee” of no more than £300

(ibo.org, 2017). A total of 334 state and state-approved higher education systems take

care of the needs of the people in Germany. Universities are registered as public

corporations through the state Administration which manages the budget, economic and

staff matters relating to the education of the people (Hartwig, 2006).

Hartwig (2006) further notes that the cost of research and teaching in public

higher education in the forms of salaries, materials/supplies, and other operating costs is

funded through the Federal budgets (or the Länder). But larger investment costs like

buildings and large scale scientific equipment are shared by both the local budget (Bund)

and the Länder fund allocation. A 50:50 Bund to Länder sharing ration of the annual

high investment costs of education forms part of the joint task of building construction in

higher education of Germany (Hartwig, 2006).

In England and Wales, the education of the people is predominantly run by the

private colleges and universities. The private school system flourishes in those states of

the United Kingdom. Because these areas are market-driven, the advocacy for a market-

based education system is intense or high. According to Sullivan and Heath (2002),

private schools behave in intense competition in order to survive. Private schools then

16
respond to parental demand, or the school perishes (Sullivan & Heath, 2002). The same

authors point out that the free-market system of schools in the U.S.A. cannot apply in the

U.K. because the latter has a different status of owners. In the U.S., most private schools

are run by the religious orders, and these schools enjoy financial subsidies from the

church or even by the state. In Great Britain, private schools are socially and

academically exclusive higher education institutions which do not enjoy any external

funding or subsidy. Hence, the cost of education floats with parental demands. As such,

the cost of school per student is very expensive according to the Independent School

Council in 2000 (Sullivan & Heath, 2002).

Those reviews may not demonstrate the value-chain analysis, but the discussions

suggest value-creation activities by both the public and private universities which add

value to the learning experiences of the students. Hence, the theoretical review centers

on Michael E. Porter`s generic value chain model as modified by Khaled Abad Hutaizat

(2011) to suit the analyses and organization of academic institutions of higher learning.

In the Philippines, the application of Porter`s generic value chain was first done

by Sison, Pablo, and the e-College Team in 2000. The unit of value chain analysis is a

private HEI. To them, modern universities must be seen in the light of value chain

processes which view the unit of investigation as a network of activities that revolve

within the systemic functions of education such as research, extension, and instruction.

Value chain guides school administrators on what value to add to students’ needs in the

areas of seeking admission and enrolment, demanding academic services, and alumni

support services. According to those authors, automating the value chain activities keeps

17
the student-clientele to continue patronizing the services of the University. Automation

ensures a sustaining satisfactory service for quality education (Sison et al., 2010).

While it is true that value chain analysis provides an excellent guide to pinpoint

“bottlenecks” and redundant processes in the value system processes, the external context

which continues to spawn changes will also impact on the value processes of an

organization such as the HEI. It is important to highlight some macro-environment

forces that influence how an educational system such as CTU will behave in response to

the changes taking place in the external environment (Daft, 2010; Kotler, 1997).

The State of Science and Technology Education

The state of global education may be seen at the global and at the national levels.

Assessment of the state of science and technology education at the national and global

setting provides the context in determining the state of Science and Technology education

of CTU.

At the global arena. Reputed as a “research-intensive public university, Nanyang

Technological University (of Singapore) [NTU] has 33,000 undergraduate and post

graduate students in the College of Engineering, Business, Science and Humanities, Arts

and Social Sciences and its interdisciplinary Graduate School” (Nanyang Technological

University of Singapore, 2018, pp. 1 Overview). According to the same source, “NTU`s

Lee Kong China School of Medicine was established jointly with Imperial College of

London.”

The campus is a frequently acknowledged top 15 beautiful University campuses

in the world. It has 57 Green Mark- certified (equivalent to LEED-certified) buildings, of

18
which 54 are certified Green Mark Platinum (Nanyang Technological University,

Singapore, 2018, pp. 1).

As a top international academic institution, “NTU was placed 12th globally in the

Quacquarelli Symonds (QS) World University Rankings. Acknowledged and “ranked as

the world`s best young University (below 50 years old) by QS for the fifth consecutive

year.” (Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, 2018). The same reference

claimed that “NTU was named the world’s fastest rising young university by Times

Higher Education in 2015.”

With respect to engineering and technology, NTU demonstrates a really world

class University for having the University “ranked 10th among universities in the Nature

Index 2018. The Lee Kong China School of Medicine” strengthened its foothold in areas

such as biomedicine and life sciences” (Nanyang Technological University, Singapore,

2018).

In the area of research, the Nanyang Technological University Bulletin (2018)

posted as hosting of two national research centers of excellence: the Earth Observatory

of Singapore (EOS) and Singapore Center for Environmental Life Sciences Engineering

(SCELSE). These Centers tackle these important issues: environmental sustainability

and public health. Nanyang Technological University`s research impact is predefined in

the NTU`s five-year strategic plan that focuses on five key research thrusts — sustainable

Earth, Global Asia, Secure Community, Health Society and Future Learning. The NTU

boasts of her “diverse strengths, particularly its longstanding expertise in engineering,

business, and education” which integrates with the various disciplines in health care,

science, and the humanities (NTU Bulletin, 2018).

19
 With regard to programs, NTU devoted herself in promoting chemical and

biomedical engineering, civil and environmental engineering, computer science and

engineering, electrical and electronics engineering, materials science engineering, and

mechanical and aerospace engineering. In terms of science education, NTU specializes

in biological sciences, physical and mathematical sciences, and science of environment.

For soft skills development, NTU prides herself in humanities, arts, and social sciences

with concentration in interdisciplinary graduate studies in sustainable earth science,

secure community, healthy society and global Asia. The NTU`s collaboration with top

universities engaging in joint and dual PhD degree programs is impressive. The NTU

partners with such great universities as Imperial College of London, Technical University

of Munich and University of California, Berkeley. Their big industry tie-ups involve

BMW Group, Rolls-Royce, Delta Electronics, ST Engineering, SMRT and Seng Te. The

NTU`s academic industry collaboration is much beyond other academic-industry

collaborations in the Philippines. Thus, NTU`s state of the art in science and technology

education is, indeed, a status of “meteoric rise in international academic reputation”

(NTU Bulletin, 2018).

Another leading science and technological academic institution in Asia is the

Asian Institute of Technology of Thailand. The AIT was put up in 1959. Since then, the

school has been one of the leading Asian higher learning institutes focusing on critical

global issues through her advanced higher education, research capacity building, and

outreach. The AIT rose to the rank of top ranked global universities according to a-multi

rank`s 2015 institutional ranking. The AIT was also awarded 5-star rating by QS world

ranking for internationalization, teaching and facility. The AIT partners with public and

20
private institutions in responding to regional needs by mobilizing and enhancing

capacities for soundly, economically and environmentally sound development (AIT

Bulletin, 2018).

The AIT offers a variety of degree programs in the areas of development and

sustainability; energy, environment, and climate change; food, agriculture, and bio

resources; engineering and technology; information and communication technologies;

industrial system engineering; and management collaboration with other programs.

Through these programs, the faculty, and research facilities, AIT stands tall with leading

global universities (AIT Bulletin, 2018)

Another global university that deserves a space in this study is Massachusetts

Institute of Technology (MIT). This University was established in 1861 to accelerate the

industrial revolution in America. Of 20, 247 applicants, MIT admitted only 1,438. The

screening is tough to guard the school`s quality and excellence. Its reported selected

honors include 89 Nobel laureates, 58 national medal of science winners, 29 National

(Medal of Technology and Innovation winner, 48 MacArthur Fellows and 15 A.M.

Turing Award winners (MIT Bulletin, 2018). The mission statement of MIT reads:

The mission of MIT is to advance knowledge and educate students

in science, technology, and other areas of scholarships that will best serve

the nation and the world in the 21st century.

The Institute is committed to generating, disseminating and

preserving knowledge and to working with others to bring this knowledge

to bear on the world`s great challenges. MIT is dedicated to providing its

21
 students with an education that combines rigorous academic study and the

excitement of discovery with the support and intellectual stimulation of

diverse campus community. We seek to develop in each member of the

MIT community the ability and passion to work wisely, and effectively for

the betterment of human kind.

The motto of MIT is “mens et manus” signifying the fusion of academic

knowledge with practical action. This mission statement clearly defines its

direction and the business of MIT in the academic industry.

Among state universities in the Philippines, there is only one “flagship” or

premier state university which is the University of the Philippines (UP). This university

is not subject to accreditation or evaluation by the CHED or by any of its accredited

accrediting agencies since it has an autonomous status. An autonomous university is not

subject or under the control and supervision of the CHED. Hence, UP system has not

submitted its programs from any of its satellite campuses for accreditation to AACCUP

nor to any accrediting agency.

All other state universities and colleges in the country must submit their programs

to AACCUP for accreditation until such time that they reach the status as “deregulated”

university (CMO No. 46 s. 2012; ISA-SED, 2017). All state universities and colleges

regulated by the CHED except UP; must undergo AACCUP accreditation. Once the

status of the state university becomes “deregulated”, that means that institution shall be

autonomous and all its programs shall be exempted from evaluation or accreditation

within a certain period of time.

22
Theoretical Review

The main theoretical framework of this study is the generic value chain and other

enrichments. But before that, a discussion of the following subjects are in order: (a)

Talcott Parsons` The Social System, (b) Robert Merton`s Social Theory and Social

Structure, (c) David Easton`s Political System, (d) Majack and Robinson`s Political

system, (f) Michael Porter`s generic value chain, and (g) Al Ries and Jack Trout`s

Positioning.

Value chain is an excellent model for organizational operations and this works

well in understanding the operations management of HEI Technology education (Chiu,

lecture, 2016). Taking the operations management in the context of value chain is to

situate the topic of investigation within the lens of strategic thinking (Daft, 2010). This

explains why this theoretical review includes an external analysis of the CTU system.

This may provide a wide intellectual portrait of this study. And strategic thinking

enriches the systemic analysis that thinks beyond the immediate.

Thinking outside of the immediate through the immediate is clearly anticipated in

St. Paul`s Admonition: “…we look not to the things that are seen but to the things that are

unseen; for the things that are seen are transient, but the things that are unseen are

eternal” (Cor. 4:18). Hence, seeing CTU as a system allows strategic thinking that St.

Paul impresses upon us. Systemic Strategic thinking such as value-chain ─ as a wholistic

system - demands the rigor of understanding the school as a system and beyond it.

The Social System

Talcott Parsons is heavily a Weberian social thinker who subscribes to Max

Weber`s idea of “Functional frame of reference.” The Weberian Frame that offers a

23
practical application and an orientation to organizational survival of the economy

(Weber, Henderson, & Parsons, 1964). Parsons wrote his own functional frame of

reference, and he called it the “pattern-variable” that offers a perspective of

understanding as well as identifying how human behavior evolves into a pattern of

relationship. As a model, it suggests a way of seeing the Weberian “overt action and the

motives” of people to arrive at the “casual interpretation of a concrete action” (Weber,

Henderson, & Parsons, 1964, pp. 115-118).

Parsons defines a “social system as two or more actors occupying differentiated

status or position and performing differentiated roles, some organized pattern governing

the relationships of the member and distributing their rights and obligations with respect

to one another, and some set of common norms, or values, together with various types of

cultural objectives and symbols” (see Eduard C. Devereux, “Parsons Sociological

Theory,” in The Social Theories of Talcott Parsons, ed. Max Black (Englewood Cliffs,

N.J.: Prentice Hall, 1961)). In the same essay, Parsons developed two important

principles that describe a social system. The first is the need for “boundary maintenance”

and second, the “equilibrium tendency” that allows the system to endure despite

turbulence that impact the former.

Parsons` sociological theory attempts to solve four basic problems for the system

to continue to survive through time: goal attainment, adaptation, integration and latency

(Devereux, 1961). Latency performs two important sub-functions; pattern maintenance

and latency (Devereux, 1961). Consistent with Emile Durkheim`s Rule 1 in Rules of

Sociological Method (trans. Solovay, 1964), Parsons views these basic problems as

“social facts” which must be treated as “things” for conceptual development. Parsons

24
considers the four basic problems as social requisites which coerce and restrain the

behavior of men in the social system to maintain order (Devereux, 1961).

However, Robert Merton has reservations to the Parsonian Social System. To

him it is too broad. As an analytical tool, it tends to overlook important variables such as

addressing the problematique regarding the extent of social order and conflict that are

really present in society. He argues that part of the theoretical consideration should be

the identification of social mechanisms to moderate the degree of conflict that prevails in

society (Merton, 1967; N.Y.: Free Press, 1967). In his Social Theory and Social

Structure (N.Y.: Free Press, 1949), Merton distinguishes the manifest function from the

latent function and sees the latent function as the unintended effect which is not usually

recognized by the actors of the system. But in his “A Paradigm for Functional Analysis,”

Merton admonishes us to recognize that there are standardized socio-cultural realities

such as norms, roles and institutions that serve as the units of analysis (Merton, 1949).

Merton also offered a conceptual distinction between the functional and

dysfunctional behavior. To him functional behavior is a behavior that contributes to the

maintenance of order. But if the social behavior leads to the unhealthy progress of

stabilizing the social system, that behavior is said to be dysfunctional. Knowing the

consequences of behavioral process can lead to institutionalizing proactive measures to

mitigate dysfunctional behavior in the interest of social order (Merton, 1949).

David Easton (1959/1965) maintains a Mertonian middle-range-theory to address

order in political system. Easton defines politics as an “authoritative allocation of

values.” Thus, the political system is entrusted with this authority to allocate values.

Easton`s conceptual definition of a political system involves three main typologies such

25
as input, conversion, and output. The output is connected to the input through a social

mechanism that is called the feedback loop. The dynamics shows a cyclical progression

of political process, and that progression is never understood as a “vicious circle” of

input-conversion-output paradigm (Easton, 1959/1965).

The input process includes three sub-typologies of demand, expectation, and

support. The conversion is consistently framed in three sub-typologies of interest

articulation, interest aggregation and interest adjudication. The output embodies public

policies, public programs and other legislated activities such as the budget (Easton,

1959/1965). This is refined by R. A. Majak and Robinson in their essay entitled

“Premises and Promises of Decision-Making” (James C. Charlesworth. Contemporary

Political Analysis, 1967).

Majak and Robinson (in Charlesworth, 1967) acknowledge the Eastonian

conceptual definition of politics as a legitimate process of allocating and spending public

resources. The only modification suggested by the authors is to distinguish between

output and outcome. The ultimate measure of an effective political system is found in the

outcomes of the authoritative allocation of values. They did not stop at simply the output

process but concentrate instead on the consequence of the output in the lives of the target

audience who is the ultimate recipent of the authoritative allocation of values. For Robert

Merton, an output that translates into best outcome measured in an improved quality of

life or happiness of the target population makes the political system functional. But if the

outcomes delivered a functional result to the intended recipients, then the output

processes are functional to the entire political system in the maintenance of welfare and

public order. The value chain is a middle-range-paradigm that offers an intellectual guide

26
towards accounting all important activities to be done in CTU at the level of operations

management. Porter’s generic value chain model is a functional translation of Merton`s

middle-range-theory for practical conduct. It is also a translation of Parsons` “pattern-

variables.” It is, to paraphrase David Easton, an authoritative allocator of resources and

public spending.

Generic Value Chain

Primary Activities. The primary activities of the generic value chain model

proposed by Michael Porter (1985) includes inbound logistics, operations, outbound

logistics, marketing and sales and service. Inbound logistics covers all activities related

to “releasing, storing and disseminating inputs to production (e.g. material handling,

inventory control, vehicle scheduling, and returns to suppliers) (Porter, 1985/2004, pp.

41-42). Operation involves the conversion of inbound logistics into the final product form

such as “machining, packaging, assembly, equipment maintenance, testing, printing, and

facility operations (Porter, 1985/2004). On the other hand, outbound logistics includes

the activities of “collecting and physically distributing the product to buyers in the form

of finished goods warehousing, material handling, delivery, vehicle operation, order

processing, and scheduling (Porter, 1985/2004). Furthermore, marketing and sales are

organizational activities that have to do with “providing means by which buyers can

purchase the product and inducing them to do so, such as advertising, promotion, sales

force, quoting, channel selection, channel relations, and pricing” (Porter, 1985/2004).

Finally, service is an activity that enhances or maintains the value of the product such as

installation repair, training, parts supply, and product adjustment” (Porter, 198/2004).

27
 Support Activities. Procurement involves purchasing inputs that the firm or the

school uses in the value chain activities. Purchased Inputs are not included in this

activity. Purchasing inputs are raw materials, supplies and other consumable items and

assets that pertain to machines, laboratory equipment, office equipment and buildings.

According to Porter (1985/2004), procurement employs a “technology procedure for

dealing with vendors, qualification rules, and information systems.” The technology

development is an activity that is found in every value activity of the firm. This involves

know-how, procedure, or technology embodied in process equipment. For Porter, “most

use a technology that combines a number of sub-technologies involving different

scientific discipline.” Porter illustrates this activity using machines, which, to him,

“involves metallurgy, electronics and mechanics.” Human resource management

embodies the complex activities of recruitment, hiring, training, development and

compensation of all types of personnel (see Porter, 1985/2004, pp. 41-42). Firm

infrastructure, as a support activity, is the whole infrastructure consisting of “general

management, planning, finance, security, legal, government affairs, and quality

management” ( Porter, 1985/2004, pp. 41-42).

Those are generic primary and support services that make up what Porter calls the

Generic Value Chain model. What is important in this model is that relevant value chain

activities with discrete technologies and economics are isolated for appropriate action.

Porter (1985/2004) asserts: “…the basic principle is that activities should be isolated and

separated that (1) have different economics, (2) have high potential impact on

differentiation, or (3) represent a significant growing proportion of cost.” Value chain is

28
a systemic relationship of value-addition activities, and the same value chain works well

in the operation of higher education institution.

Higher Education Value Chain

As the “generic” term suggests, value chain can adapt and apply to all kinds of

industries. One such industry is the education industry. The changing character of the

education industry worldwide leads to the deconstruction of the traditional education

industry model (Onsman, 2004; Poon, 2006). And this change worldwide is significant

that the education industry operation has to revolutionize itself from the tradition of

institutionalism to a more behavioral, dynamic structure that responds to the value

creation needs of the education industry. The model proactively facilitates the value

addition capacity of the university system to satisfy client needs (Pathak & Pathak, 2010;

Hutaibat, Alhtaybat, & Al-Htaybat, 2011; Sullivan and Heath, 2002).

In particular, Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) are caught in the ocean of

turbulence because of the intense pressures from stakeholders to create value. As a

consequence, HEIs learn to pay attention to focusing all efforts to allocate scarce

resources on activities that drive up value for the clients and other stakeholders

(Goldsworthy, 2008). In this regard HEIs transform their operations into a competitive

learning enterprise (Pathak & Pathak, 2010). And the best way to force the issue of

competitive positioning is to focus all energies on the systemic stimulation of the value

chain activities vis-à-vis the external changes that impact on “strategies, structure,

systems and shared values of the organization (Kotler, 1997) of the HEIs.

As a social science phenomenon, value chain activities as a system are “social

facts” that impose “social coercion” on administrative behavior (Durkheim, 1950).

29
Social facts are both “manifest” and “latent” functions of value chain analysis (Merton,

1949). For Parsons (1961), value chain activities including “adaptive,” “integrative,” and

“goal-orientation” are latency functions of institutions such as the CTU.

To initiate HEI transformation into a competitive positioning firm, Pathak and

Pathak (2010) introduce Michael Porter`s (1985) generic value chain model into the

education industry.

The Pathak and Pathak (2010) modified value chain model identified only two support

activities of operations. And the model recognizes only the human resource and the firm

infrastructure. The same model identifies five main primary value chain activities to

include technology, research training and development, teaching and learning, academic

administration, and procurement (see Fig. 1). Notice also that operations embodies the

technology, research training, and development on teaching and learning. Procurement is

concretized as the inbound logistics rather than a support activity. However, this

researcher maintains that the appropriate location of procurement is in the support

activity because procurement is not the purchased inputs but the process of purchasing

inputs that the firm uses in the value chain activities (Porter, 1985/2004). It cannot be

possible that the “academic administration become the primary activity of the firm but a

support service.” The reconfigured value chain model for HEIs is shown below:

30
Figure 1. Higher Education Value Chain by Pathak & Pathak (2010)

What is clear in these reviews is that the value chain analysis of schools can adopt

the value chain activities of Quality Assurance being defined in CMO No. 46, s. 2012;

ISA-SED, 2017. And this adaptive study has not been studied as an applied social

science phenomenon in both public and private HEIs in the Philippines. This study pays

attention to the generic value chain model and modifies it using the value chain activities

of CMO No. 46, s. 2012; ISA-SED, 2017 to analyze the Cebu Technological University

System. The macro-environment which impacts on strategy, structure, system, and

shared values of CTU is also considered because the same impact alters the value chain

processes.

Macro-Environment Context

Value chain analyses of the CTU system may not make sense if it is taken out of

the macro-environmental context. The external environment is in constant state of

change that makes it very fluid and turbulent (Daft, 2010). In turn, this turbulence shapes

31
the CTU`s strategy, structure system, and shared values (Kotler, 1997), including its

value chain activities (Porter, 1985/2004). Daft (2010) identified the macro-environment

in terms of economic, politico-legal, socio-cultural, technology, and the natural

environment (see also Kotler, 1997).

The chosen specific economic indicators for this study are GDP/GNP, per capita

income, inflation and interest rates, foreign exchange, and emerging challenges brought

about by the ASEAN and China`s booming economy. The politico-legal environment is

understood with regard to Section 1, Art. XIV (1987 Philippine Constitution), RA 8292

(Higher Education Modernization Act), RA 9744 CTU Code, RA No. 1093 (Free tuition

and Admission Requirement RA No. 10391, s. 2017), K to 12 Act, CMO 20, s. 2013,

CMO 52, s. 2006 and its Amendment in CMO 22, CMO No. 60 (on Technology

Education) and TRAIN Law, corruption, insurgency and Terrorism, and federalism

issues. The socio-cultural embodies such observable categories as the Philippine

population, its annual growth rate and age-group in the last five years, the Region 7

population, and its annual regional growth rate and age-group by province. It also

includes data on the population by age-group by cities and by top five municipalities in

the last five years.

Technological innovation may be understood in regard to virtual learning method

and on line education. The natural environment is understood in terms of natural

resources and crop production in Region 7 by provinces, climate change in terms of

drought and flash floods, annual property, and crops damage in the last five years. This

will include all the HEI competitors of CTU in terms of market share in Region 7 and

32
Cebu Province in the last five years. Thus, total college enrolment in each of the big

universities in the region is also documented.

Enrolment of the HEIs in the Philippines

In academic year 2012 - 2017, the total enrolment of all HEIs in the country was

3,589,484 which comprised of SUCs, LUCs, OGS and private tertiary education

institutions. The enrolment of SUCs was 1,410,985, the LUCs had 224,396, the OGS had

6,226, and the private universities and colleges had 1,947,877.

Then in region 7, the total enrolment as of academic year 2017 - 2018 was

249,661, and the enrolment of the State Universities and Colleges (SUCs) was 82,025.

There are four state universities in region 7 such as the Bohol Island State University,

Cebu Normal University, Cebu Technological University, and Negros Island State

University, and a state college which is the Siquijor State College.

The trend of enrolment based on the record of CHED from academic years 2013 -

2014 to 2015 - 2016 was increasing, however, in academic years 2016 - 2017 to 2017 -

2018, the trend was decreasing because of the implementation of the K to 12 Curriculum.

There were no graduates of high schools within two academic years 2016 - 17 to 2017 -

18, however, in 2018, there were already graduates from senior high school who are

enrolling in the universities or colleges the enrolment will rise again.

Positioning

Positioning and HEI are always linked to the issue of quality education. In many

ASEAN countries, national governments position the quality of their public and private

HEIs as a national priority. This strategic positioning is important and timely because

market needs of quality human capital are emerging in the OECD countries. For

33
example, in those OECD countries, about 28% among adults on the average completed

only primary education. Another 44% here earned secondary education, and only about

28% earned higher education. And about 48% of the world’s highly educated population

migrated to Japan and the USA (OECD, 2010; Stimac & Simic, 2010). The OECD

countries in general are consumer societies in quest for quality human capital. And CTU

can fill in this market with graduates of quality technology education.

Juran (1988) views positioning as consumer-satisfaction. In this sense,

positioning is to exploit what the consumers already have in mind. Al Ries and Jack

Trout (2013) have this to say of an approach of positioning: “The basic approach to

positioning is not to create something new and different, but to manipulate what’s already

up there in the mind, to retie the connections that already exist.” In other words, the

traditional approach to marketing products and services may no longer be appropriate

today to serve the purpose of conveying the product/service to the ultimate consumer. In

the book Positioning, the authors challenge the firms such as the HEIs to think as to “how

(the education services are being promoted) to be seen and heard in the over crowded

market place” (Reis & Trout, 2013). The suggestion implied in Ries and Trout`s teaching

is to create and recreate the firm’s positioning “in the prospect’s mind” first in the

“overcommunicated society”(Ries & Trout, 2013).

Earlier than the 2013 edition of Positioning, Ries and Trout (1978) and Philip

Kotler (1991) admonish marketing managers to engage the firm in a creative marketing

mix and image that will convey the message of the product/service to the target market in

ways the consumer can easily grasp and understand with high respectability and

appreciation of the product. The seamless link between market and competitive analyses

34
and the internal environment of the company defines a good marketing strategy. The

ability of the marketing strategy to connect the consumer first in the mind gives the

company a product/service strategic positioning advantage over its competitors. In a

hospital setting, the relevant consumer perception is defined by quality health care,

physicians, and the competence of the staff, nurses, the facilities and the cost of the

services. A.C. Reddy and D.P. Campbell (1993) note that a well thought out strategic

positioning is useless unless the firm corresponds it with excellent services. Put it

differently, positioning has to be understood and carried out both as a theory and as a

practice of marketing the HEI like CTU.

Positioning of CTU in the tertiary education industry of the Philippines

A very good positioning statement needs mapping of the education industry of the

Philippines in the context of the ASEAN. In the sense of the ASEAN, the Philippine

Higher Education (HEI) sector is larger than that in many of its ASEAN neighbors such

as; Thailand, Vietnam, Indonesia, and Malaysia. The Philippine HEI is characterized by

a dominance of private institutions resulting from the commercialization of the sector

(British Council, 2016).

The Philippines has a gross tertiary education enrolment of 28.2%. The

proportion of the Philippine population holding bachelor degrees compared with those

holding masters` degrees is 27:1. This means that one of every 27 undergraduate degree

holders a year takes a master`s degree. The University of the Philippines is the country’s

premiere university and was ranked 70th in the 2016 QS Asia ranking - De la Salle

University, University of Santo Tomas, Ateneo de Davao University, Silliman

35
University, Xavier University, and the University of San Carlos are among the top 10

universities included in the list of HEIs in the Philippines (British Council, 2016).

The Philippines has a strong tradition of private education in the tertiary sector.

In school year 2014 - 2015, there were 1,708 private HEIs, and the public sector is

composed of SUCs, LUCs, and others (Other Government Schools, CHED supervised

institutions, Special HEI). In 2014 – 2015, there were 227 public higher education

institutions (excluding satellite campuses) with a total of 1,684, 088 enrollees.

For those enrolled on baccalaureate programs in 2014 - 2015, 55% were female

and 45% were male. Science, Technology, Engineering, Agri-fisheries, and Math

(STEAM) subjects accounted for 18.57% (707,819) of all the baccalaureate students

(British Council, 2016).

Regional initiatives. The internationalization of the tertiary sector in Asia has

fostered competition, with a number of nations – notably Singapore and Malaysia –

claiming education hub status. The Philippines has undertaken several regional

initiatives to boost student mobility. As a member of ASEAN, the Philippines is a part of

the ASEAN Credit Transfer System, the ASEAN International Mobility for Students

(AIMS) programs, and the ASEAN University Network (AUN). Moreover, the ASEAN

AIMS program fosters student mobility and credit transfer between specific institutions

in member countries and includes the five top Philippine Universities: University of the

Philippines, De la Salle University, the University of Santo Tomas, Saint Louis

University and Ateneo de Manila (British Council, 2016).

36
 The Philippines has a total of 2,353 HEIs including satellite campuses which are

distributed as follows: 447 SUCs, 680 other government HEIs, and 1,673 private HEIs

which are sectarian and non-sectarian (CHED 2017 - 2018).

It is important to see the strategic position of CTU by referring to other studies

which apply the concept of competitive strategy of Porter (1985) and Norton and Kaplan

(2001). First, this study refers to other studies which apply the competitive strategy, one

is the study of ecotourism industry in Africa (Mitzberg (1990) and de Man (1997) cited in

(Brett, 2018). They consider Porter`s work as one of the most important books in the

tradition of what is referred to as “the positioning school”, or which strategy does a

company choose to position itself in the market place in order to ensure success?

The nature of the market, which to a large extent will be determined by the five

forces described by Porter, will determine which strategy a company will select (Porter,

2008). Porter is clear in his exposition of his theories and postulates that a number of

generic strategies provide a business with the ability to achieve competitive advantage

and to, therefore, thrive in a competitive environment. The scope of a company`s

activities will have either a narrow focus or a broad focus. He defines the first strategy as

COST LEADERSHIP. If a company like a university can succeed in keeping costs

down, and can therefore charge the lowest price, then the company will succeed in

maintaining higher market share than its competitors (Porter, 1985; De wit, 1997).

The second generic strategy is DIFFERENTIATION strategy, which allows a

company to change higher prices because the product being offered is competing against

other competitors on the basis of higher quality, or the customer`s perception of higher

quality. Where DIFFERENTIATION is selected, costs will be higher, but the company

37
is able to demand a higher price because customers perceive the product as being worth

higher price (Porter, 1985).

The third generic strategy, the FOCUS strategy, has two variants which are the

cost focus and the differentiation focus. In cost focus, a company seeks a cost advantage

for a targeted segment of the market, whereas in differentiation focus the company seeks

to create a differentiated focus for a particular market segment. Both of these approaches

depend on identifying a difference between the company`s usual customer base and an

identified segment of the market, which would otherwise be outside of the scope of the

company`s business. The identified segment will either comprise customers with

different needs or the production and delivery systems must differ significantly from

other segments of the industry (Porter, 1985). The strategic advantage of Michael Porter

(1985) is shown in Figure 2.

Figure 2. The strategic advantage of Michael Porter (1985)

Figure 2. The strategic advantage of Michael Porter (1985), the Competitive

Advantage: Porter`s Three Generic Strategies.
Source: Adapted from Porter (1985)

38
 Porter states that, if a company or school attempts to combine an emphasis on low

costs and differentiation, it will end up being “stuck in the middle” (Porter, 1985).

Companies that fail to develop one of the three generic strategies, or attempt to combine

them, are stuck-in-the-middle, and should anticipate below-average profits (Porter, 1985).

The strategy of Cost Leadership to CTU is applicable since it is a state university

which used to have a lower tuition and other fees compared with other higher education

institutions in the city or region and then last 2017, the universal access to tertiary

education was passed providing free tuition and other fees of the university or college

students.

The cost leader also positions its products to appeal to the “average customer”.

The aim is to provide the least number of academic programs desired by the highest

number of students. Although customers (students) may not find exactly what they are

seeking, they are attracted to the lower prices (Porter, 1985).

The other strategy is differentiation (Porter, 1985) of CTU compared with either

SUCs or private HEIs in the region. Differentiation is offering unique or niche service or

product, and CTU offers programs which are unique being a technological university, it

has trade and industry related programs such as Bachelor of Secondary Education major

in Technology and Livelihood Education (BSED-TLE). This program requires the

student to undergo training on different subfields such as carpentry, welding, automotive,

electrical, electronic, culinary, beauty care, and machine shop. The CTU also offers

Bachelor of Science in Industrial Technology with specialization in Electrical

Technology, Electronic Technology, Computer Technology, Drafting, Machine Shop,

39
and Mechanical Technology. It has a new program, the Bachelor of Science in Food

Technology. The main campus has several engineering programs and nursing aside from

education and technological education, some campuses offer agriculture, fishery,

forestry, horticulture, biotechnology, marine engineering, and graduate programs.

The third strategy is focus (Porter, 1985) which is narrowing CTU’s market

segment. The CTU is a technological state university, therefore, it focuses on

technological programs or even education programs with specialization on technology or

even using technology in the mode of delivery. The focus strategy of CTU is going into

the municipalities which make technological education available in the municipal level.

There are eight external campuses and 11 extension campuses which are accessible

directly by the municipal students who cannot afford to stay in the city. Although not all

program offerings in the main campus which is located in the city of Cebu are not offered

in all external and extension campuses because depending on the availability of faculty

and facilities.

Each campus has a specialized program which can be equated to a segmented

market or focus market which is in the case of CTU with specialized or flagship program.

For instance, CTU Moalboal Campus, its flagship program is fishery and tourism, Barili

campus is agriculture; Argao campus is forestry, Carmen campus is marine engineering

and fishery, main campus is industry, and the other campuses are mixed.

For CTU’s positioning, it has to focus (Porter, 1985) on quality education

(differentiation) aside from being Cost Leadership (Porter, 1985; Brett, 2018) since

positioning in university is linked to the quality of education that it delivers to its

clientele who are the students. Quality education means high academic standard as it is a

40
Constitutional mandate (Section 1, Article XIV, 1987 Constitution of the Philippines) and

statutory requirement for quality assurance (CMO No. 46, s. 2012). The vision of CTU is

“a premier multidisciplinary technological university” (RA No. 9744) which means that it

shall be a university second to none in terms of multidisciplinary technological education.

A well-thought out positioning encourages two things to happen: 1) it induces

higher accountability and improved performance (Faye et al., 2010), and (2) it guides

managers to focus on market needs and to segment the market that allows the highest

competitive advantage of the firm over its competitors. Thus, positioning allows

curricular offerings to float with the changing consumer needs and thereby align

curriculums to a strategic fit with the market needs.

After looking into the competitive strategies (Porter, 1985), it is also necessary to

refer to strategic mapping or strategic perspective of Kaplan and Norton (2001), cited in

Harmon (2004). The strategy insists that management track has four different types of

measures such as Financial, Customer, Internal Business (Process), and Innovation and

Learning. This methodology was refined using the top - down method that emphasizes

starting within the executive team and defining the organization`s strategic goals and

passing those goals downward. They believed that success results from a Strategy-

Focused Organization.

The strategic perspective that Kaplan and Norton have developed is very valuable.

Before Kaplan and Norton, most academic strategy courses were dominated by the

thinking of Michael Porter, who began by emphasizing the “Five Forces Model” which

suggested that external, environmental factors would change an organization`s

competitive situation and then focus on improving the value chain. By contrast, Kaplan

41
and Norton (2004) have put a lot more emphasis on measures and alignment, which have

certainly led to a more comprehensive approach to strategy (Harmon, 2004).

These measures and alignment of Kaplan and Norton are equivalent to the key

result areas (KRAs) of CMO No. 46, s. 2012; ISA-SED (2017) of the Commission on

Higher Education (CHED). The measures and alignment of Kaplan and Norton discuss

financial, customer, internal business, and innovation and learning measures which are

similar to the KRAs of ISA-SED which are the governance arrangement, management

arrangement, enabling features, teaching and learning, setting and achieving program

standards, professional exposure, research and creative works, support to students, and

relations to community (ISA-SED, 2017). All these areas are measures to strategize the

operation of a tertiary education in providing their services to the market who are the

students or community in general.

Theoretical Framework

A theoretical model directs attention of the researcher and the readers to the core

intention of this dissertation. This model is adapted from the generic value chain model

of Porter (1985) for higher education institutions. It has three categories such as the

primary activities, the support activities and the target “Humanistic Technology

Education.” All the components covered within the primary and support activities are

variables or activities that would provide HEI the processes to realize the target of

making technology education humanistic. Like any scheme, this theoretical framework

42
addresses the issues of relevance and integration of the key variables being investigated

in this study. For purposes of illustration, the value-chain model is shown in Figure 3.

Figure 3. Theoretical Framework (Value Chain Positioning)

(Adapted from Michael E. Porter, 1985 modified by Rivera and Chiu (2016) using CMO
46, s. 2012; ISA-SED, 2017)

The value chain model shows a set of value-adding activities of the CTU

organization which at the same time, secures the clients` satisfaction (Porter, 1985).

There are two main parts of the model. Part one is labeled support activities. Part two is

called the primary activities. The primary activities include the following: the in-bound

services that consist of selection, admission, and enrollment of students (indigenous,

handicapped, foreign students and other groups); instruction (transformation process,

curriculum development in terms of content, pedagogy in regard to the methods of

delivery and evaluation), quality of teaching and learning (setting and achieving program

standards in terms of actions to strengthen the programs, faculty profile, and appropriate

learning resources), quality of professional exposure, research and creative work, support

43
for students (equity and access — recruitments, admission, and academic support —

student services, relevance of programs), relation with the community (networking and

linkaging; extension programs)); outbound like publications, web portal, community

extension and outreach, transport, and services such as transcript, diploma, job

placement, test centers, alumni, and research; and “after sales” such as alumni service,

dormitory service, lodging service, review classes, and job entry skills training.

The support activities of the value chain model comprise the governance category,

such as faculty and staff recruitment, student support services, and procurement

processes. The governance category is understood in regard to governance arrangement.

Governance arrangement is observed using such details as probity, strategic vision,

accountability, awareness of management risks, and effective monitoring of performance.

Management arrangement is operationally observed in terms of financial control and

quality assurance arrangement. Finally, the enabling activity embraces such categories as

Information and Communication Technology (ICT), legal services, online enrollment and

instruction.

Another support activity is procurement process. Procurement processes

include such activities as public bidding and other activities that lead to the

consummation of the acquisition of the materials, equipment and buildings. Faculty and

Staff recruitment (Human Resource) is another important support activity. They are

faculty and staff recruitment processes, hiring, training, faculty and staff development

processes, skills and motivation processes of employees. Another important support

service is support for students in terms of records systems, evaluation and graduation

44
processes, student counseling, international student support processes, scholarship,

student organization registration and support processes, and discipline board processes.

All those processes are sources of value adding services to client as well as

sources of managing cost-efficiency to ensure graduation of quality technology education

graduates. The same model integrates those various activity processes and thus the

reference point for relevance of variable in this dissertation.

Conceptual Framework

A conceptual framework defines the scientific structure of this study. It is

fashioned in the hypothetico-deductive method, where the correspondence between

theory and facts demonstrates the internal/logical validity via its hierarchy of categories

and its “extra-linguistic" validity is rooted in the totality of facts (Braithwaite, 1968;

Wittgenstein, 1961; Martinez, 1980). It suggests a deductive and inductive interplay of

theoretical construction. The model is shown in Figure 4.

45
 Conceptual Framework

State of Accreditation State of Accreditation

Results of Phil. SUCs Results of CTU based on
based on AACCUP AACCUP accreditation
accreditation

Comparative Analyses Variables

Levels of accreditation
Performance
 VMG and Objectives
 Faculty
CTU Main  Curriculum and Instruction
Campus  Support to students
 Research
 Extension and Community
Involvement
 Library
 Physical Plant and Facilities
 Laboratories
CTU  Administration
Extensions (AACCUP Measures
Campuses by Programs)

Levels of Value Chain

Performance
[CMO No. 46, s. 2012, ISA-SED
2017]
 Governance arrangement
CTU External  Management arrangement
Campuses  Enabling Features
 Setting and Achieving
Objectives
 Faculty profile
 Appropriate Learning Resource
 Professional Exposures
 Research Capability
 Creative Work and Innovations
 Equity and Access
 Relevance of Programs
 Networking and Linkaging
Environment  Extension and Community
Involvement in terms of KRA

Figure 4. Conceptual Framework

46
 The model shows the comparative approaches. The first two boxes connected by

a double-headed arrow signify the issue on significant difference between two variables,

namely, the present state of accreditation results in the Philippines SUCs and the state of

accreditation results of CTU based on the AACCUP accreditation. The two vertical

arrows are simple presentation to connect the first set of variables to another set of

variables for comparative analysis between and/or among variables such as the CTU

main campus, the external, and extension campuses.

For purposes of comparative analysis with respect to the level of accreditation

performance and the level of value chain performance as seen by the respondents, the

three campuses such as the main, the external, and the extension are treated as variables.

Thus, the significant differences between the CTU main campus, external and extension

campuses are analyzed as one comparison with respect to the levels of accreditation

performance by programs and with respect to the levels of value-chain performance by

KRAs as seen by the respondents.

A significant difference between the external campuses and the extension

campuses with respect to the level of accreditation performance by programs and the

level of value-chain performance as the respondents see it is also investigated. Finally a

significant difference between the main campus, the external, and extension campuses in

their levels of accreditation by programs and in their levels of value chain performance as

the respondents see it is also determined. Those comparative relationships are designated

by simple vertical lines. The first two vertical lines do not show statistical relationships

they are simply used as “bridges” to bind it with the other set of statistical relationships.

47
However, the first examination focuses on the extent or the level of value-chain

institutional sustainability performance of the three sets of CTU campuses by KRAs.

Three levels of accreditation performance are measured in a scale of 5.0 for VMG

and objectives, faculty, curriculum and instruction, support to students, research,

extension and community involvement, library, physical plant and administration. In

regard to the value chain performance, the indicators are clustered in terms of governance

arrangement (6), management (3), enabling features (2), setting and achievement (7),

faculty profile (1) appropriate learning resource (3), professional exposures (4), research

capability (3), creative work and innovation (2), equity and access (12), relevance of

programs (5), networking and linkaging (3), and extension and community involvement

(1) based on the ISA-SED is the Institutional Sustainability Assessment–Self-Evaluation

Document by CHED (CMO No. 46, s. 2012; ISA, 2012 and ISA-SED, 2017).

48
 CHAPTER III
METHODOLOGY

This section explains the methodology of the study. It comprises the research

design, research environment, respondents and sampling procedure, data collection

procedure, and ethical consideration.

Research Design

In order to address the research questions, a descriptive-comparative approach is

utilized in this study. The study examines the program accreditation results of AACCUP

of all state universities and colleges in the country and CTU. The study basically

assesses the status or the state of the CTU education system as a whole or in general

based on the results of the AACCUP accreditation results and the value chain

performance. The different curricular programs are examined in order to find out the

competitive position of the university in terms of the accreditation status and the value-

chain institutional sustainability performance. It adopts descriptive-comparative approach

in comparing the accreditation performance of the main campus and the external

campuses, as well as the extension campuses, or between the external and the extension

campuses.

The areas to be assessed of the university are its VMGO, faculty, curriculum,

support to students, research, extension and community involvement, library, physical

plant and facilities, laboratories, and administration. These areas are examined in every

campus and in every program of technological education of the university. Finally, the

49
results of the ISO certification of the university and the program offerings are examined

as additional document to determine the competitive advantage of CTU in the region.

Research Environment

The environment of the study is the different campuses of the Cebu Technological

University situated in the city of Cebu, in some municipalities, and island municipalities

of the province of Cebu. There are 20 campuses of the university composed of the main

campus, eight external campuses located in Argao, Barili, Carmen, Daabnatayan, Danao

City, Moalboal, San Francisco, Camotes Island, Cebu, and Tuburan. There are 11

extension campuses Bantayan Island, Dumajug, Malabuyoc, Mountain Cebu City, Naga,

Oslob, Pinamungahan, Samboan, San Fernando, San Remegio, and Tabogon in the

province of Cebu.

Map of Cebu showing the Cebu Technological University campuses

Figure 5. The map of Cebu where CTU campuses are located

50
 The Cebu Technological University (CTU) is a chartered university enacted by

the Philippine Congress (RA No. 9744, 2009). The CTU was formerly known as Cebu

State College of Science and Technology (CSCST), which was composed of nine

campuses throughout the province of Cebu. It became a state university on November 10,

2009 by virtue of Republic Act No. 9744.

The university, as a system of nine campuses and 11 extension campuses, started

as Cebu School of Arts and Trades in Cebu City; Sudlon Agricultural College in Lahug,

Cebu City; Abellana National School in Cebu City; Danao Vocational School in Danao

City; Tuburan Vocational School in Tuburan; Moalboal School of Fisheries in Moalboal;

Argao Agro-Industrial School in Argao; Quirino School of Fisheries in Carmen; Manuel

A. Roxas Memorial School of Fisheries in Daanbantayan; and Magsaysay School of

Fisheries in San Francisco, Camotes Islands. These were integrated into Cebu State

College of Science and Technology (CSCST) System on June 10, 1983 by virtue of Batas

Pambansa Bilang 412. It was a mandate that the new state college shall expand its

curricular programs focusing on higher technological education.

On December 16, 2003, to fully standardize and to highly institutionalize the

entire management of its educational system, Cebu State College of Science and

Technology was granted Certificate of Registration by Anglo - Japanese American (AJA)

Registrars Incorporated in accordance with ISO 9001:2000 Quality Management System

Standards, with Certification No. AJA 03/6952 giving it international recognition. On

February 7, 2007, CSCST was recertified by AJA Registrars Inc. as ISO 9001:2000 QMS

compliant.

51
 The Main Campus in Cebu City started in 1911 when the Cebu Trade School, it

was established as one of the earliest vocational schools in the country. Founded by the

Americans as the Manual Arts Department of the Cebu Normal School (now Cebu

Normal University), its main purpose was to develop technical skills. The school

produced its first graduates in 1912.

Cebu Trade School (the main campus) later became an affiliate of the Cebu

Provincial High School located along Jones Avenue, Cebu City. Through Proclamation

No. 180 on August 20, 1928, it became a separate entity and acquired its present site at

the corner of M.J. Cuenco Avenue and R. Palma St., Cebu City.

In 1925, the secondary school was opened. In 1940, Commonwealth Act No. 313

renamed Cebu Trade School to Cebu School of Arts and Trades (CSAT). That same year,

it offered the two-year technical course for male students. In 1950, it opened its doors to

female students.

The first tertiary offering of CSAT was the Bachelor of Science in Industrial

Education in 1954. In 1969, it offered Master of Education (M.Ed.) and Master of Arts in

Vocational Education (MAVED). In 1975, it started offering Bachelor of Science in

Industrial Technology (BSIT). In 1982, it offered the Master in Public Administration.

In 1996, to meet the needs of technologists occupying managerial positions in the

industry, the Graduate School of the Cebu State College of Science and Technology

offered the Doctor of Philosophy in Technological Management (Ph.D. TM) and Doctor

in Development Education (Dev. Ed. D.) a year later.

In 1998, the Bachelor of Elementary Education and the Bachelor of Secondary

Education achieved Level 1 Accreditation Status as assessed and evaluated by the

52
Accrediting Agency of Chartered Colleges and Universities in the Philippines

(AACCUP). These were the first curricular programs of CSCST which underwent

accreditation.

The Argao Campus began as an extension school of Cebu Provincial High School

in Cebu City in 1945 before the Americans landed in Cebu to continue the pre-war

classes. On July 1, 1945, the Provincial Board and the school authorities established it as

the Cebu South Provincial High School. In 1949, buildings were constructed out of the

war reparation funds. The school was then converted to Cebu South National High

School in 1961. After 17 years, it was converted to Cebu South Agro-Industrial School.

In 1984, it was renamed CSCST-Agro-Industrial and Forestry College.

The Barili Campus traced its origin in Barangay Sudlon, Cebu City. By virtue of

The Omnibus Law 948, the Sudlon Agricultural School was created on August 2, 1948.

In 1954, it was transferred to Lahug, Cebu City. In 1972, it became one of the 11

agricultural schools placed under the Bureau of Vocational Education – EDPITAF

Program. It was during this time when tertiary degrees in agriculture were opened. On

May 30, 2001, as part of the CSCST System, the College of Agriculture was relocated to

its present 100-hectare site in Cagay, Barili, Cebu.

The San Francisco Campus traced its foundation on June 22, 1956 when RA No.

1984 was enacted to create the Cebu School of Fisheries in the Municipality of Poro.

However, in June 1961, the school was transferred to the Municipality of San Francisco

because of its large population. Under RA No. 3500, the school was renamed Magsaysay

School of Fisheries in 1963. It was changed in 1984 to CSCST-Fishery and Industrial

College.

53
 The Carmen Campus started as the Quirino School of Fisheries under RA No.

2700 in 1959. It was administered and supervised in 1964 by Cebu School of Arts and

Trades (CSAT), Cebu City. By virtue of MECS Order No. 72, s.1979, the school was

converted into a Regional Institute of Fisheries Technology (RIFT), one of the seven

schools under the Educational Development Projects Implementing Task Force

(EDPITAF). It was renamed CSCST-College of Fisheries Technology in 1984.

The Daanbantayan Campus was founded on March 3, 1948 by virtue of

Provincial Board Resolution No. 500 and was named Manuel A. Roxas School of

Fisheries, the oldest known fishery school of the country. In 1951, by virtue of RA No.

673, it became a national vocational school under the supervision of the Bureau of Public

Schools. It transferred to its present site in Agujo, Daanbantayan and in 1952, its

supervision was assigned to the Bureau of Fisheries. The school became one of the

regional fishery schools offering both secondary and post-secondary programs.

On April 8, 1983, the school was converted into Central Visayas College of

Fisheries under B.P. 379. However, before its implementation, another law, B.P. 412,

was approved on June 10, 1983 making the school part of the Cebu State College of

Science and Technology System. Finally, in 1984, it was renamed CSCST-College of

Fisheries.

The Danao Campus started in June 1949 by virtue of Danao Municipal Council

Resolution naming it Danao Provincial High School. On June 22, 1957, RA No. 1907

converted it into a national vocational secondary school. In July 1965, the school

transferred to its present site in Sabang, Danao City. Ten years later, it was changed to

54
Danao Vocational School which then offered the two-year trade technical curriculum. In

1984, it was renamed CSCST-College of Industrial Technology.

The Moalboal Campus started as Moalboal Provincial High School by authority

of Moalboal Municipal Council Resolution No. 87 dated December 31, 1947. On

February 15, 1967 by virtue of RA No. 3613, it was converted to Moalboal Southern

School of Fisheries. In 1975, its name was shortened to Moalboal School of Fisheries. In

that same year, the Three-Year Diploma in Fishery Technology was offered.

The Tuburan Campus was first established in 1945 as Cebu North Provincial High

School. On June 18, 1961, RA No. 3433 converted it to a national, vocational high

school. A year later, RA No. 3502 renamed it Tuburan National School. It later became

CSCST-Polytechnic College, and through Board of Trustees Resolution No. 028 dated

November 16, 2004, its name was changed to CSCST - Tuburan Campus, reflecting its

geographical location.

Respondent and Sampling Procedure

The 191 respondents of this study are the directors of instruction, research,

community services, student services; HR manager; the VPAA and the registrar and

admission; officers of the main, external, and extension campuses; the directors of the

campuses which offer technology education programs; and the directors of technology

schools, graduate school deans and department heads. Generally, all campuses whether

the main campus, external campus, or extension campus are offering technology

education. The technology education programs are the following (1) Bachelor of

Secondary Education (BSED) major in Technology, Livelihood, and Entrepreneurship

55
(TLE) which are divided into two BSED major in Home Economics and Technology

(HET) and BSED Industrial Technology (IT); (2) Bachelor of Science in Industrial

Technology (BSIT) in selected majors; and graduate education like Master of Arts in

Vocational Education (MAVED), Master in Technology Education (MTE), and Doctor of

Philosophy in Technology Management (Ph. D. T. M.). Graduate program coordinators

are also included in the survey.

Research Instrument

The data needed in this study were the results of the AACCUP accreditation from

the State Universities and Colleges (SUCs) of the Philippines including the CTU

AACCUP results and the survey results based on the CMO No. 46 s. 2012; ISA-SED,

2017 Key Result Areas (KRAs). Therefore, the study utilized the AACCUP instruments

revised in 2014 and the Institutional Sustainability Assessment Self-Evaluation

Document (ISA-SED, 2017); hence, a documentary analysis was used based on the

accreditation results for the last seven years of accreditation and the ISA-SED instrument.

The survey method of data collection was used as the method of data collection.

The questionnaire adopts the value chain variables and measures that are printed in CMO

No. 46, s.2012; ISA-SED, 2017.

Data Collection Procedure

56
 The data gathering follows these processes:

First, letter request to the University President, requesting his good office to allow

the researcher to get all the data needed for the study;

Second, the letter request to the University Quality Assurance Director requesting

for the AACCUP results;

Third, give the survey forms based on the Key Result Areas (KRAs) of CMO No.

46 series of 2012, ISA-SED, (2017) to all the campuses and retrieved some days after for

processing the answers; and

Fourth, access the internet specifically the websites of AACCUP and CHED for

the accreditation results of all State Universities and Colleges (SUCs) in the Philippines

for the last seven-year-period of accreditation and some vital data from the CHED.

Data Analysis Procedure

The data collected were analyzed using percentage, weighted mean and Kruskal-

Wallis test. Percentage was utilized in presenting the distribution of the programs of the

State Universities and Colleges in the Philippines in terms of accreditation status.

Weighted mean was used so as to determine the respondents’ extent of assessment on

each of the KRAs per campus of the Cebu Technological University (CTU). Moreover,

Kruskal-Wallis test was used in order to ascertain the degree/extent of difference among

CTU Main, External and Extension campuses in terms of accreditation status and KRAs

respectively.

57
Ethical Consideration

In an adherence to the ethical principles of conducting research, accuracy in data

gathering and data processing is ensured and systematic and objective procedures are

followed. Foremost, letters of request are sent to the selected key informants, the vice

president for academic affairs and the heads of satellite campuses in the Province of

Cebu.

The accreditation results particularly the accreditation levels of the different SUCs

in the country are published in the AACCUP website which is accessible to all peoples in

the country and abroad hence, it is not confidential, however, the mean scores of the

results are held by the SUCs since these are confidential. The records of SUCs which are

general information in nature are considered public records or documents since SUCs are

public universities; therefore, information of general in nature can be accessed by the

public, however, records pertaining to the specific mean scores of each institution are

considered confidential or private in nature. Even though the nature of the documents is

public, still, confidentiality is strictly observed. Letters of request to conduct research are

appended to this proposal.

58
 CHAPTER IV

DATA PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION

This section shows the data presentation, analysis, and interpretation of the study.

But before the presentation of the three hypothesized data-sets, it is proper to show the

weighted means of the three campuses: CTU – main, external and extension with respect

to their levels of performance in terms of the KRAs of the CHED ISA-SED (2017)

document. The same weighted means are inputs to the analysis and interpretation of the

hypothesized research questions. The order of presentation is as follows: the level of

performance of the CTU System with respect to Good Governance and Management,

Enabling Features, Quality Teaching and Learning, Quality of Professional Exposure,

Research, and Creative Work, Support for Students, and Relation to the Community; the

state of education of the State Universities and Colleges (SUCs) and the state of

education of the CTU system by AACCUP accreditation standards; the accreditation

performance levels of the main campus, its eight external campuses, and the 11 extension

campuses, and the level of value chain performance of the CTU main campus, its eight

external campuses and 11 extension campuses using the CHED ISA-SED measures.

Levels of Institutional Value Chain Sustainability Performance

This section presents the extent of institutional sustainability performance of the

CTU–main campus, external and extension campuses with respect to the five KRAs of

the CHED Institutional Sustainability Assessment – Self-Evaluation Document (ISA-

59
SED) measures. These are the five KRAs: management and governance, enabling

features, quality teaching learning, quality of professional exposure, research and creative

work, support for students, and community relations. Table 1 to table 14 provide the

extent of institutional sustainability performance levels of CTU campuses particularly

Tables 1 to 3 for KRA 1, Tables 4 to 6 for KRA 2, Tables 7 to 9 for KRA 3, Tables 10 to

11 for KRA 4, and Tables 12 to 14 for KRA 5.

Level of performance in governance arrangement. The area of governance

arrangement of CTU is composed of probity, strategic vision, accountability, awareness

and management of risk, effective monitoring, and performance which are shown in table

1.

Table 1. Level of Performance in Governance Arrangement

The Institution’s governance arrangement CTU CAMPUSES
demonstrates:
Main External Extension
1. Probity 3.91 3.56 3.63
2. Strategic Vision 4.18 3.86 3.54
3. Accountability 3.91 3.71 3.58
4. Awareness & Management of Risk 3.73 3.56 3.49
5. Effective Monitoring 3.45 3.52 3.51
6. Performance 4 3.59 3.44
Aggregate Mean 3.86 3.63 3.53
ISA-SED (2017) Institutional Sustainability Assessment Self-Evaluation Document
It is revealed in table 1 that the aggregate mean of the main campus is 3.86,

external campus is 3.63, and extension campus is 3.53 which are in the level between 3.4

to 4.1 with a “very good” description using the scale of 0.8 interval from 1.0 to 5.0. The

difference between the main campus and the external campus is 0.23 while the difference

60
between the main campus and the extension campus is 0.33 showing that the main

campus is better than the other two campuses with respect to the governance, however all

campuses need to exert more effort in terms of governance or administration.

Level of performance in management arrangement. Table 2 presents the

aggregate mean of the three campuses which cover the management arrangement,

financial control, and quality assurance arrangement.

Table 2. Level of performance in Management Arrangement

The Institution’s management CTU CAMPUSES
arrangements are sufficient to manage
Main External Extension
existing operations and to respond to
development and change.
Management Arrangement 4.09 3.63 3.29
Financial Control 3.73 3.45 3.33
Quality Assurance Arrangement 3.82 3.56 3.46
Aggregate Mean 3.88 3.55 3.36
ISA-SED (2017) Institutional Sustainability Assessment Self-Evaluation Document

The aggregate mean scores in Table 2 show that these are in between 3.4 to 4.1
with a description of “very good” which shows that the main campus is better than the
external and extension campuses with respect to the management arrangement. This data
confirms that the main campus has better resources compared with the external and
extension campuses.

Level of performance in enabling features. The enabling features of the KRA are

composed of Information Communication Technology (ICT) for more efficient and

effective management and a viable, sustainable appropriate resource generation strategy

to support the university`s development plan (Table 3).

61
Table 3. Level of performance in Enabling Features
The Institution has enabling features such CTU CAMPUSES
as….
Main External Extension
ICT for more Efficient and Effective 3.73 3.41 3.08
Management
A viable, sustainable appropriate resource 3.91 3.5 3.18
generation strategy to support its
development plan
Aggregate Mean 3.82 3.45 3.13
ISA-SED (2017) Institutional Sustainability Assessment Self-Evaluation Document

As reflected in Table 3, the efficiency and effectivity of ICT management and its

viability and sustainability in appropriating resource generation strategy to support the

institution`s development plan of CTU have the aggregate mean scores of 3.82, 3.45, and

3.13. The main and external campuses aggregate mean scores are in the levels of 3.4 to

4.1 having a descriptive meaning of “very good” while the extension campus’ mean score

is 3.13 which is in between 2.6 to 3.3 with a descriptive definition of “good”.

It reveals that the extension campus has lesser capability in terms of ICT

management and viability and sustainability with respect to resource generation strategy

in supporting its development plan. The location of the main campus is in the highly

urbanized city which has better access to the technology, and again, it has better access or

opportunity in terms of funding. The main campus has established its ICT management

before the external and extension campuses. With respect to sustainability of resource

generation, the main campus has better position since it has several colleges within one

campus, hence, more possibilities in terms of student recruitment.

62
 The institutional value chain sustainable performance of CTU is the functional

frame of reference which is the practical application and an orientation (foundation) to

CTU`s survival of operation (economy). The functional reference of CTU`s survival can

be assessed through its value chain (Porter, 1985) activities which are the overt act

(Weber, Henderson, & Parsons, 1964) particularly the KRA ‘governance and

management arrangement and enabling features’ (ISA-SED, 2017).

Further, Parson`s social system theory (Cliffs, 1961) needs actors (administrators

and faculty) who occupy differentiated status or position and perform differentiated roles.

The administrators and faculty have to perform their differentiated roles or functions in

order to attain their goal which is quality education of their students.

Level of Performance in Quality Learning and Teaching

Setting and achieving objectives. Table 4 shows the different indicators in setting

and achieving objectives such as program approval, program and monitoring review, and

action to strengthen program:

Table 4. Level of performance in Quality of Teaching and Learning

Setting and Achieving Objectives: CTU CAMPUSES
Program Approval: Main External Extension
The Institution sets the objectives and learning 4.08 3.95 4.21
outcomes of its programs at appropriate level
The Institution has effective mechanisms that 3.92 3.79 3.23
enable students to achieve the standard outcomes
Program and Monitoring Review:
the Institution has effective arrangements for 3.58 3.86 3.06
monitoring the effectiveness of its program
Action to Strengthen Program:
The Institution takes effective action to address 3.58 3.69 2.98

63
weakness
The Institution takes effective action to build on 3.75 3.81 2.99
strengths
Aggregate Mean 3.78 3.82 3.29
ISA-SED (2017) Institutional Sustainability Assessment Self-Evaluation Document

The aggregate mean scores in Table 4 show that the external campus is better than

the main campus and extension campus. Both main and external campuses have

aggregate mean scores in between 3.4 to 4.1 with a descriptive meaning “very good”

while the extension campus has a mean of 3.29 which is one level lower and has a

descriptive meaning “good.” This shows that some teachers in the external campus do

better at their jobs; however, the difference between the main and external campuses is

not so significant.

Faculty Profile. Table 5 shows that the institution has an adequate number of

faculty with appropriate expertise and competence in their specialized field.

Table 5. Level of performance in Faculty Profile

Faculty profile CTU CAMPUSES
Main External Extension
The Institution has an adequate number of 3.58 3.74 2.97
faculty with the appropriate expertise and
competence to teach the courses offered
by the Institution
Mean 3.58 3.74 2.97
ISA-SED (2017) Institutional Sustainability Assessment Self-Evaluation Document
The faculty profile of the external campus has better profile than that of the main

campus, but both are in between 3.4 and 4.1 having a descriptive meaning “very good”

while the extension campus is one degree lower than the main and external campuses.

64
The mean score of 2,97 of extension campus means that it is within 2.6 to 3.3 with the

descriptive level “good.” It shows that the instructors and professors working in the

external campuses have a better profile than those of the main campus as well as the

extension campus.

Library resources, laboratories, and ICT. As shown in Table 6, the external

campus has better scores in terms of library resources, laboratories, and ICT support to

students. It means that, in terms of teaching and learning opportunities particularly in

facilities availability, the external campuses have a better position than the main campus

and extension campuses.

The aggregate mean scores in table 8 reveals that the external campuses is 3.72

while main campus is 3.39 which are both “very good” while extension campus is one

degree lower “good” than the two campuses. It is important to note that all three (3)

indicators such as the library resources, laboratories, and ICT to support student learning,

the external campus surpasses the performance of the main campuses.

Table 6. Level of Performance in Library Resources, Laboratories, and ICT

Appropriate Learning Resources; the Institution CTU CAMPUSES
makes effective use of learning resources such
Main External Extension
as:
Library resources 3.42 3.68 3.04
Laboratories 3.33 3.47 2.85
ICT to support student learning 3.42 3.45 2.84
Aggregate Mean 3.39 3.72 3.03
ISA-SED (2017) Institutional Sustainability Assessment Self-Evaluation Document

65
 There are external campuses like in Barili, Argao, and Danao; they have better

computer laboratories and other technical laboratories since they have computer

programs which require good facilities. However, the main campus has several

technological programs, and the instructors and professors are competent also but the

ones in the external campus have surpassed them in terms of laboratory facilities. The

main campus has just established the new buildings for technological and engineering

programs; after that, most buildings were destroyed by the earthquake sometimes in

2015.

The performance in quality learning and teaching (ISA-SED, 2017) is in

accordance with the sociological theory of Talcott Parsons which provides the strategy to

solve the basic problems of CTU to be able to sustain and survive (Devereux, 1961)

where problems are goal attainment, adaptation, integration, and latency. Parsons

considers the four basic problems as social requisites which coerce and restrain the

behavior of the administrators and faculty of CTU as social system to maintain order

(Devereux, 1961) or maintain a quality standard of education (CMO No. 46, s. 2017;

ISA-SED, 2017).

The goal attainment of CTU is to be able to be the number one premiere

multidisciplinary technological university which can be attained by following the

institutional measures of value chain sustainable performance. The CTU system has to

adapt and integrate by benchmarking universities in the country and abroad which have

proven quality education by acquiring a center of excellence or center of development

ranking.

Quality of Professional Exposures, Research, and Creative Work

66
 This section presents the level of performance of CTU in regard to professional

exposure, research and creative work.

Table 7. Level of Performance in Professional Exposure, Research, and Creative

Works
Professional Exposure CTU CAMPUSES
Main External Extension
Practicum 4.25 3.85 2.93
Internship 4.25 3.75 3.04
OJT 4.25 3.62 3.02
Case writing HEIs 4.25 3.73 2.99
Aggregate Mean 4.25 3.74 3.00
ISA-SED (2017) Institutional Sustainability Assessment Self-Evaluation Document

Regarding professional exposure as shown in table 7, the main campus is better

than the external and extension campuses. This is clear because in the main campus, the

graduates have direct access to industries for it is located in the city. For the students’

practicum, internship, and OJT, the main campus has better access to companies

considering that it is in the metropolitan area. It is important to note that the main

campus has a mean of 4.25 which is “excellent”, the external campus has a mean of 3.74

which is “very good”, and the extension campus has a mean of 3.00 which is “good.”

Level of performance in research pool. Data demonstrates the level of

performance of CTU in terms of research pool of faculty, post-graduate students and post

doctoral research works.

67
Table 8. Level of Performance in Research Pool-community of Faculty, Post
Graduate Students, and Post Doctoral Research Works
Research Capability; the Institution has a CTU CAMPUSES
research capability that fosters and supports
Main External Extension
creative research and other advanced scholarly
activity. This capability consist of:
Research pool/community of:
Faculty 3.58 3.59 2.94
Post graduate students 3.51 3.55 2.92
Post doctoral research works 3.58 3.54 2.78
Aggregate Mean 3.56 3.56 2.88
ISA-SED (2017) Institutional Sustainability Assessment Self-Evaluation Document

In terms of research capabilities, the main campus and the external campus

faculty are given equal mean score. The CTU research administrators are giving

opportunities to the faculty and even provide some incentives for those who can present

and publish papers. All faculty members are encouraged and mandated to produce a

research paper every year. The aggregate mean of both main and external campuses is

3.56 with the descriptive meaning “very good,” while, the extension campus has a mean

score of 2.88 with a descriptive meaning “good.” There are several faculty members in

the main and external campuses who are doing research and have published several

papers already. On the other hand, the extension campuses need to look into their

research pool.

Level of performance in Arts and Innovation in Science and Technology. Table 9

reveals the level of performance of the faculty in their professional exposure particularly

in the art and innovation in science and technology.

68
Table 9. Level of performance in Arts and Innovation in Science and Technology
Creative Works or Innovations; the Institution CTU CAMPUSES
has programs that promote creative work in:
Main External Extension
the Art 3.42 3.27 2.99
Innovation in Science and Technology 3.33 3.11 2.89
Aggregate Mean 3.38 3.19 2.94
ISA-SED (2017) Institutional Sustainability Assessment Self-Evaluation Document

With art and innovation in science and technology, the main campus is better than

the external campus. Main campus has a mean has 3.38 which is just 0.02 in the level of

“very good.” While the external campus of 3.19 and extension campus’ mean is 2.94,

both are within “good” category. It reveals that the main and external campuses have

revealed several creative arts and innovations in terms of science and technology since it

has programs which are very technical like graphics art and other technological programs

back ahead of the external and extension campuses.

The professional exposure, research and creative works are the university’s

“boundary maintenance” described by Parsons (Devereux, 1961). The faculty members

in a university are the ones who are mandated to maintain or sustain its operation in order

to endure despite of turbulence. Although Merton has reservation to Parsonian social

system because to him it is too broad, for him, there should be an analytical tool to

address problems in CTU`s operation. In order to reach the desired quality of education

for students, the faculty has to have good professional exposure and involve more on

research and creative works. With the concept of sustainability of the university, it is a

mandate that the faculty has to always involve in research and innovation of science and

technology in order to be functional. On the other hand, if the faculty gets away or does

69
not perform the required quality standard, it shall result to be dysfunctional which leads

to the unhealthy progress of the organization (Merton, 1949).

Level of Performance in Support for Students

Level of performance in equity and access. Table 10 shows the result of Support

to Students: Equity and Access particularly in the system of recruitment admission,

academic support, and effective in recruiting, admitting, supporting and graduating.

Table 10. Level of performance in Equity and Access

Recruitment Admission and Academic Support; CTU CAMPUSES
the Institution has effective:
Main External Extension
Recruitment system 4.17 3.65 3.16
Admission system 4.25 3.77 2.91
Support system 4.00 3.71 2.89
Graduation system 4.25 3.83 2.74
The Institution is effective in recruiting,
admitting, supporting, and graduating:
Indigenous group 3.42 3.39 2.48
The Handicapped 3.92 3.43 2.51
Low level Income Classes 3.83 3.71 2.75
Foreign students 3.67 2.75 2.20
Other special groups 3.42 2.87 2.36
Aggregate Mean 3.88 3.46 2.67
ISA-SED (2017) Institutional Sustainability Assessment Self-Evaluation Document
The main and external campuses have an aggregate mean of 3.88 and 3.46,

respectively, which is in the level of “very good”, while the extension campus has a mean

of 2.67 which has a descriptive meaning of “good.” The main and external campuses

have better equity regarding the program offerings compared with the extension campus.

70
The main campus had established its programs way ahead from the external and

extension campuses.

Level of performance in Student Services. Table 11 shows the student services

such as direct scholarship and study grant to develop competences needed to support the

economy and enable the country to compete with local markets and to support the non-

academic needs of the students.

Table 11. Level of performance in Student Services

The Institution operates effective arrangement CTU CAMPUSES
to:
Main External Extension
Direct scholarships 4.17 3.70 2.86
Study grant to develop competences needed to 4.33 3.63 2.64
support the Filipino economy and to enable the
country to compete in global labor markets
The Institution has programs for Students 4.00 3.52 2.68
Services to support the non-academic needs of
the students
Aggregate Mean 4.17 3.62 2.73
ISA-SED (2017) Institutional Sustainability Assessment Self-Evaluation Document

As seen in table 11, the aggregate mean scores reveal that regarding students`

supports in terms of all indicators, the main campus has better performance with respect

to opportunities compared with the external and extension campuses. However, after the

promulgation of the Universal Access to Tertiary Education or RA No. 10931 was

approved by the Congress of the Philippines which grant free tuition and other fees to all

students in state universities and colleges, this has a different scenario already.

71
 The main campus is in the level of “excellent” based on the mean score 4.17

which is just 0.03 to 4.20 while the external campus has a mean score of 3.62 which is

“very good.” The extension campus has only 2.73 mean score which has a descriptive

meaning “good.” This shows that the performance of extension campus is much lower

compared with that of the main and external campuses with respect to student services.

The performance in support for students of the university can be dependent on the

“authoritative allocation of values” (Easton, 1959/1965) because a state university has its

budget coming from the allocation of the government. Easton’s political system is

entrusted with the “authoritative allocation of value” authority which was acknowledged

by Majak and Robinson (Charlesworth, 1967) that conceptual definition of politics is a

legitimate process of allocating and spending resources whose goal is to provide service

or support to the students. Public money is spent for the students in state universities and

colleges in the country with the goal to provide accessible quality education for students

and to make the country have enough supply of educated and skilled human capital.

Relations with the Community

Level of performance on Relevance of Programs. Table 12 shows the

performance of CTU in terms of relations with the community particularly the relevance

of its programs.

72
Table 12. Level of performance on Relevance of Programs
Relevance of Programs: CTU CAMPUSES
Main External Extension
The Institution offers programs that take into
consideration the social, cultural, economic, and
4.08 3.67 2.80
develop mental needs of the country at local,
regional and national needs, as well as the need
of the country to compete effectively in global
markets.
Mean 4.08 3.67 2.80
ISA-SED (2017) Institutional Sustainability Assessment Self-Evaluation Document

The mean scores in table 12 show that the university’s programs are relevant to

the social, cultural, economic, and develop mental needs of the country at local, regional,

and national needs, as well as the need of the country to compete in global markets. The

main and external campuses are in better position having mean scores of 4.08 and 3.67,

respectively, having the descriptive definition which is “very good” while the extension

campus has a mean of 2.80 which is “good.” All the technological programs of CTU are

in response to the needs of the industry particularly the technical capacity of the

graduates.

Level of performance in Networking and Linkages. The CTU is valued as partner

of other HEIs, professional, government and non-government organizations, and

industries within the Philippines and internationally as shown in table 13.

Table 13. Level of performance in Networking and Linkages

Networking and Linkages: CTU CAMPUSES
The Institution is valued as a partner by: Main External Extension
Other higher education Institution 4.00 3.72 3.01
Professional, government and non-government 4.08 3.71 2.81

73
organizations
Industry within the Philippines and 4.17 3.57 2.58
internationally
Aggregate Mean 4.08 3.67 2.80
ISA-SED (2017) Institutional Sustainability Assessment Self-Evaluation Document

In terms of network and linkages, as shown in table 13, the main campus has

more linkages compared with the external and extension campuses. The main and

external campuses have the mean scores of 4.08 and 3.67, respectively, which are all in

the level of “very good” while the extension campus has a mean of 2.80 which are a

descriptive meaning “good.” There are several instructors and professors in the main

campus who were able to connect some government agencies in the local, regional,

national, and international arena. There are several national and international universities

which are linked to the university in terms of technological education.

Level of performance in Community Extension and Community Involvement. In

terms of the relations with the community extension, Table 14 shows that the main

campus has higher mean over the external and extension campuses. There are several

extension activities that CTU faculty members are involved with. As part of the

requirement that, at least, there is one extension activity in every year, each faculty

member should participate as either leader or member. Community extension is one of

the thrusts of the university, hence, it is clear that all faculty members must have

community involvement or project as shown in table 14.

74
Table 14. Level of performance in Extension and Community Involvement
Extension programs: CTU CAMPUSES
Main External Extension
The Institution is valued by its local community
as a provider of extension programs that are
4.42 3.79 2.48
responsible for the needs of the community for
people empowerment and self-reliance.
Mean 4.42 3.79 2.48
ISA-SED (2017) Institutional Sustainability Assessment Self-Evaluation Document
The main scores in table 14 reveal that the main campus has a mean score of 4.42

which is in the “excellent” category, the external campus has a mean score of 3.79 which

is in the “very good” category, and the extension campus has a mean score of 2.48 which

is in the “fair” category. This shows that the university has quite a lot of extension

programs for the community since this is a state university, it has the mandate that the

faculty must go into the community to do public service by way of providing technical

skills, teaching the selected community, and providing livelihood activities. One of the

main purposes of the university is to provide livelihood and education directly to the

community. The faculty members are mandated to get involved in doing service to the

community for free. This is one of the activities which are needed for the AACCUP

accreditation. Each faculty must render community extension either as knowledge or

skills provider or training workshop organizer or facilitator.

In relation to the community, the CTU provides programs which are relevant to

the need of the industry and having linkages or networking and extension. The CTU as a

social system has to embody the social requisites of “goal attainment” by Parsons

(Devereux, 1961) which is the strategic direction of the university. It needs to connect

75
and link with the society to be able to sustain and to be able to attain the strategic goals

for value creation (Porter, 1985).

Comparative Accreditation Performance of SUCs and the CTU

The State Universities and Colleges (SUCs) in the Philippines are established for

the prime purpose of catering to the need of the poor but deserving students. On the

basis of such, it is imperative that the quality of the services delivered be examined. And

one way of doing it is through the accreditation results which are done by an impartial

entity – AACUP. This is revealed in table 15.

Table 15: Comparative State of Accreditation Performance of SUCs and CTU

Accreditation National CTU
Status Frequency %) Weight Frequency (%) Weight
Candidate 491(13.43) 2.50 29(24.58) 2.50
Level 1 1121(30.66) 3.00 42(35.59) 3.00
Level 2 1289(35.26) 3.50 44(37.29) 3.50
Level 3 698(19.09) 4.00 3(2.54) 4.00
Level 4 57(1.56) 4.50 0(0.00) 4.50
Aggregate wx̄ 3.32 3.09

The data obtained from 100 State Universities and Colleges (SUCs) in the country

included in this study are presented in Table 15. For the purpose of assessing the school

where the proponent of the study is connected with, CTU as a system is presented

separate and distinct from the other SUCs around the country. As delineated, of the total

number of programs offered by the different SUCs, 2% are in Level Four which is the

highest level of accreditation, 19% in the Third Level, 35% in Level Two, 31% in Level

One, and 13% in the Candidate Status.

76
 On the other hand, in the case of CTU, none of its programs has reached the

highest level of accreditation. Nonetheless, 3% of its programs are in the Third Level,

37% in the Second Level, 26% in the First Level while the remaining 25% are still in the

Candidate Status. Making use of their corresponding aggregate weighted means (wx̄), the

overall picture of the national SUCs is at 3.32 while that of the CTU is at 3.09.

Evidently, a difference in value exists as the national is 0.23 points higher than CTU.

However, it is also to be noted that both are within the same range with a verbal

description, Level 1.

Test of Difference among the CTU Main, its External and Extension Campuses in

terms of Accreditation

In addressing the research question whether or not a significant difference exists

among the CTU Main, External and Extension campuses, Kruskal-Wallis test was

employed which is shown in table 16.

Table 16: Test of difference among the CTU Main, External and Extension
Campuses in terms of AACCUP Accreditation:
Mean Ranks for H P value
CTU Main External Extension
31.1 24.3 12.2 6.61 0.04*
Main campus is better than extension, and external campus is better than extension.
Main and external campuses are the same.

The extent of difference among the three campuses is indicated in the H value of

6.61. Such difference is deemed significant on the basis of the p value which is lesser

than the margin of error or the alpha at 0.05. To ascertain which two of the three

campuses significantly differ, it is worth looking at their corresponding mean ranks

77
ratings. On the basis of such ratings, it appears that 31.1 is significantly higher than 12.2,

24.3 is significantly higher than 12.2 and 31.1 is not significantly higher than 24.3.

This goes to show that CTU Main campus is significantly has a better

performance compared with CTU extension campus. In like manner that CTU external is

having a better performance compared to CTU extension campus. Moreover, the data

indicate that CTU external has a comparable performance with the CTU Main. This

does not come as a surprise considering that the mean accreditation ratings of CTU Main

and CTU External campuses are 3.77 and 3.61, respectively, while that of CTU

Extension campus is only 2.79.

The accreditation ratings of both the CTU Main and CTU external campuses

belong to the same level while that of the CTU External is one level lower than those of

the other two. Though a significant difference exists, much needs to be done on the basis

that CTU Main and CTU External campuses are still in the second level of accreditation.

The second level or Level 2 is “Fair” which means that the “criterion is met in most

respects, but some improvement is needed to overcome weaknesses, 50% lesser than the

standards” (AACCUP Instrument, 2014, pp. 3), and much more for the CTU Extension as

it is still in the candidate status. The Candidate Status is still far below Level 1 which is

still under preliminary survey visit without clear numerical rating. The foregoing

discussion leads to the rejection of the null hypothesis declaring the absence of a

significant relationship among the three campuses.

The AACCUP is the functional instrument of quality education in which the data

or measures utilized are the manifest functions of the instrument. The AACCUP

instrument has a coercive power (Merton, 1949) to compel the HEIs to do their best

78
towards excellence in education. Structural functionalist theory stressed education’s

importance as an integrative and regulative mechanism that would bind people together

and help them develop consciousness of their responsibilities and relationships within the

wider society (Durkheim, 1933).

The AACCUP is an instrument of higher education institutions used by the CHED

to assess or evaluate the performance of the SUCs. The instrument is considered as the

regulative mechanism (Durkheim, 1933) that would bind the SUC administrators, faculty,

and other actors in education as well as the students and the public in general. The

AACCUP instrument has a coercive power to compel the players or actors in education to

bind together or work together to reach the desired goal of the best quality of education

for the students.

Performance Profile of CTU Campuses by Key Result Areas

The profile of the CTU main, external and extension campuses using the KRAs

of CHED CMO No. 46, S. 2012; CHED ISA-SED 2017 is reflected in table 17.

Table 17: Performance of CTU using the Key Result Areas (KRAs), ISA-SED 2017
KRA CTU Main (n=12) External (n=94) Extension (n=85)
1 3.54 3.50 3.55
2 3.67 3.63 3.56
3 3.77 3.80 3.55
4 3.95 3.60 3.40
5 4.15 3.87 3.69
Overall 3.82 3.68 3.55
Delineated in Table 17 are the ratings made by the respondents in the three Cebu

Technological University campuses across KRAs. In CTU main, a pattern has been

established wherein the ratings assumed an ascending order from KRA number one up to

79
KRA number five. This indicates that among the key areas, area number one which is on

good governance and management is the most in need of attention.

There is also a need to prioritize the quality of their delivery of service in the

aspect of teaching. In a nut shell, in prioritizing the giving of intervention across KRAs,

the order has to be from key area number one (1) through key area number five (5).

Although it registered a considerably high rating in key area number five, effort has to be

expended in making the necessary improvement since the overall picture of their

performance as reflected in the overall rating is only 3.82, way below the highest rating

of five.

In the case of CTU External campus, the order of prioritization in the provision

of intervention for the purpose of enhancing improvement is as follows: KRAs number

one, number four, number two, number three, and number five. In consonance with that

in the CTU Main, it needs to focus the most in the area of good governance and

management. The second and third in the sequence are recruitment admission and

academic support as well as on the aspect of teaching respectively. A heavier challenge

stands in the way of the people concerned in running the programs of the entire campus

on the basis of its overall rating which is even lower than that of the CTU Main campus.

Significant difference in value-chain. Moreover, for the CTU Extension campus,

the sequence in order of priority is key areas number four, number one, number three,

number two and number five. Its lowest performance is in the recruitment, admission

and academic support. Second in the ladder is in the good governance and management -

the one which is common among the three campuses. As to whether or not a significant

80
difference exists among the three CTU campuses, the specific data are presented in Table

18.

In a nut shell, it can be construed that a significant difference among the CTU

campuses exists. This is exemplified in the p value of the overall ratings which is lesser

than the margin of error or the level of significance at 0.05. This goes without doubt that

in general, CTU main, CTU external, and CTU extension campuses are not of the same

performance on the basis of the KRAs. This does not come as a surprise since going by

KRA, all the Kruskal-Wallis values warrant the conclusion that indeed the three

campuses differ in performance. Specifically, on the basis of the overall result, the CTU

Main campus and CTU External campus do not differ as disclosed in comparing their

mean ratings. However, CTU main is significantly better compared with CTU extension.

The same holds true to the comparison between CTU External and CTU Extension

campuses.

Table 18. Difference in performance among the CTU Main, External and Extension
Campuses (df=2)
KRA Mean Ranks for H P value
CTU Main External Extension
1 16.7 11.8 4.5 13.73 0.001*
2 9.2 11.8 3.0 10.20 0.006*
3 10.3 6.8 2.5 9.27 0.009*
4 21.2 15.3 5.5 17.91 0.000*
5 10.5 6.5 2.5 9.80 0.007*
Overall 21.4 14.1 6.6 15.72 0.000*

Nonetheless, it would also be better to disclose the results of the comparative

analyses among the three CTU campuses per KRA. In terms of KRA 1, CTU Main

81
appeared to be better than both CTU External and CTU Extension campuses. But, as far

as CTU external and CTU extension are concerned, no significant difference was found.

Surprisingly, a different scenario is shown in key area number 2. It came out that CTU

external campus is better than the other two campuses and it came out as well that CTU

main and CTU extension are the same. Key result area number 3 portrays a picture

wherein CTU main outperformed the other two campuses; in like manner that CTU

external outperformed CTU extension. The same scenarios are indicated in KRA number

4 and number 5 having CTU extension campus to be the least performer among the three

CTU campuses.

In addition to AACCUP instrument, the CHED had come up with another one

which would evaluate the different areas of concern in the performance of delivering the

knowledge and skills to the students. A policy of CHED, the CMO No. 46, s. 2012 as

revised in 2017, the ISA-SED is a another regulative mechanism (Durkheim, 1933) that

brings or forces the actors of HEIs to work together in order to be able to deliver the best

quality education (knowledge and skills) to their students. The concept of Durkheim

before in social system in particular the HEIs is very much applicable today as a guiding

principle in the performance of functions or roles in education.

The purpose of formal education such as higher education institutions is to

provide each individual with the knowledge and capabilities that are essential for

meaningful participation in particular societal contexts. The skills that the students

acquired from the HEIs or particularly a technological institution such as CTU would be

used by the graduates for them to be able to integrate in the society and make them

develop consciousness of their responsibility and relationships within their society. The

82
technological skills that the students acquire will support them to be able to be a

functional member of society (Durkheim, 1933). The technological skills now of the

graduates can be considered tools for integration into human society or social system,

therefore leading to a concept of humanizing the technological education.

83
 CHAPTER V

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This chapter presents the summary of findings, conclusion and recommendations

of the study.

Summary of Findings:

The results of the KRAs are presented and statistically treated in Tables 1 to 14

specifically Tables 1 to 14 specifically Tables 1 to 3 for KRA 1, Tables 4 to 6 for KRA 2,

Tables 7 to 9 for KRA 3, Tables 10 to 11 for KRA 4, and Tables 12 to 14 for KRA 5.

The aggregate mean scores in Tables 1 to 14 reveal a trend on the differences between the

main, external, and extension campuses.

In order to address research problem number one, the study utilized the

instrument provided by the Commission on Higher Education (CHED) the CMO No. 46,

s. 2012 revised in 2017 which is the ISA-SED. All the KRAs are integrated in the

Memorandum Order and revised in the 2017 Institutional Sustainability Assessment Self-

Evaluation Document (ISA-SED) to measure the extent or level of performance among

CTU main, external, and extension campuses with respect to the institutional value chain

sustainability. The main campus reveals to have better performance compared with the

two other campuses except in the quality of teaching and learning, faculty profile, library

resources, laboratories, and ICT where the external campus has a higher mean than the

main campus.

84
 With respect to research problem number two, if there exists a significant

difference between the accreditation results of the State Universities and Colleges (SUCs)

and CTU based on the AACCUP accreditation results, the study revealed that the

accreditation results of all SUCs in the country (national is 3.32 and CTU is 3.09) are in

the same category level 1.

As to research problem number three, if there is a significant difference among

the three campuses, with respect to the seven-year-period accreditation performance

level, based on the results in table 16 of the study, there exists a significant difference

among the three campuses as indicated in the p value which is lesser than the level of

significance at 0.05. The main campus is better than external and extension campuses.

There is a difference between the main campus and the external and extension campuses.

For the last research question, if there exists a significant difference among the

CTU main, external and extension campuses with respect to the level of value chain

performance by KRAs, as revealed in tables 17 and 18, the main campus is better than the

external and extension campuses in terms of performances based on the five KRAs of

CMO No. 46 series of 2012 of CHED; ISA-SED, 2017. It showed that the main campus

has more curricular programs, more research activities or published research and more

activities involving the community.

In fact, the CTU system, including all external and extension campuses based on

the AACCUP results from 2012 to 2017, leads in the number of curricular programs that

had been accredited, although as of the last accreditation in 2017, there are only three

programs which are within the status Level III Re-accredited. There is no program which

is Level IV accredited yet of CTU, however, it has several numbers of activities

85
involving community service, and linkages, and it is ISO certified until the year 2022,

these are the value adding activities of CTU. It has several extension programs or

projects which are research-based projects or community-based projects that make CTU

have direct access to the different government agencies, non-government agencies,

organizations, and societies.

Finally, the CTU system including all external and extension campuses based on

the AACCUP results from 2012 to 2017, leads in the number of curricular programs that

had been accredited, and as of the last accreditation in 2018 and again in 2019 release of

AACCUP news that CTU is top one ranking SUC in terms of numbers of programs

accredited levels I to IV in 2018 (AACCUP, 2019, released March 8, 2019 held in

Century Park Hotel, Malate, Manila); however, this study covers the 2010 to 2017 or

seven-year-period accreditation. It has several numbers of activities involving

community service, and linkages, and it is ISO certified until the year 2022; these are the

value adding activities of CTU. It has several extension programs or projects which are

research-based projects or community-based projects that make CTU have direct access

to the different government agencies, non-government agencies, organizations, and

societies.

As a social science phenomenon, the AACCUP and the ISA-SED, 2017 KRAs

were “constraining effects” on administrators (Durkheim, 1950) on their behavior which

are either “functional” or “dysfunctional” which also inhibit the sustainability of

operations (Merton, 1949). They have “integrative” or “goal attainment” functions of the

CTU system (Parsons, 1961).

86
Conclusions

The performance level of CTU with respect to the CMO No. 46, s. of 2012 or the

Institutional Sustainability Assessment Self-Evaluation Document (ISA-SED, 2017), has

complied most of the KRAs. The CTU main campus has revealed to have better

performance compared with the external and extension campuses with few exceptions in

some areas where the external campus exceeds the main campus. However, the general

trend is that the extension campuses are lower than the main and external campuses with

respect to all KRAs.

This study infers that the CTU lacks in the appreciation of the ISA-SED (2017)

instrument, although the main campus is able to outperform the other two campuses but

still needs to focus its attention on the governance and management areas. With respect

to the resource generation, as of this time, it is not a concern since the congress already

provided the law allowing students to enter state universities and colleges for free tuition

and other fees.

The CTU as a higher education institution has to observe the quality standard

provided by the AACCUP for it to perform its functions to deliver quality technological

education to its students. As of the period of the seven-year-period of accreditation,

CTU is within the same category or it is at par with the other country`s SUCs which are

in the same classification based on statistical analysis of the SUC level of performance

using the AACCUP instrument. However, there are state universities in the country that

have reached the highest level of accreditation, and some are granted with Center of

Excellence (COE) or Center of Development (COD) in some of their programs offered.

87
 With respect to the differences of AACCUP accreditation levels, the main campus

has better performance status compared with the external and extension campuses which

means that the main campus has more programs and is more advanced in terms of

research, creative works, facilities, faculties, and community involvement.

Based on the latest AACCUP release as of March 7, 2019, CTU leads among

SUCs in terms of number of programs accredited Levels I to IV accreditation. This

proves that CTU has outperformed other SUCs in terms of the number of programs

accredited, however, it does not have programs granted with Center of Excellence (COE)

or Center of Development (COD) as of this time of study.

Recommendations

Based on the aforementioned findings and conclusions derived from the study, the

following recommendations were drawn:

With respect to the performance of CTU in terms of the KRAs of CMO No. 46, s.

2012 with the revised instrument the Institutional Sustainability Assessment Self-

Evaluation Document (ISA-SED, 2017), CTU has to look closer to the governance or

management area. It has performed well in terms of faculty profile in the main and

external campuses, however, the extension campuses need to be provided with excellent

faculty as well.

This study recommends that the administration of CTU shall visit its vision,

mission, and goals of each campus whether it is the main, external, or extension campus

because it brings the name CTU. The CHED has provided the measures which are the

88
CMO No. 46, s. 2012 with the ISA-SED, 2017 and delegated the evaluation

responsibility to the accrediting agency which is the AACCUP.

For the CTU positioning concern, it is strongly recommended to adapt the

concepts of Competitive Advantage of Porter (1985) which are the three generic

strategies: cost leadership, differentiation, and focus. The procedure is to combine either

focus-cost leadership or focus-differentiation depending on the actual need of the

university. To choose focus-cost leadership would be un-necessary because, since it is a

state university, there is already a law providing universal access to tertiary education

which entitles the students to enter university with free tuition and miscellaneous fees.

No need to be a cost leader.

The next option is to have differentiation strategy (Porter, 1985) since the

university is already in the position that is very accessible to the students. However, it is

general knowledge that every person has different interests. The interest of individual

persons in their dream to become a professional in any field of specialization must be

addressed by the state through education. But there is no school in the country which can

provide all of the different fields of specialization; therefore, each school must position

itself in a way that it is capable and have the facilities, capabilities, and human capital to

be able to give the needed skills.

The positioning strategy of CTU is Differentiation because CTU has

differentiated program offerings (Porter, 1985). This is because the target students are

those interested in technology education, coming from poor or average families and have

different needs. Some are interested in program which are not heavily technology but

with a technology-based curriculum like Bachelor in Secondary Education with

89
technology major. Most of the program offerings are technology education, technology-

based programs for instance Bachelor of Science in Industrial Technology with different

technical skills as majors. There are students who are interested in STEM based on the

Kto12 Curriculum or programs such as Sciences, Technology, Engineering, and Math.

There are other programs which are not technological in nature but infused with

technology such as ABM or Accounting, Business, and Management.

For the existing value chain activities of CTU such as the primary and support

activities provided in the theoretical framework with the target result which is the

humanizing the technological skills or education of the graduates which is labelled as

Humanistic Technology Education, CTU has to provide extra values in technology

education which is to harmonize the technological skills in human endeavor.

With the Differentiation strategy (Porter, 1985) of CTU in providing technology

education to the students meaning that the acquired technological skills shall be utilized

in the integration to society (Merton, 1949) which is the goal attainment aspect of

Parsons (Devereux, 1961; Durkheim, 1933) of education, this differentiation positioning

strategy, technological skills for integration of graduates to society, and attaining the

desired goal of technological education are in accordance with the target principle of this

study, the Humanistic Technology Education. The concept of humanizing technology

education is a confirmation of the functional frame of reference (Weber, Henderson, &

Parsons, 1964) which offers a practical application and an orientation to CTU`s survival

of operation and existence.

Regarding the additional value chain activities for competitive positioning of

CTU using the differentiation strategy which are recommended in this study, first, is

90
hiring more highly specialized instructors or professors in the field of technology

education, second, providing more training to the instructors and professors; and third,

sending its instructors and professors to universities which have good reputation in

delivering technology education, whether local or international universities. The fourth

recommendation is to compel the faculty to do research of their field of specialization

with monetary benefits as this is already the main requirement for professorial position in

the next cycle of the National Budget Circular No. 461 of the Department of Budget and

Management (DBM).

The budgetary requirement for these recommended value chain activities is

believed to be not a problem considering that it is a state university which has sufficient

financial support from the national government. Therefore, for CTU to be different from

others, it must go beyond business as usual approach. The desired vision or goal

attainment (Devereux, 1961) of CTU to become the premiere multidisciplinary in

technological education can be attained by Differentiating (Porter, 1985) its services

beyond other SUCs.

Humanistic technology education or humanizing the technology for education is a

regulative mechanism (Durkheim, 1933) that would bind the administration, faculty,

staff, and stakeholders of CTU together and encourage them to develop the consciousness

to attain the goal which is the premiere multidisciplinary technological university in the

Philippines.

All the above stated recommendations are for the Cebu Technological University

to establish in order to attain its goals.

91
 For the Silliman University Graduate School, it is recommended that PhD Social

Sciences should be retained in order to have more graduate students from other higher

education institutions whether from SUCs, LUCs, OGS, or private institutions for them to

enhance their skills in social sciences.

For the Commission on Higher Education (CHED), this agency being the

supervisory agency of the Philippines to look into the performance or operation of the

higher education institutions must monitor closely the program offerings and the

processes in delivering the institutional programs if they are in accordance with the

standard required by the CMO No. 46, s. 2012 and the ISA-SED, 2017 standards in order

to have competitive human capital with respect to the ASEAN market or employment.

Then for the School of Public Affairs and Governance (SPAG) of Silliman

University, it is recommended that the PhD. Social Sciences students should be

encouraged to conduct more research or studies on value chain, strategic positioning of

HEIs or any industry. This kind of study gives the PhD students the opportunity to be

able to acquire the skills in administration or management whether in an educational

institution or public industry or private industry administration. This study provides the

tool in assessing the company’s competitive advantage compared to its competitors.

Generally, the study widens the horizon of understanding the social system of the state.

92
REFERENCES

Accrediting Agency of Chartered Colleges and Universities of the Philippines

(AACCUP), www.aaccupqa.org.ph
AIT Bulletin (2018). Asian Institute of Technology of Thailand. https://www.ait.ac.th
American Industrial Arts Association. (1985). Technology Education: A Perspective On
Implementation. Reston, VA: AIAA.
Baumeister, R.F. & Leary, M.R. (1995). “The Need to Belong: Desire for Interpersonal
Attachments as a Fundamental Human Motivation”, Psychological Bulletin. Vol.
117 No. 3, pp. 497-529.
Bernas, G. J, S.J. (1997). Article XIV, Section 1 of the 1987 Philippine Constitution, A
Reviewer-Primer, 3rd Edition, Rex Book Store.
Bound, J., Braga, B., Khanna, G., & Turner, S. (2012). A Passage to America:
University Funding and International Students. www.personal.umich.edu
retrieved August 21, 2017.
Braitwaite, R.D. (1968). Scientific Explanation. A Study of the Function of Theory,
Probability and Law in Science. Cambridge University Press. The Edinburg
Building. Cambridge CB2 8RU, UK. www.cambridge.org
Brett, R.M. (2018). Cost Leadership or Differentiation? Applying Porter’s Competitive
Strategies in Ecotourism. A Case Study of Mkhuze Game Reserve. Department
of Social Sciences. University of Zululand. South Africa. African Journal of
Hospitality, Tourism, and Licensure. Vol. 7 (2)

Brewer, M.B. (1991). The Social Self: On Being the Same and Different at the Same
Time. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. Vol. 17. No. 5. Pp. 475-482.

British Council. (2016). https://www.britishcouncil.ph/sites/default/files/list-of-

autonomous-higher-education-institutions.pdf

Charlesworth, J.C. (1967). The Theory of Decision-Making by Majak, R. & Robinsons

J.A. Contemporary Political Analysis. The Free Press. New York. Collier-
Macmillan. London.

CHED Memorandum Order (CMO) No. 20 s. (2011). Policies and Guidelines for the Use
of Income, Special Trust Fund and Programs of Receipts and Expenditures of the
State Universities and Colleges (SUCs).

CHED Memorandum Order (CMO) No. 20 s. (2013). General Education Curriculum,

Holistic Understanding, Intellectual and Civic Competencies.

93
CHED Memorandum Order (CMO) No. 46 s. (2012). Policy-Standard to Enhance
Quality Assurance (QA) in Philippine Higher Education through an Outcomes-
Based and Typology-Based QA.
CHED Memorandum Order (CMO) No. 52 s. (2006). New Policies and Guidelines for
the Grant of Autonomous and Deregulated Status to Selected private Higher
Education Institutions with Benefits Accruing Thereto.

CHED Memorandum Order (CMO) No. 53 s. (2006). Policies and Standards for
Information Technology Education (ITE) Programs

CHED Memorandum No. 60 s. (1996). Updated Policies and Standards for Information
Technology Education (IT) Category/ies.

CHED Memorandum No. 78 s. (2017). Policies, Standards and Guidelines for the
Bachelor of Technology and Livelihood Education (BTLEd).

Daft, R.L. (2010). Organization Theory and Design. Vanderbilt University. South-
Western Cencage Learning, www.kvimis.co.in retrieved 6/22/17
Devereux, EC Jr. (1961). The Social Theories of Talcott Parsons. Engelwood Cliffs. N.J.
Prentice-Hall
Dorri, M., Yarmohammadian, M. H., & Nadi, M. A. (2012). A Review on Value Chain in
Higher Education. Procedia: Social and Behavioral Sciences. Elsevier Ltd.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/271614861; or www.sciencedirect.com
de Man, A. P. (1997). ‘From position to place’. In: Van den Bosch, F.A.J. and de Man,
A.P. (eds.). Perspectives on Strategy: Contribution of Michael E. Porter, 81-90.
Dordrecht. Springer Science + Business Media
Easton, D. (1957). An Approach to the Analysis of Political Systems. World Politics. Vol.
9, No. 3. Pp. 383-400. Johns Hopkins University Press. (April 30, 2006).
http://www.jstor.org/
Eckel, P.D. and King, J.E. (2004). An Overview of Higher Education in the United
States: Diversity, Access and the Role of the Marketplace. Washington, DC:
American Council on Education
Eckel, P.D. (2008). Mission Diversity and the Tension between Prestige and
Effectiveness: An Overview of US Higher Education. Higher Education Policy.
2008. International Association of Universities. www.palgrave-journal.com/hep
ProQuest
Fahy, J., Hurley, S., DeLuca, L.M., & Hooley, G. (2010). A Competitive Positioning
Analysis of UK Universities. University of Limerick.
www.anzmac.org/conference_archive/2010/pdf retrieved 6/21/17

94
Gabriel, E. (2006). Value Chain for Services. A new dimension of Porter`s Value Chain.
The IMS International Journal, 1-26. Retrieved from http://www.olegabriel.com
Glass, A. (2014). The State of Higher Education. OECD Higher Education Program
(IMHE). Better Policies for Better Lives. www.oecd.org/edu/imhe
Goldsworthy, J. (2008). Research Grant Mania. Australian Universities Review. 50(2),
17-24. Cited in Pathak & Pathak, 2010. http://eprints.qut.edu.au/.
Hartwig, L. (2006). Funding Systems and Their Effects on Higher Education Systems in
Germany. OECD. https://ww.oecd.org/germany/38308008.pdf retrieved August
21, 2017.
Harmon, P. (2004). Strategy Maps: Converting Intangible Assets into Tangible
Outcomes. A Book Review of Strategy Maps by Robert S. Kaplan and David P.
Norton – Harvard Business School Press, 2004, 454 pages.
Hutaibat, K., Alhtaybat, L. & Al-Htaybat K. (2011). Strategic Management Accounting
and the Strategizing Mindset in an English Higher Education Institutional
Context. Emerald. Journal of Accounting & Organizational Change. Vol. 7 No. 4.
www.emeraldinsight.com/1832-5912.htm
Ibo.org. (2017). Guide for IB Students Considering Higher Education in Germany.
www.ibo.org retrieved August 21, 2017.
ISA-SED (2017). Institutional Sustainability Assessment Self-Evaluation Document of
CHED
Juran JM (1982). Upper Management and Quality. Juran Institute, New York

Kaplan. R. S. & Norton, D.P. (2004). Measuring the Strategic Readiness of Intangible
Assets. Harvard Business Review Bulletin. Harvard University

Kasser, T. (2002). The High Price of Materialism. The MIT Press. London

Kasser, V.G. and Ryan, R.M. (1999). “The Relation of Psychological Needs for
Autonomy and Relatedness to Vitality, Well-being, and Mortality in a Nursing
Home”, Journal of Applied Social Psychology. Vol. 29 No. 5. Pp. 935-954

Kotler, P. (1991). Marketing Management: Analysis, Planning, Implementation, and

Control. Engelwood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall

Kotler, P. (2001). A Framework for Marketing Management, by Prentice-Hall, Inc. A

Pearson Education Company Upper Saddle River, New Jersey 07458 A
Framework for Marketing Management, by Philip Kotler Copyright © 2001by
Prentice-Hall, Inc. A Pearson Education Company Upper Saddle River, New
Jersey 07458.

95
Maslow, A. (1970). Motivation and Personality. Harper and Row. New York. NY

Merton, R. K. (1938). Social Structure and Anomie. Harvard University. American

Sociological Review. Volume 3, Issue 5.

Merton, R. K. (1968). Social Theory and Social Structure. 1968 Enlarged Edition. The
Free Press. A Division of Macmillan Publishing Co. Inc. 868 Third Aveneu, New
York. New York 10022.

Mintzberg, H. (1990). Strategy Formation: School of Thought. In: Frederickson, J.W.

(ed.) Perspective on Strategic Management. New York

MIT Bulletin (2018). Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Massachusetts

NTU Bulletin (2018). Nanyang Technological University, Singapore.

https://www.ntu.edu.sg

Nyaungwa, D. F. (2016). Value Chain Analysis and Modelling to Assess and Create
Modern and Innovative Methods of Quality Culture at Institutions of Higher
Learning. Monitronic Success College Namibia. P.O. Box 40792 Ausspannplatz
Windhoel. Namibia.

OECD, (2003a). The Source of Economic Growth in OECD Countries, OECD, Paris

OECD, (2003b). The Policy Agency for Growth; An Overview of the Sources of
Economic Growth in OECD Countries, OECD, Paris.

OECD, (2010). Education at a Glance. OECD Publishing.

Onsman, A. (2008). Tempering Universities` Marketing Rhetoric: A Strategic Protection
Against Litigation or an Admission of Failure? Journal of Higher Education
Policy and Management. 30(1), 77 - 85. Cited in Pathak & Pathak (2010).

Pathak, V. & Pathak, K. (2010). Reconfiguring the higher education value chain„,
Management in Education. 24(4), pp. 166–171. QUT Digital Repository. SAGE.
Australai. http://eprints.qut.edu.au/

Paul in King James Version (1991). “While we look not at the things which are seen, but
at the things which are not seen; for the things which are seen are temporal; but
the things which are not seen are eternal.” The Dake Annotated Reference Bible.
Dake Publishing. P.O. Box 1050. Lawrenceville. Georgia 30246.

Perumal, (2013). Effective Value Chain School. Wilson Perumal & Company, Inc;
Wilson Perumal & Company Forms Strategic Partnership with Leading South
Korean Advisory Service, The Key to Way Electronics Business Journal. Atlanta
(Atlanta).

96
Poon, T.S. (2006). The Commodification of Higher Education: Implications for Academic
Work and Employment. International Journals of Employment Studies. 14(1), 81-
104. Cited in Pathak & Pathak (2010).

Porter, M.E. (1985). The Competitive Advantage, Creating and Sustaining Superior
Performance. The Free Press. NY. 10020.

Porter, M.E. (1980, new ed. 1998). Competitive Strategy: Techniques for Analyzing
Industries and Competitors. New York. The Free Press

Porter, M.E. (2015). Aligning Strategy and Project Management. [on line video].
Retrieved from www.youtube.com (accessed 25.4.2018)

Porter, M.E. (1985). Value Chain. Mind Tools. htpps://www.mindtools.com )retrieved

June 12, 2017).

Quacquarelli Symonds (QS). (2019). World University Ranking. https://www.qs.com

Reddy, A.C. & Campbell, D.P. (1993). Positioning Hospitals: A Model for Regional
Hospitals.

Republic Act No. 7722 (1994). The Higher Education Act (Commission on Higher
Education).
Republic Act No. 8292 (1997). Higher Education Modernization Act of 1997.
Republic Act No. 9744 (2009). The Cebu Technological University Code.
Republic Act No. 10533 (2012). An Act Enhancing the Philippine Basic Education
System by Strengthening its Curriculum and Increasing the Number of Years of
Basic Education, Appropriating Funds Therefor.
Republic Act No. 10931 (2016). Universal Accewss to Quality Tertiary Education Act.
Republic Act No. 10963 (2018). Tax Reform for Acceleration and Inclusion (TRAIN).
Ries, A. & Trout, J. (1978). Positioning. New York. McGraw-Hill
Ries, A. & Trout, J. (1986). Marketing Warfare. New York: McGraw-Hill

Ryan, R.M. & Deci, E.L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the Facilitation of
Intrinsic Motivation, Social Development, and Well-being. American
Psychologist. Vol. 55 No. 1. Pp. 68-78
Sison, R., Pablo, Z.C., & E-college Team. (2000). Value chain framework and support
system for higher education. College of Computer Studies, De La Salle
University, Manila
Smoak, A. (2016). Michael Porter’s Generic Cost Leadership Strategy Explained.
Strategic Management. Strategy Organization. (accessed 2-24-19)

97
Snowden, M. & Halsall, J. (2016). Self-determined Approach to Learning: A Social
Science Perspective. Cogent Education Abingdon. Vol. 3, Issue 1. ProQuest.
https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/231186x.2016.1247608
Stimac, H. & Simic, M.L. (2012). Competitiveness in Higher Education: A Need for
Marketing Orientation and Service Quality. Economic and Sociology. Vol. 5, No.
2, 2012. Pp. 23-34. ISSN 2071-789X
Sullivan, A. & Heath, A. F. (2002). State and Private Schools in England and Wales.
Paper Number 2002-02. Nuffield College, Oxford and Department of Sociology.
University of Oxford. https://www.sociology.ox.ac.uk retrieved August 21, 2017.
Syrjala, H., Leipamaa-Leskinen, H., & Laaksonen, P. (2015). Social Needs in Finnish
Young Adults’ Mundane Consumption. Young Consumers. Bradford Vol. 16,
Issue 3. Pp. 302-315. Emerald Group Publishing Limited. ISSN 1747-3616. DOI
10.1108YC-10-2014. Findland
Solovay, S. & Mueller, JH. (1964). The Rules of Sociological Method by Emile
Durkheim. Eight Edition. The Free Press. New York. Collier-Macmillan Limited.
London.
Tajfel, H. (1981). Human groups and Social Categories, Cambridge University Press.
Cambridge.
Weber, M., Henderson, A.M. & Parsons T. (1964). The Theory of Social and Economic
Organization. Translated by AM Henderson and Talcott Parsons. Collier-
Macmillan. The Free Press. New York.
Yarmohammadian, M. H., Mozaffary, M., & Esfahani, S. S. (2011). Evaluation of
Quality of Education in HigherEeducation based on Academic Quality
Improvement Program (AQIP) Model. Procedia Social and Behavioral
Sciences,15 (2011), 2917– 2922. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.04.214.
Wittgenstein, L. (1961). Philosophy and Phenomenological Research. 24(4): 576-577.
International Phenomenological Society. https://scholar.google.com/ph. Cited in
Braitwaite (1968)
Wotherspoon, (accessed, 2018). Durkheim (1933) Social Theory–Sociological Theories
of Education, Chapter 2.pdf
Wright, Israel, & Lauda. (1993). Cited in Dyer, L. & Stuart, S. (2004). Technology
Directions. Using Jigs and Fixtures. Vol. 63. Issue 10, 19-10.

98
 APPENDICES

Appendix A.1: Approved Letter by the president

99
Appendic A.2: Approved Letter by the Director of Quality Assurance

100
Appendix B: Research Instrument: Questionnaire

SCHOOL OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS AND GOVERNANCE

Silliman University
Dumaguete City

Questionnaire
Dear Respondents:
I am Mr. Felix Q. Pocong, Jr. who is currently pursuing the degree in Doctor of
Philosophy in Social Science in Silliman University. One of the requirements to earn this
degree is to write a dissertation, and my topic is Value Chain Activities For Competitive
Positioning Among State Universities And Colleges In Philippine Education Industry.

The questionnaire is based on CMO No. 46, s. 2012, as adapted by Prof.

Reynaldo Y. Rivera for the Deans and Directors of Silliman University in a University-
wide planning on September 20, 2013. These are five Key Result Areas (KRAs): (1)
Governance and Management (2) Quality of Teaching and Learning, (3) Quality of
Professional Exposure, Research and Creative Work, (4) Support for Study and (5)
Relations with the community.

Please help me fill out this Questionnaire as frankly as you can. Your sincere and
honest responses will help me finish my degree in Doctor of Philosophy in Social Science
in Silliman University, Dumaguete City.

Thank you.

Sincerely,

FELIX Q. POCONG, JR.

Ph. D. Candidate

101
 The Questionnaire
(Adopted from Dr. Reynaldo Y. Rivera`s Planning Input in Silliman University)

Instruction: IN A SCALE OF 5, PLEASE RATE THE STATEMENT BY

ENCIRCLING THE RATING, WHERE 5 IS FULLY MEETING THE INDICATOR SO
THAT ITS “ELEMENTS ARE DEMONSTRATING GOOD PRACTICE” AND THE
SCALE OF 1 MEANS THE “CRITERION (INDICATOR) IS NOT MET. THE CHED
SCALE AND SCORE INTERPRETATION FOR RATING EACH INDICATOR IS
ILLUSTRATED IN THE TABLE BELOW:

Rating Interpretation for rating each indicator

5 The criterion/criteria for the indicator is/are fully met, and its elements are
demonstrating good practice
4 The criterion/criteria for the indicator is/are met with most elements
demonstrating good practice
3 The criterion/criteria for the indicator is/are met in most respects, but
improvement is needed
2 The criterion/criteria for the indicator is/are met in most respects but much
improvement is needed to improve weaknesses
1 The indicator is not met

KRA 1: Good Governance and Management. Please encircle your rating on each
statement in a scale of 5.
Core Indicator Criteria Rating

Governance a. Probity 1 2 3 4 5
Arrangement.

The Institution’s b. Strategic vision 1 2 3 4 5

governance
arrangement
c. Accountability

102
demonstrate 1 2 3 4 5

d. Awareness and management of 1 2 3 4 5

risk

e. Effective monitoring 1 2 3 4 5

f. Performance 1 2 3 4 5
Management
a. Management Arrangements 1 2 3 4 5
The Institution’s
management
arrangements are
sufficient to manage b. Financial Control 1 2 3 4 5
existing operations c. Quality Assurance Arrangement
and to respond to
development and 1 2 3 4 5
change.

Enabling Features a. Information and Communication

Technology (ICT) for more efficient
The Institution has 1 2 3 4 5
and effective management
enabling features such
as…… b. A viable, sustainable appropriate
resource generation strategy to
1 2 3 4 5
support its development plan

KRA 2: Quality of Teaching and Learning

Core Indicator Criteria Rating
1. Program Approval
a. The Institution sets the
objectives and learning
1 2 3 4 5
outcomes of its programs at
appropriate level
b. The Institution has effective
mechanisms to ensure that its

103
 programs achieve those 1 2 3 4 5
objectives
c. The Institution has effective
mechanisms that enable
1 2 3 4 5
Setting and Achieving students to achieve the
Program Standards standard outcomes.
2. Program and Monitoring
Review
a. The Institution has effective
arrangements for monitoring
1 2 3 4 5
the effectiveness of its
programs
3. Action to Strengthen
Program
a. The Institution takes
effective action to address
1 2 3 4 5
weakness.
Setting and Achieving b. The Institution takes
Program Standards effective action to build on
1 2 3 4 5
strengths.
c. The Institution takes
effective action to enhance
1 2 3 4 5
performance by the
dissemination of good
practice.
The Institution has an
adequate number of faculty
1 2 3 4 5
with the appropriate expertise
and competence to teach the
courses offered by the
Faculty Profile Institution.
The Institution makes
effective use of learning
resources such as:
a. Library Resources
1 2 3 4 5

104
Appropriate Learning b. Laboratories
resources
1 2 3 4 5
c. Information and
Communication Technology
1 2 3 4 5
(ICT) to support student
learning

KRA 3: Quality of Professional Exposure, Research, and Creative Work

Core Indicator Criteria Rating

a. Practicum
1 2 3 4 5
b. Internship
1. Professional Exposure 1 2 3 4 5
c. On-the-job Training
1 2 3 4 5
d Case Writing (for
graduate HEIs)
1 2 3 4 5
2. Research Capability Research pool/community
of:
The Institution has a research
capability that fosters and a. faculty
supports creative research and
1 2 3 4 5
other advanced scholarly
activity. This capability b. postgraduate students
consist of:
1 2 3 4 5
c. postdoctoral research
workers
1 2 3 4 5
3. Creative Work and/or The Institution has
Innovation programs that promote
creative work in:
a. the arts

105
 1 2 3 4 5

b. Innovation in science and

technology
1 2 3 4 5

KRA 4: Support for Students

Core Indicator Criteria Rating

1. Recruitment Admission
and Academic Support
The Institution has effective:
a. Recruitment system
1 2 3 4 5
Equity and Access b. Admission system
1 2 3 4 5
c. Support system
1 2 3 4 5
d Graduation system
1 2 3 4 5

KRA 4: Support for Students (continuation)

Core Indicator Criteria Rating

1. Recruitment Admission
and Academic Support
The Institution is effective in
recruiting, admitting, supporting,
and graduating:
a. Indigenous groups
1 2 3 4 5
b. The Handicapped

106
 1 2 3 4 5

c. Low level Income Classes

1 2 3 4 5
Equity and Access d. Foreign students
1 2 3 4 5
e. Other special groups
1 2 3 4 5
2. Student Scholarships.
The Institution operates effective
arrangements to:
a. direct scholarships
1 2 3 4 5
b. study grants that develop
competences needed to support
the Filipino economy and to
enable the country to compete in 1 2 3 4 5
global labor markets
The Institution has Programs for
student services to support the
Student Services
non-academic needs of the
students. 1 2 3 4 5

KRA 5: Relations with the Community

Core Indicator Criteria Rating

The Institution offers programs

that take into consideration the
social, cultural, economic, and
develop mental needs of the
country at local, regional and
Relevance of national needs, as well as the 1 2 3 4 5
Programs need of the country to compete
effectively in global markets.

107
 The Institution is valued as a
partner by:
a. other higher education
Institution
1 2 3 4 5
Networking and
Linkages b. professional, government and
non-government organizations
1 2 3 4 5
c. Industry within the Philippines
and internationally
1 2 3 4 5
The Institution is valued by its
local community as a provider of
extension programs that are
Extension Programs responsible to the needs of the 1 2 3 4 5
community for people
empowerment and self-reliance.

Thank you very much.

108
Appendix C:
CURRICULUM VITAE
PERSONAL DATA
Name FELIX Q. POCONG, JR.
Contact 09777950192; 09422057904
Email address ctusillimanup@gmail.com
Age 53
Sex Male
Birthday March 23, 1966
Status Married
Religion Christian
Address Poblacion East, Moalboal, Cebu
Spouse Christine Alegado Pocong
Children Elizabeth, Joshua and David
Father’s Name Felix T. Pocong (deceased)
Mother’s Name Lucia L. Quibido (deceased)
Step-Mother’s Name Vicenta Jabanes Pocong
Brothers’ Names Soldado, Vicente, Mariano, Marcelo and Go
Sisters’ Names Godofreda (deceased), Gaudencia, Esmeralda

EDUCATIONAL ACHIEVEMENTS
GRADUATE STUDIES

(1) Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.) in Social Sciences

Graduated, March 24, 2019
Silliman University, Dumaguete City, Negros Oriental

(2) Master of Education in Social Studies (M. Ed.)

Graduated, April 24, 2013
University of the Philippines Cebu, Cebu City

(3) Doctor of Development Education (Dev. Ed. D.)

9 units taken, Summer 2013
Cebu Technological University Moalboal Campus, Moalboal, Cebu

(4) Bachelor of Laws (LLB)

Graduated, March, 2004
Southwestern University, Cebu City

109
 (5) Master in Business Administration (MBA)
39 units taken, 1994 to 1998
University of San Jose Recoletos (USJR), Cebu City

UNDERGRADUATE STUDIES
(1) Diploma in Professional Education (DPE)
Graduated, March 2010
Cebu Technological University Moalboal Campus, Moalboal, Cebu

(2) Bachelor of Science in Computer Engineering (CPE)

Graduated, March, 1990
Cebu Institute of Technology, Cebu City

(3) Diploma in Industrial Technician (DIT)

Graduated, June, 1986
Cebu State College of Science and Technology, Cebu City

SPECIAL TRAINING

(1) Orchid Tissue Culture, May to June 2001

University of Hawaii, Manoa, Honolulu, Hawaii, USA

(2) Computer Technician

July to October 1992, Starsoft AG, Bern, Switzerland

BASIC EDUCATION

(1) Secondary
Graduated, 1984
Badian National High School, Badian, Cebu
(2) Elementary
Balabagon Elementary School
Graduated, 1979 Salutatorian

ADMINSTRATIVE EXPERIENCE:

(A) CTU, Moalboal Campus

(1) University Director of NBC 461 Cycle 7 June 2016 – March 2019
(2) Chairman, Masters’ Degree Programs, Graduate School CTU Moalboal
110
 (3) President CTUSFA Moalboal Campus (2014 to 2016)
(4) Adviser, Graduate School Association (GRASA) (2014 -2015)
(5) Adviser, Social Science Society (2013 -2015)
(6) Member, Bid and Award Committee, (2014-2015)

(B) Local Government Unit of the Municipality of Moalboal

(1) Municipal Vice Mayor, in Moalboal, 2001 to 2007 (two terms elected)
(2) Municipal Councilor, in Moalboal, 1998 to 2001

( C ) Association/Society/Cooperative

(1) Rotary Club of Cebu Guadalupe, Guadalupe, Cebu City, 1995 until recently
(2) President, Cebu Orchid Society, Cebu City (1994 to 2015)
(3) Board of Director/Member, Cebu Ornamental Multipurpose Cooperative

AWARDS/CERTIFICATES:
(1) CHED Dissertation Grant, 2017-2018
School of Public Affairs and Governance
Silliman University
Dumaguete City

(2) Parallel Session Speaker, Service-Learning

University of the Philippines Diliman, Quezon City
7th International Conference on Teacher Education at the University of the
Philippines Diliman, Quezon City, Philippines, on 26-28th July, 2012.

(3) Certificate of Recognition as Teacher Demonstrator during the Service-

Learning Activity at Cantipla Integrated School, Cebu City, on 27th day of
January, 2012;

(4) Certificate of Participation given by the Social Sciences Division of the

University of the Philippines Cebu, on 4th day of May 2011 in Cebu City,
Philippines;

(5) Certificate of Participation on seminar entitled “Research for International

Publication sponsored by Philippine Association of Graduate Education
(PAGE), May 4, 2013 at Crown Regency Hotel, Jones Avenue, Cebu City;

(6) Outstanding Alumnus, Cebu Institute of Technology (CIT) 2000

(7) Outstanding HVCC Farmer, 1998-1998

111
 (8) TVEP Scholar, CSCST Cebu City, 1984 to 1986

(9) Grantee, Study Now Pay Later Plan of SSS, 1984 to 1986

(10) Paul Harris Fellow by Rotary Club International 1998

(11) Rotarian of the Year, 1986-1987

INSTRUCTION:

(A) Undergraduate

(1) Teach the following subjects: Curriculum Development, Constitution,

Philippine Government, Philippine History, Geography, Philosophy,
Business Math, Engineering Economics, Digital Electronics, and the
Teaching Profession

(2) Reviewer of Social Science subjects and Curriculum for LET Examinees
2014

(B) Graduate School

(1) Teaching Social Science subjects and Socio-Philosophical and Legal

Foundations of Education
(2) Teaching Master of Public Administration courses
(3) Adviser, MA. Ed. Major in Social Studies students

RESEARCHES:

(1) Qualification of Faculty in Higher Education Towards Industry 4.0

Framework – on going
(2) Paper and Charcoal Briquettes, presented at Cebu Technological University

EXTENSION:
(1) Mangrove Tree Plantation 2014 CTU property
(2) Conducted lecture on Disaster Preparedness among selected barangays in
Moalboal in 2014
(3) Organizer, Medical Mission December 2014 in Barangay Basdiot,
Moalboal

112
 (4) Conducted lecture on Camansi Cookies among selected Women’s
Association in Moalboal, 2013.

ELIGIBILITY:
Passed the Licensure Examination for Teachers (April 2010)
Passed the Licensure Examination for Real Estate Broker (2009)
EMPLOYMENT/WORK EXPERIENCES:
(1) Associate Professor 1, Cebu Technological University, Moalboal Campus,
Moalboal, Cebu, since September 4, 2013 until present
(2) Director NBC 461 Cebu Technological University System (6/2016-3/2019)
(3) Operating own business “Orchid Gallery” since 1993 until present
(4) Operating new business “Buhing Bato Enterprises” a construction supply
(5) Teacher I, Badian National High School, Badian, Cebu June 2013-September
3, 2013
(6) Municipal Vice Mayor in Moalboal, Jule1, 2001 to June 30, 2007
(7) Municipal Councilor in Moalboal, July 1, 1998 to June 30, 2001
(4.1) Chairman, Committee on Agriculture 1998 to 2001
(4.2) Chairman, Tourism Committee 1998 to 2001
(8) Part Time Instructor, Cebu Technological University Moalboal Campus,
November 2012 to March 2013
(9) Volunteer Teacher, San Juan High School, Moalboal, Cebu, 1996 to 1998
(10) Computer Technician, Starsoft AG, Bern, Switzerland, July to October,
1992
(11) Accounting Clerk, Manila Bulletin, Intramuros, Manila, Jan. 1991 to May,
1992
(12) Computer Encoder, ZASTEC Phils., Makati City, 1991 five months
(13) Computer Technician, CIT Laboratory 1986 to 1988.

113