THE recent release of the worldwide university subject rankings by London-based consultancy Quacquarelli-Symonds (QS) has seen the three top universities in the annual listings.
Unfortunately, UST is nowhere to be found.
Of the 30 subjects included in the rankings, the English Language and Literature category is a former stronghold of UST. But this year, the University—touted as one of the finest hubs of litterateurs and men of the humanities in the country—slipped in the reckoning.
This year, Ateneo de Manila University and the University of the Philippines landed within the 51-100 bracket in the subject while De La Salle University trailed at the 101-150 range. While this may seem to be an honor for these schools, this is a big challenge not only for UST, but for the tertiary education system of the Philippines.
It was in 2011 when UST last made the rankings, after it notched a spot in the 101-150 bracket.
In 2012, meanwhile, Ateneo and UP placed 24th and 33rd.
The fluctuating performance of these elite universities has been a lingering malady in the higher education landscape of the country. Over the years, the four schools have consistently gone down the rankings.
For instance, in the QS Asian rankings, UST ranked 101 in 2010, then went down to 144th in 2011 and to 148th in 2012, then to a dismal 150th this year.
While many academicians in the country continue to cast doubt on the methodology of QS (whose indicators are academic reputation, employer reputation, and citations per paper), the UST administration sees the annual listings as a challenge to improve itself.
But the declining fortunes of UST and other Philippine universities merely mirror the state of Philippine higher education.
The Commission on Higher Education (Ched) oversees the regulation of 1,683 higher educational institutions, many of them fly-by-night. The Philippines has the highest number of tertiary schools in Southeast Asia, double that of neighboring Indonesia, and three times the number in Thailand. Not surprisingly, the Philippines lags behind these countries in the QS listings.
Ched should shut down schools which exhibit poor performances in licensure examinations, and which are unable to meet the student-faculty ratio, and other standards set by Ched.
But Philippine schools should themselves shape up.
For instance, while anyone is delighted with the prestige of being a Thomasian, it is about time for UST to devise ways to decongest the thickly populated España campus. Why not limit the number of entering freshmen and transferees?
Another one is to strengthen the faculty, particularly its research arm.
While the University produces studies and researches, the problem is that some of these works are not published in internationally refereed journals
And lastly, Thomasians—now living in the highly-competitive 21st century—should not be limited to the confines of the classroom. The administration and faculty members should be supportive of students who represent the University in international contests and forums. This way, UST will be a tiger in the educational map, always ready to growl for excellence.
While landing in the QS rankings should not be the end-all and be-all for Philippine schools, it should be a goad to self-improvement. These listings should not be shrugged off. They must be considered a wake-up call for Philippine tertiary education.
