I STILL remember the weight of those four long yellow folders in my hands. They looked ordinary from the outside, but within them were more than documents, printed outputs, and learning materials. They represented years of teaching experiences, sleepless nights preparing lessons, and the hope that my academic journey would finally be acknowledged. When I finally submitted them, I felt a deep sense of relief. More than the submission itself, I felt a sense of fulfillment knowing that those folders represented my journey, contributions, and commitment to higher education.
That experience gave me a deeper appreciation of Joint Circular No. 3, s. 2022 (JC3) and the SUC Faculty Position Reclassification System (SFPRS). JC3 is not the issue. The greater challenge is that we have created a system that expects Filipino faculty members to perform with world-class standards while continuing to ask whether our classification and compensation truly reflect the complexity of their work.
I appreciate the SFPRS portal of the Commission on Higher Education (CHED) because it provides a more organized and transparent pathway for faculty evaluation. The continued implementation, regional training zones, and system orientations for the current cycles are moving forward under the leadership of CHED Chairperson Shirley Agrupis. For many faculty members, this is more than a digital platform.
The system may appear rigid, but perhaps excellence requires a certain level of discipline. Promotion should not simply depend on the number of years spent in service. It should reflect actual contributions. Under JC3, faculty members are evaluated through four major Key Result Areas: Instruction; Research, Invention, and Creative Work; Extension Services; and Professional Development. Advancement toward higher salary subranks requires consistent performance across these areas.
However, JC3 also reveals a deeper question: Are we asking Filipino faculty members to become too many things at once?
I vividly remember a meaningful conversation I had with a former classmate while I was in England last October. She is now an associate professorial lecturer at the London School of Economics. In many UK universities, these pathways include Teaching and Research, Teaching and Scholarship, and Research-Only. Her career follows the Teaching and Scholarship pathway, which recognizes excellence in teaching, educational leadership, curriculum innovation, and contributions to student learning. Unlike research-focused academics whose advancement may depend heavily on laboratory work, grants, and international publications, faculty members in this pathway are recognized for their impact as educators.
In the Philippines, however, faculty members are often expected to carry multiple identities simultaneously. We are teachers inside the classroom, researchers producing knowledge, extension workers serving communities, and professionals continuously upgrading ourselves. This expectation exists partly because global ranking systems such as Times Higher Education and Quacquarelli Symonds place significant importance on research productivity and citations, encouraging universities to strengthen publication outputs. Some may argue that this pressure is necessary because universities cannot progress without stronger research performance. That argument is valid. Academic institutions must continue pursuing excellence, innovation, and global competitiveness.
This is where the discussion on faculty classification becomes important. From a scientific job evaluation perspective, the discussion extends beyond compensation. It is a question of whether the value and complexity of the work are being properly recognized. The position requires higher education teaching, research involvement, extension responsibilities, and continuous professional development. The concern is therefore not the lowering of standards. The real challenge is making sure that the recognition provided is proportional to the responsibilities and expectations placed upon faculty members.
This is the noblesse oblige of higher education: the privilege of shaping minds comes with the responsibility of carrying enormous academic expectations. But responsibility must always be matched with appropriate recognition.
Thankfully, this conversation is no longer confined to academic discussions. There are now active legislative proposals seeking to address the long-standing concerns on faculty compensation, including measures that aim to raise the entry-level salary of SUC and Local University and College (LUC) instructors to ₱50,000 per month or align the position with Salary Grade 16. In addition, CHED Chairperson Shirley Agrupis shared that CHED is scheduling a meeting with the Civil Service Commission to review concerns surrounding SUC plantilla positions.
JC3 represents an avant-garde movement toward a more accountable and performance-based culture in Philippine higher education. It challenges faculty members to demonstrate meaningful contributions rather than rely solely on seniority.
Those four yellow folders I carried were never just folders. They represented the journey of a faculty member trying to meet a demanding standard while hoping that the system would also recognize the weight behind every accomplishment.
Perhaps the true measure of JC3 is not only how well it evaluates what faculty members produce, but also how sincerely it recognizes what faculty members carry. Because behind every submitted portfolio is not merely a record of outputs. There is a person, a profession, and a lifelong commitment to educate the next generation.
***
For questions, please e-mail nicasio.pimentel@antiquespride.edu.ph./PN
