Speech, like any other skill, can be learned. This study is based on the belief that all individuals are capable of mastering oral expression and can use this skill (among others) to function fully in a society. This principle of communication is the basis for the inclusion of oral communication in the general education program of higher education and now in high school. Oral communication shapes and, in one way or another, controls our society. Thonssen, cited in King (2006), asserts that rhetoric (an important area of ​​oral communication) is an instrument that has functional value in the social order. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”?Get the original essayIn fact, Leonard Cox (1899), in his book The Arte or Crafte of Rhetorike, argued that it can be used by educators, prosecutors in the courts, princes and ambassadors, teachers of God and even those who have something to propose to an assembly. Oral communication is powerful and influential because it can be integrated across different disciplines. It is true that speech is a means by which people live together more effectively and more harmoniously and that it is an indispensable instrument of social adaptation and cooperative living. Considering the wide application and importance of oral communication in society, there is no doubt that oral communication was an important general education program and is now included in the new K+12 policy . According to academicians, “it is the responsibility of speech training to ensure that our speech is adequate to communicate effectively under ever-changing and expanding conditions. (Weaver and Ordean, 1963:3}. As a result of these changing trends in communication, many schools now require their students to enroll in various oral communication courses. Different colleges and universities offer a course in oral communication as preparation for a career Even the United States of America began including this course as a prerequisite subject for graduation as early as the 18th century. Senior students are required to take logic courses while undergraduates. first year must enroll in rhetoric and elocution courses. It is a manifestation of the qualification demanded by globally competitive industries, but also an implicit demonstration of the integral function of oral communication in all. aspects of society Boileau and Friedrich (1999) believed that speaking and listening skills are two essential skills that must begin in society. They argued that human speaking skills must be continually modified and improved through learning new vocabulary, developing distinct speech patterns, and, most importantly, discerning what "language" can be used. be used to achieve the objectives. Considering all the undeniable importance of oral communication in society, the researcher is even more curious about how to further improve the subject now that it has been transferred to the high school K+12 program. Since education is considered crucial in leading the stability of any nation, it is necessary that the various programs offered in the education system of the country be studied in order to continually improve and meet the specific needs of the stakeholders as well as the world of work. walk. With the implementation of Republic Act No. 10533 which aims to improve the basic education system of the Philippines by strengtheningits curriculum and increasing the number of years of basic education, the majority of general education courses at the higher level of the Higher Education Commission are relegated to the high school level of the Ministry of Education. Oral communication is included in these general education courses. The objective of the said Republic Act is to “develop productive and responsible citizens equipped with essential skills, competencies and values ​​for lifelong learning and employment” (Congress of the Philippines, 2012 : 1). To achieve this goal, the curriculum must be developed in conjunction with the Higher Education Commission, the government agency that once provided the core courses that were required to be offered in high school. Oral communication is clearly considered an important course in an individual's academic life. Morreale et al (2000) conducted a study that identified the importance of oral communication as a rationale for their plan to centralize the study of communication under the National Communication Association. With strong evidence of the importance of this course, experts and researchers in this field have attempted to further develop the course over the years. Weide (1995) conducted a study to determine the varying levels of apprehension of high school students regarding their oral communication skills, the benefits students gain from the course, the preparation of oral communication teachers, and the curriculum employed by other schools. Additionally, Abdullah (2011) examined the use of pair work to improve oral communication skills in a school in the United Arab Emirates. In another study, Rajman (2010) determined whether a task-based approach could be useful for teaching oral communication in a school in India. Although there are a number of studies focusing on different aspects of oral communication in relation to improving course delivery, there is little literature on oral communication program evaluation in the Philippines. Accordingly, this study analyzed the programs offered in various state colleges and universities in Region IV-A that can serve as a basis for improving the oral communication course for the high school program. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE ON GENERAL EDUCATION IN THE PHILIPPINES National Policy. When Batas Pambansa 232 or “An Act to provide for the establishment and maintenance of an integrated system of education” was approved by the former President. Ferdinand Marcos in 1982, the principles, indeed the very name of general education, were already widely accepted. In Section 3, “Statement of Basic Policy,” the law states that “It is the policy of the State to establish and maintain a comprehensive, adequate and integrated educational system…” In Section 4, “Declaration of objectives", the first The objective of the education system is to "provide a broad general education which will assist each individual in the particular ecology of his own society..." However, neither the 1973 Constitution nor the 1987 Constitution directly states a commitment to general education. However, they affirm some principles of liberal education, even if they do not do so in direct relation to the country's higher education. In its Article to develop moral character, personal discipline and scientific knowledge. , technological and professional efficiency. However, Article XIV of the 1987 Constitution on “education, science andtechnology, arts, culture and sports", in section 3, number 2, states that all educational institutions "shall inculcate patriotism and nationalism, foster love of humanity, respect for rights of man, appreciation of the role of national heroes in the historical development of the country, teaching the rights and duties of the citizen, strengthening ethical and spiritual values, developing moral character and personal discipline, encouraging critical and creative thinking, broadening scientific and technological knowledge and promote professional efficiency. » In 1994, through Republic Act 7722, the Commission on Higher Education or CHED was established. It is a separate entity from the Ministry of Education, Culture and Sports and attached, for administrative reasons for these purposes, to the Office of the President. Its jurisdiction extends “to both public and private institutions of higher education as well as degree programs in all postsecondary educational institutions, public and private” (Republic Act No. 7722, 1994 ). The creation of CHED responded to the widely felt need to improve the quality of higher education, increase the percentage of college and university graduates who pass government licensure exams, strengthen graduates' communication skills oral and written and to create an organization that will focus on meeting these needs (Calderon 2004). University of the Philippines. In the Philippines, the recognized leader in general education is the University of the Philippines (UP). UP President Vicente G. Sinco, whose term covered the period 1958-1962, is generally recognized as the initiator of the university's General Education Program (GEP). But even before instituting the GEP at the university, the UP already offered what were called “preparatory courses” for subsequent specialization in various disciplines. These courses are required for all students, regardless of major, and include English, Spanish, and Filipino institutions (Guerrero, 1985). As president of UP, Sinco promoted research and scholarship in the sciences and humanities and opposed political and sectarian interference in university affairs. He also reformed the curriculum, "implementing a general education program for the first two years of university..." He encouraged intellectual activity within the UP through various initiatives (National Historical Institute 2012). Sinco's GEP provided 63 units that students had to complete before they could take courses in their specialty (Guerrero, 1985). Successive UP presidents have introduced innovations under the Sinco GEP. UP President Salvador P. Lopez, whose tenure covered the years 1969-1975, saw students given an option: choose a combination of English and Filipino, or choose one or the other of these two. Lopez came to the UP presidency at a time of nationalist intellectual ferment, and it was at this time that Filipino was seriously considered as a language of instruction for various courses (Evangelista 1985). Over the next few years, UP campuses across the country offered their versions of the GEP. It was in 1986, under the presidency of Edgardo Angara whose mandate lasted from 1981 to 1987, that the GEP was standardized on all university campuses in the country. A UP student, regardless of where he or she is enrolled in the university's constituent units across the country, is required to complete twelve (12) courses. The values ​​promoted by the courses have been defined and multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary approaches to teachingcourses were introduced (Kintanar, 1991). The GEP underwent review and evaluation processes in 1991, 1992 and 1995. UP President Francisco Nemenzo Jr., whose term lasted from 1999 to 2005, claimed that these revisions were the basis for the implementation of the Revitalized General Education Program or RGEP in 2001. It was later integrated. in the GEP. The RGEP introduced the following shifts in the GEP: (1) From the prescribed courses, students could choose courses in three areas of knowledge – namely arts and humanities, social sciences and natural sciences and mathematics , (2) the number The number of units was increased from 42 to 45, (3) New GE courses were created, (4) Other departments were involved in creating and offering new courses (Nemenzo, 2001). The UP presents the following general objectives of the RGEP: (1) Broaden the intellectual and cultural horizons of students; (2) Foster student commitment to nationalism balanced by a sense of internationalism; (3) Cultivate in students the ability for independent, critical and creative thinking; and (4) Instill in students a passion for learning with a high sense of moral and intellectual integrity. UP presents as particularities of the RGEPobjectives: (1) Enable students to acquire basic skills and competencies in mathematics, reasoning and communication; (2) To develop students' awareness, understanding and appreciation of the various disciplines of the natural sciences, social sciences, humanities and philosophy; and (3) Develop students' ability to integrate and/or adapt the knowledge and skills they have acquired across disciplines (UP-Diliman Office of the Vice-Chancellor for Academic Affairs, 2012). Critics of the RGEP included the lack of required core subjects and the program's refusal to prescribe an ideal combination of courses for students. They identified problems based on students' response to the subjects, with some RGEP advocates justifying students' refusal to accept professors deemed boring, tyrannical, or simply not interesting. They felt that the university's criteria for relevance do not necessarily correspond to those of the students. subject selection criteria – which are still evolving. As a result, relevant subjects would not be taught. With the RGEP, critics have emphasized that the UP denies its right and its duty to “give sufficient importance to historically and societally under-addressed subjects, issues and themes”, leaving room for “a socially favored preference”. instilled in students. In summary, they criticize the RGEP for failing to ensure a balance between “student choice and institutional orientation” (Guillermo, 2001). General education policy before kindergarten and 12th grade. One of the first actions of CHED was to review and revise the curriculum of higher education institutions in the country. In 1996, he issued CHED Memorandum Order (CMO) No. 59 titled “New General Education Curriculum” which was implemented from the 1997-1998 academic year. The new GE program subsequently became an integral part of all baccalaureate programs in higher education institutions nationwide (Espiritu, 2012). CMO Series No. 59 of 1996, later called GEC-A, requires students to complete 63 units, excluding physical education and the National Service Training program. The compulsory subjects were composed of the following elements: 24 units of language and literature, 15 units of mathematics and natural sciences, 18 units of humanities and social sciences and six).