THE UST administration has reduced its tuition increase for the next academic year to 6%, the Artlets Student Council (ABSC) announced Thursday night, June 8.
The University originally proposed a 7% tuition hike, a rate that officials said reflected fees that coincided with the ones aproved by the Commission on Higher Education (CHED).
“The AB Administration confirms that the proposed 7% tuition fee increase is now lowered to 6%. Moreover, this change is now reflected in the Table of Fees available at the MyUSTe portal,” the ABSC announcement read.
The University will also retain its 35% downpayment scheme instead of the proposed 40%, based on the meeting minutes prepared by incoming Central Student Council executive coordinator to the secretary John Harold Peralta.
The minutes of the meeting, a copy of which was obtained by The Flame, also revealed that CHED had allowed UST to increase its tuition by 8.7%, but the University reduced the rate to 7%.
Based on Peralta’s document, the University’s tuition hike seeks to compensate its staff and fund its onsite and online operations for the upcoming academic year as it continues its delivery of hybrid learning The higher fees will aid UST’s plans to conduct 75% to 90% of class hours onsite within the next term, depending on the college and course.
The Faculty of Arts ad Letters will push through with its implementation of hybrid learning, with at least 50% of classes to be held onsite, according to ABSC’s announcement.
“However, some courses are allowed to function with less than 50% onsite class. High-stakes assessments will remain in its onsite delivery,” the ABSC said.
Last February, the Office of Vice-Rector for Academic Affairs said no courses would purely be held online or onsite for the upcoming academic year.
“For tertiary programs, more than 75% of the courses should be implemented with at least 50% of the course hours conducted onsite,” the guidelines read.
The University initially sought a 7% tuition increase last April but some former ABSC officers claimed the consultations on the proposal “lacked student representation.” F
