Under this law, UPOU is mandated to provide leadership in the development of open and distance learning (ODL) and the effective use of technology to support and promote best practices. It is further tasked with sharing ODL expertise with other higher education institutions (HEIs) and government bodies in the country, and with serving as the benchmark against which other HEIs offering ODL are to be guided, among other responsibilities. 

In short, UPOU is not only the country’s premier provider of ODL, it is also the designated leader and reference point, entrusted with setting national standards and shaping how ODL is practised and advanced across the Philippines. 

For this reason, the claim that OUs in general are facing a substantial erosion of their first-mover advantage does not quite apply to UPOU. 

Having said that, UPOU has nonetheless seen a blurring of its advantage, as many more conventional universities are now offering courses online, aside from onsite. I am seeing something new, which is that they have become bolder in experimenting with different modes of learning, including synchronous online learning, which UPOU has thus far chosen not to adopt. This is an opportunity to innovate, not imitate. We must creatively build on our existing strengths to deliver distinct and high-quality learning experiences. 

DL: You mentioned that UPOU does not offer synchronous learning, even as other HEIs have begun adopting it as one of their modes of delivery. Do you see UPOU moving in that direction at some point, or will it continue to hold to its current pedagogical design? 

JS: UPOU courses are designed for mainstream adult professionals who generally do not have time to study synchronously. By pedagogical design, we are not pursuing the synchronous path as it does not meet the needs of our learners. Our advantage is that we have been doing ODL for a long time, long before anyone else in the Philippines, and we know the ODL principles of design and delivery by heart, while many conventional universities are still figuring them out.

There is this assumption that all it takes to deliver ODL is to digitalise everything, to convert all their courses into the digital format and to deliver them online, not realising that a lot of students may 

struggle to fully benefit from long synchronous sessions because of the mental load involved in processing live online content. 

DL: It’s reassuring to know that UPOU continues to ground its mode of delivery in the needs of its adult learners and the core principles of ODL. At the same time, how do you see UPOU continuing to elevate itself and innovate creatively without merely following what others are doing?

JS: Our plans to innovate extend beyond adhering to a standard asynchronous model. Without revealing too much at this stage, we are working on addressing the needs of different student segments and educational landscapes, both locally and abroad, through tailored models that provide a more personalised learning experience. 

DL: In what I have elsewhere described as the global digital convergence, where distinctions between traditional, open, and online education are rapidly dissolving, and institutions are compelled to redefine their identities and value propositions, artificial intelligence (AI) has quickly become the dominant discourse of innovation, its promise amplified by institutions eager to stay relevant in an increasingly crowded digital landscape. How big a role is AI playing in UPOU’s teaching-learning processes? 

JS: We have set up policies, including rethinking assessment and learning activities in order to address AI issues. But we don’t let AI dictate us. For us, AI is just like any other technology. We are a technology-enhanced learning university, which means we integrate AI into our processes, but we’re not driven by AI. It was very clear to us at UPOU when we first came onto the scene that ODL had its own philosophy and pedagogy. Whatever technology that was available was never meant to dictate what we were doing. As we apply technology to ODL, we really work with the tool, the pedagogy, and the content holistically. 

DL: Impressionistically, how central would you say AI is to the technological uptake among universities in the Philippines? And how AI-driven do they tend to portray themselves, whether for marketing or other purposes?

JS: My observation is that within many universities here, it is often the faculty members themselves who express apprehension toward AI. So, when they think of AI, some immediately worry that it might replace them as teachers, and that AI will do the work for students, leaving students with little to learn. There’s a sense of anxiety about what to do with AI and how to navigate it. It’s less about promoting themselves as AI-driven and more about trying to make sense of what AI means for their teaching.