The Submission vs Publication Divide in Philippine Graduate Research

By Jeanne Alejo-Abitago Apr 13, 2026 98 1

For years, finishing a graduate degree in the Philippines was often constrained by a “publish or perish” requirement. Under CMO No. 15, s. 2019, many students experienced significant delays, not because their research lacked merit, but because publication often depends on factors outside a student’s control, such as journal backlogs and protracted peer-review timelines. In contrast, CMO No. 21, s. 2025 introduces a tiered compliance model that aligns dissemination requirements with the specific intent of each program track.

Under this new framework, students in academic tracks may now qualify for graduation upon providing Evidence of Submission, while those in research-heavy or PhD tracks may require Evidence of Acceptance or Full Publication.

The Dilemma: Guarding Research against the Predatory Trap
Although this amendment is a positive policy shift, it depends on one important factor: the strength of the internal research system in the university. In the absence of a strict internal process, it is highly possible that students, lacking knowledge of academic publishing, will become victims of predatory journals. These are the so-called pay-to-publish organizations, which promise rapid publication but not genuine peer review; thus, both the student and the reputation of the institution are undermined.

To succeed, the new CMO needs not only to loosen timelines but also to make HEIs stronger gatekeepers. One cannot simply request Evidence of Submission; schools must ensure that submissions are made to legitimate, refereed, and high-quality outlets.

The HEIs as Quality Gatekeepers

Pursuant to Republic Act No. 7722, the Commission on Higher Education (CHED) holds the statutory mandate to set minimum program standards and monitor institutional performance. Nevertheless, as the first line of quality assurance, Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) use their academic authority to mentor students and ensure that they submit to legitimate, high-quality journals instead of predatory ones.

The new rules permit students to graduate at the stage of submission or acceptance; therefore, to ensure the work is genuine, universities should have clear procedures to verify its authenticity. This can be done in two steps:

Step 1. The Check (Internal Verification)
The school should verify whether the journal is genuine before a student is cleared. This ensures that the department confirms that the student did not simply upload the file to a pay-to-publish site, but rather submitted it to a real, peer-reviewed journal that is not included on predatory lists.

Step 2: Formal Certification Language
The Registrar or the Dean of the Graduate School should use the following specific templates for clearances and scholastic records:

For Master’s (Academic Track):
"Cleared for graduation based on Evidence of Submission to [Name of Journal/Conference], a verified refereed outlet, in compliance with CMO No. 21, s. 2025."

For Master’s (Research) / PhD (Academic Track):
"Cleared for graduation based on Evidence of Acceptance by [Name of Journal], an accredited refereed outlet, in compliance with CMO No. 21, s. 2025."

For PhD (By Research):
"Cleared for graduation based on Full Publication in [Name of Journal], an indexed and refereed outlet, in compliance with CMO No. 21, s. 2025."

This entails enhancing institutional responsibility.

Enhancing Institutional Responsibility
The shift introduced by CMO No. 21, s. 2025 successfully transfers the primary duty for quality from the individual student to the institution. This “course correction” is in line with the larger framework of Philippine law, particularly RA 11171, which acknowledges refereed publications as significant markers of a successful research program and active faculty participation.

Further, CHED must offer ongoing technical support and oversight. This guarantees that institutions have the tools and direction they need to support students' meaningful research experiences while upholding strong academic standards. Under this collaborative framework, the shift to “academic realism” becomes a shared responsibility, where the national body provides the resources and institutions guarantee the integrity of the output.

Hence, by focusing on the integrity of the process, from internal review to final submission, universities can ensure that their students' work is published in venues that genuinely contribute to the global body of knowledge.

CMO No. 21, s. 2025 is a progressive move, but it is not a shortcut. Its success will be determined by the ability of HEIs to develop a robust internal “defense system” against unethical and predatory publishing. Ultimately, the academic community must ensure that this transition to academic realism does not compromise the global prestige and integrity of Philippine graduate education.

Keywords

Philippine graduate education CMO No. 21 s. 2025 predatory journals academic publishing higher education institutions research integrity CHED policy publication requirements

Jeanne Alejo-Abitago

Jeanne Alejo-Abitago holds a Ph.D. in Criminal Justice from the University of Mindanao, Philippines, and serves as a regional ambassador for the Asian Council of Science Editors. Her multidisciplinary expertise extends to global governance, specifically through her studies on government innovation for social inclusion with United Nations and is further reflected in her roles as a peer reviewer and her membership in the International Association of Crime Analysts (IACA) and the Eastern Regional Organization for Public Administration (EROPA).

View All Posts by Jeanne Alejo-Abitago

Disclaimer

The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of their affiliated institutions, the Asian Council of Science Editors (ACSE), or the Editor’s Café editorial team.

Comments

Dr.Sami Hammed Farhan

13 April, 2026

It is one of the most important and advanced fields currently; however, it requires strong institutional oversight to ensure sustained success in publishing in reputable university journals.