This study aimed to examine the stance and evaluative meanings embedded in attitudinal language used in Commission on Higher Education (CHED) memoranda on curriculum evaluation and instruction, and to determine how these linguistic resources construct institutional authority and regulatory voice in higher education governance. This research adopted a qualitative corpus-based discourse analysis design. The study was conducted in the Philippines and analyzed publicly available CHED Memorandum Orders and Regional Memoranda issued between 2023 and 2025. A corpus of thirty selected CHED memoranda related to curriculum evaluation and instructional directives was compiled from official CHED publications. The analysis was guided by the Attitude subsystem of Appraisal Theory, focusing on affect, judgment, and appreciation, and was complemented by Stance Theory to examine evaluative, epistemic, and affective stances. Corpus linguistic techniques, including frequency analysis, collocation, and concordance, were employed to systematically identify recurring evaluative patterns and stance markers such as modal verbs and attitudinal lexis. Findings revealed that judgment was the most frequently employed attitudinal resource, primarily used to evaluate institutional compliance, professional standards, and accountability. Appreciation was also prominent, particularly in assessing curriculum quality, program alignment, and policy value. Affect occurred less frequently and was mainly used to express concern for student welfare and public interest. In terms of stance, evaluative stance, and epistemic modality, especially through modal verbs such as shall and must, were consistently used to reinforce authority, certainty, and obligation in policy implementation. The study demonstrates that CHED memoranda strategically employ attitudinal language and stance resources to construct an authoritative and regulatory institutional voice. These findings contribute to the understanding of institutional discourse in higher education and highlight the role of evaluative language in shaping policy interpretation and compliance.