Home
Laglagan
 
[Most Recent Entries] [Calendar View] [Friends View]

Friday, October 10th, 2008

    Time Event
    12:01a
    STFAP: Paid Under Protest > ALYANSA
    The University of the People has gone past the crossroads. Two years ago, we were faced with a predicament: to be an academic institution that genuinely provides access to those who deserve UP education or to further widen the chasm of inequity to their disadvantage. Much to our consternation, our beloved University, through its Administration, has chosen the latter path.

    This dismal picture was clearly painted in the case of the young man from Mindanao who wanted to be a UP Chemistry major, but was forced not to pursue his aspirations because his parents could not afford his assigned bracket when they applied for the Socialized Tuition and Financial Assistance Program (STFAP). His father who was unemployed and his mother who was a government employee originally intended for their son to be placed in Bracket D (PhP 300 per unit with full miscellaneous and laboratory fees). However, he was assigned to Bracket C (PhP 600 per unit with full miscellaneous and laboratory fees). The so-called University of the People does not seem to empathize with the plight of those in this particular case. Instead, the UP Administration attempts to evade the issue by citing reasons for his failure to enroll that are far-off flimsy (i.e., the boy’s cultural circumstances).

    The UP Administration further claims that they have pulled all the stops in terms of comprehensively studying the new bracketing scheme. They pompously boast of academic studies on this matter, yet they have not shown sincerity in addressing the real and apparent problems that this supposed innovation has wrought. It may be recalled that during the pendency of the approval of the tuition adjustment and STFAP re-bracketing and the subsequent implementation of these policies, ALYANSA, along with other groups in the UP community, has already raised and asserted the following points that, up to this point, remain unaddressed by the UP Administration:


    1.

    That the new bracketing system seems to be inconsistent with its supposed aim to adjust the tuition rates due to inflation. Under the old STFAP Bracketing System, those whose annual family income range from PhP 0-PhP 130,000 (Brackets 1-5) were given full subsidy that included free tuition and a variable stipend of up to PhP 5,000. The new scheme now in place only grants the same benefits to those whose annual family income is less than PhP 80,000 (Bracket E). The UP Administration seems to imply that those who cannot afford the tuition way back in 1989 can now do so at present despite the inflation.
    2.

    That the office tasked with the information dissemination on this development is not properly and sufficiently equipped with the necessary resources to do such.During the onset of the implementation of the new STFAP, many families whose children were qualified for enrollment in UP were mostly unaware of the process of applying for socialized education, much more its existence. In fact, this was further proven during ALYANSA’s interaction with parents during our distribution of STFAP application primers during the beginning of the academic year. Moreover, it was UP President Emerlinda Roman herself who further proved that not all parents are aware of the STFAP. In her letter in the UP Forum (Volume 9, Number 4, July-August 2008), she said that a mother wrote to her explaining that they cannot afford the tuition for her daughter who passed the UPCAT. In this circumstance, she had to personally assure that “the Scholarships Office in Diliman [write] to this lady and [to advise] her to instruct her daughter to apply for STFAP.”
    3.

    That the University, through its Office of Scholarships and Student Services (OSSS), is not fully capable of the actual implementation of the STFAP. Ideally, the applicant should know his or her bracket before payment of tuition. Unfortunately, this is not the case for many students who are instead, compelled to loan from the University to pay in the meantime for the default Bracket B (PhP 1,000 per unit). Furthermore, the University cannot efficiently address bracketing appeals, leaving some students without proper bracket assignments even if the semester draws to a close.
    4.

    That delayed paying schemes must be made available to students. Some students may not have the capacity to pay tuition in full during the prescribed period. The UP Administration must not neglect this fact and instead, aim to genuinely explore the option of monthly or quarterly payment installments for the sake of deserving students. If those who can more than afford education in other universities are given this privilege, UP must do so as well for those who cannot afford but deserve its education.
    5.

    That the STFAP bracketing system, albeit a product of years of study, must be reexamined in light of cases of students opting not to enroll in UP. These should not be treated as just mere isolated cases. The UP Administration must open its eyes to the reality that there are UP students (and UPCAT passers) who are indeed prejudiced by this current system. The fact that there are cases of students and parents who suffer from such is sufficient reason to review the congruence of the existing tuition system and the actual capacity of people to afford such and to propose and implement a proper remedy in the form of a just and progressive socialized tuition policy.


    Ultimately, we in ALYANSA would like to emphasize that two long years have passed since the implementation of these new policies that have evidently been a burden to many of us UP students. We have waited long enough for the UP Administration to rectify its severe errors. This period has long expired. Let us not stand by idly as another year, our centennial year, goes by when more and more deserving students are deprived of access to UP education.

    During the enrollment period for the Second Semester, join us in making anindelible mark as we protest against the current STFAP. On those days, let us show everyone, especially the UP Administration, that our payment of tuition is not an expression of our conformity to their erroneous policies. On those days, expression of our dissent is a concrete step that must ensue in order for the UP Administration to hear us out -- loud and clear. On those days, let your Form 5 show that you have PAID UNDER PROTEST against policies that prejudice you and your fellow Iskolars para sa Bayan.

    PUSH FOR A JUST, PROGRESSIVE, AND SOCIALIZED TUITION POLICY!

    Current Music: Poorman's Grave - Eraserheads
    Comments: saluhin mo ako.
    12:13a
    Comments: saluhin mo ako.
    12:26a
    First, do no harm
    NexNote: When I was planning the conversion of Guilder into an institute years ago, I came across the arguments of Prof. Rakesh Khurana of HBS which resonated with my own perspectives about the business "profession." Those who want to practice management must make a commitment to responsible behavior.

    http://www.economist.com/daily/columns/businessview/displaystory.cfm?story_id=12371968&fsrc=nwl

    Current Music: Serve Chilled - Groove Armada
    Comments: saluhin mo ako.
    12:31a
    Let's Stop the Cancer Epidemic
    http://www.truthout.org/100808F

    Current Music: Father in the Forest - Matisyahu
    Comments: saluhin mo ako.
    7:38a
    Comments: saluhin mo ako.
    9:19p
    Comments: saluhin mo ako.
    9:26p
    Perks for rich jailbirds
    "Reporters take a look at former solon’s cell"

    NexNote: And we call this justice?

    http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/inquirerheadlines/nation/view/20081010-165605/Perks-for-rich-jailbirds
    Comments: saluhin mo ako.
    9:40p
    ON THE PRESIDENTIAL PARDON OF CLAUDIO TEEHANKEE JR. > MBC STATEMENT
    Executive Secretary Eduardo Ermita is correct in saying that the power to commute sentences and grant pardons is a presidential prerogative enshrined in the Constitution. However, in resorting to this argument to parry widespread criticism of the executive clemency granted to convicted murderer Claudio Teehankee Jr., the government betrayed a disturbing lack of respect for victims’ rights and the public’s right to information.

    While the government may have made the motions to meet the minimum requirements of the law with the notification of the Hultman family—which the Hultmans never received—and the publication of a notice when Teehankee applied for executive clemency, the recent statements of Mr. Ermita and Justice Secretary Raul Gonzalez have demonstrated a dismaying indifference to the plight of the victims’ families, insisting that the government was under no obligation to inform the Hultman family about the presidential pardon. But why deny the Hultmans, one of the grievously offended parties in this case, the courtesy and the right to be informed and to respond to the government decision?

    The lack of transparency in the granting of the pardon, given the sensational nature and public attention that surrounded this case, can only lead people to question the motives behind the Arroyo Administration’ s actions. The just-released Global Competitiveness Report 2008–2009 of the World Economic Forum indicates that the Philippines has not made any headway in improving its competitiveness rankings, and the study points out that one of the major reasons for this is the poor quality of the country’s public institutions. With the Arroyo Administration’ s mishandling of the Teehankee case, we only see a further erosion in the people’s trust in our public institutions.

    9 October 2008

    Copyright 2008 © Makati Business Club
    Comments: saluhin mo ako.
    10:08p
    Comments: saluhin mo ako.

    << Previous Day 2008/10/10
    [Calendar]
    Next Day >>

Free Radical   About LiveJournal.com

Advertisement