IN THE FACE OF
COMMERCIALIZATION AND REPRESSION
PREPARED BY:
REV-UP MANILA
ASAP-KATIPUNAN ALTERNATIVE STUDENTS’ ALLIANCE FOR PROGRESS-
KATIPUNAN NG MGA PROGRESIBONG MAG-AARAL NG BAYAN
HOPE HEALTH ORGANIZATION FOR THE PEOPLE
HEAD HEALTH ALLIANCE FOR DEMOCRACY
AUPEUALL UP ACADEMIC EMPLOYEES UNION
AUPWUALL UP WORKERS’ UNION
PRIMER ON DIFFERENT ISSUES IN UP MANILA
In the University of the Philippines Manila, students, faculty and health employees and workers face new and more aggressive forms of commercialization and repression. There is the highly encouraged by the Chancellor and the rest of the UP Manila Administration PAASCU/PACUCOA Accreditation of the colleges of the university, the threat of adapting the UP Diliman 2009 Code of student Conduct, the impending implementation of the Return of Service Obligation (R.S.O) to all degree programs, degraded facilities and laboratories and lack of tambayans to cater the organizations, fraternities and sororities in UP Manila are clear manifestations of continuous blows to our democratic rights.
As such, this primer aims to arm us with deeper analysis on these issues as to consolidate our ranks in asserting our rights to every means possible.
PAASCU/PACUCOA ACCREDITATION: EXCELLENCE AT WHAT COST
Many private schools are familiar with PAASCU, yet to a state university like UP-Manila, there is a need to be critical to identify the dire repercussions it may have on the students, faculty and health related facilities on the whole.
In fact, there are no specific guidelines to the PAASCU process with regard to state universities; they are using guidelines meant for private schools, a curious discrepancy. Hence it is taking a different shape in a state university from the advent of the 300% tuition increase. We must break the issue down to direct any objection, protest and questions for the benefit of the UP community amidst propositions of privatization and major changes to democratic regulations.
The insulting rhetoric of providing and legitimizing excellence, the so called “CHEdCENTER OF EXCELLENCE” tag it will give us, dispels all the other grave consequences PAASCU brings. They feed on UP being a premier state university and twisting it into an instrument for trampling civil liberties.
What are PAASCU and PACUCOA?
The Philippine Accrediting Association of Schools, Colleges and Universities (PAASCU) is a private, voluntary, non-profit and non-stock corporation which aims to supposedly meet greater standards for academic learning. It is comprised of schools all over the country and is forwarded by many school owners, mainly of the private sector.
Chancellor Ramon Arcadio is the only board member of PAASCU coming from a state university and such has taken it upon himself among others to have UP Manila Colleges accredited. PAASCU is highly endorsed by the Commission on Higher Education (CHEd) headed by Emmanuel Angeles who also sits as a co-chair the Board of Regents.
So far, the College of Medicine is the only college in UP Manila that is PAASCU Accredited. UP Manila is the first and only state university to undergo accreditation to private accrediting bodies.In fact, there are no specific guidelines to the PAASCU and PACUCOA process with regard to state universities; they are using guidelines meant for private schools, a curious discrepancy.
Today, the Chancellor has released statements encouraging the deans of all the colleges of UP Manila to undergo PAASCU Accreditation. However, the dentistry program of UP Manila will acquire accreditation from the Philippine Association of Colleges and Universities Commission on Accreditation (PACUCOA) because PAASCU does not have an “instrument” to measure the standard of learning for dentistry.
What is to be implemented with PAASCU and PACUCOA Accreditation?
The process of PAASCU and PACUCOA Accreditation involves “self-evaluation” of the university’s program to be accredited and series of visits from PAASCU and PACUCOA representatives.
To prepare for the PAASCU and PACUCOA Accreditation, the university should first apply and pay an accreditation fee. Chancellor Ramon Arcadio has yet to disclose how much was the application fee that UP Manila paid to undergo accreditation. The UP Manila Administration already paid the fees even without consulting the students and faculty if we approve of the accreditation.
In fact, today, Chancellor Arcadio has led the preparations by creating committees and subcommittees for the PAASCU and PACUCOA Accreditation without seeking the students, faculty and non-academic personnel’s approval to undergo accreditation.
The said “self-evaluation” of the program constitutes of a questionnaire to be answered by the administrative personnel and faculty on what they think are the strengths and weaknesses of the program. They will evaluate the curriculum, facilities, research output and the like. I
In the said series of visits by PAASCU and PACUCOA observers in classrooms, departments, laboratories and other venues of the academic process, the facilities of the program to be accredited will be scrutinized and rated base on what PAASCU and PACUCOA thinks align with “quality” and “excellent” education. The observers will also be inside the classrooms, taking note of every lesson and the entire conduct of the lecture by the students and professors. Students and faculty are directed to follow the strictest of procedures to impress upon the observers the “appropriate” standards.
This in effect creates an artificial classroom experience, and such what is observed is a fictional idea of what the observers want to see in a UP classroom. A model classroom manufactured to create the illusion of “excellence” that is deemed fit.
Why are we against PAACU and PACUCOA Accreditation?
According to the UP Manila Administration, accreditation from PAASCU and PACUCOA of the courses of UP Manila will be advantageous for the university. The following are the said benefits:
- Being tagged as “CHEdCENTER OF EXCELLENCE”
-PRESTIGE
-Having “CHEdCenter of Excellence” recognition will give us 3 Million Pesos every year for 5 years
- The government will give us greater state subsidy because PAASCU and PACUCOA Accreditation will “prove” that we are “excellent”, thus “worthy of higher state subsidy”.
- Grants and Scholarships
-support from the private sector for our researches
-attract scholarships from the private sector
- We will be recognized internationally, thus, making UP Manila globally competitive and at par with other educational institutions.
Chancellor Arcadio also said that undergoing accreditation from PAASCU and PACUCOA will also affirm UP Manila’s claim to be an excellent educational institution. To quote what he meant in Filipino, “para naman may ibang magsabing magaling tayo kasi tayo lang lagi ang nagsasabing magaling ang UP.”
The UP Manila Administration is giving us very lucrative promises as part of their propaganda to make us approve of accreditation. But it is important that we become critical of this and expose their true intent and to what it lead us.
We are not against upgrading the quality of education of UP Manila or of any educational institution for that matter. It has always been our call to have a quality and accessible education for the masses.
What we are against is that PAASCU and PACUCOA accreditation of a state university like UP Manila bring about forms of commercialization of education and repression to the faculty and students. These are:
- On the issue of “CHEd CENTER OF EXCELLENCE” and having greater state subsidy if we prove we are “worthy" enough
The concept of excellent education or high standards in learning should not contradict the principle that education should also be affordable by the masses. More so, the problems that UP Manila, as state university, faces boil down to the lack of subsidy that the government gives.
The global competitiveness of the university should not be at the expense of limiting the opportunity for the grass roots sector to send their sons and daughters to college. UP should be the University of the People and not a University oriented for Profit.
It is the government that should provide higher state subsidy for us to upgrade the quality of education and not the other way around. It is an insult to say that we have to prove we are worthy of higher subsidy from the government when in fact it is their obligation to give us the due budget as a state university.
- INCREASE OF TUITION, LABORATORY, MISCELLANEOUS and OTHER FEES
In private schools, colleges and universities, increase in tuition and other fees and imposition of exorbitant fees are the most glaring effects of PAASCU and PACUCOA Accreditation. Take for example Lyceum of the Philippines which is currently Level IV accredited by PAASCU. In the course of its accreditation, it increased its tuition as it goes up another level. St. Michael’s College in Laguna, another Level IV accredited by PAASCU, has increased its tuition from ______to ______. Students who graduated from PAASCU or PACUCOA Accredited high schools or those who study in PAASCU or PACUCOA accredited universities would testify to this fact. Accreditation means high tuition and exorbitant fees.
Thus, UP Manila would not be any different to this fact. To prepare for the PAASCU and PACUCOA visits to the educational facilities that we have, the administration would need funds to upgrade our laboratories, classrooms, libraries and the like. Chancellor Arcadio proudly said that he is willing to shell out funds from his office for these. But clearly, these funds would not suffice the need of the many programs of UP Manila he wish to be accredited. Secondly, why the need for a PAASCU and PACUCOA Accreditation for him to shell out funds from his office or from the alumni?
If the funds of the administration could not sustain the college’s needs to prepare for the accreditation process, there would be no other left body to resort to than to let the students fill the needed funds by imposing increase in tuition, laboratory fees, miscellaneous fees, etc.
When the UP Board of Regents approved the 300% tuition and other fee increases last December 2006 and ratified the New UP Charter last 2008 which has a provision that states that tuition and other fees are subject to change base on the inflation rate of the country, TOFI has already been legitimized and deemed inevitable. But PAASCU and PACUCOA Accreditation could be used as another justification of the UP Administration to increase tuition and other fees.
It is a new form of commercialization where in the burden of having excellent education will again be put onto the students’ and their parents’ shoulders instead of the having the government provide our right to quality and accessible education.
- Authority of PAASCU and PACUCOA to recommend revision of academic curriculum and involvement of private sector to our researches
It should be clear to us that PAASCU and PACUCOA are comprised of private sector that has only profit as their main interest. In the accreditation process, they can recommend revision of our academic curriculum and could then insert subjects or courses that are tie-up with its sponsor private companies.
Furthermore, the grants and scholarships which are said to be benefits we can reap from the accreditation will be given by private corporations who have interest in our intellect and skills- our researches, inventions, thesis, and the like.
This scheme to lure us towards PAASCU and PACUCOA leads us to the road of privatization of a state university like UP Manila.
- Trampling on ACADEMIC FREEDOM
UP is known to have professors who are unconventional in their way teaching as our university takes pride of our so called liberal education. UP Professors are given their academic freedom to teach the way they want to teach and see fit for their students to learn their lessons. This has been an important factor in molding UP’s liberal culture.
In the PAASCU and PACUCOA Accreditation, academic freedom will be clearly stepped on. The model classrooms which will be presented during PAASCU and PACUCOA visits would set standards for the professors on how should they conduct the lecture. The professors are required to make a rigid lesson plan which is in accordance to what PAASCU and PACUCOA regard as “excellent teaching method/plan”. To site an example of this, in PAASCU accredited schools, if the PAASCU observers are in the classroom, the teacher may start the lesson through a game so as to make the class livelier and the students involved. Some start the class through a prayer, having the students recite the mission vision of the school, and the like.
There is also an experience from PAASCU accredited schools like College of St. Benilde and St. Michael’s College wherein professors or teachers who failed to impress the PAASCU observers were fired even though they have taught in the school for a long time already.
These are clear examples of trampling with the academic freedom which we cannot tolerate in UP Manila.
- Implementation of repressive policies
Among the major proposals that have been associated with accreditation in the experience of other schools:
- no permit, no exam
- strict compliance with uniform and dress code
- greater requirements for organizational activities
In the College of Pharmacy, which house the target programs to be accredited by PAASCU, policies such as wearing of shorts and slippers in the premises of the building are not allowed as well as having “outrageous hairstyles’ are implemented. These are vague and repressive policies that are very subjective and curtail freedom of expression of the students. We understand the need to wear uniform and shoes especially during lab classes but not allowing the students to wear slippers or shorts even outside these lab classes is repressive. These policies can also be implemented in the programs that will undergo accreditation so as to have certain “decorum” of the students when the PAASCU or PACUCOA visitors arrive in our colleges to scrutinize us.
Why UP-Manila?
Among all UP units, UP Manila is the only unit which is being pushed into accreditation. There are many factors to consider such as the location of UP Manila which is near many private schools who are also PAASCU accredited and who are also members of the board. Yet what is most glaring is UPM’s distinct role as the Health Sciences center along with its attachment to PGH. It is strategic in terms of providing and strengthening privatization in an institution which caters not only to health as accessible education but as a primary social service.
According to the guidelines, there are none for the accreditation of state universities. Clearly, the guidelines which are being used for UPM is for private schools. The treatment of accreditation in the new frontier of public education is treated as a private endeavor.
One of the major aspects of today’s health situation is the export of health workers, the accessibility to health both as education and as a service is dwindling; PAASCU serves to intensify that character; further reinforcing the education system as both colonial and commercialized; each complimenting the other.
The demand for health workers, services and education causes PAASCU to direct their attention to UPM who has a supply of all three; following in the neo-liberal pattern of exporting our labor and privatizing social services. Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo in her Medium Term Higher Education Development Plan or MTHEDP blatantly claims a stress on increasing privatization schemes in the education sector. In the case of UPM it relieves them both of their responsibility for UPM as a university and as a hospital.
CONCLUSION ON PAASCU/PACUCUOA
Thus, PAASCU is redundant and creates more problems than it solves, attesting to the continued attacks on the state of UP education. Even listening to PAASCU reps will tell us only that they are in search of greater academic excellence. This is at the cost of the population and in effect “excellence” itself becomes a privilege of those who can afford UP education and services. Out of the numerous solutions and alternatives present, the BOR and Arcadio had to choose the worst one. The fight for the increase in state subsidy still stands on the premise of our human rights, a definite road to development.
UP becomes excellent when it abides by the principles set by Oblation, PAASCU strives for the same, however hopes for the opposite. The struggle for social change requires greater unities of the UPM community in protecting the rights of all sectors whether the threat internal or external.
UP DILIMAN 2009 DRAFT OF CODE OF STUDENT CONDUCT: DISCIPLINE TO WHAT EXTENT
As part of the continuous blows to our democratic rights, we are facing a threat of adapting the repressive and outright anti-student UP Diliman 2009 Code of Student Conduct. UP President Emerlinda Roman, through her presidential advisory council,released a memorandum to all UP Chancellors encouraging them to adapt the said Code of Student Conduct.
The CSC outrightly represses student rights and freedom. It attacks our right to organize, to peaceful assembly and representation.
The following are some of the provisions that evidently show how students' rights are violated or disregarded:
- Terminologies and provisions in the Draft Code are vague, subject to misconstruction towards curtailment of the freedom of speech and of expression.
Section 1.3.1.a. Creating within the University premises disorder, tumult, breach of peace, or serious disturbance;
Section 1.4.e. Engaging in disgraceful conduct within University premises;
The UP Administration fail to define what exactly does ‘breech of peace” or “serious disturbance” mean. Students are vulnerable to this, especially militant political organizations who conduct rallies, protest actions or demonstrations inside the university which is their right to express and for peaceful assembly. Likewise, the term “disgraceful conduct” is highly subjective and could mean public display of affection, kind of nudity, vulgar speech, or other eccentric acts that have always been incorporated in activities that are already considered part of the traditions of UP.
- Some provisions in the Draft Code concerning student organizations are constricting and downright impossible to satisfy, thereby constituting a curtailment of the students’ freedom to organize and to form associations.
Section 3.1.a. A student organization seeking University recognition must have a membership of at least 0.5% of the eligible student population, including officers, who have completed at least one (1) year of residency in the University…