More response to Monsod: From UP Cebu Student Council

Response to Monsod

The UP Cebu dean’s ouster movement did not come from made-up stories and unfounded complaints. It is rooted from seven years of the dean’s patent autocratic leadership. The campaign was not launched and participated by only a handful. In fact, over 70% of UP Cebu constituents signed the manifesto in favour of Dr. Avila’s ouster. On March 8, 2011, UP Cebu held a one-day strike participated by hundreds of constituents.

Under the UP Charter provision on democratic governance in the University that should be based on collegiality, representation, accountability, transparency and active participation of its constituents, Dr. Avila failed to involve full participation in the design of the program of UP Cebu's autonomy.

The dean’s unpopular and recurring decision to abolish the high school was opposed not only by UP Cebu students and alumni but also by the Cebu community. UP Cebu high school provides quality and accessible education to poor but deserving students. To abolish the high school because it is non-income generating only proves that UP is geared towards trekking the road to commercialization where deserving kids from poor families do not have a place.

Dr. Avila proved his autocratic leadership when he granted non-voting members of the Executive Committee voting power to favourably cause the closure of the UP High School of the Professional Education Division (PED). Immediately after, the committee sent a proposal to abolish the high school to the Office of the University Chancellor. Without waiting for the Chancellor’s reply, the dean issued a memorandum directing the high school to stop accepting applicants. Worse, he issued another memorandum ordering the high school to request permission to hold all activities from the Office of the Dean to suppress further opposition from the constituents and the alumni.

Dr. Avila did not listen to his constituents despite the vehement calls for genuine leadership and democratic governance. Instead, he stood firm on his unilateral decision to remove the student representative from the Executive Committee. He even declared it as final and non-negotiable. He reasoned out that we were only following the 2006 Revised UP System Code wherein no student representative is in the committee. He also added that UP Cebu is the only campus in the UP system that has a student representative in the Execomm. Instead of viewing this as a problem, he should be proud. He is in the position to encourage other UP administrators to follow the example of UP Cebu and to include the students in its decision making so that we may march towards progress and democratic governance.

The student representative plays a vital role in representing the students, airing out their concerns and upholding their right to take part in the decision making of the college. With the sole representative of the students gone, how are we supposed to inform the administration of our problems? How is the college able to perform and march towards progress when it refuses to listen to its constituents?

Dr. Avila also hired then Supervising Administrative Officer Al-sidry Shariff despite his lack of credentials and complaints against him for qualified theft. He did not act on reported issues of harassment by Mr. Shariff against university staff and security guards.

We suggest that Prof. Monsod visit UP Cebu. She should take a look at the now defunct soccer field beside the Arts and Sciences building. Dean Avila has allowed the developer Green Peaks to dump their excavated material on the field without benefit for the college other than five trucks of garden soil. His non-action on the encroachment of Green Peaks on UP Cebu property now endangers the UP high school from land slide due to softening of the soil as caused by heavy rain.

But the last straw was the retrenchment of the 15 guards. We could not understand how his administration could dare to do it to honest and hardworking men who worked for years to ensure the safety of UP Cebu constituents. The winning bidder was willing to absorb all 15 guards. Even UP Cebu Security Committee Chairperson Prof. Karl Roque was supportive of the retention of the UP guards. Dean Avila and his crony Supervising Administrative Officer Al-Sidry Shariff, however, refused the retention of the 15 UP guards for the unfounded reason of inefficiency. Such excuse to terminate the UP guards was clearly shallow and can readily be remedied. Moreover, the replacement of guards does not necessarily ensure efficiency.

The students of UP Cebu urge Prof. Monsod to not base her assertions on few documents provided by one party only. As a professor who served the university for 40 years, she should be sensible enough to ask for documents from both parties so she could formulate her opinions scientifically. We challenge Prof. Monsod to know all the things behind every complaint filed by UP Cebu constituents against Dr. Avila. It is clear; however, that Prof. Monsod’s stand on Dr. Avila’s dismissal as dean is driven by her utter dislike to the new UP President Alfredo E. Pascual.


Signed:
UP Cebu Student Council 2011-2012
Nagkahiusang Kusog sa Estudyante (NKE)
League of Filipino Students (LFS)- UP Cebu
UP Cebu students

(UNFOR)GIVING REVOLUTION

By Gene Nisperos

The forum dubbed “Giving: Join the New Revolution” held at the UPCM last Tuesday left a bad taste in the mouth. It was, at best, an exercise that was rude, myopic, uninspiring, disturbing, deplorable, and a host of other adjectives too embarrassing to invoke.

It was rude because even though the name of Professor Solita Monsod was plastered on the posters of the said event, she was not the main speaker. In fact, Prof. Monsod barely spoke and only to correct the so-called “evidenced-based” presentation that essentially cut her down under the pretext of disputing certain parts of her famous speech (the one that went viral on youtube).

The actual speaker was an alumnus of the UPCM, the valedictorian of the Class of 1979 and a renowned dermatologist, who allegedly went through great pains of conducting a survey and research to prove one point: that you can have your cake and eat it too.

His presentation was a rather tasteless defense of something that should not have to be defended in the first place: the decisions UPCM graduates make at the end of their schooling. He seemed to believe that he can justify decisions made in the past by being charitable now. Thus, what followed was a shameless display of self-aggrandizement hypocritically sub-titled “the merits of expatriate-ism and reciprocity”.

The shabby treatment of Prof. Monsod was wrong on so many levels. Worse, it reflected very poorly on how we comport ourselves when faced with judgment we deem unfair. Rather than be gracious and act with honor and integrity, we only managed to reveal to Prof. Monsod how sorely lacking we are in both.

The forum was also disturbing because a big part of it was all about money – charity money being doled out by the alumni for various projects or “needs” of the college. After the head of the PGH Medical Foundation read a very lengthy laundry list of projects that have been funded by donations, especially those from the UPMASA, some alumni started pledging to donate hundreds of thousands of pesos. It felt like an auction and our dignity was up for sale.

The myopic assumption was that giving money back to the college is equal to or sufficient to connote “serving the Filipino people”. Rather than address the issue of why the UPCM has NOT been able to instill enough values for its students to stay after they graduate to serve the underserved, the forum only highlighted our continuing refusal to sincerely acknowledge our shortcomings and change – change our values, our notions of excellence, our concepts of success – to something more relevant to the many who are still waiting for us to serve them.

I saw the look on the faces of the students and young alumni – many of whom came to hear Prof. Monsod speak and perhaps, listen to an intelligent discourse that would ensue. But that did not happen.

Instead, they saw the inability of the college to rise beyond its own self-interests. Prof. Monsod virtually threw the gauntlet, a challenge for us to confront issues larger than ourselves and to commit and be part of genuine national development. Yet the anemic response of our alma mater was DONATION?

We are better than this. We should be better than this.

I am not a fan of end-of-the-year speeches extolling this or that virtue. During our graduation in 1993, then health secretary Juan Flavier gave an impassioned speech akin to the one of Prof. Monsod. My reaction then is still my reaction now: a 30-minute speech, no matter how eloquent, cannot undo the distorted values ingrained by five years of med school. Graduates who went on to serve the underserved did so in spite of, not because of, the kind of education they received.

Someone once said that physicians are the natural attorneys of the poor. UPCM graduates who stayed behind, including those who tried to insulate themselves from our sad state of affairs by concentrating on their practice, cannot but see the face of suffering every time they treat the poor, who seem to have grown more numerous and impoverished over the years.

That some UPCM graduates have chosen to stay and suffer the daily grind of life in this archipelago of our despair is a measure of solidarity that cannot be experienced vicariously by those who have chosen to leave, even if some of them occasionally look back to see how we are doing.

I have no judgment on those who left the country. They have their reasons. I thank them if they help the people back here, but love them anyway (particularly my friends and classmates) if they do not. Yes, I sincerely wish that they did stay but cannot fault them for their decisions. However, I cannot say the same for a very few who did stay but managed to only make life here more miserable.

The forum last Tuesday reminded me that there is still a war being waged. It is a war being waged here, although everyone can help pitch in. It is a war for the hearts and minds of medical students. It is a war for the soul of this nation, for the future of our people.

THIS is the REVOLUTION.

(Editor's note: Dr. Gene Nisperos is a graduate of the U.P. College of Medicine. The link to his Facebook note was sent to us by U.P. Kilos Na, which also commented thus about the same forum: "Rather than address the issue of why the UPCM has NOT been able to instill enough values for its students to stay after they graduate to serve the underserved, the forum only highlighted our continuing refusal to sincerely acknowledge our shortcomings and change – change our values, our notions of excellence, our concepts of success – to something more relevant to the many who are still waiting for us to serve them.")

Cheating in UP - INQUIRER.net, Philippine News for Filipinos

The Diliman Diary is reposting a column by U.P. Diliman Economics Professor Solita C. Monsod in Inquirer.net dated July 4, 2009 to remind its readers of the cheating that occurred at U.P. Diliman and how the cheaters were let off by a majority vote of the Board of Regents. The column prompts us to ask the question: Can this shameful episode repeat itself in the country's bastion of Academic Freedom? To read the column, just click the link:
Cheating in UP - INQUIRER.net, Philippine News for Filipinos