At the recent UPOU Unive Council, the decision was to uphold the status quo of what is written in the University policy on academic excellence awards which states that blah blah blah blah, ergo the practice of not giving an award to a student with a grade of 5.0 in any of his/her courses is in fact just a practice and not a policy. Ergo, we stick to what is written on the policy.
But, I say here, isn't it a sound practice? Isn't that the whole point to the ACADEMIC EXCELLENCE award?
I already have said enough during my battle to push for keeping the practice, especially in the context of UPOU. For one, as faculty member of UPOU, I do not want to just stick to the status quo simply because all other autonomous units and the BOR have ruled on/agree to the matter. If UPOU was the kind to always stick to the status quo, we would not be here in the first place. It is not in our identity to always uphold age-old traditions, UP system policies included, in a culturally transmissionist manner. UPOU is an evolution of its kind, a recreation in itself. Even our website is reflective of our everchanging selves, kinda messy but so what?. A lot of what we do may be hand me downs, but we have done a lot of things bottom up, and quite a few as afterthoughts, even photofinish at that. That is how beautifully dynamic and equally TIRING it is to sustain who we are as an institution (nakakapagod maging maganda talaga!)
Therefore, after a tiring week of having our Term 3 set of grads approved, I still can not let this matter go. I still want to have the chance to say my piece.
Good thing is, MY ONE and ONLY UPOU unive council, where I can stand and make a fool of myself, live and webstreamed because it is the only floor where I care to be one, has said that we can go on with the discussion. So, I go on this way because it's a brain itch I really need to let go off so I can move on.
Just for the record, I have said this:
MAJOR BLAH BLAH BLAH, tipong ramdam na ramdam ko sa ugat ko, see minutes of 41st UPOU university council minutes.
Despite another round of UC execom meeting and this recent UC meeting, I still can not change my mind on this matter. Part of my brain says, "C'mon Aleta, let this go..so many more battles to fight for, so many more meetings to do, let this matter go." PTI, dami mo pang kelangan tapusin sa buhay mo! Well, I just couldn't cuz obviously, I'm here blogging my thoughts away...saying it to the wind, so the wind can blow it away forever, just like how it happened to Wanda the witch on a windy Wednesday.
I can only blog because I know whatever I will say here is a very layman's point of view. It's quite a commonsensical and practical view which to my mind will not hold water nor be a compelling argument enough to turn the tide. Though I would like to give credit to a social scientist colleague of mine who reminded me about being a Social Studies teacher or any teacher for that matter. To arrive at something, one needs to define the terms. Only then can we bring in perspectives and lay out criteria so that what it is, becomes or perhaps what has already BECOME, is in fact as IS and it is just a matter of writing these down for all UP units to see and the BOR to simply respect.
I think faculty members of UPOU already have a common view of academic excellence, or what it means to deserve such an award. So I need not get into defining academic excellence. Instead, I go on to raise this, for my second speech:
The only symbolic representation/ objective measure of this thing called academic excellence, in UP, that is, (cuz you better check out other unives as well) is our grading system. My practical brain says I see a number line, from 1 to 5, with several points in between. Every student has the right to education: complete a course and to earn a grade. Now whether it is 1.0, 1.5, 1.75, etc until 3.0 is both a student and teacher's responsibility. A student does his/her part to earn the grade, while the teacher provides the structure/ terms so there will be basis for the grade. The only objective/standard measure the unive has is the grading system. However, whether it is going to be a 4.0 or 5.0, EXT or DRP is solely the student's responsibility.
In other words, our grading point system already shows the length of chances or palugits for a student to prove that he/she may be considered for an academic award because you have 1.0......up to 3.0. Below 3.0 is already the space where a student shall prove himself/herself to be a 3.0 or 5.0. EXT or DRP are still actions to go for. Therefore gaining a 1.0=excellent, is out of the picture, not unless course, EXT is completed.
In the end, academic excellence is a combination of the grade that a student earns based on work, performance and completion of requirements and the criteria set by the faculty, the grading system asserted by the university. Whatever happens in the classroom nor between the teacher and student is something the award (nor policy) does look into. Whether the teacher intends to be good or nice or unfair, is a matter the award (nor policy) does not look into either. The grading system all the more does not say all these.
The grading system we have all chosen to abide with only say these:
1.0=....1.25=......1.5=....1.75=....2.0=.....2.25=....2.5=.....2.75....=....3.0=.........5.0=Failed
And therefore to me, clear as mud (sinlinis ng putek), a 5.0=Failed. The student does not make the cut nor qualify a 1.0=excellent nor a 3.0 passing. A 5.0 is not even = to bobo, =bolero, =pabaya, =nagkasakit, =namatayan, =nanganak, =nabungian, =nangopya....=victim of poor teaching...=refuses to give in to sexual harassment
But then the standing policy is this: GWA, the sum total of its parts. I am for keeping this. However, I am adding (not changing) a stricter measure because I want to change another criteria because we are UPOU, PERIOD:
a) GWA is a criteria we choose to keep and respect.
b) I propose to add a second criteria: no grade lesser than 5.0, a stricter criteria because...
c) I propose to change one criteria, which is on academic loading. A student who has a load of 3-9 units is not considered as underload, but a part time load. A 12.0 is a full time load. A part time student and fulltime student should have equal chances of being considered for academic excellence awards, whether he/she is working, non working, a student in special circumstances therefore advised to take a part time load, a student who chooses to be overload/cross register
d) a record of EXT or DRP should not bar a student from being considered for an academic excellence award
e) Final criteria, is the student has no record of MRR
Because I am proposing c) to open the gates for all types of learners, learning circumstances and multiple intelligences to be considered/screened for academic excellence awards, the only passport I can verify will be the record of grades. Therefore no grade lower than 5.0 is the only strictest measure I can afford to have. Items D and E are still debatable.
Now given the above, I realize, I do not need theory nor research to look and argue for what I think is a sound practice. I argue using the same set of rules in place which I want amended. In the same way, that while I look at all the rules/policies of UP residential campuses, and find these not applicable, I always find ways to go for practices which I think is in the best interest of my AA students. IF you agree that it is in fact a sound practice, then why not make a move for these to serve as guidelines which are truly reflective of our practices. Like always, let's do this bottom up! Who cares if we end up in the same island? I just want to sail out and paddle this boat I have chosen to ride, no matter where the tide brings us anyway.
But to propose all of these in some kind of resolution formatted in a legal fashion, I really don't know. If it will be another semester's work to be argued, dis/approved, implemented in 2 years' time, then what does this say about U.P. in general...lol!
But, I say here, isn't it a sound practice? Isn't that the whole point to the ACADEMIC EXCELLENCE award?
I already have said enough during my battle to push for keeping the practice, especially in the context of UPOU. For one, as faculty member of UPOU, I do not want to just stick to the status quo simply because all other autonomous units and the BOR have ruled on/agree to the matter. If UPOU was the kind to always stick to the status quo, we would not be here in the first place. It is not in our identity to always uphold age-old traditions, UP system policies included, in a culturally transmissionist manner. UPOU is an evolution of its kind, a recreation in itself. Even our website is reflective of our everchanging selves, kinda messy but so what?. A lot of what we do may be hand me downs, but we have done a lot of things bottom up, and quite a few as afterthoughts, even photofinish at that. That is how beautifully dynamic and equally TIRING it is to sustain who we are as an institution (nakakapagod maging maganda talaga!)
Therefore, after a tiring week of having our Term 3 set of grads approved, I still can not let this matter go. I still want to have the chance to say my piece.
Good thing is, MY ONE and ONLY UPOU unive council, where I can stand and make a fool of myself, live and webstreamed because it is the only floor where I care to be one, has said that we can go on with the discussion. So, I go on this way because it's a brain itch I really need to let go off so I can move on.
Just for the record, I have said this:
MAJOR BLAH BLAH BLAH, tipong ramdam na ramdam ko sa ugat ko, see minutes of 41st UPOU university council minutes.
Despite another round of UC execom meeting and this recent UC meeting, I still can not change my mind on this matter. Part of my brain says, "C'mon Aleta, let this go..so many more battles to fight for, so many more meetings to do, let this matter go." PTI, dami mo pang kelangan tapusin sa buhay mo! Well, I just couldn't cuz obviously, I'm here blogging my thoughts away...saying it to the wind, so the wind can blow it away forever, just like how it happened to Wanda the witch on a windy Wednesday.
I can only blog because I know whatever I will say here is a very layman's point of view. It's quite a commonsensical and practical view which to my mind will not hold water nor be a compelling argument enough to turn the tide. Though I would like to give credit to a social scientist colleague of mine who reminded me about being a Social Studies teacher or any teacher for that matter. To arrive at something, one needs to define the terms. Only then can we bring in perspectives and lay out criteria so that what it is, becomes or perhaps what has already BECOME, is in fact as IS and it is just a matter of writing these down for all UP units to see and the BOR to simply respect.
I think faculty members of UPOU already have a common view of academic excellence, or what it means to deserve such an award. So I need not get into defining academic excellence. Instead, I go on to raise this, for my second speech:
The only symbolic representation/ objective measure of this thing called academic excellence, in UP, that is, (cuz you better check out other unives as well) is our grading system. My practical brain says I see a number line, from 1 to 5, with several points in between. Every student has the right to education: complete a course and to earn a grade. Now whether it is 1.0, 1.5, 1.75, etc until 3.0 is both a student and teacher's responsibility. A student does his/her part to earn the grade, while the teacher provides the structure/ terms so there will be basis for the grade. The only objective/standard measure the unive has is the grading system. However, whether it is going to be a 4.0 or 5.0, EXT or DRP is solely the student's responsibility.
In other words, our grading point system already shows the length of chances or palugits for a student to prove that he/she may be considered for an academic award because you have 1.0......up to 3.0. Below 3.0 is already the space where a student shall prove himself/herself to be a 3.0 or 5.0. EXT or DRP are still actions to go for. Therefore gaining a 1.0=excellent, is out of the picture, not unless course, EXT is completed.
In the end, academic excellence is a combination of the grade that a student earns based on work, performance and completion of requirements and the criteria set by the faculty, the grading system asserted by the university. Whatever happens in the classroom nor between the teacher and student is something the award (nor policy) does look into. Whether the teacher intends to be good or nice or unfair, is a matter the award (nor policy) does not look into either. The grading system all the more does not say all these.
The grading system we have all chosen to abide with only say these:
1.0=....1.25=......1.5=....1.75=....2.0=.....2.25=....2.5=.....2.75....=....3.0=.........5.0=Failed
And therefore to me, clear as mud (sinlinis ng putek), a 5.0=Failed. The student does not make the cut nor qualify a 1.0=excellent nor a 3.0 passing. A 5.0 is not even = to bobo, =bolero, =pabaya, =nagkasakit, =namatayan, =nanganak, =nabungian, =nangopya....=victim of poor teaching...=refuses to give in to sexual harassment
But then the standing policy is this: GWA, the sum total of its parts. I am for keeping this. However, I am adding (not changing) a stricter measure because I want to change another criteria because we are UPOU, PERIOD:
a) GWA is a criteria we choose to keep and respect.
b) I propose to add a second criteria: no grade lesser than 5.0, a stricter criteria because...
c) I propose to change one criteria, which is on academic loading. A student who has a load of 3-9 units is not considered as underload, but a part time load. A 12.0 is a full time load. A part time student and fulltime student should have equal chances of being considered for academic excellence awards, whether he/she is working, non working, a student in special circumstances therefore advised to take a part time load, a student who chooses to be overload/cross register
d) a record of EXT or DRP should not bar a student from being considered for an academic excellence award
e) Final criteria, is the student has no record of MRR
Because I am proposing c) to open the gates for all types of learners, learning circumstances and multiple intelligences to be considered/screened for academic excellence awards, the only passport I can verify will be the record of grades. Therefore no grade lower than 5.0 is the only strictest measure I can afford to have. Items D and E are still debatable.
Now given the above, I realize, I do not need theory nor research to look and argue for what I think is a sound practice. I argue using the same set of rules in place which I want amended. In the same way, that while I look at all the rules/policies of UP residential campuses, and find these not applicable, I always find ways to go for practices which I think is in the best interest of my AA students. IF you agree that it is in fact a sound practice, then why not make a move for these to serve as guidelines which are truly reflective of our practices. Like always, let's do this bottom up! Who cares if we end up in the same island? I just want to sail out and paddle this boat I have chosen to ride, no matter where the tide brings us anyway.
But to propose all of these in some kind of resolution formatted in a legal fashion, I really don't know. If it will be another semester's work to be argued, dis/approved, implemented in 2 years' time, then what does this say about U.P. in general...lol!
No comments:
Post a Comment