Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
2Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Lsg+Official+Sfd+Report

Lsg+Official+Sfd+Report

Ratings: (0)|Views: 359 |Likes:
Published by JD Obias

More info:

Published by: JD Obias on Feb 21, 2012
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

02/22/2012

pdf

text

original

 
1
LSG OFFICIAL REPORT ON THE STUDENT-FACULTY DIALOGUE
Eugenio Lopez Center, Antipolo CityFebruary 11, 2012
In Attendance:LSG CB BarOps Commission Faculty
Jill De Dumo Carlo Marcaida Dean Danilo L. ConcepcionToff Lamug Rey Velasco Dean Raul C. PangalanganGia Recio Lia Veneracion Dean Salvador T. CarlotaKriska Chen Prof. Concepcion L. JardelezaAzy Ignacio Prof. Ma. Gisella N. Dizon-ReyesMike Tiu Prof. Jay BatongbacalBenedict Nisperos Prof. Leo BattadJo Ann Madarang Prof. Dan CalicaMai Suarez Prof. Rommel CasisDominic Obias Prof. Tristan CatindigRichard Beltran Prof. Rowena Daroy-MoralesPC Celeridad Prof. Dan GatmaytanIvan Galura Prof. Rowena GuanzonLouie Camino Prof. Eduardo LabitagBam Santos Prof. Jay LayugPatrick Carbonell Prof. Linda Malaneb-HornillaProf. John MoloProf. Alberto MuyotKrissy Conti,
Student Regent 
Prof. Elizabeth PangalanganProf. Serafin SalvadorProf. Patricia Salvador-DawayProf. Francis SobrevinasProf. Nicholas Ty
Official Agenda:
A.
 
Academic Delinquency RulesB.
 
Magna CartaC.
 
Block v. BiddingD.
 
OLA and ExternshipE.
 
Seniors‟ Bar Review Program
 F.
 
ScholarshipsG.
 
DormitoryH.
 
SecurityI.
 
Utilities & FacilitiesJ.
 
LibraryK.
 
Moot Court BudgetL.
 
Organizations‟
Tambayans 
 M.
 
RegistrationN.
 
Dress Code**
*Confidential**Topic included by the Faculty
 
2
A.
 
Academic Delinquency Rules
Premise:
There are two different set of rules
applicable among the student body: the “old” University Rules
applied to Batch 2012
, and the “new” rules applied to the younger batches. The differentiating factors are the
3-Strike rule and Double Probation rule.
Response/Discussion:
1.
 
In order to facilitate the discussion, the Faculty noted that everyone has to work on the premise that wecannot do away with the University Rules. If it is imposed by the University, then it cannot be contested.The College can impose stricter rules, but it cannot go below the University Rules.2.
 
On the 3-strike rule and the double probation rule
 
The Faculty said that they not casting our judgment on the merits of these rules because theQPI has already been abolished. Besides, there is also the problem with the Bar. If it will reallyimprove the quality of the graduates and the performance in the Bar, then the new rules willnot be abolished.
 
Meanwhile, the Faculty would like to see first the minutes of the Full Faculty Meeting to whichthis was approved of, since some are not familiar with the rule. Also, some asked whether ornot the rules have the approval of the University Council.
 
The Dean mentioned that the rules may be reviewed, provided the LSG give documentedcases of students who suffered injustices because of the rules.2.
 
Regarding the interpretation of a grade of 4.0.
 
LSG stated that according to University Rules, the grade of 4.0 may be taken out by two equalmeans: by a removal exam, or by retaking the subject. Thus, the students should be given anopportunity to choose between removing or retaking.
 
LSG was tasked to give documented cases or instances wherein a student is prohibited fromtaking one option over the other.
B.
 
Magna Carta
Premise:
The discussion on the Magna Carta was done by using the document to contextualize the concernsstudents would like to bring up to the Faculty. Each provision was discussed, including the motivations behind it.The question on what to do with the Magna Carta itself was reserved to another date.
Response/Discussion:1.
 
Discrimination and harassment
1
-
52.5% of the respondents have been/ felt personally insulted in classor while inside the premises of the college by a Faculty member or an administrative staff.
1
 
Students shall be protected against discrimination in the entire duration of being a student in the College. They shall not be expelled fromthe College, punished with disciplinary action or any other sanction, personally insulted, or be denied any kind of privilege on the basis of his or her physical handicap, physical appearance, socio-economic status, political or religious beliefs, culture, sexual orientation, genderidentity, or membership in student organizations. This protection shall specifically include pregnant students, certified reformed drugabusers, and students with HIV/AIDS shall not be discriminated against.
 
*FYI: The UP Law Students‟ Magna Carta is a product of series of consultations with students from year 2008 to
the present. The LSG employed focus group discussions and surveys to capture the concerns of students acrossthe years. For the purpose of this presentation, a survey was administered with students of the College forsecond semester AY 2011-2012 with a sample of 200 respondents.
 
3
 
LSG cited instances* wherein students were affected by this provision.
 
Some Faculty members agreed that the cited in
stances were clearly violative of the students‟
rights, while some also expressed concerns that the situations mentioned could have beenisolated cases.
 
All agreed that a more concrete and comprehensive grievance mechanism should beestablished, which proposal should come from the LSG, but in the meantime, it was stressedthat even without said mechanism, students who experience any for of harassment anddiscrimination should report to the administration their complaint.2.
 
Late submission of grades
2
 
90% of the respondents have received their grades on or after the periodof enlistment for the succeeding semester. Some of these subjects are prerequisites to another subject.
 
The Faculty notes that the late submission of grades has academic delinquency repercussionsto a student.
 
Dean stated that the Faculty will do its best to submit their grades on time, and in case theycannot do so, he believes it is unfair for the students
to be prejudiced by the Faculty‟s failure.
 
 
Dean Carlota also said that there on the part of the Faculty, there is already a greatimprovement over the years, but it could not be denied that this still exists. Rest assured thatthe faculty is sensitive to the unfair implications of the late submission of grades by theprofessors.
3.
 
Notice of grading components and procedure
3
 
 
54% of the respondents said that they had taken atleast one class wherein they were not informed of the grading components and procedure. 78% saidthat they had also taken a class where bluebooks, exams, papers, recitation cards and otherrequirements were not available for review. 43% of the respondents answered that they experiencedbeing denied access to their class records and class standing. 35.2% of the respondents answered thatthey had experienced taking an exam which they had not been notified of at least two weeks before itwas conducted. For those who answered affirmatively to the four preceding items, 57% claimed thattheir grades were prejudiced by virtue of these causes.
 
The students and the faculty agree that the core of the issue is the transparency of the grades.
 
A Faculty member recognized that the students should know at the beginning of the semesterthe rules of the game. However, the students should not ask for their grade every afterrecitation, which becomes annoying already and overly burdensome to the professor. Thereshould be balance.
 
Prof. Guanzon shared her method to the other Faculty members: “I have a class beadle.
Nobody speaks to me except to the beadle. All my recitation grades are open. The beadlephotocopies it to make sure I have a spare copy in case I lose mine. I also made this rulebecause I would like to establish a custom for myself. Professional ethics requires me to affordmy students some equality.
 
 
Prof. Muyot also shared his method, which is also similar to Prof. Daway‟s: “
I would like to sharemy system of transparency, and that is an Excel file which I submit to the Office of the CollegeSecretary before the submission of grades. It is always available for the students. Hence there isno mistake in the computation. I also follow what Bing does and that is only to talk to thebeadle. They can also consult but they have to schedule it. The professor is free to come upwith whatever method he wants as long as he observes transparency.
 
2
 
Students who belatedly receive their grades from the previous semester shall not be adversely affected in their enrolment for thesucceeding semester They shall not be disallowed to underload if reasons warrant and they shall not be required to force-drop a paid-forsubject of which the failed subject is a pre-requisite.
 
3
 
Students shall be informed of the grading components and procedure at the beginning of class. Bluebooks, exams, papers, recitationcards and other class requirements shall be available to the students for review. They shall be informed of their class standing upon request
of the student. Upon availability of student‟s final grade, he/she shall be given a break
-down of grades on such said subject.

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->