By: Jasmine Panes and Herkurt Tamba
Cartoon by: Louise Gabrielle Abing
When confronted with an unprecedented or otherwise highly uncertain situation, even the most experienced and competent leaders may find it difficult to make decisions. The recent uproar over the removal of university beneficiaries from the institution's Academic Scholarship (AS) grant has cast a cloud of uncertainty over how management makes a decision despite the ambiguity it has caused among the student body.
To highlight the previous mandate of the university, according to the guidelines of Resolution No. 6, Series of 1992, Section 9, "No student shall enjoy more than one (1) grant or scholarship in the University except for the Special Skill Grantees (KE, MSU Chorale, and SDG) who, at the same time, may enjoy Academic Scholarship, provided that, they shall receive only an augmentation allowance not to exceed P100.00 per month in addition to their privileges as scholar." With this ratified regulation, the institution has the authority to rescind students with existing scholarships from gaining academic stipend, except if students will withdraw their former grants to have the latter’s benefits and privileges. Yet, with Republic Act 10931 being set into motion by higher authority, the university shelved its statutory policy to yield to the said enactment of the law.
Since the implementation of RA 10931, or the "Universal Access to Quality Tertiary Education Act," in 2017, students who are under either public or private-funded scholarship programs have been known and believed to be eligible grantees of the University Scholarship Program if they meet the qualification requirements. Accordingly, with the publication’s sit-down interview with Mrs. Eljean Cobarde, the scholarship coordinator, she shed light on the real situation about the entrenching skepticism induced by the clamor about the reinstatement of the previous policy of the administration, alongside the clarification made by the UniFast OIC Executive Director, Atty. Ryan L. Estevez.
Ma'am Cobarde made it clear through Atty. Estevez's statement that it is not permissible to have double scholarships if the financial assistance received by the students [have] the same nature and the same source of fund, particularly with SUCs being funded by the national government.
This means that the administration had unintentionally overridden the "should be" clause of the Free Tuition Act, since there are enrolled students who enjoyed leverage from both government subsidies such as the AS, DOST, DBP, Landbank, and others.
The committee head clarifies that the memorandum for multiple grants is not clear, so they agreed to allow students to receive bursaries as long as they met the requirements and upheld the established qualifications of their grants. As we magnify the issue, we can trace the fine lines that made the system matted due to the elusive implementation and frailty of the higher office (CHED), inducing repercussions on the downstream, where the burden is heavily placed.
On the other hand, Ma’am Cobarde has also admitted that she overlooked some of the students in the list who have existing government-funded scholarships, which puzzled scholars whose names were written in the recent Academic Scholarship release. Yet she averred that such loopholes were born out of the towering tasks she had to take on responsibly. It was reported that there was a substantial increase of scholars from the online education modality, which Ma’am Cobarde wholly handled and managed. As per the statement, about 1/3 of the population are scholarship grantees, and each of these students had to undergo individual verification by the committee head. She went on to say that there was a pressing test that affected the orientation of students due to the two-year pandemic and the abrupt change of university chancellor.
Relatively, a shepherd with more than 2000 sheep cannot guarantee everyone will be directed on the same path since it is self-consuming; a glitch made by the committee is an error that ripples to the top-level governing body.
This is a request to the administration to create an ad hoc office to oversee and manage the university's scholarship program, as well as other public and private scholarship-granting entities.
Through this specific management, the problem of targeting and validating students’ academic standing and scholarship status will be attenuated, and concerns from the studentry will be addressed directly with greater certainty and a significant level of information due to an increase in economies of scale, particularly in manpower and divided labor.
Furthermore, with the confusion caused by the provision's externalities and the administration's drawbacks, speculations arose as to which bitter taste comments and remarks afflicted the said committee. According to Ma’am Cobarde, there were inquiries and posts that flagged her, and some were sarcastic and foul. It is important to note to all MSUans that there are proper avenues to address our concerns and that expressing our sentiments does not need to be grounded on illness. In the words of Ma’am Tersa Castillo, the head of the registrar's office, with the support of the administration, will enhance their engagement, and that MSUans will be "expecting more close coordination about this matter". Communication plays a key role in maintaining sustainable student service; reciprocally, the learners should also proactively participate in the objectives of the office. It is by intersecting both the benefits of the parties that we can cut across a common decision for everyone’s common good.
As a result, the committee should not be thrown into the hot skillet for the consequences that perplexed the scholars and the university in general. Howbeit, as the office continues to transition to its fundamentals after the shift in the educational paradigm, it is to be highlighted that this occurrence should not be seen as obstructive, but rather as a manifestation of the scholars’ proactivity to the issues that may further bring heat to the student-admin relationship.
Indeed, preemptive actions are salient in putting off fire, since, "Ang maliit na butas ay lumalaki, konting gusot dumarami."
*This article can also be read in the March school paper issue.
Comments