deaf_boy
Jan 8, 2006, 04:35 PM
Tempest at San Beda
First posted 04:17am (Mla time) Jan 08, 2006
By Isagani Cruz
Inquirer
NOW that the yuletide is over, let me relate the interesting issue of academic freedom at the San Beda College of Law, where I was a professor and bar reviewer in Political Law and International Law for 20 years.
San Beda is a distinguished law school that has produced an impressive number of bar topnotchers led by former Supreme Court Justice Florenz D. Regalado, whose bar rating of 96.7 percent remains unsurpassed to date. Among its more prominent alumni are the late Raul Roco, Rene Saguisag, Antonio Martinez, Antonio Nachura, and many other successful practitioners. .
One of the important features of the academic discipline of San Beda College is its retention policy providing that any student who flunks twice in any subject will be ineligible for enrollment in the succeeding semester. This is a condition every applicant for admission to the law school must accept in writing before he may be enrolled.
This rule has been rigidly enforced over the years with beneficent
results. The elimination of students who do not come up to its academic standards has given the college an enviable record in the bar examinations and burnished the pride of San Beda lawyers in their alma mater.
This semester, however, this policy was not applied. Three senior students who had failed twice in Torts and Damages (a bar examination subject) were originally disqualified under the rule but, upon their request for reconsideration, were allowed to re-enroll. This was done upon recommendation of Dean Virgilio B. Jara to the Father Rector, who approved it.
Upon learning of this irregularity, the Law faculty registered a strong protest with the Father Rector. His excuse was that he had acted "in the exercise of a discretionary power that is inherent in my position as Rector-President of the College."
One faculty member disagreed and immediately resigned. In his letter to Dean Jara, he wrote in part:
"I regret I cannot but take strong exception and express my disappointment in your recent decision, as affirmed by our Rector, to re-admit students who have failed twice in the same subject. I view this radical departure from what has been consistently practiced by your predecessors as both unwarranted and unfair and may well lead to the 'commercialization' of our institution, which I have come to cherish dearly.
"I view this action of our Rector as a clear sign that, unlike his predecessors, he is determined to undermine our autonomy with respect to our College's admission and retention policies. If this were to be tolerated now, what would prevent him from later on changing or 'reconsidering' the grades we give our students? He can well claim to possess as well the authority, or the discretion, to interfere in our academic freedom as professors.
"I would not be effective as a teacher in an academic atmosphere which allows unjustified intrusions in the determinations of the faculty. We are responsible professors with the interest and welfare of our institution and our students at heart. I feel that, at the very least, we ought to be trusted to do what becomes us as teachers."
Dean Jara read the letter, abruptly said. "Okay," and without further comment wrote on it the single word, "Accepted."
The reaction of the faculty members was to invoke their academic freedom and deny the "inherent discretion" the Father Rector claimed he possessed to reverse their academic decisions. The academic regulations embodied in the Students' Code, they argued, "cannot be reviewed, suspended or disregarded by the Rector or the Board of Trustees."
"The Dean cannot abdicate faculty authority over academic matters by choosing not to make a stand or by allowing or even voluntarily asking the Rector or the Board of Trustees to interfere," which was what Dean Jara had done.
"The members of the faculty are members of the legal profession and are in the best position to train students who aspire to join them in the same profession."
"To be candid, a number of faculty members have already expressed their intention to resign from the College of Law. However, they were prevailed upon to defer any final decision so we can have a final dialogue with you regarding this matter."
In their subsequent dialogue, Father Rector Anscar J. Chupungco simply repeated that he had exercised his discretion in representation of the owners of the school who, he added, had approved his decision. He did not categorically answer if his discretion covered the right to order the admission of students disqualified by the faculty. But his order was admission enough.
I feel that the discretion claimed by the Father Rector impinged on the academic freedom of the professors who certainly know more about the competence of their students than the highest administrative official of the College. I am disappointed that, for all their principled objection, they obediently surrendered that precious freedom they had so vigorously invoked and defended as teachers of the law.
The lone teacher who resigned said he did so because he is the son of his father. His name is Carlo L. Cruz, and I am his proud father.
First posted 04:17am (Mla time) Jan 08, 2006
By Isagani Cruz
Inquirer
NOW that the yuletide is over, let me relate the interesting issue of academic freedom at the San Beda College of Law, where I was a professor and bar reviewer in Political Law and International Law for 20 years.
San Beda is a distinguished law school that has produced an impressive number of bar topnotchers led by former Supreme Court Justice Florenz D. Regalado, whose bar rating of 96.7 percent remains unsurpassed to date. Among its more prominent alumni are the late Raul Roco, Rene Saguisag, Antonio Martinez, Antonio Nachura, and many other successful practitioners. .
One of the important features of the academic discipline of San Beda College is its retention policy providing that any student who flunks twice in any subject will be ineligible for enrollment in the succeeding semester. This is a condition every applicant for admission to the law school must accept in writing before he may be enrolled.
This rule has been rigidly enforced over the years with beneficent
results. The elimination of students who do not come up to its academic standards has given the college an enviable record in the bar examinations and burnished the pride of San Beda lawyers in their alma mater.
This semester, however, this policy was not applied. Three senior students who had failed twice in Torts and Damages (a bar examination subject) were originally disqualified under the rule but, upon their request for reconsideration, were allowed to re-enroll. This was done upon recommendation of Dean Virgilio B. Jara to the Father Rector, who approved it.
Upon learning of this irregularity, the Law faculty registered a strong protest with the Father Rector. His excuse was that he had acted "in the exercise of a discretionary power that is inherent in my position as Rector-President of the College."
One faculty member disagreed and immediately resigned. In his letter to Dean Jara, he wrote in part:
"I regret I cannot but take strong exception and express my disappointment in your recent decision, as affirmed by our Rector, to re-admit students who have failed twice in the same subject. I view this radical departure from what has been consistently practiced by your predecessors as both unwarranted and unfair and may well lead to the 'commercialization' of our institution, which I have come to cherish dearly.
"I view this action of our Rector as a clear sign that, unlike his predecessors, he is determined to undermine our autonomy with respect to our College's admission and retention policies. If this were to be tolerated now, what would prevent him from later on changing or 'reconsidering' the grades we give our students? He can well claim to possess as well the authority, or the discretion, to interfere in our academic freedom as professors.
"I would not be effective as a teacher in an academic atmosphere which allows unjustified intrusions in the determinations of the faculty. We are responsible professors with the interest and welfare of our institution and our students at heart. I feel that, at the very least, we ought to be trusted to do what becomes us as teachers."
Dean Jara read the letter, abruptly said. "Okay," and without further comment wrote on it the single word, "Accepted."
The reaction of the faculty members was to invoke their academic freedom and deny the "inherent discretion" the Father Rector claimed he possessed to reverse their academic decisions. The academic regulations embodied in the Students' Code, they argued, "cannot be reviewed, suspended or disregarded by the Rector or the Board of Trustees."
"The Dean cannot abdicate faculty authority over academic matters by choosing not to make a stand or by allowing or even voluntarily asking the Rector or the Board of Trustees to interfere," which was what Dean Jara had done.
"The members of the faculty are members of the legal profession and are in the best position to train students who aspire to join them in the same profession."
"To be candid, a number of faculty members have already expressed their intention to resign from the College of Law. However, they were prevailed upon to defer any final decision so we can have a final dialogue with you regarding this matter."
In their subsequent dialogue, Father Rector Anscar J. Chupungco simply repeated that he had exercised his discretion in representation of the owners of the school who, he added, had approved his decision. He did not categorically answer if his discretion covered the right to order the admission of students disqualified by the faculty. But his order was admission enough.
I feel that the discretion claimed by the Father Rector impinged on the academic freedom of the professors who certainly know more about the competence of their students than the highest administrative official of the College. I am disappointed that, for all their principled objection, they obediently surrendered that precious freedom they had so vigorously invoked and defended as teachers of the law.
The lone teacher who resigned said he did so because he is the son of his father. His name is Carlo L. Cruz, and I am his proud father.