PROSPECT AND RETROSPECT
Temario C. Rivera
1967-1968 (First Semester)
Stripped of all its sentimentalities, the
New Year becomes meaningful when seen as the constructive link between the past and the
present. Signifying the resurgence of new life, the New Year, one fervently hopes, ushers
in new approaches and wise perspectives in dealing with the concrete problems that
continuously assault our individual existence, and institutional relationships. Because
the New Year is at once a Retrospect and Prospect, it becomes doubly meaningful. And in
the University, it becomes doubly real for here, the fresh hopes that come with the new
year become immediately tested by the continuous ferment and controversy that animate
university life.
For example, there is the unresolved
conflict about the question of academic freedom in the university. Has the issue been
sufficiently ventilated? Are the threats real or imagined?
The dismissal, or as the administration
would put it , the ‘termination of the appointment’ of some temporary instructor
in the university raises the question of legitimate faculty recruitment and appointment.
The charges of harassment against certain faculty members known for their radical views
and political activism can not be ignored. The least that the administration can do is to
study carefully these charges. Both sides have spoken. Now is the time for positive
action.
The case of the dismissed instructor
dramatized by the determined picketing of Dr. Hilario Lim and propelled by the concept of
academic freedom strikes deep into the basic guidelines of the University. It impels the
administration to reaffirm uncompromisingly the inviolability of academic freedom in the
University. It demands that the administration set down concrete rules on faculty
recruitment and appointment that shall not only uphold but also advance the
university’s commitment to excellence.
The long-range development plan of the
president lists faculty development, research, instruction and student development as
priority projects. The president would do well to take a hard look at the reality of the
immediate problem centering on faculty recruitment and promotion and the problem of
academic freedom for they are essential to the realization of these objectives. If
considerations other than academic competence are allowed to influence the selection and
retention of faculty members, and if academic freedom is weakened, the President’s
development plan becomes at best an illusion. Without academic freedom, any faculty
development program becomes ineffectual; research will stagnate; instruction will
deteriorate; and student development, a hollow promise.
In the field of student welfare, the
administration must now seriously reexamine its mailed fist policy against fraternities.
The withdrawal of recognition of the two law fraternities, the Alpha Phi Beta and the
Sigma Rho, was a rash and injudicious decision deserving a careful reexamination. The
administration must wake up to the reality that it cannot legislate fraternities out of
existence. No man can outlaw the inborn sociological and psychological needs that impel
students to join fraternities. Fraternities in the university have proved themselves
effective socializing agents in the university.
While it is true that some reforms in the
fraternity system are in order, this is not enough reason for their abolition. Stricter
but reasonable supervision on the part of the Administration and internal reform to be
consciously and assiduously carried out by fraternity members are just about the only two
practicable measures for the improvement of the fraternity system. But while there is much
promise for internal reform initiated by the fraternities, strict, reasonable supervision
on the part of the Administration has been sadly lacking. The Administration’s action
in withdrawing recognition of some fraternities, in the final analysis, will be taken as a
confession of the University’s dismal failure to supervise properly and effectively
the fraternities. If the fraternities show positive signs of initiating much needed
reforms, let not the administration shirk its duty - that of encouraging and accelerating
the impetus toward reform by effective supervision. Abolition of fraternities is
definitely not the solution; it is not only injudicious; it is most unrealistic.
Corollary to the president’s
long-range program of student development, the Administration must also extend greater
autonomy to campus organization. University authorities must work with the premise that
university students are in the main responsible and mature students capable of directing
their own affairs. This attitude, in fact, must be enhanced for it enables the faculty to
and the students to work side by side with complete trust and respect for each other - a
prerequisite to an effective and fruitful exchange of ideas.
The faculty and the administration must
concretize this ideal relationship of mutual trust and respect by finally installing a
student regent in the Board of Regents, a clamor long denied to the students. This
singular act will prove once and for all that the student the university intends in the
estimation of his esteemed supervisors, has finally come of age.
Such are the prospects that animate this
New Year! |
