UP President Roman on Financial Resources

In the spare time that lenten break affords an exam-weary student, I decided to browse through materials concerning the administration of the University of the Philippines. This is admittedly motivated by my desire to further root on solid ground our arguments against a Tuition Adjustment in the UP College of Medicine, as is the majority opinion of the UPCM's students.

Still reeling from a verbal scourging that I received from certain faculty members in yesterday's Task Force on TFA meeting at the UPCM, I proceeded to write essays like the post earlier to this one that speaks of my sentiments on the matter at hand. What I did not elaborate much on is the very much visible and felt insinuation of the Task Force that I should not have written UP President Emerlinda Roman about the activities of the Task Force, reportedly because "it is not yet final and it's pending the Dean's review".

Why exactly did I write the UP President and subsequently cause her written inquiry sent to the UPCM asking for an explanation from the Task Force? I did so because I believe in the right of every UP constituent to responsibly engage the central administration in matters affecting a large group within the University. Furthermore, I wrote President Roman herself because I distinctly remember her good reputation for listening to all sectors.

On recent review of postings on the UP website, President Roman's speech Imagining UP's next 100 years tells a lot on her outlook on University management and partly satisfies my own self-questioning on why I did choose to write the UP President regarding Tuition Adjustment. Allow me to quote portions of her piece discussing Financial Resources:

On Financial Resources
We are all aware that in the Philippines, education’s share in the national budget has been getting smaller. Moreover, higher education’s share of the total education budget has also decreased. We can expect this situation to worsen rather than to improve in the future.

UP’s income has been more or less stable, but it is of course insufficient to sustain even existing programs. Government policies promise nothing substantial in terms of financial support in the future, though we fully intend to continue lobbying aggressively each time DBM puts out a budget call.

We do have other options. One is to do nothing and to simply rely on government funding. This would mean downscaling our operations, which would translate into admitting fewer students and reducing allocations for faculty development and the upgrading of facilities. In short, accepting as inevitable the University’s progressive deterioration and decline. This can hardly be considered a real option.

The other option is to look elsewhere for funding which leads me to the University’s centennial celebration.

The Centennial Celebration
The UP Centennial Celebration is potentially a unique rallying point for the whole academic community, including the alumni. Here is an opportunity to pay tribute to what may well be the institution that has had the most definitive effect on our lives.

We will set up a UP Centennial Com-mission to oversee preparations for the grand homecoming in 2008. In line with this, we will embark on an aggressive campaign to raise funds to enable us to move closer to the “world-class” university of our dreams.

(Emphases with green font color supplied.)

I interpret the highlighted parts to be consistent with Resolution 0405-003 of our outgoing UP Medicine Student Council, which in particular opposes any Tuition or other Fee Adjustment but does not stop short of an empty protest. The council openly suggested three things, part of which supports President Roman's inclinations to "continue lobbying aggressively" to the Government for more subsidy and to "look elsewhere for funding".

Curiously, her vision for the University's financial resources does not include adjusting tuition or other fees charged from students. Instead, she proposes a concrete action plan: to have an "aggressive campaign to raise funds". Again, increasing a student's matriculation is not mentioned, even in context.

Why then is the UPCM Task Force on Tuition Adjustment adamant on pursuing increases in student matriculation? Why can't they just heed the call of the University's highest official to actively pursue other options?