senator pia cayetano on new UAAP rule on residency : “unconstitutional; unjust and cruel to athletes”

we are posting in full statement by senator pia cayetano:

Dear UAAP Board,

Many athletes, former athletes, and parents of athletes are in an uproar over the recent decision of the UAAP board to require graduating high school students to sit out 2 years if they come from a UAAP high school and go to a different UAAP college.

Forgive my ignorance, but what is the 2-year residency requirement for other than to curtail the freedom of the young athlete to choose the college where he wants to study and play?

In the USA, transferring college athletes have a 1-year residency rest before they can play for their new school – only 1 year, and it doesn’t apply to high school students who choose to go to a different college. The 1-year residency rule requires an athlete to sit out one year of competition because transferring student-athletes suffer academically over time. The year-in-residence is meant to help the athlete acclimatize to the new school and adjust academics-wise. [1] So what’s your 2-year rule for?

A student-athlete’s choice of university is influenced not only by athletics, but also by academics, campus life, and personal situation [2], and the 2-year residency encumbers their freedom of choice.

In my humble opinion as an athlete, a parent of both a college and a high school athlete, and a lawyer, the 2-year residency that is currently applied to transferring college students, as well as any residency rule for high school students, deny athletes of their rights to develop their full potential. It goes against the Constitutional mandate to promote sports especially among our youth, and is an unreasonable limit on an athlete’s freedom of choice as well as academic freedom to choose which college to enter into.

Section 19, Article 14, of the 1987 Constitution states that:

“(1) The State shall promote physical education and encourage sports programs, league competitions, and amateur sports, including training for international competitions, to foster self-discipline, teamwork, and excellence for the development of a healthy and alert citizenry.”

Will the new rule help achieve this?

To excel in sports, one needs to be in constant training of both the body and the mind. Do you know what it’s like for an athlete to sit out two seasons? Athletes thrive on competition. That’s what gets us going. That’s what all the hard training is about. Its what makes it all worth while. To make an athlete sit out two seasons? That just kills the dream. Para sa isang atleta, para mo na ring sinabi na wag ka na lang maglaro. Is this what you want to achieve? Seriously?

I am against any kind of residency rule for graduating high school students. For transferring college students, the 1 year residency rule will suffice. Anything more than that is injustice to an athlete.

I will end this letter by citing a provision in our Bill of Rights against cruel and unjust punishment. For an athlete, this 2 year residency rule is cruel and unjust punishment!

source : http://www.mydailyrace.com/?p=2566

 

read : new UAAP rule on residency is unjust, unfair and harms high school athletes

new UAAP rule on residency is unjust, unfair and harms high school athletes

social media was ablaze in the last few days on this new rule of the UAAP on residency:

HIGH school players who will transfer to another UAAP school in college will now have to wait for two years before becoming eligible to play in the league.

The UAAP board on Tuesday approved the recommendation of its amendments committee to increase the residency requirements for transferring high school players from one year to two years.

The new rule, which got the vote of the board during its regular monthly, meeting will take effect immediately and will cover the current batch of graduating high school players in the UAAP.

source : http://www.spin.ph/sports/basketball/news/blow-to-pingoy-astransferees-required-to-undergo-two-year-residency-under-new-uaap-rule

apparently this rule was invented as a reaction to the recruitment war between the Ateneo and FEU on a star high school player of FEU, a two-time MVP in the high school league.

( read here :   http://www.spin.ph/sports/basketball/news/blow-to-pingoy-astransferees-required-to-undergo-two-year-residency-under-new-uaap-rule and here http://www.spin.ph/sports/basketball/news/new-residency-rule-wont-stop-pingoys-switch-to-ateneo-insists-dad)

we think the new rule is all wrong :

• this new rule benefits only the UAAP schools, not anyone else, not the high school athletes and not the league. and the benefit to the schools is just temporary, all it does is delay the playing time and does not totally protect the schools from losing their top high school players to other schools. the obvious intent of the new rule is to prevent or strongly discourage high school athletes from moving to another school for college.  it’s a selfish, misguided rule just for the benefit of the schools.
• it does the most harm to the high school athletes as they are unjustly deprived of playing the sport they love and have labored for for another year. the one year residency to begin with is wrong and extending it for another year makes it doubly wrong.  these high school athletes have been competing, honing and practicing their skills throughout high school and to many it started during their grade school days, this rule puts a two-year stop to that regimen, to that success formula. any athlete know that sustained and continued playing time, specially in competition play and training are key to sports greatness. all athletes know – you stop competitive playing and you don’t improve and to some lose some of your skills while others who continue progress more.
• putting in place rules that have the effect of barring or impeding a high school student from pursuing his college education in the school of his choice is wrong and immoral, specially if this is being done just to protect the school’s college sports program.  the fact is schools have differing quality of education, the same as having differing quality of sports programs. high school students, including athletes choose the best that they can have (and afford). putting in barriers for the students to choose the best or better education and sports program is wrong for the schools to do so.
• it does not make sense that the league is stopping high school students from pursuing greater things for their education and the sport they love.
• the new rule does not make the UAAP league any better nor does it do anything positive to sports, all it does is give the schools some kind of fake psychological benefit.
• the new rule is definitely discriminatory against universities who do not have coed high schools like la salle and ateneo. this will mean their women recruits for the women sports in the UAAP sill need to wait it out for two years. not having female students in their high schools automatically mean they will need to recruit from high school girls.

there is something very wrong with UAAP schools looking for ways to improve their chances at winning games in the league not by improving their sports programs but by imposing rules that discriminate other schools and do nothing but harm high school athletes.

winning UAAP games is best done by winning in the courts during games, not in meeting rooms by creating unfair, discriminatory, harmful and selfish self serving rules. this new UAAP rule does not help the league in any way, all it does is hurt the future and dreams of high school athletes.

read more here : Twitter ablaze as #NewUAAPRule stuns UAAP fans http://www.rappler.com/sports/23150-twitter-ablaze-as-newuaaprule-stuns-uaap-fans

sports photography – just one or two more seconds for the money picture shot!

the alternate title – damn it’s hard to take sports shots! sub-title – specially if you do not have the camera and lens for it.

those are things we knew before but got confirmed when we actually tried it.

the football match was between the juniors teams of Ateneo and FEU at the Ateneo football field for the UAAP. given that we did not have the right camera and lens for sports shots, the expectations for great pictures were intentionally set very low.

sports photography is probably one of the few types where you do need really specialized cameras and lenses. you need a fast camera, a fast and very long lens (telephoto or zoom)  and one that can take many multiple shots one after the other with each shot perfectly focused. these types of cameras and lenses will cost easily more than $100,000 versus the camera and lens we used which was a fraction of that cost.

but we took the pictures anyway.

we wanted to capture a a specific shot – one that an Ateneo striker kicking a ball past the  FEU goal keeper. i was hoping that the picture will show the ball just passing through the goal keeper.  the shots we got were multiple shots and resulted to some nice pictures of the ball getting kicked, sailing to the goal keeper and then passed the goal keeper down deep into the net for a goal.

but no shot where the ball just passing the goal keeper. we missed that shot by a mere one or two seconds!

nice try, better luck next time.

photo #1 : ateneo player prepares to kick the ball into the net. feu goal keeper prepares himself to defend

photo # 2: football sails through the air after the ateneo player kicks it

photo #3 : well in this space is supposed to be the shot we wanted to record – the ball sailing just past the goal keeper. but the camera motor failed me as it was unable to take the shot. we swear our finger was continuously pressing the shutter button!

photo #4: it’s a goalllllllll! football hits the net as FEU goal keeper looks at it and the Ateneo player runs back to his team mates to celebrate.

the other thing we experienced was the need to stalk the play of the game. we intended to take a goal shot and we needed to read the game and get ready to take the shot when the goal was supposed to be made. looking at the viewfinder the whole time to follow the flow of the game didn’t work. we needed to remove the camera from our eye to watch the game. and as soon as a developing goal was about to be made, that’s when you put the camera up to your eye.

these were lucky photo shots as we were able to read the play correctly and a goal was made. but, those one to two seconds delay didn’t allow us to achieve our goal.

oh well, that is what happens to amateur sports photographers with amateur cameras and lenses. (insert laughter here)

Ateneo October, 2012 1BIG5 Bonfire Celebration In Pictures

do you have pictures you took during the 1BIG5 celebration? share it in this blog – send it to this blog via email (wawam.email@ gmail.com) and will post it. include any caption you want placed on it.

UAAP 75 finals Ateneo-UST game 2 : if Ateneo wins, referees are in to it, if UST wins, referees are fair

referees favoring Ateneo Blue Eagles in game 1 of the UAAP 75 finals was what made UST lose, that was according to UST growling tigers coach pido jarencio. coach pido also said something about the Ateneo players or was it the Blue Eagles’ coach Norman Black being able to speak good English and by implication UST growling tigers’ being poor at it had played a role in their loss. we did not understand how proficiency in speaking English mattered during the game, we hardly saw the Ateneo and UST players say anything during the game it being basketball and not a debate but that was how coach pido saw it.

no surprise to us since much of what coach pido said didn’t really make sense to us.

we didn’t think the Ateneo Blue Eagles won the game because of the referees or that they spoke better English, it was because coach pido did not adjust his team’s game play on the 3rd quarter of the game. the Ateneo Blue Eagles were down at the end of the 2nd half on account of too many unforced errors, poor defense and generally poor shooting. but the whole complexion of the game changed during he 3rd quarter as the Blue Eagles went on a shooting rampage and clamped the Growling Tigers on defense when it had a fantastic 17-0 ran in that quarter.

we think coach pido was unable to read the change in play employed by the blue eagles in the 3rd quarter both on offense and defense. unable to read the play meant he missed out on changing the play for his own team.

the UST growling tigers concentrated so much defense muscle on greg slaughter, often three players guarding him that other blue eagle players became free to score on the offense. one notable blue eagle was nico salva who shot his career best in that game. salva simply toyed around with the UST defense and took shots from his favorite spots, made his favorite shots plus others.

salva is the kind of player who is very low key – simple shots taken in a very muted way unlike kiefer ravena and greg slaughter. kiefer ravena is an explosive and impressive player. he makes these fantastic shots and fantastic moves that you can’t help but notice he is doing well in a game. slaughter because of his height and position is also as noticeable but in a different way. because slaughter is an imposing center, you will notice it if he is doing well in a game as he will always make his shots look easy under the ring and make you wonder why the defense can’t stop him.

salva just makes the regular jump shot and the occasional lay-up with very little fanfare and muted style. but the difference is that salva is one hell of an efficient player. his almost boring style makes him unnoticed by coaches and other players and coach pido and the growling tigers were no exception in game 1.

salva is the player that just creeps into the game unnoticed mostly. and when he gets into a scoring rhythm, he can carry that throughout the game.

but apparently coach pido did not notice these things. he did not change the game play on defense and continued to pour in effort and manpower on slaughter. slaughter on his part very smartly accepted it but looked for the open man when three UST players were on him.

if coach pido paid attention to the game, he would have realized the defense he put on salva was doing a bad job at it. salva was able to get away from his defense in almost any spot a few feet away from the ring.

coach pido was also obviously unable to find the correct player mix to get their offense going. UST is made up of great shooters but the combination coach pido put in simply didn’t click. the growling tigers tried but they were unsuccessful in putting shots in that they had zero points for a stretch of around 7 to 10 minutes during the 3rd quarter.

having zero points for that long a time may be a function of the defense put up by Ateneo. Ateneo is one of the best defensive teams in the league but we did not see any new plays put up by the Ateneo crew on defense. UST had zero points in that period not because Ateneo had put up a great defense, it was just that the combination of players in the court for UST did not work well. we think the UST players became shell shocked by the juggernaut offense of the Blue Eagles that they lost confidence and found themselves unable to shoot.

so what will happen in game 2? well we think coach pido will once again say after the game that the Ateneans were favored by the referees if UST loses the game tomorrow. it’s a very convenient and easy excuse to make for coach pido. of course if UST wins tomorrow, coach pido will conveniently forget his referees for Ateneo charge and just say his players did it all.

there is something about the blue eagles that we have noticed – they win most of their games due to their 3rd quarter performance. things simply change for the blue eagles on the 3rd quarter. they can be doing badly (as they did in game 1 with UST) in the 1st and 2nd quarters but when they come out of the half huddle, they make the adjustments in their play and recover in the 3rd quarter. the blue eagles are almost always a completely different team when they come out to the court during the 3rd quarter. it’s like a miracle happens in the dugout during the half time break that they discover the secret formula to win the game.

to us, that secret formula is coach norman black. black we think is the best coach in the league. he is to us the Great Adjuster. black is able to see things so well and is brilliant at making the adjustments he needs to make in offense and defense in the 3rd quarter to win the game. the Ateneo Blue Eagles is made up of very good players, both its first five and the bench crews. among his first five, we know ravena, salva and slaughter can win games plus add to that the bench like buenafe, golla and elorde and that makes a potent team.

but having great players is not enough. you need an even greater coach who can analyze games as they evolve and think up of changes in offense and defense plays and get the combination of players that work. many of the teams in the UAAP, like the UST growling tigers, have many great players just like Ateneo but the advantage of the blue eagles is that they have norman black to make it all work well and adjust to win games.

and as we have seen in game 1, coach pido jarencio is no coach norman black.

makes in offense or defense play and player combinations

professors of 3 of the top universities, Ateneo, La Salle and University Of The Phlippines support the rh bill

click to read:

• based on serious evidence, the RH Bill is pro-poor and authentically pro-life & pro-family – UP Economics Professors
• UP School Of Economics : Population, Poverty, Politics and the Reproductive Health Bill

• joint statement of ateneo and UP professors : Pass The RH Bill Now
• UP and Ateneo professors issues support on RH Bill

• de la salle university professors support the rh bill – “rh bill is pro-life”

• ateneo president fr villarin ignores bishop, upholds independent thinking and appreciates ateneo professors efforts on rh bill
• 33 more ateneo professors support rh bill, now 192 professors
• bishop wants pro rh bill Ateneo professors fired – hahahaha
• 160 Ateneo De Manila University Professors declare support for the RH Bill
• Catholics Can Support The RH Bill In Good Conscience – Ateneo Professors’ Position Paper RH Bill 5043

professors of 2 catholic schools, la salle and ateneo announce support for the rh bill

a couple of days ago. professors of de la salle university, a catholic school published their support on the rh bill. la salle joins the professors of another catholic school, the ateneo de manila university in supporting the rh bill.

the support of the ateneo professors has created controversy as the CBCP and  the ateneo president reacted to what the ateneo professors did. with the la salle professors joining the ateneo university, this will be an even bigger controversy in the coming weeks.

read their statements here (click to read) :

• de la salle university professors support the rh bill – “rh bill is pro-life”
• ateneo president fr villarin ignores bishop, upholds independent thinking and appreciates ateneo professors efforts on rh bill
• 33 more ateneo professors support rh bill, now 192 professors
• bishop wants pro rh bill Ateneo professors fired – hahahaha
• 160 Ateneo De Manila University Professors declare support for the RH Bill
• Catholics Can Support The RH Bill In Good Conscience – Ateneo Professors’ Position Paper RH Bill 5043

the de la salle professors:

Prof. Ma. Arcadio G. Malbarosa, Political Science
Dr. Antonio P. Contreras, Political Science
Prof. Louie Montemar, Political Science
Prof. Anna Malindog, Political Science
Dr. Grace Roldan, Political Science
Dr. Antoinette Raquiza, Political Science
Prof. Gina Lomotan, Political Science
Dr. Francisco Magno, Political Science
Mr. Levita A. Duhaylungsod, Political Science
Mr. Robin Garcia, Political Science
Prof. Mark Evidente, Political Science
Prof. Allen B. Surla, Political Science
Prof. Antonio Pedro Jr., Political Science
Prof. Michael Angelo B. Promentilla, Chemical Engineering
Prof. Ma. Carla Pacis, Literature
Mr. Anthony Lawrence A. Borja, Political Science
Dr. Luis F. Razon, Chemical Engineering
Mr. Anton Simon M. Palo, Psychology
Dr. Robert E. Javier Jr., Psychology

The following members have signed the Statement by e-mailing us their scanned signatures:
Dr. Allan Benedict I. Bernardo, Counselling and Educational Psychology
Prof. Ronnie Holmes, Political Science
Atty. Avelino M. Sebastian Jr., College of Law

The following members have expressed support through e-mail, and have indicated they will sign:
Dr. Arturo Pacificador Jr., Mathematics
Dr. Rochelle Lucas, English and Applied Linguistics
Dr. Danilo Dayag, English and Applied Linguistics
Dr. Jeane Peracullo, Philosophy

The following has expressed support and e-mailed an authorization to consider him a signatory to the Statement:
Atty. Arno Sanidad, College of Law

Via RH Bill Portal:
Atty. Emily Sanchez Salcedo, Commercial Law Department

(the following as shared by Louie Checa Montemar)
Redento B. Recio, Polsci/LSIG
Arnel B. Galgo, COSCA
Rey Pomarca, COSCA
J. Bartolome, COSCA
Jon Alcazar, COSCA
Ma Ella Oplas, Polsc

the ateneo professors:

1. Marita Concepcion Castro Guevara, PhD, Department of Interdisciplinary Studies
2. Marlon J. Manuel, JD, Ateneo Law School
3. Amparita S. Sta. Maria, LL.B., LL.M, Ateneo Human Rights Center, Ateneo Law School
4. Joy G. Aceron, MPA, Ateneo School of Government, and Department of Political Science

ateneo’s 1BIG5 versus the world at UAAP 75

adamson soaring falcons

ateneo blue eagles

feu tamaraws

la salle green archers

national university bulldogs

ue red warriors

up fighting maroons

ust growling tigers

round 1  is done at the UAAP 75 seniors basketball tournament and we know the top four – 1.  ateneo blue eagles,  2. FEU tamaraws, 3. UST growling tigers and 4. NU bulldogs in that order.

the top four is important as the teams that land in those go to the semi finals after round 2. among the top four, the top two are even more important as these two teams enjoy the twice to beat advantage where their opponents, those in the 3rd and 4th place will need to beat them twice to advance to the finals.

the big story here is on the defending champion, the ateneo blue eagles who has won the uaap seniors basketball tournament four consecutive years in the last four years. this year, should ateneo win again will be it’s 5th consecutive year which will make history in the 75 year old competition.

winning consecutive years in a collegiate team sports competition is very, very difficult as the nature of the competition is that all the teams lose their players every four years as they graduate from college. to win consecutively will mean the team needs to keep training new recruits throughout the years and sustain a system. the reality is each team will need to look for new stars as the current stars graduate.

the question now is can the ateneo blue eagles make it to 1BIG5?

ateneo is in the top spot after round 1 as it has maintained it’s key star players in greg slaughter a leading center in the league, keifer ravena the “phenom” guard and the reliable nico salva a forward. the other important advantage of the ateneo team is they have a long list of second stringers. if the first stringers under perform, they can field in their 2nd stringers who can very well compensate for the weakness.

the UST growling tigers was touted by ateneo coach norman black the team to beat in this tournament but it has faltered somewhat as it is now at 3rd position, tied with FEU. NU bulldogs was also expected to be at the top 2 but other teams have found a way to counter its stars in the team.

looking at the standings, the conclusion is that the stronger team is the one that does not rely on only one star player. FEU, UST and NU are teams that rely too much on only 1 star player while ateneo has more than one that make a difference in games.

will it be history or bust for the ateneo blue eagles? tell us what you think and vote:

ateneo professors, the rh bill and independent thinking

there is a long line of controversy that has involved ateneo professors, ateneo de manila, the CBCP and fr. villarin all to hinged on the controversial rh bill (reproductive health bill).

read them all here (click to read):

• ateneo president fr villarin ignores bishop, upholds independent thinking and appreciates ateneo professors efforts on rh bill
• 33 more ateneo professors support rh bill, now 192 professors
• bishop wants pro rh bill Ateneo professors fired – hahahaha
• 160 Ateneo De Manila University Professors declare support for the RH Bill
• Catholics Can Support The RH Bill In Good Conscience – Ateneo Professors’ Position Paper RH Bill 5043

Church of the Gesu at the Ateneo De Manila University

new Ateneo Traffic Group (ATG) set up to fix traffic problems in Ateneo & Katipunan

we are posting here this comment by a reader on the above: (click to read here:   http://wawam.wordpress.com/the-traffic-plan-ags-ignored/#comment-6031)

from dino:

Hi! I’m not sure if the blog writers here are aware, but in any case, this might be of interest:

A new Ateneo Traffic Group (ATG) was formed by the new president of Ateneo (Fr. Jett Villarin) to study traffic concerns in Ateneo. I think this might be the right time to revive this traffic scheme which the AGS apparently ignored a few years ago following the accident involving Amiel Alcantara. I suggest that this traffic scheme be sent to the ATG directly at atg@admu.edu.ph along with an enlarged diagram (the one in this page looks a bit too small).

I do observe, though, that traffic in Ateneo and Katipunan seems to be at its worst during rush hours at the Ateneo Grade School. It appears that they want to reduce car volume on campus as much as they can. This is probably the reason why they are encouraging people to bike more (hence the bike lanes proposal) or depend on public transportation. There are also proposals for carpooling/shuttle/drop and ride schemes, more covered walkways, and tighter traffic rules.

Due to the occasional petty crimes these days along the streets and in public transportations, I doubt though that depending on public transportation is a good idea if we want kids, especially the AGS students, to be safe. But if this is the case, I don’t think we can expect car volume on campus to go down significantly especially during rush hours in Ateneo. However, there surely has to be many other better ways of dealing with the traffic problem.

Judging from the news articles at the Ateneo website, it appears that Fr. Jett’s priority in this activity is to study how to make Ateneo as environment-friendly as possible. I hope, though, that they don’t forget about the safety of the children in designing new traffic schemes and policies.

Here are more related details (along with other proposals in the article re: community meeting) about the Ateneo Traffic Group formed earlier this year:
email: atg@admu.edu.ph
http://www.ateneo.edu/index.php?p=120&type=2&aid=10638
http://www.ateneo.edu/index.php?p=120&type=2&aid=10683
http://www.ateneo.edu/index.php?p=120&type=2&aid=10795
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/viewform?formkey=dDBjOGF1QVNXNzBNN1A4OFkwOWhxWlE6MQ#gid=0

this blog had been very involved on the  safety and traffic situation at the Ateneo since some  years ago as we responded to the accidental  death of then a grade 5 boy at the ateneo grade school, amiel alcanatara on february 24, 2009.

amiel died in a traffic accident at the ateneo grade school parking lot as he was navigating the parking lot . amiel came from the school canteen  where he bought some food and was on his way back to the family car when a grade school mom in her van lost control of the  van she was driving and rammed amiel to his death at the back of the alcantara family car.

almost right after amiel’s accidental death at the parking lot, a group of AGS (ateneo grade school) parents who did not know each other simultaneously got together to analyze the safety and traffic situation at the ateneo  and proposed changes and improvements to the safety and traffic situation at the AGS. many of the parents in the group were engineers and architects who are knowledgeable and in fact had experience in designing traffic flow management.

ateneo had set up a committee composed of different stakeholders in the school to recommend to the school actions and changes in the safety and traffic situation at AGS. this gorup of parents were eventually invited to join the committee.

the output of this group of parents was a long list of short, medium to long term  recommendations on what the school might want to do to improve safety and traffic at AGS and in some parts the rest of the school.

these recommendations were in some form or another submitted  to the school just months after amiel’s death in february 2009.  unfortunately, the committee who was headed then by Mr. John Paul Vergara, a university school official had ignored the group’s recommendations which included a preliminary traffic management plan that included changes in the physical layout of the AGS parking lot and a new traffic flow proposal.

we are not sure if the AGS or ateneo even looked at the proposal but we did observe that the school implemented a traffic plan that did not include the recommendation of the group.

three years after the accidental death of amiel alcantara at the AGS parking lot due to a traffic accident, ateneo has announced the formation of the  Ateneo Traffic Group under the leadership of the new Ateneo University president, Fr. Jett Villarin as posted here in this blog by dino wo we assume is an ateneo parent.

dino has suggested that we send the output of the work of group of parents to the ateneo. this blog has assinged that task to one of its writers and will update developments here.

UAAP 74 basketball finals game 2 – ateneo vs feu and the silver bullet for the win

the epic finals game in the UAAP 74 basketball competition is set tomorrow at the Smart Araneta Coliseum at 3 pm.

it is epic for feu as this is a come from behind championship campaign for them, from a third place finish during the qualifying rounds, and overcoming the twice to beet challenge in the semi finals, needing to beat adamson twice before getting into the finals. feu already lost game 1 and in humiliating fashion with a high double digit loss to ateneo, the game was mostly dominated by ateneo. losing the game tomorrow means the championship goes to ateneo.

it is also epic for ateneo. not only are they the defending champion, they are 3peat champions and winning tomorrow will mean a historic back to back championship 4 times over. ateneo will only be the 3rd team to accomplish this feat.

what is ateneo supposed to do to win tomorrow?

• not much, they just need to play the kind of game they have been playing in all their games during the season – killer defense, a fast game, score on the errors and rebounds and play as a team.
• ateneo has been one of the most consistent teams during this season, always delivering the same way in every game.
• ateneo has at least 10 good players  - the starting 5 are all killers and the next 5 are equally competent.
• slaughter, ravena and salva are the top 3 players. if any two of them do well tomorrow, they have the championship. although of the three, salva is the most consistent, scoring double digits in almost all the games.
• any of the three having a gang bang game and that is it for FEU. all three players have done that before and to devastating effect on their opponent.
• monfort and long are also always there to boost the team. monfort has sparked scoring sprees while long has been the best defensive player of ateneo.
• and then ateneo’s bench. they are very, very reliable. they can take over the first five if they are having problems and has enough skill not only to maintain the lead but to increase and bring it back to the lead.
• final word – ateneo will attempt to erect a significant lead during the first quarter of  the game. they will start the game very aggressively. if feu collapses from this first quarter onslaught, it will be all over for feu’s title quest.

feu will not go that easy, or at least that is the expectation.

• they need to play as a team. they have failed to do this in many of their games.
• their top 3 players need to play as a crew, look for each other and give each other the ball for easy points. they have not done this much. feu’s top 3 players tend to play on their own.
• feu should stop using the 3 point shot as their winning formula. the chances of success are much lower on these types of shots. they need to bring the ball closer to take the 2 point shot instead. they don’t have much of a down to the ring game, but close jump shots are much better than 3 pointers.
• rr garcia need to find his groove back. he has been inconsistent in many of the game.
• above all, feu need to be tough and full of confidence. i think this factor will be the biggest challenged for feu. they lost big during the first game versus ateneo, it will not be easy to shake that off from their minds. it will be the mental conditioning that will make them win the game.

the truth & reality of James Soriano’s article – comment from a mom

from a reader, Gravy, comment #327

I am a mother of a teenage son and a toddler daughter. James Soriano’s piece strikes a chord as I am faced with a dilemma on what language to teach my toddler. While I was raising my first-born, it didn’t occur to me at all about what language to use The whole family spoke in Filipino. My husband is a Filipino teacher, we chose to stay here in the Philippines despite opportunities to immigrate, we imbued love of country to our son.

In high school my son reaped academic awards, always placed in the top 15 of the batch, and was a leader to his peers. He joined a lot of activities and is comfortable in public speaking, even joining a debate club, albeit his difficulty in using the English language. However, his struggle with the English language caught up with him and affected his confidence in using the language. I surmise this was what caused him to drop from the debating team and another activity involving public speaking. We have successfully raised a well-rounded, competitive high achiever. He has the confidence, and this should have taken him far, but the reality is, his inability to speak English fluently crippled him, and I find it unfair.

But that’s reality, not only in school, but more so in the real world of his chosen profession (business) where he wants to dabble now that he is in college.

Because of this concern, I asked my sister-in-law who is a preschool teacher in an exclusive school how the kids in exclusive schools are able to speak fluent English, and she shared with me that the families use English exclusively in their homes, and this came to me as somewhat of a shock. I myself am not comfortable speaking in English, but I find it a “forced responsibility, slash, obligation” that I teach my toddler English as her primary language if I do not want her to feel limited in enjoying her interests and reaching her goals later in life, as what happened to her brother.

It’s a good thing though that there’s a trend these days to raise a bilingual or even a trilingual child, as advocated by child psychologists, as this supposedly helps babies’ brains to have the capacity to learn more. I won’t go into the theory of that, but the implication of that in my household is for English, as well as Filipino, to be taught to the baby. If there was no bilingual movement, I doubt that I’d be teaching Filipino. I’m sorry, but I’m just being honest. The family members speak to the baby in English and the househelp are delegated to speak to my baby in Filipino. It’s not because “FIlipino is the language of the unlearned,” but perhaps because it is a matter of convenience that between the family members and the househelp, the family members are more equipped to communicate in English. But we all speak to each other in Filipino.

True enough, my daughter is quickly picking up and understands both languages, but as expected, she’s speaking more in English. When we ask her to say “ball” and she says “bula,” I am proud that she knows both languages. But then deep inside, knowing our own limitations in speaking English, I know we can only go so far and we will eventually default back to using Filipino. And it’s hard to cast away the apprehension that we will inadvertently be “depriving” my daughter of her ability to reach her full potential without a full grasp of the English language. If one can be honest to himself, just by looking around, it’s not enough to know how to speak in English, you have to speak it fluently and naturally. You have to think in English. And you have to start young and have the language ingrained in your brains, and it’s the mothers that do this, and I can’t blame them.

I thank James Soriano’s BRAVE and HONEST characterization of what the Filipino language’s role is in his life, and I must say it is an accurate reflection of not just the current, but what has always been, I believe, the state of our national language. It is a wake-up call to all of us. But with mothers like me who would teach English as a primary language only because they want the best for their children, in this very competitive world and with not much support from the government to change the system to benefit Filipino speakers as compared with English speakers, this “illness” will continue to persist, as the mothers will just pass it on to the next generations, if they do not wish their children to be put to a disadvantage.

I had the opportunity to immigrate, but I chose not to. I love my country, and I have imbued that love of country to my son. My husband is a Filipino teacher, and is fully equipped to teach my baby very good Filipino. I just find it ironic that we, Filipinos who chose to stay behind, would find ourselves at a disadvantage to use our beloved Filipino language in our beloved country, the Philippines. James Soriano has a message, as painful as it may seem, and I hope critics would surpass the initial shock of the truth and actually get their minds together for a more useful and meaningful purpose, and that is to constructively help address and solve the problem.

the James Soriano article – when truth hurts, pinoy netizens ache

the pinoy twitter world is once again abuzz, this time with a fellow named james soriano who posted an article in manila bulletin about the language, actually languages pinoys use – english and filipino.

we do not understand at all the flak soriano is getting in the pinoy social media world  - the soriano article is reality. what you read there and how pinoys use languages, english and filipino in particular are all true.

the article talks  about soriano’s journey with filipino and how he started young and what new things he has discovered when he went to college. his experience is also true for most pinoys who go through schooling in private schools in the country. nothing wrong with that at all.

we also find it interesting, in fact ironic that almost all of those who were attacking and disagreeing with soriano were  tweeting in english and not in filipino.  which is exactly one of the points of the soriano article – that many pinoys being bi-lingual use the language they find most appropriate depending on the situation and the audience or receiver of the communication.

we think the adverse reactions soriano has been getting is being caused by the fact that truth hurts. readers just can’t accept the fact that even in language, there is a divide in philippine society.

we know of the divide in wealth, opportunities, jobs, justice and education in philippine society where the rich are able to get the best and the mostest (intended) while the poor make do with meager offerings. the truth hurts to know that that also exists in language.

with inequitable distribution of wealth comes inequitable opportunities in education that results to inequitable distribution of language skills and ends up in inequitable distribution of job opportunities which goes back to inequitable distribution of wealth.

the divide, a wide one between the poor and the rich is one of the most enduring problems in philippine society. it is not only an issue of poverty, it is an issue of inequitable distribution of wealth where a very small portion of the population control a very large portion of the wealth of the country while a very large population are poor dividing among themselves a very meager portion of the wealth of the country.

marketing puts it at 85% of the population belonging to the poor, the DE socio eco class while only 15% at most belong to the ABC socio-eco class.

if there is a wide divide in socio-economic wealth, why shouldn’t there be a wide divide in the use of language? although they might not know it yet but that is what most of the critics of soriano cannot seem to accept.

nowhere in the article did soriano disparage or insult the poor nor did he express his elitist sentiments, all that he has done was state facts on the use of language. it is a fact that when we are in the streets and when we talk to ordinary folks, we use filipino while when we are at work, in school oir even at home, we use english. more glaringly when we are in school, we almost always use english.

how can we not use english in school, specially college when the medium of instruction in private colleges and even in public colleges is in english? books are in english, even road signs are in english. where in that did soriano fail?

every pinoy know that english skills is very important in finding a job. in the country. call center jobs, the sunshine industry in the country has been hiring the most number  of new graduates and young people and english skills as most key for these jobs. jobs outside the country,  for OFWs, also put a premium on good english skills. sometimes in some of these jobs, the course you take is less important but english skills is a number one skill local and foreign employers look for.

ask anyone in business and those in the universities and they will tell you the country’s educational system need to improve it’s teaching of english to pinoy students. the country’s declining proficiency in english is one of the reasons why pinoy graduates are getting less competitive.

on the other hand, the BPO industry will tell you that we have gained significant market share in the global market, we are now 2nd or 3rd in the world because of the pinoy labor force’s proficiency in english compared to other countries. but the same BPO industry will tell you that it has been increasingly difficult to hire pinoys for call center jobs because of the declining english proficiency of pinoy graduates.

i think by and large the critics and attackers of soriano have misunderstood the article. they probably need to read the article again and understand what is there, not what is “between the lines”. but i doubt if there is anything written between the lines.

the upside is that the high number of attackers and those disagreeing with soriano’s article are in effect professing their sympathy with the poor, the uneducated. they seem to be going against soriano as they want to defend the poor. the only question is – why is it that these same defenders of the not learned posting mostly in english and not in filipino? the fact that most of the post in english proves exactly the point soriano is raising in his article.

Language, learning, identity, privilege

Ithink

By JAMES SORIANO
August 24, 2011, 4:06am

MANILA, Philippines — English is the language of learning. I’ve known this since before I could go to school. As a toddler, my first study materials were a set of flash cards that my mother used to teach me the English alphabet.

is this james soriano when he was in high school?

My mother made home conducive to learning English: all my storybooks and coloring books were in English, and so were the cartoons I watched and the music I listened to. She required me to speak English at home. She even hired tutors to help me learn to read and write in English.

In school I learned to think in English. We used English to learn about numbers, equations and variables. With it we learned about observation and inference, the moon and the stars, monsoons and photosynthesis. With it we learned about shapes and colors, about meter and rhythm. I learned about God in English, and I prayed to Him in English.

Filipino, on the other hand, was always the ‘other’ subject — almost a special subject like PE or Home Economics, except that it was graded the same way as Science, Math, Religion, and English. My classmates and I used to complain about Filipino all the time. Filipino was a chore, like washing the dishes; it was not the language of learning. It was the language we used to speak to the people who washed our dishes.

We used to think learning Filipino was important because it was practical: Filipino was the language of the world outside the classroom. It was the language of the streets: it was how you spoke to the tindera when you went to the tindahan, what you used to tell your katulong that you had an utos, and how you texted manong when you needed “sundo na.”

These skills were required to survive in the outside world, because we are forced to relate with the tinderas and the manongs and the katulongs of this world. If we wanted to communicate to these people — or otherwise avoid being mugged on the jeepney — we needed to learn Filipino.

That being said though, I was proud of my proficiency with the language. Filipino was the language I used to speak with my cousins and uncles and grandparents in the province, so I never had much trouble reciting.

It was the reading and writing that was tedious and difficult. I spoke Filipino, but only when I was in a different world like the streets or the province; it did not come naturally to me. English was more natural; I read, wrote and thought in English. And so, in much of the same way that I learned German later on, I learned Filipino in terms of English. In this way I survived Filipino in high school, albeit with too many sentences that had the preposition ‘ay.’

It was really only in university that I began to grasp Filipino in terms of language and not just dialect. Filipino was not merely a peculiar variety of language, derived and continuously borrowing from the English and Spanish alphabets; it was its own system, with its own grammar, semantics, sounds, even symbols.

But more significantly, it was its own way of reading, writing, and thinking. There are ideas and concepts unique to Filipino that can never be translated into another. Try translating bayanihan, tagay, kilig or diskarte.

Only recently have I begun to grasp Filipino as the language of identity: the language of emotion, experience, and even of learning. And with this comes the realization that I do, in fact, smell worse than a malansang isda. My own language is foreign to me: I speak, think, read and write primarily in English. To borrow the terminology of Fr. Bulatao, I am a split-level Filipino.

But perhaps this is not so bad in a society of rotten beef and stinking fish. For while Filipino may be the language of identity, it is the language of the streets. It might have the capacity to be the language of learning, but it is not the language of the learned.

It is neither the language of the classroom and the laboratory, nor the language of the boardroom, the court room, or the operating room. It is not the language of privilege. I may be disconnected from my being Filipino, but with a tongue of privilege I will always have my connections.

So I have my education to thank for making English my mother language.

james soriano is supposed to be a senior at ateneo de manila university and writes a column at manila bulletin. we googled “james soriano ateneo” and this is what came up :

AHS senior James Soriano is best Filipino high school debater

date posted: 2007-08-23 13:43:17

The organizers of the 2007 World Schools Debating Championships (WSDC) recently released the official individual rankings of the Top 50 Individual Speakers in a field of 156 world-class debaters representing 35 countries.

James Soriano, a member of Ateneo de Manila High School Class 4A and the chairman of the Sanggu-HS Executive Board, was ranked 31st Over-All Best Speaker with a speaker’s tab of 72.78.  This is the highest rank thus far obtained by a Filipino high school debater in the 19-year history of the annual tournament. The last time a Filipino debater entered the exclusive Top 50 bracket was in the 2003 WSDC held in Lima, Peru when debater Eric John Paredes of Paref Southridge ranked no. 42 with a total score of 72.08333.

http://www.admu.edu.ph/index.php?p=120&type=2&sec=27&aid=4036

Michelle Ann Juan, ex-Ateneo professor – justice del castillo’s “legal researcher”in SC plagiarism

newsbreak has identified the “legal researcher” who was responsible for according to the SC inadvertently deleted the citations in the supreme court decision written by associate justice mariano del castillo that contained plagiarized portions from other sources – michelle ann juan, an ex-ateneo professor.

(click here to read: http://www.newsbreak.ph/2010/10/27/ex-ateneo-prof-behind-plagiarized-sc-rulings/)

source: http://www.newsbreak.ph

being an ex-professor and at ateneo at that, one od the country’s top schools makes us wonder how juan made the mistake od inadvertently deleting the citations in the SC decision. what makes the error even more amazing is that the deletion occurred 50 times in the document.  we can perhaps accept 1 deletion, but 50 times? getting the deletion done 50 times to us seem clear and conscious intent, not an honest mistake nor an accident.

as an ex-professor of one the best law schools in the country, juan should know that plagiarism is not acceptable. did juan tolerate plagiarism or “unintentional deletion” of citations in the papers her students submitted to her when she was a professor?

we assume that one of the things the ateneo law school teaches its students how to properly write legal documents and that should include making sure citations are included when a document uses work done by someone else. certainly grade school students at the ateneo de manila university are taught that as early as grade 3, if grade schoolers at ateneo know that, why wouldn’t a professor at the ateneo lw school know that.

based on the newsbreak article, juan has a very impressive resume. aside from graduating at one of the top in her class, she also placed 4th at the bar exams, has a master’s degree from New York University and was the editor in chief of the Ateneo Law Journal. we find it hard to believe that someone like juan with such credentials can make simple mistakes as deleting citations and unintentionally commit plagiarism. being an editor-in-chief of her school’s paper alone should prevent her from committing such mistakes and certainly not 50 times.

something is not right in the story the SC wants us to believe on this plagiarism case at the SC.

as posted at the Ateneo Law School website:http://law.ateneo.edu/index.php?p=323

Juan, Michelle Ann U., A.B., J.D.

Michelle Juan is a Professorial Lecturer in the Ateneo de Manila School of Law, teaching Legal Research, Legal Logic, Property, and Private International Law. She earned her B.A. [Philosophy] from the Ateneo in 1997, and her J.D. in 2002. She has also lectured at the Pamantasan ng Lungsod ng Maynila (University of the City of Manila) and the FEU-DLSU JD-MBA Program.

Michelle graduated 3^rd in her batch, received a special commendation for her J.D. thesis [on the use of force in international law], and was the recipient of the St. Thomas More Award. Beyond these academic achievements, she was also Editor-in-Chief of the Ateneo Law Journal, and member/oralist of the Ateneo team to the Philip C. Jessup International Moot Court Competition.

Michelle went on to place 4^th in the 2002 National Bar Examinations, and then worked as an Associate with Romulo Mabanta Buenaventura Sayoc & De Los Angeles, one of the leading law firms in the Philippines, specializing in domestic and international arbitration,

2010 UAAP Ateneo-FEU basketball championship – competent coaching made the difference

like everyone else, we were shocked at the outcome of the first game of the 2010 UAAP basketball championship between Ateneo and FEU over the weekend. we were more shocked than the FEU players themselves. we thought it would be tough and close, it was easy and wide.

we have to agree with the FEU sports official who described their teams loss like an animal  facing the headlights of  a car on a highway at night. – the FEU players froze, with eyes wide and stood there and waited for  the car to run them over.

we think it is the coaching that made the difference in that game and leading to the finals. norman black , the ateneo coach, is once again making the difference for ateneo.  the ateneo squad in the past few years and most specially this year usually starts cold and gets hotter as the season nears the end.

the ateneo team specially this one kept on improving game after game. the ateneo team had the same players now as the start of the season, the difference lie in the adjustments coach norman black makes game to game. it is these adjustments in play and strategy that allowed the ateneo team to win over FEU which had previously beat ateneo twice during regular play.

listen to the ateneo players after their games – all of them talk about practicing hard before the game. that tells us they do change their plans when they go into a new game and they practice it well.

ateneo’s team this season do not have the stars it used to have in the last two years.  they seem to be all even across the players. look at the games they have played and you will see that different players star in different games. that tells you this team operates on specific strategy of play rather than being central to one or  two players.  different players come out as the star of the game as the plays work and evolve during the game.

FEU on the other hand must have set their plays on their two stars – romeo and garcia as they have done in most previous games.  unfortunately, their coach did not adjust their plays and strategies when it did not work. either the coach failed to adjust the play or if the coach did, the players did not respond to the instructi0ns.

what is going to happen on game 2? ateneo for sure will adapt most of the game plan they had in game 1 and probably come up with a few new plays to anticipate adjustments that FEU will make on thursday.

we think its important for ateneo to employ the same strategy of piling up the points on fastbreaks very early on. it is important not just on the point building standpoint but more importantly on the psychology side.

FEU players seem to be psychologically vulnerable. they fold when ravaged in the mind and that is what ateneo’s play will be on game 2.

manny pangilinan once again does the right thing – quits ateneo for good

part of PDI’s news article:

“Circumstances have continued to the point where [this issue] is creating division within the university,” the Ateneo statement quoted Pangilinan as saying in a letter to the school’s president, Fr. Bienvenido Nebres, S.J.

“I have no desire to see this happen, or be an accessory to it,” he went on. “In that light and all things considered, it is best that I stand firm in my decision to retire, and reiterate this wish in my earlier note to you on 3rd April 2010.”

read in full: http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/inquirerheadlines/nation/view/20100417-264734/Manny-Pangilinan-quits-Ateneo-board-for-good

manny pangilinan’s speechgate has taken another bizarre turn – he now says his resignation from the ateneo is irrevocable.

pangilinan delivered a plagiarized speech in the 2010 commencement exercise at the ateneo. this was exposed on the internet where a side by side comparison was made identifying important parts of his speech  plagiarized from graduation speeches delivered by barack obama, oprah winfrey, j. k. rawling and conan o’brien in the US. in some parts, the speech copied them word for word.

as a reaction the  exposed plagiarism, pangilinan apologized for his error and resigned his post at the ateneo.

fr. ben nebres, ateneo president responded to pangilinan saying he should not yet resign and would like to talk it over with him and  the ateneo’s board of trustees. after a few days, the board of trustees of the ateneo released a statement saying they are rejecting pangilinan’s resignation.

now, pangilinan is once again doing the right thing – by rejecting ateneo’s rejection of his resignation.

this  shows pangilinan to be a man of honor where he relentlessly upholds principles, keeps on doing the right thing even though the ateneo keeps on giving him an open door to excuses.

the ateneo, on the other hand has lost it’s principles and integrity in first honoring plagiarism at the university, gives the sinner an excuse for his sin and even rejects his resignation. pangilinan’s irrevocable resignation puts ateneo once again in a bad light and much worst than how this whole thing began.

the last episode proves once again ateneo has no principles and has lost it’s integirty. one wonders, has ateneo lost the way?

what is “the ateneo way” now?

ateneo professors disagree with official ateneo action on manny pangilinan speechgate

we are publishing here verbatim what we got through email.

THIS is the Ateneo Way!  we will give our response to this next.

——————

Response to the Statement of the
Ateneo de Manila University’s Board of Trustees
Regarding the Issues Arising from
the Commencement Address of Manuel V. Pangilinan

We, the undersigned faculty, administrators and staff of the Loyola
Schools of the Ateneo de Manila University, strongly disagree with the
decision of our Board of Trustees to reject Mr. Manuel V. Pangilinan’s
offer to retire from his official duties most notably in his role as
Chairman of the Board.

As an academic institution, the Ateneo de Manila University should
take cases of plagiarism very seriously as these are violations of
intellectual integrity. In this instance, the act of plagiarism in the
speech delivered by Mr. Pangilinan at the graduation ceremonies of the
John Gokongwei School of Management and the School of Science and
Engineering on March 26, 2010 and the speech delivered by Mr.
Pangilinan at the graduation ceremonies of the School of Humanities
and the School of Social Sciences is beyond dispute.

While it was suggested by Mr. Pangilinan himself that he had some help
with the speeches, he also accepted ‘full and sole responsibility’ for
the plagiarism. Having taken full and sole responsibility, Mr.
Pangilinan bore the sole burden of accountability. As a University, we
should have applied the standards we usually apply to cases of
plagiarism, the same standards we use in handling acts of intellectual
dishonesty among our students, staff, professionals and faculty. We
teach the members of our community to accept responsibility for their
actions and to accept the consequences for such actions.  But in this
case, there is a claim of responsibility without accountability.

In fact, a higher standard must apply in this instance because Mr.
Pangilinan is the Chairman of our Board and as such, he is the co-head
of the University along with our President. In many respects, he
represents the University. As a symbol of his representation of the
University, the Chairman of the Board of the University has a seat on
stage at commencement exercises and academic convocations, two of the
most sacred rites of the academe. It would present an awfully awkward
situation and a tremendous distraction to have memories of a
plagiarized speech overshadowing these ceremonies because of the
presence (or absence) of Mr. Pangilinan.

Accepting Mr. Pangilinan’s offer to retire would have allowed him and
the University to move on from this unfortunate incident. Mr.
Pangilinan’s offer to retire was an honorable act. Not accepting Mr.
Pangilinan’s offer to retire dishonors that action.

Accepting Mr. Pangilinan’s offer to retire does not diminish our
regard for his person and for his contributions to society and to the
University. Not accepting his offer to retire, on the other hand,
seriously undermines the academic integrity of the Ateneo de Manila
University.

Signed:

Leland Joseph R. Dela Cruz (Development Studies Program),
Joy G. Aceron (Department of Political Science),
Fernando T. Aldaba (Department of Economics),
Clark Lim Alejandrino (Chinese Studies Program),
Rowena Anthea Azada-Palacios (Department of Philosophy),
Edsel L. Beja Jr. (Department of Economics),
Rica Bolipata Santos (Department of English),
Louis Catalan S.J. (Department of Philosophy),
Antonio F. B de Castro S.J. (Department of History),
Aleta C. Domdom (Department of Economics),
Ma. Celeste T. Gonzalez (Department of Education),
Marita Castro Guevara (Department of Interdisciplinary Studies
Development Studies Program),
Roberto O. Guevara (Department of Theology),
Estelle Marie M. Ladrido (Department of Communication),
Albert M. Lagliva (Department of Philosophy),
Joseph Anthony Y. Lim (Department of Economics),
Ma. Emma Concepcion D. Liwag (Department of Psychology),
Gabriel Maria J. Lopez (Department of Leadership and Strategy),
Ada Javellana Loredo (Department of English),
Pamela Joy M. Mariano (Department of Philosophy),
Isabel Pefianco Martin (Department of English),
Lara Katrina Tajonera Mendoza (Department of English),
Ruben C. Mendoza (Department of Theology),
Jovino G. Miroy (Department of Philosophy and Fine Arts Program),
Luisa O. Moldera (School of Social Sciences),
Ambeth R. Ocampo (Department of History),
Glenda C. Oris (Kagawaran ng Filipino),
Emma E. Porio (Department of Sociology-Anthropology),
Mary Racelis (Department of Sociology-Anthropology),
Danton R. Remoto (Department of English),
Fructuoso T. Sabug  Jr. (Department of Leadership and Strategy),
Sairry R. Sandoval (Department of Economics),
Elizabeth S. Tan (Chinese Studies Program),
Maria L. Tendero (School of Social Sciences),
Philip Arnold P. Tuano (Department of Economics),
Fernando N. Zialcita (Department of Sociology-Anthropology),

Signatories as of 6.04 p.m., Wednesday, 14 April 2010.

ateneo response to manny pangilinan’s plagiarism re-defines ateneo

we are posting here reader reactions on  manny pangilinan’s speechgate.  this is the official response of the ateneo: ateneo honors plagiarism, rejects manny pangilinan’s honorable act of resignation

Rey Angeles :

MVP gives a speech with plagiarism.

MVP is caught. MVP weighs his options. MVP is greatly embarrassed. MVP apologizes.

MVP resigns from the board.

MVP says he will continue his support of Ateneo sports. MVP will not reveal if he knew the speech contained plagiarism before he gave the speech.

What else do we want MVP to do? What else can MVP truly do aside from killing himself?

BUT what the Ateneo’s Board decides to do is another thing. MVP is not Ateneo and the Board is not MVP.

Ateneo has a tradition and name to protect. These tradition and name are rooted in 150 years. They may go another 150 years from now.

Ateneo has spawned heroes. Ateneo has grown leaders of corruption as well. Ateneo has influenced the Philippines for good and for evil. Which tilts the balance? That is good for Ateneo to know.

How will Ateneo define itself now? Its action on the MVP apology and resignation will define itself.

Ateneo is now put to a test.

Is its slogan, Man For Others, just a silly slogan or can it really stand the winds of the times?

Careful, Ateneo Board, you are weighed not just for yourself but for what Ateneo stands for.

As for me, it is good to put to the test what we stand for and to discover who we really are. Only then, we can make changes for the better.

REY ANGELES
AB Economics 1970
Ateneo de Manila

PV Ferrer :

A sad, sad day has come to the Ateneo where the decision and actions by its board of trustees in this case of plagiarism has spoken louder than the words they have crafted on their justifications.

To their young students in the Ateneo, it simply says that the high standards they once held for integrity and truth no longer exists. Plagiarism and other forms of violations of integrity and intellectual property are now permissible acts in the Ateneo blessed from the very top guardians of its moral standards.

It is really sad to see what the Ateneo has now become and for what is now stands for. This was a very poor example to its grade school and high school students from whom they pretend to demand excellence and integrity.

ateneo honors plagiarism, rejects manny pangilinan’s honorable act of resignation

Response of the Board of Trustees on the issues arising from the Commencement Address of MVP

date posted: 2010-04-12 14:59:56

SPECIAL BOARD OF TRUSTEES MEETING
11 April 2010

The Board of Trustees met on April 11, 2010 to deliberate on the issues arising from the commencement addresses of its Chairman, Mr. Manuel V. Pangilinan, on March 26 & 27, 2010. The Board reviewed the history of the case, from the writing of the speeches to the posting of the blogs, from the response of Mr. Pangilinan to the reply of Fr. Nebres issued on April 3, 2010. It kept in mind as well the concerned statements from faculty, students, staff, administrators and the public at large.

The Board came to the following conclusions:

1. The Board considers the matter of plagiarism very serious, particularly for an academic institution. It recognizes that Mr. Pangilinan considered this a very serious matter that has caused him deep embarrassment and pain. With him, the Ateneo community has struggled with the issue and engaged in a deep reflection on its own values of honesty and integrity.

2. In its discussion, the Board kept in mind the Catholic moral tradition which for culpability considers not just the seriousness of the matter but also whether there is full awareness and consent. It recognizes that the matter is serious, but that the plagiarism happened without full awareness on the part of Mr. Pangilinan.

3. At the same time, the Board acknowledges with deep respect Mr. Pangilinan’s immediate and full acceptance of responsibility and apology for this mistake. This is particularly admirable, because in acting in this manner, he spared others from this responsibility. This is a rare example of humility, selflessness, and leadership in our midst.

4. The Board accepts Mr. Pangilinan’s apology as the appropriate response to this unfortunate incident.

5. However, the unanimous decision of the Board is not to accept Mr. Pangilinan’s resignation. It expresses full confidence in his leadership as Chairman.

6. On the matter of the honorary degree conferred on Mr. Pangilinan, the reasons for the conferment are articulated in the citation. These are his visionary leadership, his love of country and service and commitment to our people, his generous self-giving to our country, the Ateneo de Manila and many other institutions. These remain unchanged.

In conclusion, the Board of Trustees asks Mr. Pangilinan to please reconsider his resignation from the Ateneo Board of Trustees. There is so much to be done, not just for the Ateneo, but for our country and people. His leadership is needed today more than ever.

ateneo batch 2010 response to manny pangilinan’s plagiarism – calls who disagree with it as “vultures”

Batch 2010′s Official Response to Manuel V. Pangilinan

Dear Mr. Pangilinan,

Graduation is an event marked by people overflowing with triumph and euphoria, with some hint of sadness. It is a time of hanging on to the fond memories of friendship and lessons learned; letting go of the bad things which hinder one’s own and others’ growth; looking forward to the future as the graduates face a brand new chapter in their lives in entering the “real” world; and going with love because it is true that the world would die without it.

Just a day after that momentous event, the Graduation of SOH and SOSS Sesquicentennial Batch 2010, however, I and the rest of my batchmates still in the dark were greeted with the news of other people comparing parts of your commencement address with other previously given addresses by (as far as I know) J. K. Rowling, Barack Obama, Conan O’ Brien and Oprah Winfrey. People were voicing out views, comments and reactions all over the place, specifically on the social networking site Facebook. They ranged from the most negative and severe, the impartial and reflective, to the most supportive and optimistic on your behalf. The enormity with which the incident blew out of proportion, significantly because of media coverage and the internet, seemed astounding in the days that followed. This was then followed with the immediate release of your public apology and you owning up (and taking full and sole responsibility at that) to the mistake many of your detractors have maliciously chosen to point out, highlight, and emphasize. For that alone, you already have our full respect and admiration. Father Ben replied consequently, and asked that you reconsider your decision, after he accepted your apology with much care and understanding.

In view of all these and upon consultation, Batch 2010 would like you to know that like Father Ben, we understand that this incident has caused much personal embarrassment and pain on your part. And also with Father Ben, the Batch accepts your earnest apology wholeheartedly, and also utterly respects the fact that you do take full responsibility, even though the whole thing was not entirely of your doing.

Also like Father Ben, the Batch would have to disagree with your decision of retiring from your duties in the Ateneo, especially for the Ateneo community. The Batch recognizes that your response to what has become a sort of fiasco for waiting vultures was apt for a man such as you, and we can only imagine your distress throughout this whole unfortunate event – enough that you would claim that “wala na akong mukhang maihaharap.” Speaking in behalf of the alumni and undergraduates of the university, we indeed recognize that you are very much valued by the Ateneo community; so much so that it is believed we are fully equipped in moving on, learning, and going forward from this whole regrettable occurrence. And enumerating everything you have contributed to the Ateneo would be futile and overwhelming, to say the least; hence, I will refrain from doing so here.

As you must have felt that the events which unfolded were out of your hands, we too believe that your decision in the end is also beyond our grasp – it is between you, Father Ben, and the Board of Trustees. It has always been an honor that a man such as your magnanimity, innovation, dedication, and ardent spirit chose to be prominently of service to and for the Ateneo; and we sincerely hope you continue gracing us with that honor despite whatever ultimate decision you make. You, together with other Ateneo visionaries, were given the gift of having the capacity to change lives – lives which work and thrive from being inspired and motivated by you – through your life right now and beyond. Now, more than ever, we need someone who can show us how to deal with challenges, the way you have handled this situation with courage and utmost humility.

Sincerely yours,

Gregorio Ramon A. Tingson
President
Sanggunian ng mga Mag-aaral ng mga Paaralang Loyola
Pamantasang Ateneo de Manila
Academic Year 2009-2010
Ateneo de Manila University Batch 2010

date posted: 2010-04-12 15:03:36