Accountability, transparency, Gender spaces, practical platforms, accessible spaces for activism, and the most pressing issues here in the University, here is a rundown of the Presidentiables' replies to the questions thrown at them by the hosts of the Miting De Avance.
During the 20-minute Open Forum, the Presidentiables faced the questions crafted by MIDV following five key themes, namely: (1) mental health, (2) student activism and red tagging, (3) the student reagent position, (4) transition to face-to-face classes, and (5) the University Chancellor's five-year development plan.
The first question revolved around how they, as KASAMA President, can help their fellow students as they sit back in face-to-face learning set up, simultaneously facing high prices, anxiety to socialize, and mental health issues.
Hafzah Imam's response practically highlighted three points. First, she would encourage KASAMA Senators to forge a pantry project to assist those students who are struggling financially. Second, to address anxiety about socializing, Imam noted the efforts taken by social media groups like the Dakilang Pamantasan Posting, which created an online messaging chat platform to socialize. Lastly, she highlighted the presence of Guidance Counselors and that reaching out to them and the Student Peer Facilitators (SPF) is a way to address mental health concerns.
Pierre Pitogo also responded to the same question in which he highlighted his platform, specifically the KASAMA Support System, which makes KASAMA open its door to students to share their problems and grievances. Likewise, he shared how this System will financially help the students in need. Lastly, he noted how the KASAMA would partner with the Guidance Office and the Department of Psychology to forge "real-world applications," and the student's engagement would be the chief driver.
The second question underscores their way of protecting the students engaged in activism, voicing opinions and dissent, away from the horrors of red tagging.
Imam's response to the question underlines her willingness to defend the student activists; however, she noted a need to assess their keenness to fight and the essence of their principles. While she believes that activism is not terrorism, she limits herself by noting that so long as it is not involved with anarchism, "I can attest to that," she said. Imam continued to thaw her thoughts by reiterating her objective of pushing "seminars and teaching students about preventing the recruitment of NPAs by educating them about radical extremist ideology."
Pitogo is open to the engagement of activism as he noted how it is a way to exercise one's freedom of speech. He continued to point out that those who were red-tagged will undergo a thorough investigation of the matter together with the administration [unspecified] to prove their innocence and put the liability on those who have tagged them accordingly.
The third question explores their thoughts on what they will do when bombarded with heavy criticism as they are not only the KASAMA President of the University but also represent the MSU System studentry as a Student Regent.
"First, I have to address the root cause of their concern because we really need to know the problem so that we need to address them properly and then provide them with the right solutions," said Hafzah answering the third question. She added that there is the need to be composed, "criticisms are there probably to make sure that you can improve the services you can provide to the students." She ended by reiterating her belief that there is no perfect administration, "all we can do is give our best."
Pierre gave a few words by submitting, "first, we prioritize to engage with the students and utilize the wasted time." He ended his response by countering it with a question, asking how he could fulfill the student regency role if he could not develop the Institute first.
The fourth question dives into the five-year development plan for the University anchored on six pillars: education, research and innovation, student support, public service, governance, and infrastructure. The Presidentiables were asked among the six pillars which one they pursue, where their platforms lie, and why they think this is the most important.
Hafzah pondered for a while before responding, "probably I will go with the governance." Her rationale for this decision is based on the recent student loss of confidence in KASAMA and the need to reclaim and rebuild this trust and confidence. She pointed out that this should be done in increments, the first of which is the finalization of officers before proceeding to strategic planning. Additionally, she highlighted the need to know more about the task.
Pierre responded by saying that he is focusing on education. He noted how this is where the Public will see the development of the students, not only intellectually but also mentally.
The last question provided the audience with a glimpse of the decision-making capacity of the Presidentiables. As Student Regent, they have the power to lobby programs that benefit the whole MSU System; the question is they are given two choices but can only lobby one program—(a) institutionalized mental health programs or (b) higher quality and accessibility of education, research, and innovation. Unsurprisingly, the two Presidentiables have chosen varying stances.
Hafizah explicitly noted how she would lobby for institutionalizing mental health programs. She said, "the students must be prioritized, because if students are not mentally ready, how can we expect them to excel?" In a follow-up question about whether it is an acceptable trade-off to prioritize the mental health program rather than the latter, she still insisted on lobbying for the institutionalized mental health program. She worries that not caring for their mental health might increase depression and anxiety rates.
Conversely, Pierre would lobby for the higher quality and accessibility of education, research, and innovation. He pointed out how this program would be instrumental in boosting the University's excellence simultaneously for the students to excel in their chosen fields. In a follow-up question about whether it is an acceptable trade-off to prioritize higher quality and accessibility of education, research and innovation programs rather than the former, he reiterated how it would be beneficial, especially for the University.
The following segment opened it to the Public to scrutinize the KASAMA hopefuls. The forum concluded with event moderators Jayvee Bondoc and Allen Dave Capa reminding students to cast their votes as the flock of contentions remained to be heard due to time constraints.
About the Author
Reggy Bartido
Reggy H. Bartido is a Senior BA Sociology undergraduate student of the Mindanao State University - Iligan Institute of Technology (MSU-IIT). At the present, Reggy holds the post of Editor-in-Chief of CASSayuran - the official publication of the College of Arts and Social Sciences (CASS) of MSU-IIT. That said, Mr. Bartido’s undergraduate thesis (on-going) primarily revolves around Environmental Sociology studies and Sustainable Development, areas that are part of his research interest that also includes Youth Studies and Political Sociology.
Post a Comment
Any comments and feedbacks? Share us your thoughts!