Not Another Kristel: UP’s Struggle for the Right to Education
On tuition and the two loudest campaigns regarding it
By Kimberly C. Villegas
"From the Office of Vice Chancellor. Final decision: File LOA.”
It only took a small piece of paper for a college student as young as Kristel Tejada to end her life. It was March 15, 2013, a Friday. She was 16 years old then, and was on her second semester of her freshman year in the University of the Philippines Manila.
Blessilda came up to Chancellor Manuel Agulto and pleaded, "almost at the verge of kneeling in front of him”. Christopher recalled how quick they were to write a letter of repentance addressed to Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs Josephine de Luna, as instructed by Agulto. They had to do everything it takes just to keep their eldest child in school, as schooling for Kristel "was her life and hope."
All of these was due to a nearing deadline for the payment of tuition for the second semester, which for the Tejada family was a deadline "impossible" to meet.
Christopher, Kristel's 40 year-old father, managed to land a job as a driver just a few days before she filed the income tax return as part of the Socialized Tuition and Financial Assistance Program (STFAP) application process. Their payment for the tuition for the first semester was late, but still they were able to do so.
Kristel grew up as a responsible ate and a student. The lack of her family's financial capability did not stop her from attending school. "Even if she was hungry, she would go to school,”said Krizia.
However, Christopher's salary of Php500 a day did not suffice to pay his daughter's tuition on time. Kristel survived her first semester as a Behavioral Science student through promissory notes. And to add insult to injury, Christopher lost his job two months after he got it.
"We really struggled to get by. There was a time I was selling newspapers for a living. I would earn $0.05 per copy. Imagine what would happen to us if I only managed to sell six copies?" said Christopher.
Krizia firmly believed that it was the instruction for her sister to file a forced leave of absence that provoked her to commit suicide
"I know that we cannot put all the blame to UP Manila. But it was the biggest factor...There were bigger problems that we faced in the past. Even if we hardly get a good meal, we stayed together. We remained strong,”Krizia said.
"If the main reason is our family problems, she could have (committed suicide) ages ago.”
Krizia added, "She wanted to be a doctor because she wanted to save people’s lives. It is no longer possible now. But in a way, I would like to think that she still saved others — the youth who wants to study but could not afford it,” Krizia said.
History Repeats Itself: STFAP to STS
It turns out, ironically, that the UP's socialized tuition was "part" of the plan to "democratize access and admission to its academic programs while promoting fairness and social justice in the University, befitting its status as a state-supported institution of higher learning" (BOR Resolution, 30 Jan. 1989, as qtd in Mendoza, et al., 2014). It was claimed to be necessary in order to make UP education affordable, especially for those who come from poor families.
infographic courtesy of UP Journalism Club
Socializing tuition was originally suggested by Dr. Manlapaz in his team's report in 1976. 13 years after it was recommended, Former UP President Jose Abueva implemented the Socialized Tuition and Financial Assistance Program (STFAP) in 1989. The recommendation had no details; it was merely "premised on the argument that those who can afford should pay more".
For 22 years, the STFAP had served as the UP System's tuition scheme, dividing students into brackets based primarily on their annual family income. Their assigned bracket will determine the amount they have to pay as tuition fee or the corresponding benefits they will receive.
STFAP received several criticisms from various stakeholders not only due to frequent cases of bracket mismatches, but also due to high processing cost . In a report by the Study Group on Admissions entitled "Democratizing UP" submitted to University of the Philippines (UP) President Alfredo E. Pascual on January 2014, the processing of STFAP was estimated as P1,000-P3,000, a cost which includes transport, photocopying documents, documentary stamp tax, notarial fees, etc., according to the report), and appeals for mismatches take long to be processed again.
According to the report, Former UP President Roman admitted that because the government approves budget for UP that is always averagely 40% lower than requested, the State University had to design the STFAP "to earn income from tuition".
infographic courtesy of Philippine Collegian
After a series of revamps that apparently led to higher tuition fee, The UP Board of Regents for the third time has again updated the socialized tuition scheme, this time replacing the 24-year-old STFAP with Socialized Tuition System or STS. Aside from its new name, STS promises to “speed-up the processing of tuition bracket applications, adjust income brackets of student applicants, and increase the stipend of poor students.” Now done online, the STS reduced STFAP’s 14-page application (which used to last up to 10 months) form to two pages, and the number of indicators for applicants from four to two.
Under the STS, the income cut-offs for brackets A, B, C, and D will be adjusted “upward” “by 30 percent” to address the drift towards upper brackets as income rises due to inflation. Therefore, a lot of students should find themselves in lower tuition brackets.
Based on the data obtained by the Philippine Collegian from the Office of Scholarships and Student Services (OSSS) as of September 16, 2014, the number of students paying the full tuition rate of P1,500 per unit have spiked by 43 percent--from 5,112 in 2013 to 7,307 in 2014.
infographic courtesy of Philippine Collegian
Social Equity
Krizia, for her part, criticized the ‘no late policy’ of UP, which was withdrawn by the UP administration following Kristal’s death.
“All students, especially the poor, should be given an opportunity to finish their education. If they are really after the tuition, then there are other ways such as putting students’ card on hold. But it would be a lot better if they would just lower the tuition,” said Krizia.
The continuous increase in tuition fee along with the emergence of other school fees pushed the students to consistently call for the scrapping of the socialized tuition scheme, which later on was strengthened as the alliance called “Rise for Education” (R4E) was founded three years ago. However, a new campaign has emerged, calling for an action similar to Krizia’s but different from Rise for Education's (R4E)--reform the STS.
Progressive Alliance for the Rollback of Tuition and Accessibility of Education (PARTAKE) is an alliance of youth and student organizations “calling for a progressive tuition rollback and a more accessible education in the University of the Philippines.”
Similar to R4E, PARTAKE believes that education is a right of which no single Filipino should be deprived. However, their means to assert that right is different.
Formed around July 2015, PARTAKE has launched its campaign in UP Diliman, Manila, and Los Baños.
PARTAKE sees nothing wrong with charging students with tuition fee, as long as the student pays only the amount that he or she could pay for. The administration, PARTAKE lobbies, should decrease the rates per bracket and increase the stipend for the lower brackets.
Aside from rollback, PARTAKE also calls for a number of ST reforms. Some of these are: review of MORES-1sec as a tool in measuring the capacity to pay in order to address the problem of mis-bracketing raised by the student body; providing of guidelines in answering the ST System survey; making the answering of the ST System a requirement for the students in order to prevent mis-classification of students under “No-Discount” bracket due to failure to answer the survey questions; providing of equal applications to all UP students inclusive of the graduate students and double degree majors; and ensuring that local committees that approve appeals will adopt a uniform system of approving them via a trust-based system.
infographic courtesy of PARTAKE
All those reforms proposed were clearly feasible, but an important question is: IS A ROLLBACK POSSIBLE?
According to PARTAKE, yes it is.
Last year, the UPD University Student Council conducted a survey showing that students find the current tuition rates expensive, the answer to which—as PARTAKE believes—is rollback. As one goes down the income brackets, the burden (tuition as percentage of income) increases. This is an alarming fact because in an ideal socialized tuition scheme, those in the lower brackets should be burdened less—PARTAKE’s “progressive” way.
infographic courtesy of PARTAKE
In the said research, the alliance found out that UP has a total of Php 20B worth of time deposits which are being left unused, and earns an interest income of Php 232M from all its assets and investments
PARTAKE therefore proposes to add P1,000 stipend to both Brackets E1 and E2, and reduce the rates of Bracket A because “the system is stil imperfect in giving the correct brackets. We need to reduce the 1,500 as a safety cushion for those who will be mis-bracketed.” The alliance also proposes an additional
Right now, PARTAKE has submitted their proposal to on the University Committee on Scholarships and Financial Assistance (UCSFA) and the UP Board of Regents.
Free Education For All
While Kristel’s sister sees tuition as an OK thing as long as there will be a rollback, his father Christopher dismisses reforms as “mere band-aid solutions.”
“Are these solutions? This is UP, so education should be free. The time to fight the system is now. I’ve lost a daughter because of that”.” (Italics mine)
A big chunk of the student population of UP has been sharing the same sentiment ever since tuition in UP was socialized, which R4E has been putting forward along with their campaign against Tuition Fee and Other School Fees (TOFI) increase and commercialization schemes.
R4E is an alliance of different student councils and publications from high schools and universities, youth organizations, members of the academe, parents, out-of-school youths and citizens form all walks of life calling for a quality education that is free and accessible to all, regardless of your socio-economic status.
R4E members firmly believe that education is a right, and therefore must be given to students by the government for free for each and every Filipino student. It is absolutely discriminatory, they say, for rich students to be the ones paying for the tuiton of the poor, especially because education is a government mandate.
By “free education”, R4E members mean zero tuition fee, other school fees, dorm rentals, and venue rental fees, and a socialized stipend system, “kasi part yun ng karapatan sa education--pagkakaloob ng free at accessible na basic student service.”
Aside from the fact that education is a constitutional right, R4E stands their ground against all forms of socialized tuition scheme as it has clearly become an “income-generating” mechanism.
According to Tilendo, the socialization of tuition fees in State Universities and Colleges (SUCs) perfectly fits into President Aquino’s Roadmap to Public Higher Education and Reforms (RPHER). “Actually, mismong nakalagay do’n na lahat ng SUCs ay dapat maging self-sufficient na; magkaroon ng socialized tuition schemes para doon makuha yung pang-maintain ng universities.” This, as R4E sees it, is a clear form of “panggigipit sa mga estudyante”.
The instruction to SUCs to be self-sufficient serves nothing but as a reason to implement STFAP reforms after reforms that only lead to increased tuition, says Tilendo—increased tuition which yields big fund more than enough to sustain the university.
“Kung iisipin mo, yung STFAP, yung lahat ng socialized tuition--STFAP, STS--kung ano man yang form or anong reform yan, 3 decades syang nag-exist. Eh sa tinagal-tagal ng Unibersidad ng Pilipinas nakaya natin na mag-aral nang walang binabayarang tuition in the very first place. So bakit bigla silang magi-implement at lalong pinapalala?
“Kasi, for example, 1.9B y’ung nasingil mo sa tuition tapos 150M lang y’ung kaya nilang gastusin for financial assistance. Ang laki laki ng pera ng UP. ”
And where do the excesses go? To the “revolving fund”.
“Alam natin kung saan napupunta, or alam natin na walang napupuntahan yung tuition kundi sa revolving fund at ginagamit for corruption, and ginagamit ng government na panggastos,” said Tilendo.
As for people who are raising their eyebrows on R4E’s call for socialized stipend while calling for a free tuition, Tilendo explains, “Magkaibang usapin kasi y’ung tuition and financial assistance. Syempre, y’ung financial assistance, socialized sya, in a way na mas matutulungan mo y’ung mas nangangailangan. Pero tulong kasi y’un. Hindi sya tuition na babayaran nila y’ung kaya lang nilang bayaran....Magkaibang bagay y’un.”
R4E’s campaign, which has been consistent even before the alliance was built, is in stark contrast with that of the newly formed alliance PARTAKE. For R4E members, progressive rollback “does not address any problem at all”, rather “makes the situation worse”.
“Kumbaga compromise eh. Sige, mataas yung tuition kaya babaan natin para OK sa student. Actually in the first place hindi OK at all...In the very first place hindi dapat tayo sinisingil...Kaya nating mag-aral nang walang tuition.”
“Ang hindi nila nare-recognize is UP, state university sya--public university. Walang pagtingin, walang recognition, na commercialized y’ung education...Kumbaga semi-private or profit-oriented y’ung UP kasi nga may "scarcity"...na parang "each according to kakayanang magbayad".
From 2010 until this year, 94% of all UP students from all UP units pays tuition, while only 6% studies for free. Out of the majority, 40% is classified under Bracket A.
“Kapag naniningil ka ng tuition...hindi ka naniniwala na in the first place ay karapatan yung edukasyon,” said Tilendo. “Ginagatasan mo yung students hanggang kaya niyang magbayad. So kahit i-bracket mo pa yan na for example proposal mo na 1500 y’ung base tuition ngayon, babaan mo sya sa 1000 pesos kasi feeling mo progressive y’un, or from 1000 gagawin mong 300, so progressive yun? Actually, regressive pa y’on kasi in the first place, y’ung maximum na kakayanan ng student na magbayad, hangga’t kaya mong maningil, maniningil ka...Utak admin yun eh! Anti-student.”