A plea for an effective grievance procedure

“Every student has the right to go through a standard process in cases where academic evaluation is to be justified.”

One of the newest amendments to be ratified, the USG Constitution’s Bill of Rights was revised to uphold a student’s right to due process and proper academic evaluation, a vital provision during grade consultation and academic grievance cases.

Tapat Party President Gab Andres explains that DLSU is one of the few Philippine academic institutions with a system that provides students an opportunity to air grievance against any member of the academic community.

Yet, the grievance procedure is problematic, with continuously unfelt benefits. In a survey conducted by The LaSallian, students anonymously aired their difficulties in understanding DLSU’s current grievance system.

A sophomore (CAM-ADV) student observes, “the procedure [seems] to be designed to give students a hard time when it should be empowering us instead.”

Aside from the problem with the procedures involved, a third year Accountancy major, wary filing a case may reflect in his/her record, or that faculty and students’ impressions of him/her will change for the worse confides, “I’m scared that filing a grievance might have unwanted effects.”

USG efforts

Complementing the latest revision to the Bill of Rights, the USG has also sought to improve the system by revising some of the process. Chief Legislator Carl Au affirms this and cites Resolution 2011-26, which was amended into DLSU’s grievance process back in 2011.

Section 6.4.1.4.1 in the Student Handbook previously stated that all members of the Ad-Hoc Grievance Board must be present for a hearing to push through. Explaining that this routinely caused delay and postponement, the revision now states that a hearing only requires the majority of the board (three members) to be present convene a grievance case.

Au holds, “Delayed justice is no justice.” He explains that people who file grievance cases would now be assured that their matters would not be delayed due to technicalities.

In addition, the USG’s Judiciary Branch trained its first batch of Student Consultants, a constitutional commission established to handle student disciplinary issues and grievances. Au clarifies that they act as “student lawyers.” spreading awareness and helping students with their cases.

On the other hand, Andres believes that this weakens student representation, saying that it overlaps with the duties of the executive board. He recommends giving priority to making students aware of their right to air grievance, “instead of making the current grievance system more complex and bureaucratic.”

Stifled students

Amidst these improvements, survey respondents still revealed lack of awareness on the grievance procedure.

Several freshmen respondents explained that they didn’t know that the system existed, and they couldn’t access information about the procedures for filing a grievance case.

Majority of respondents from upper batches, though aware of its existence, verify that “certain parameters for filing grievances seemed vague,” and that they did not know how or where to go to file a formal grievance.

Clah Lazaro, II AB-CAM, shares that she experienced her professor’s failure to give her grades, but failed to file a grievance case because she and her classmates “weren’t aware yet of the grievance procedure until the latter parts of our [stay] in DLSU.”

Filing grievance

According to Section 6.3.1 and 6.3.2 of the Student Handbook, grievances can either be informal (verbal complaint) or formal (written and signed).

For informal grievances, the student may hold a dialogue with the offending party. If differences cannot be resolved, the department Chair may be approached to set an appointment. The Chair will then act as a mediator, alongside the student’s batch president.

If a student wishes to file a formal grievance, the student must undergo the informal grievance procedure, then approach his/her USG college president in the USG Office in SPS 302, where they would be assisted in filing their case.

A written complaint must be filed and signed to the faculty member’s department chair not less than four weeks after grade consultation. The department chair would then write to the faculty member for a written response to the grievance file. After the department chair receives the response, he would then hold a meeting with the affected parties.  If settled, the department chair resolves the case with written justification.

Students dissatisfied with the outcome may appeal, through the department’s Dean, to the Ad-Hoc grievance board for a hearing of the grievance. The board members would then settle on the appropriate procedures for the hearing prior to hearing out the actual case – a step that may be prolonged due to a variety of factors. Details are available in Section 6.4 of the Student Handbook.

“Hassle”

In practice, the full process is deemed tedious and complicated, which some students believe is not worth pursuing regardless of their complaints. A College of Engineering (COE) student agrees, “Some say that it’s almost useless to us students because of its longevity and ineffectiveness.”

In the survey conducted by The LaSallian, 69 percent of the respondents stated that they underwent academic problems like being graded unfairly, being taught inadequately, and having to deal with a professor that was unavailable for grade consultation.

Students whose formal cases were not accepted nor acted upon believe that the process was unsatisfactory and unhelpful. A College of Liberal Arts (CLA) respondent claimed that when she/he filed a case, the board prioritized and attended to the professor more than the students.

In addition, students suppose that the administration would not file a grievance case against professors who have been a part of DLSU for a significant amount of time, especially those who have high positions in the University. Others believe that direct confrontation between the students and the professor is more acceptable and easier to settle, much like in informal grievance.

Beneath all, students lack assurance that proper action can be done and fear that filing a grievance could worsen their problems.

Leaving it at that

Even if the grievance system serves as a formalized procedure for handling student complaints, 38 percent of students affirm that their recurring problems were not grounds for filing a formal case.

A School of Economics (SOE) graduate adds that the grievance system, in her experience, is only valid in cases that involve a need to change grades. She furthers that unfair treatment as she was told is not a valid grounds for grievance.

A COE student stated that as long as he passes at the end of a term, he will not file a case against a professor. Another student wanted to, but did not pursue filing because he/she received a “decent grade from the professor anyway.”

Dr. Louie Sembrano, Chairperson of the Theology Department, warns of both parties’ personal vendettas fuelling a problem. “There is a need to know if someone is telling the truth or not. If there is a just reason, I have nothing against that,” he adds.

Other respondents who found the system satisfactory did not encounter any academic or behavioral problems with members of the academic community.

Gab Andres stresses that the administration must be vigilant in exploring problematic, sensitive cases when pursuing academic grievance.  The push for justice, however, does not lie with the administration alone, he adds, and the DLSU student population must not tolerate any form of student oppression in the first place.