Over the past few weeks, I’ve heard several complaints being thrown around about the way the University Student Government (USG) handles things, especially with the recent controversy surrounding this year’s General Elections (GE). The complaints have ranged from accusations of the candidates’ insincerity, to a lack of transparency among the entire USG, to everything in between. The one that struck me in particular, though, was about student apathy with regards to certain USG initiatives. Some students noticed that some of the projects arranged by the different sectors of the USG, particularly seminars and talks, were only attended by students due to incentives given by different professors.
I realized that this comment did not only apply to the USG, but to several projects within DLSU in general. Several professional organizations under the Council of Student Organizations (CSO) arrange conferences and seminars with decorated speakers, experts in their respective fields. Often, though, these seminars only receive participants because of the incentives given by several professors in the organization’s respective college.
So why is it that these activities need to rely on this system in order to fill out venues with participants? It’s easy to blame the organizers and say that the problem lies with the way the event was planned, or perhaps with the way the seminar was marketed. However, I realized that, maybe, the problem isn’t just with the speakers, or the venues, or the marketing of the activities. Perhaps part of the problem is with the mindset of the students of DLSU in general.
I realized that a large majority of the students, including myself, are just not interested in attending seminars about investment banking, finance, and other similar academic issues. The result is that even the seminars with the best possible program and the best possible speakers are still reliant on the incentive system. Even the most insightful professors and career experts cannot entice students who simply do not care for these academic talks.
At the end of the day, the student population of DLSU cannot really be blamed for having this kind of attitude. However, it would not hurt for students who do not really see the point in seminars and talks to try to develop a more open mind, especially when it comes to these other avenues for learning. Instead of always blaming the organizers, it becomes a case of allowing oneself to become more appreciative of these opportunities to learn. I, personally, am rarely interested in these kinds of events. However, I realized that I had to adjust my mindset, and be more open and more willing to learn, if only to make the most of the activities and opportunities present.
At the same time, it becomes the challenge of those organizing these events, whether they are from the USG or from the organizations under CSO, to find different ways to innovate these academic seminars in order to appeal to the student body. One example is how conferences in the past have been able to garner participation and attendance by appealing to external delegates from other universities. Another example is how some seminars create more interaction between the speakers and participants, or how some talks try to connect the academic topic with a more relatable one. If the groups of students organizing these activities are able to continuously innovate and improve the way they are held, then added participation, even without incentives, will follow.
These seminars and talks arranged are usually extremely effective opportunities to learn, which is why it is a shame that students are unable to make the most of it. Whether it is due to the apathy of the participants or due to the complacency of the organizers, I hope the students of DLSU are able to make the necessary adjustments in order to truly maximize these avenues for learning.
