“Changes of schedule, we understand, will always be difficult because we get used to certain things, but we will adjust. Things are not permanent.”
This was but one of many assurances former DLSU Chancellor Dr. Robert Roleda shared in late 2017 after news broke that the controversial University Break (U Break) was approved by the President’s Council and slated for implementation on the term that followed.
At the time, the shift—which moved the break from Fridays to Mondays—stirred intense debate among members of the Lasallian community and received heavy opposition from the student body. Despite lobbying attempts made by the University Student Government (USG) to retain the old schedule, the new U Break pushed through as planned and is still in effect today.
Three terms after its implementation, The LaSallian explores how students’ perception have changed on U Break.
Revisiting the U Break controversy
The new U Break schedule was implemented on the second term of Academic Year 2017-2018. The University administration justified the move by citing data gathered from a 10-year period, which showed suspensions occurring most often on Mondays. According to them, these suspensions brought about disruptions to the University’s academic calendar, urging the Academics Council to adjust the U Break. Before its approval, the proposal was reviewed by the Office of the Chancellor.
Initiatives were made by the administration to involve everyone in the process of discussing whether or not the shift should push through. Initially, the proposal was disseminated through a post shared on the USG Facebook page, along with a detailed illustration of the new schedule.
The proposed change did not sit well with students, who were quick to express their disapproval online. Mostly evident on social media platforms, a #NoToUBreak hashtag swamped the Twitter feed of most Lasallians. The growing uproar prompted the administration to arrange a town hall meeting to settle the concerns of students, faculty, and organizations.
The USG, through Former President Mikee De Vega and Former Vice President of Internal Affairs Brian Chen, held a press conference to explain the justification behind the sudden U Break change, the expected changes to the schedule, and their own counter proposals to be presented to the administration.
Ultimately, the administration’s justifications prevailed over student concerns. A term after, the new U Break schedule was implemented.
Reassessment of students
A year later, have Lasallians accepted the change? An online survey conducted by The LaSallian shows that this may not be the case. Out of 106 respondents, 38 students said that they were in favor of the U Break, 22 respondents said that they are neutral about the change, while 46 students said that, until now, they are not in favor of the new U Break. Before the implementation of the shift, the publication had carried out a similar survey. At the time, 100 of the 105 respondents opposed it.
Among the options of travel time to and from school, productivity in terms of academic and org work, and class schedule, majority complained that the new schedule made their travel to and from school more hectic because of Friday traffic. Marie* claims that “it was easier back then.” She adds that traffic is worse during Fridays, especially for people who utilize ride-hailing services as a means of transportation.
Lorraine* affirms this, and shares that “going back to the province [on a] Friday is super traffic and makes one heavily weary, especially as a commuter.” However, some students do point out that in their case, Monday traffic is more hectic than Friday traffic.
On the other hand, the survey also shows that some students have changed their opinion about the new U Break schedule. Gabrian Lozano (IV, MKT) admits that the shift gave him “more weekends than weekdays.” Anna Ongchuan (II, PSM-ADV) adds to this by saying that Mondays “allow you to have that extra day to study and accomplish all requirements.” In the middle of the spectrum, some students claim that the new U Break “did not make much of a difference.”
The students’ argument
In an interview with Chen and De Vega last January, they reevaluate the implementation of the U Break. Chen cites the three main reasons why students objected to the change: Friday traffic, three-hour evening Wednesday classes, and decrease in participation for organizational activities.
As Chen explains, “I think the students were greatly affected by this one (Friday traffic). Kahit lumabas ka lang diyan sa Taft Avenue makikita mo na. What more if you go home to Makati, [or] if you go home to the North?”
(Going out to Taft Avenue, you’ll immediately see [the traffic].)
De Vega echoes Chen’s concerns regarding the shift to Friday. “There are security issues included. If they go home much later on a Friday or ‘yung gabing pag-uwi, mas delikado for them than previously when maaga silang pumapasok,” she argues. “If they end up going home on a Saturday, they have less time in their homes [especially] if they live in the provinces.”
(If they go home much later on a Friday or late at night, it is far more dangerous for them than previously when they had to go to class early.)
Chen also notes the added burden to student organizations in scheduling their activities on Mondays. “They suggested [to] make the student activities on Mondays, [but] walang pumupunta pag Mondays. What [organizations] did to adapt was to schedule and set activities on Friday nights. When I was VP for Internals last year, nararamdaman ko na first and second term ng implementation ng bagong U Break, kumokonti yung officers na nagiging active, kumokonti yung nagpa-participate,” he explains.
(They suggested to move the student activities on Mondays, but no one goes on Mondays. What [organizations] did to adapt was to schedule and set activities on Friday nights. When I was VP for Internals last year, I observed that during the first and second term of the implementation of the new U Break, fewer officers remained active and participated.)
De Vega also narrates that they recorded decreases in attendance in terms of student activities, stressing how crucial it is for student life, “From the point of view of someone who is inclined to student activity, I believe that Lasallians should have a holistic education. It’s important for us to have all of these activities.”
Current USG President Gabbie Perez acknowledges that student views became widely varied concerning U Break. “Ayaw namin ma-misrepresent ang student body. Kinausap namin ‘yung student leaders. Tinanong muna namin sila ‘As a student, how do you feel?’, ‘As a President, how do you feel?’, and the remarks were very different,” she elaborates.
(We don’t want to misrepresent the student body. We talked with student leaders. We asked them, ‘As a student, how do you feel?’, ‘As a President, how do you feel?’, and the remarks were very different.)
But she emphasizes that the USG will always take on the side of the student body, stressing that “We’re always for student activities [and] participation, basta kung saan nakakabenipisyo ang estudyante.”
(We’re always for student activities [and] participation, whichever benefits students most.)
Present administration’s outlook
Vice Chancellor for Academics Dr. Merlin Suarez explains that despite the U Break shift, the University still monitors the data concerned with the schedule change. She notes that the majority of students still do prefer the previous U Break schedule. “The conclusion of the data from the students is that 31 percent say [that] it’s fine, and then 69 percent really still want to go back to the [original] U Break,” she reveals.
Suarez expects the data to be presented soon along with other University administration officials to discuss what further action will be taken, but she admits that there hasn’t been a formal schedule for the discussion. “What we want to do is to study the data presented by the students and have this formally discussed in the Academics Council, but we have not done so yet. There will be a discussion in the [Academics Council] sometime this term. We’ll discuss it in the Academics Council, we will ask the students to present their study, and we will listen to their recommendations,” she assures.
Lobbying for students’ rights
Chen and De Vega both relay the difficulty of creating a compromise between student and administration concerns. “When you’re in a position of power, it’s very, very easy to think like an administrator. What’s important is to make sure that the opinions are fully heard, the opinions are fully lobbied for—finding out what the students really want and sticking to that,” De Vega says.
Perez reiterates the need for a data-driven approach to representation, calling for more quantitative input for USG policies. “The [strategy] is [to] gather data but from different perspectives: from student organizations [and from the] student population,” she explains.
Her statements echo Chen’s advice for the next student leaders. “In reality, what the administrators look at is hardcore data. Okay, ‘yan ‘yung stand mo, why? Can you show me? Real data is more convincing than assumptions. One of our directives kasi from last year was to make sure data will be properly gathered by student organizations in terms of activities. That will be their main arm, when it comes to re-lobbying [to] put the U Break back,” Chen emphasizes.
*Names were changed for anonymity.
