ANNIVERSARY SPECIAL NOVEMBER 2005LaSallianThe

Mediocre Achievers for God and Country?

Politics places the utmost importance on images. Politicians depend on it for their survival in office. Apart from their contributions to society, it is the image they portray to the public – by the way they talk when interviewed, by the stands they take regarding certain issues and more – that determines whether or not they will succeed in politics.

Such pivotal role that image plays is also very much relevant among schools. Normally seen as the school for the economically fortunate but intellectually inferior, De La Salle University’s institutional image is much more complex than this simple label. After almost a century of hard work, the University has gained a formidable foothold in the local academic scene, as evidenced by PAASCU Level IV accreditation status and membership in the ASEAN University Network.

Such a simplistic label then does not do the University justice. However, seeing DLSU as plainly an academic mover is still not enough. Going back to the politician analogy, image is not built by performance alone.

How DLSU handles issues both internal and external weigh in heavily on how other people view the institution. They affect popular perceptions of the school, Lasallians in the former and the national community in the latter.

Outward imageClearest evidences of the latter are the Brothers’ stand on the

Gloriagate scandal and the issue on ineligible Green Archers. What is clear in the two situations is that both were calculated risks. If either turns out negatively, the consequences will undermine the very foundations of DLSU.

The Brothers’ stand on the “Hello Garci?” tapes was a coura-geous act, a prominent first among all universities. While many people admired the courage of the Brothers, some parties were disdained by the political activity undertaken by DLSU. The Uni-versity inexorably projected an image of high moral integrity, since it is calling for a “supreme sacrifice” on the grounds that President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo had lost moral ascendancy to rule. Political retribution on the University may prove to be a fatal aftereffect.

Whether or not this high moral image will backfire on DLSU will be tested in the Benitez-Gatchalian ineligibility debacle. The possible effects springing from media sensationalizing are dis-concerting. Suspension in the UAAP and the branding of DLSU as granting special admission to athletes may mar its image for a long time. Consequently, there may be fewer freshman applicants and an inherent doubt in high school seniors regarding the validity of DLSU’s application process.

Evidently, image is drawn from leadership. The Brothers had prerogative to release their political stand although it is not the consensus of all. Similarly, the Administration was compelled to release its statement regarding ineligible athletes after hearing that the PEPTCR papers of the two athletes were possibly faked.

For now, the drama unfolds.

Embedded culturePrior to the eruption of the two aforementioned controversies,

DLSU has maintained a rather serene image for some years. During that time and relevant up to present, the pride Lasallians possess draws strength from this image. The assurance that DLSU is if not second the best in the country may be the reason for the prevalent culture of mediocrity and apathy in the university.

This mediocrity is everywhere. In academics, many students have already contented themselves with the 1.0 mark. The so-so in

the best institution would still be excellent out in society anyway. In the context of career opportunities upon graduation, it is a popular belief that a DLSU diploma will carry the name of the student well into employment.

In student governance, mediocrity turns into apathy, where some do not even exercise their right to vote. Issues arise but stu-dents merely shrug them off, believing that dilemmas will be solved even without their participation.

From every batch of Lasallians arises the few politically and academically mindful. Often earning key leadership posts in student organizations, they position themselves for a lucrative career. One would expect them to be at the forefront of political reform upon graduation. However, a significant number of these outstanding students land in huge corporations.

Political initiative and standing up for students is neatly con-verted to maximizing profit for the company. Direct contribution to society gives way to indirect contribution – working for the company to enhance the lives of the Filipino consumer. The com-panies they used to ask solicitations from become the companies that they work for.

In this manner, questions will arise.

Crafting of an imageThese unrelated occurrences all interplay in the crafting of

image of DLSU. In turn, people are influenced by the stereotype the image establishes. But, there is no default destiny or career path for Lasallians. There is no “default Lasallian” anyone entering 2401 Taft should become. Anyone studying in DLSU needs only to maximize his/her stay in the University and in the process, eliminate mediocrity, apathy, and misconceptions.

A Lasallian must not be swayed by typical labels of greatness and constructs of excellence so heavily marketed in DLSU.

“The future begins here. ™” DLSU’s omnipresent tagline implic-itly denotes by virtue of the singular noun, like a compass pointing in only one direction, a singular future for all Lasallians. That is arguably the corporate future.

“The future begins here. ™” could be better termed “Futures begin here.”

TABLE OF CONTENTSIn Retrospect

Passing the ChalkProfessors come in all colors of the physical and educational spectra. There are dedicated and lazy ones, the buddy-types and...

page4

The 1.0 Supremacy page7

Student Representation page8

Constructs

Corporate Academics page10

Creeping Mediocrity page12

IconsWhere they Worth It? page15

Benitez & Gatchalian:

Four Shades of Green

page16

The Pumaren Connectionpage18Through The Years page20

Handling Controversy page22

Editor’s Note

A new challenge always begins with a person expecting the best, not only with the situation, but...

Electing student-leaders is like celebrating one’s birthday: it happens annually...

Freedom of inquiry, freedom of discussion, and freedom of teaching - without these a university cannot exist...

In an attempt to fully understand the university’s current state, one must ask how DLSU is faring...

DLSU formally recognized that both Mark Lester Benitez and Timoteo Gatchalian III “may have some personal...”

Joseph Yeo, Kristine Prado, Faith Dimakiling, and Desiree Hernandez - what do these athletes have in common...

Players win the games. The coach loses it. This cliché goes to show the burden of a coach has on his...

Evey year, De La Salle aspires to bag the general championship title. Despite continuos efforts, DLSU still lags behind perennial leader UST...

Image clearly matters especially for an institution holding a revered position in Philippine education such as De La Salle University...

EDITORIAL

Standpoints

Most of you should be wondering now. Why did the artist in our cover page hang her artworks on the wall without finalizing them? Disrupted figures, pale frames, unfinished touches. Assuming the artist has a superb image in the industry, art collectors and critics will still have the tendency to grade her unfinished masterpieces with an excellent rating.

The same logic is roughly applicable to universities like De La Salle. A school’s image is the sum total of the actions and merited reactions it has established through the years. But the dictum of our generation is the other way around: We merely depend on DLSU’s image without grasping its real manifestations – the quality of academic and non-academic services it offers.

Our anniversary addendum is a mixture of topics about the many facets of the University’s image.

There is the overwhelming mediocre behavior of students in academics and student leadership. Is DLSU producing mediocre achievers for God and country? Why are some students already contented with a 1.0 grade? Another essential matter is DLSU’s identity as a “business” school. The corporate image has been tailor-fitting the academic curriculum through the years.

Our Sports correspondents discuss the good and ugly image of DLSU’s sports programs. A rundown of the UAAP first half reveals the past achievements of basketball and volleyball teams. Four athletes and Coach Franz Pumaren were also featured on how they notched glory in their respective careers, despite severe pressures in and out of the court.

Touching on the ineligibility issue, the Sports writers gave particular attention in review of the performances of Benitez and Gatchalian for the Green Archers. But the bigger picture is how the Administration treats the controversy ranging from media confession to investi-gation.

Quoting Antoine de Saint Exupery in his book The Little Prince, “What is essential is invisible to the eyes.” Indeed, there are essential matters that influence our lives in the campus, yet they are not bared into deeper scrutiny. May this special issue assist you to critically probe issues that have been part of the Lasallian way of life. Godspeed.

Paul Darwynn Yanquiling GarilaoEditor in chief

The LaSallianNovember 2005 3

Image Driven

P

1910s: Band of BrothersDe La Salle College was born in 1911. Back then, it had only

elementary and high school levels and 125 students. The first nine teachers were Lasallian brothers, most of them born in Europe and educated in the United States.

Lasallian professors brought with them values and lessons from their homeland. They were conservative both in dress and manner. They were authoritarians and used corporeal punishment. Rote learning was the preferred teaching method. Proper behavior was observed stringently during this time. Since most students boarded at school, the discipline of the teachers extended beyond class hours. Being Lasallian Brothers, the professors also emphasized their faith. The operative slogan was that religion is the basis of education.

1920s – 1930s: All-in-OneLa Salle in the 1920s was a flurry of activity. Moving to Taft

Avenue from its previous home in Paco, the school expanded not only in size, but also in the services it offered. Throughout it all, the student population increased, and more Brothers and professors were brought in to teach. The number of lay teachers increased, but most were still Brothers.

The professors during this period maintained discipline and order in their classes. But they also provided openings for students to contribute to class discussions. He required the class to conform to the rules of behavior and school policies.

Because of the many demands of the school on its staff, profes-sors had to be flexible. It was common for a professor during this period to also be a sports coach, a supervisor for boarders, or a club moderator. Even though some of the Brothers were already directors or sub-directors, they still handled the same teaching load as other professors.

Because of all the extra work professors handled, they were required to interact more with their students. While the professor was still strict, the increased relations narrowed the gap between the two. This contrasted with the early years of DLSC when the foreign Brothers and their native students were culturally separated.

The extra activities also made professors better-rounded. Even though the Brothers made up two-thirds of the teaching staff, em-phasis wasn’t limited to one area anymore. Professors during this period stressed the virtue of versatility.

As the 1920s gave way to the 1930s, professors became admired by their students. Professors not only taught well; they were also very skilled in their fields. Many professors became inspirations as students could see their abilities being put to actual application.

Lasallian professors were also noted for their impartiality. Be-ing one of the most prestigious colleges in the Philippines, DLSC drew students from well-known families. Despite this, the professors treated all their students the same way.

1940s – 1950s: Authority Strikes BackDuring the early days of World War Two, La Salle was turned

into a shelter. The school was allowed to reopen under Japanese occupation.

Professors were in frequent danger from their Japanese over-lords. Misunderstandings often happened, and professors could be killed if they weren’t careful. The occupation period stunted the growth of DLSC. Classes were monitored so professors reverted back to being authoritarian figures.

The nearing end of the war brought many tragedies to the Lasallian brothers. Many brothers were killed and massacred when Japanese soldiers were looted the city. This was a great loss for the school and the Lasallian order.

Transition of PowerDuring the fifties, there was a transition from brothers to lay

staff. Because of the murders of many Brothers, there were not enough of them to teach an ever-increasing number of students.

Even though the number of Brothers declined, their disciplinar-ian stance remained. During these times, questioning authority was tantamount to blasphemy. However, professors also made few allowances. This authoritarian policy remained mainly because of the times, with the war having just ended. But because of this, the gap between teachers and students was widened. Instead of having mutual relationships, professors once again wielded a rod of iron.

1960s – 1970: Maximum ToleranceBy the rock ‘n’ rolling sixties, lay professors were very common

and were mostly male. They normally dressed formally, donning a polo-barong, barong or long-sleeved shirt with a tie. Some even came in the coat-and-tie get-up despite the climate.

As teachers, they were more of the chalk-and-black-board type. They did most of the talking without getting their students to air out their thoughts. To present the lesson in an open style was considered revolutionary.

This was a period when the global social atmosphere trans-formed everything in the tradi-tion of the chaos theory. For instance, the Vietnam War disillusioned many about the notion of an infallible author-ity that had nothing but pure intentions. As distant as that was to DLSC, profes-sors became viewed with suspicion and could never be completely trusted; they were “agents of the estab-lishment.”

The professors, includ-ing senior faculty members like Professor Waldo Perfecto, had to mellow down their au-thoritative selves. Although they did not relinquish the prerogative their position gave them, they be-came more tolerant of rule-breaking. They saw that the more they pushed a student, the more rebellious he became. The theme of the times was “live and let live.” Professors viewed student delinquency as a form of self-expression. So, they hardly squealed on the students.

December 6, 1968 was what Brother Benedict, FSC described as the day that “shit hits (the) fan.” It is considered by many alumni as the birth of student power, the day students rose up against the

rofessors come in all colors of the physical and educational spectra. There are dedicated and lazy ones, the buddy-types and you-may-touch-me sorts. Regardless of the model they come in, they all have one goal: to educate us. How they’ve been doing that over the years is what’s been evolving. Every decade brings with it something special that marks it as unique.

Now, while the stories here are characteristic of the times they hail from, it is important to remember the Bell curve: there are always exceptions.

The LaSallianNovember 20054 The LaSallianNovember 2005 5

IN RETROSPECTIN RETROPECT

Passing the ChalkNICOLE TANGCO, JENSEN CHING, AND ROSHAN NANDWANI

The easy-pass way of thinking cannot hope to be fully prevented in any educational system, much less with De La Salle University. With the fast pace of everything around, the learning objective of the students becomes more or less concentrated on one thing - survival. The idealistic hopes of true learn-ing are pushed down the drain, and instead are replaced with temporary memorization, barely enough to sustain a borderline grade. The case worsens when passion for the subject is nigh inexistent, and the realization of being in the wrong course hits the shore hard. The adrenaline that pushes you to do well in school is replaced by an empty feeling of loss, regret, and even helplessness, thus forcing one lower into the pits of the 1.0 syndrome. This time, the students study because, hell, they just want to get it all over with. The question left to give all of this some sense is, why?

Lost

How many times has the choice of course been left to pure whim, igno-rance, or “parental guidance”? A common occurrence during the filling of application forms is that adolescents usually pick the most popular programs like management and engineering without much thought for “practical” reasons. The fact is most people who enter college rarely have any idea of what they want to become, Lasallians included. It is actually at this point in their lives that students try to contemplate their purpose and future. The result? These people spend most of their college years floating around the subjects, struggling to find their inner peace. This is one reason that can be-come one of the major factors for the 1.0 culture to cultivate. While waiting for inspiration to strike, subjects taken, most especially minors, become mere stepping stones, with the students’ mentalities concentrated on remaining on

DLSC administration. It was shortly followed by the First Quarter Storm, proving that students did not have to submit to any authority. They got the President himself to entertain them in Malacañang, albeit forcibly. Why should they listen to any professor? As one decade closed and another began, the dichotomy between profes-sors and student became clearer. Soon, professors were just that: professors, media that transmitted information. What is worse is that many professors became afraid of confronting their students.

The Tides of ChangeThe seventies meant change: DLSC became DLSU, Martial Law

was declared and brought with it yet another pendulum swing: from tolerance back to being more authoritarian. This gave the profes-sor back his sense of command but it made him seem even more suspicious. Some of the younger professors attempted to bridge the gap by hanging out with their boys at night as drinking buddies. Even this was taken with a grain of salt.

On the upside, professors carried this tide of change into their classroom. Finally introduced at this time was the open discussion in the classroom. Professors started to employ the let’s-sit-in-a-circle technique, and started to allow the free flow of ideas. Also, since they were also affected by the social events (professors are people too, after all), some also took action against the government, some-times even alongside their students.

Early 1980s: Shut Up!Ironically, teachers heard this phrase a lot of times too and not

just students. The eighties meant that they could not express their opinions and beliefs mainly because of the political situation. The teachers could not speak, and just like they sometimes tell their students, they had to keep their mouths shut.

Late 1980s: “Look I’m a rebel too!” With EDSA, President Marcos left the country and the

country earned its freedom. Finally, people could express themselves in any manner possible. Students remember some of their teachers who did not seem follow any dress code. Teachers wore mini skirts and blouses with plunging necklines, clothes that would otherwise get students of today directly sent to the Discipline Office.

UP at DLSUJust like students, teachers did have their personal conflicts with

their co-workers. The faculty was made up of people with different beliefs and ideologies. In the eighties, Brother Andrew Gonzales got some of the UP teachers to come and teach at DLSU for higher pay and more benefits. One can’t deny the fact that people from UP and DLSU are different. The faculty had some sort of a clash of classes and there existed a rivalry of sorts. Teachers wanted to show that their alma mater was better than the other however this his eventually died down during the nineties.

1990s: “Sorry, class. I’m studying too”It was at about this time that the University decided to work

on making the school more world class. Teachers were asked to do more research. The teachers themselves were now using the trimestral system excuse that students always seem to use. They had a hard time balancing teaching their students at such a fast pace and doing their research.

Mommy TeacherTeachers took on the role of second parents since a lot of stu-

dents had both their parents working to keep up with rising costs. The teachers realized that they couldn’t just teach what was in the

syllabus, and had to impress them with their knowledge. Beyond that, professors realized that they had to win the students’ hearts by listening to them. Students asked the teachers for advice and they learned to answer.

2000 - todayPaano ba ‘to?

Today, the teacher-student relationship has become much more comfortable. And with computers and the Internet, students now sometimes play teacher. When it comes to things about technology, more often than not, students know more. The good thing is that teachers accept this. In some classes, teachers request their students to help them out: setting up the projector or creating an e-group. Students know that their teachers know more than them but now the teachers realize that they too can learn a lot from their students.

Ano’ng racket mo?

As the economy is getting worse, and the University is doing all the cost-cutting it can do, teachers are having a hard time keep-ing up. Teachers sometimes admit that they are just working for DLSU because of the money, which for some teachers is no longer enough. They then have no choice but to look for other sources of income.

To keep up with the times, professors have to find part-time jobs or start small businesses. They don’t involve in scams or anything, but just to lighten the financial difficulties they deal with, they find themselves asking each other, “So, anong racket mo?”

If there’s anything this tells us, professors are people too. What makes them different from students is that when they step out of campus, they are no longer teachers. They become parents, chil-dren, siblings and professionals. Like the people around us, they are affected by everything that happens in our world. Professors of the future will be no different. Just like those who have gone and those who grace our halls today, professors will ultimately be reflections of the here and now.

A new challenge always begins with a person ex-pecting the best, not only with the situation, but also with one’s performance. Remembering your first days in college, you yourself might have thought along the lines with that person. Grades would have become the essential measure for everything. As months roll by, you manage to learn the ropes of university life, and more importantly, the worth of a passing grade. Well, not just its worth—you soon discover that you can actually get by with grades ranging from 1.0-2.0. The goal now shifts from getting the highest grade possible, to attaining a so-so mark that is not indicative of failure.

SEE PAGE 9, 1.0 SUPREMACYGRAPHICS BY LUIS DE VERAARTWORK BY CARVIN CHOA AND IAN ROMANGRAPHICS BY JAN JAUDIAN

The LaSallianNovember 20056 The LaSallianNovember 2005 7

IN RETROSPECTIN RETROPECT

TheSupremacyDIANE MARGARETH TANG AND JOSE FRANCISCO UNSON

1 .0

middle ground and being “just enough.” The primal need to excel is lacking, as the ardor for the topics is. According to Professor Jose Luis Liongson of the Marketing Department, “Students who under-perform lack the passion, or they just don’t know what they want.”

Professors’ Secret FormulaOftentimes, the blame for mediocre

grades manages to find its way to the in-structors. The usual reasons students utter regarding low scores obtained include such platitudes as “The teacher wasn’t fair” or, worse, “He/She doesn’t know how to teach!” Admittedly, the teacher always possesses a certain amount of accountability to perform well. It is upon the mentor’s shoulders that the perpetua-tion of the students’ interests to the course ultimately rests upon.

Students, on the other hand, can-not be helped to feel some amount of disinterest to any course, and when that happens, the responsibility of the professor is greater. Not only are they supposed to teach the required lecture from the syllabus, but they are also ex-pected to create an atmosphere where growth is the primary concern. Being able to read every person’s potential becomes the challenge, and sometimes the weakness, of some faculty members in this University. Knowing which buttons to push may become the starting point of a meaningful and purposeful life for a student, and the possibility of an end to a life of “substandard.”

Multiple IntelligencesA student in De La Salle University

takes everything from algebra to physi-cal education to accounting to general psychology. The intention of the school is to develop the best of well-rounded in-dividuals. However, that doesn’t always happen. Not all students do well in every single subject. In Physics, they might get a 4.0 with ease but find getting a 1.0 in Literature a challenge. In these moments of struggle, students can’t help but find themselves faced with a pile of course card marked with mediocre grades.

While this might seem disappoint-ing for a student who strives to achieve in everything, it’s not something to be ashamed of, if one subscribes to How-ard Gardner’s theory. To explain why students tend to settle for the average, Dr. Roberto Mendoza, Professor Flordeliza Bolante, and Dr. Alexa Abrenica of the Psychology Department cited the theory of multiple intelligences. It states that man has many forms of intelligence, ranging from linguistic to athletic, musical to arithmetic. People are said to possess all these potentials.

The slide down to mediocrity in

certain areas might be a manifestation that the field simply isn’t one’s specialty. This can be seen in the case of an athlete who can perform amazing feats in his event and yet cannot grasp concepts in economics, or that of a talented singer whose voice is flawless but is lousy at computer programming. These are just two examples of the multiple intel-ligences we possess and the dynamics of how they work.

What Drives You? At the beginning of each course,

every teacher distributes a syllabus, and it should be crystal clear to every Lasal-lian what he or she has to do to make the grade. This means that with some effort, you can do better by getting a 3.0, a 3.5, yes, even a 4.0. Following the syl-labus and keeping up with it shouldn’t be that hard. Sounds so simple doesn’t it?

The reality is, as Prof. Liongson ob-served, was that some students settled for mediocre grades simply because the course they were taking wasn’t important to them. They could exert a little more effort to get the above average grade but there isn’t any drive to them. Simply, there is no passion to do it. As disturbing as this might seem, a possible explana-tion is that it can’t be helped. You cannot force someone to be passionate about what they are doing if it is not important to them.

This can be seen best in the way students can pour countless hours and immeasurable amounts of efforts to their major subjects and thesis to get high grades but put just enough effort to pass in minor subjects. It is quite possible that when the passion to learn and excel in a particular field is absent, mediocrity cannot be helped and a student just can’t love every single course in his course flowchart.

Beyond 1.0 Take your pick: multiple intel-

ligences, being lost in your course, ab-sence of passion, or lack of motivation from professors. All these factors affect the way we think and the way we work. Thus, any and every one of these reasons validates the Lasallian psychology of the 1.0. But what is important to remember that a single decision can have a pro-found impact on a mindset. Deciding whether to settle with a mediocre grade despite extensive efforts shows what a true Lasallian is really made out of. We do not simply sit still while the referee makes a bad call on our team; in fact, we protest against it. Same thing goes for our academics. Mediocrity is not merely a fact accepted by students of world-class universities. It’s a dare.

STUDENT REPRESENTATION

BY JOYCE ALFONSO AND FRANCESCA STA. ANA

swallow it? Rather, how will it be done? This solution might be plausible only in words.

Student representationThe line splitting those who believe they are well

represented and those who think otherwise is clearly defined. On one side are students who recognize the things that the SC has been able to accomplish for them and think that they are indeed well represented. On the other hand, there are those who disagree with the SC’s actions, for reasons that may range from being hypercritical to apathetic. The former pertains to the cynical side of the student body that never seems to be satisfied. The latter, on the other hand, reflects those who don’t even bother to vote.

However, putting the blame solely on students is unfair. There are some things that the SC can certainly do to improve their relationship with their constituents, especially the apathetic ones. They must find better means to consult with the student body and they must truly be the voice of the students.

While it may be time for the SC to find more in-novative ways in order to get the students’ attention and support, students should also do their share. Be-ing proactive is the key to a productive relationship between leaders and constituents. In other words, active participation is needed.

In the end, it’s not just a matter of how well the Student Council represents their constituents; it’s also a question of how and how much we, the students, want to be represented.

Standing up for whose beliefs? Rashly releasing a stand regarding current issues may prove

to be counter-productive for student leaders because the position they have taken may not reflect the true sentiments of their con-stituencies. The SC’s stand regarding the GMA controversy is a case in point.

It may be recalled that when the famed Gloriagate tape scandal erupted, the Christian Brothers immediately called for the Supreme Sacrifice—GMA’s resignation. Before the Brothers came up with their stand, deliberations were held in order to consider the interests of all concerned sectors in the University. Neverthe-less, this decision did not receive a hero’s welcome in the Lasallian community. To add insult to injury, the Lasallian brothers, the Alumni Association, and the SC made their own separate stands on the issue. Some students even expressly opposed the move made by their own representatives, which goes to show the lack of effective communication and consultation among them.

LA Representative Chris Ngo, meanwhile, tries to present the rhyme and reason behind their questionable action. As he put it, “it is hard to be the voice of 13,000 individuals. It certainly isn’t possible to please everyone, and some things just can’t be com-promised. Therefore, the SC acted in ways that they deemed was appropriate.” There are 42 LA representatives in all.

Another LA Representative, Madel Balane, acknowledges that due to “the time-constraints, only quick, informal consultations were conducted with some students.” Thus, the SC’s stand does not necessarily mirror the sentiments of all the students of DLSU.

But whatever happens, LA representatives ensure that whenever they make a stand on an issue, the votes that they make are well studied and weighed despite the limitation of incomplete consulta-tion. LA Representative Mandee Comia expressed, “We make sure that at all times, we represent the voice of the students.”

Whether or not that voice belongs to the majority of the students

is still an enigma.

Representative DemocracyAccording to Wikipedia, representative democracy is “a form

of democracy… wherein voters choose (in free, secret, multi-party elections) representatives to act in their interests, but not as their proxies-for example, not necessarily according to their voters’ wishes, but with enough authority to exercise initiative in the face of changing circumstances.” This may justify the actions of student leaders because as the authoritative body on campus, they should be decisive in coming out with stands on issues that require imme-diate response from them. But that does not mean that they could arbitrarily make a stand on issues, especially the sensitive ones, without being mindful of the pulse of the student body.

Evidently, campus politics can be less dirty than national poli-tics. Admittedly, student leaders may have tendencies to promote their own personal interests or agendas rather than the students’. However, this should not be applied to all the Student Council of-ficers, especially when their terms have not expired yet. But when their tenure is over, their performance could be subjected to intense scrutiny and their output will reveal their true colors.

Former LA representative Mico Geronimo prescribes a medi-cine: more effective student representation in the lower SC levels. He explained that batch officers should effectively represent their constituents among all of the officers, as they are the most effective persons to reach out and interact with the students. In the idea of the LA and batch reps effectively representing their own respective batches, it is best said that it is a case-to-case basis. These batch officers are given so much power and authority to do this task, but it’s really up to these people how well they do it. If this will be real-ized, there would be a more robust representative democracy.

The medicine does not seem like a mere placebo. However, the more pressing question remains: when will the student leaders

lecting student-leaders is like celebrating one’s birthday: it happens annually. There is fanfare, there is celebration, and there are the occasional entertainers. But after the balloons have popped, the feigned smiles have faded, and the enthralling rhetoric dis-appears in thin air, what comes next? Supposedly, student officers get elected for the purposes of leading, serving, and most importantly, representing their fellow students. But how well do Student Council (SC) officers represent their constituents? Are they re-ally the student body’s voice?

These lingering questions need to be answered by the student-lawmakers of DLSU – the Legislative Assembly (LA) representatives.

E

1.0 SUPREMACY, FROM PAGE 7

PHOTO BY ERIC SIY

The LaSallianNovember 20058 The LaSallianNovember 2005 9

“Freedom of inquiry, freedom of discussion, and freedom of teach-ing - without these a university cannot exist,” once said educational philosopher Robert Maynard Hutchins when asked of the principles central to the existence of the university. Indeed, it often goes without saying that to underscore the importance of academic freedom in universities is to state the obvious: universities, more than other social institutions, require definite autonomy so as to render them-selves fully capable of freely advancing knowledge.

Unfortunately, the vision of an immaculate, ivy-tower university sheltered from external pressures is far from reality. Amid unprec-edented advances in higher education, De La Salle University (DLSU) and other universities over the world are being forced to deal more closely with a largely unrecognized partner: the busi-ness corporation.

What are the origins, strengths and weaknesses, and prospects of industry-academe relationships in the University? To put it bluntly, how corporate have we become as an educational institution?

Then and NowWhile there were very few doubts as to the merits of a Lasallian

university education in the Philippine setting, its true pedagogical mission had constantly been a matter of contention. A commentary by DLSU Professor Salvador Roxas-Gonzales in the 1970s pub-lished in The LaSallian attests to this. Roxas-Gonzales lamented the seemingly dictatorial manpower surveys that were proliferating during his era – surveys that sought to show the relevance of offered degree programs to industry needs, hiring trends, and company demand. He pointed out, likewise, that “when the now advanced universities were just building up, there were no such surveys and projections.”

Fast forward to DLSU circa 2000. Chances are, those thinking along the lines of Prof. Roxas-Gonzales could very well be surprised at the prevalence of business culture on campus.

Partly due to the 24-year old trimestral system, the University has been able to tailor-fit and introduce entirely new courses aimed at the market. What was once the College of Commerce is now the College of Business and Economics, offering eight specializa-tions. There is also the perennially attractive Liberal Arts-Commerce double degree with the College of Liberal Arts

The College of Computer Studies allows students to pursue Information and Communications Technology Management (ICTM) as well as Computer Science with specialization in Software Tech-nology (CS-ST) in just three years and one term. CS-ST majors can then acquire a Masters’ degree by merely extending their studies for a year. This former scenario also holds for the College of Sci-ence (COS), whose Mathematics and Physics programs are now increasingly being oriented to business applications. For instance,

beginning next school year, COS will open Physics programs with minors in either Economics or Finance.

More recently, the College of Engineering introduced Infor-mation Technology (IME-IT) and Service Management (IME-SM) specializations for Industrial Engineering due to “the growing demands of the IT industry.”

Orient InsightsPutting these developments aside, it is the corporate job-focused

ORIENT2 (previously dubbed ORIENT3) that has drawn criticism from some members of the Lasallian community – prompting it to incorporate more introspective elements. The program largely retains its corporate focus though; with very little emphasis placed on ideals such as justice, social responsibility, national develop-ment, and even the Lasallian Five C’s (Competence, Confidence, Commitment, Compassion and Christ-like).

A relevant and insightful observation regarding corporate cul-ture in DLSU was penned by former The LaSallian Editor-in-Chief Meryll Yan. In her July 2004 column entitled “De La Salle, Inc.”, Yan worriedly pointed to the then-ORIENT3 as a “symptom of a corporatized culture,” apart from existing University policies on identification cards and payscale rankings for professors.

Still, the most perturbing and noticeable sign of a seemingly institutionalized corporate slant in the University is that “our best and brightest are flocking en-masse to multinationals,” said Yan. “Yesteryear’s student politicians eventually ended up as national leaders, while today’s student politicians end up as management trainees,” then quoted Yan from Economics professor Gerardo Largoza.

It may be interesting to note that former Student Council (SC) Presidents Jillian Sze and Saint Anthony Tiu are now working in consumer goods giant Procter & Gamble. Another former SC Presi-dent in Jolina Mallari is in competitor Unilever. Many more Lasallian luminaries, from the SC noticeably and other organizations are currently employed in huge multinational corporations.

However, to the industry’s merit, it may be observed that these companies are exercising their corporate social responsibilities in efforts like Gawad Kalinga and other socio-civic activities.

Ivy and IndustryIn the book Ivy and Industry: Business and the Making of the

American University, Christopher Newfield came to the conclu-sion that businesses and universities were closer collaborators than actually perceived. Universities, Newfield claims, established many facets of the market economy - corporate capitalism, com-mercial technology, and organizational management. Businesses, in turn, revitalized research and teaching via commercialization,

the introduction of corporate management methods, and the opening of entrepreneurial opportunities. Most importantly, by augment-ing universities’ meager financial capabilities, businesses gave many universities a new lease on life – even allowing them to flourish.

On the other side of the industry-academe story is corporatization – “the intrusion of industry interests into the core mission of the university,” according to Deborah Woo from the University of California - Santa Cruz. In the United States and Canada where industry-academe relationships are most advanced, many universities have come under fire for al-legedly subordinating academics to corporate agenda. Perhaps the most striking example of how detrimental corporate ties can become is the case of University of Toronto clinical researcher Nancy Oliveri. She was sued by pharmaceutical company and University benefactor Apotex for publishing results that revealed how one of Apotex’s drugs was actu-ally detrimental to children’s health.

More recently, the September 10 edition of The Economist detailed that scientists “are turning against free and open inquiry” for commercial reasons, as corporate sponsors are “attaching strings to donations in order to prevent competitors from free-riding on their research.”

DLSU is, recognizably, no stranger to these things. The institution, for one, is still popularly perceived as a business school due mainly to its alumni. Within the walls of DLSU, campus maintenance services are currently outsourced to private enterprises. Partnerships with industry are commonly on a per-college basis with collaborative projects and donation clauses. The University itself is being benchmarked against originally corpo-rate standards- criterion ranging from resource growth to efficiency targets. In the same way, curricular offerings across all colleges, as mentioned, have been significantly reworked with industry demands in mind.

Forgotten responsibilities Whenever corporatization is discussed,

there is the largely neglected but important

trade-off between social responsibilities and corporate priorities among students. Volunteer Formation head Ed Rico of the Center for Social Concern and Action (COSCA), noting most students’ preference for corporate work after graduation, that integration of service components in the curriculum is underway for Lasallians to be “sensitive to the needs of our less fortunate brothers and sisters whether they go to the corporate world or to [nongov-ernmental organizations].”

The office revealed that since 1996, no one from DLSU-Manila has joined the Lasallian Volunteer Program, a “career option for new graduates to work in a La Salle mission school in the province, a La Salle partner NGO or La Salle partner community or parish/church.”

DLSU Inc.?The dangers of a corporate-thinking Uni-

versity without a formidably solid teaching and research infrastructure are not readily visible, but are nevertheless clear. DLSU may soon find itself fending off valuable corporate funding sources it intends to appeal to. And what better way to entice external funds than to foster an analytical culture that gave rise to capitalism in the first place?

It is unlikely for DLSU to be overtaken by private interests soon because of a primitive industry-academe relationship. However, as shown by the career paths chosen by top Lasallians reinforced by the observation of COSCA, there is a dire need to foster alterna-tive, civic-oriented sensibilities among Lasal-lians – if the University is to truly become a community committed to “easing the plight of the vulnerable and marginalized of Philippine society” (Principles of Lasallian Education in the Philippines).

In the final analysis, it is worth reflecting on the words of economist Thomas Sowell: “Capitalism knows only one color: that color is green; all else is necessarily subservient to it, hence, race, gender and ethnicity cannot be considered within it”. Whether DLSU adopts a darker shade of green or not, only time will tell.

Notwithstanding the predominantly corporate mindset on campus, the opposite is true for DLSU research, output which largely remains not commercially viable. “Our inventions haven’t really been that fantastic yet,” explained Dr. Luis Razon of the Uni-versity Research Coordination Office (URCO).

Structures like an Ethics Commit-tee and Intellectual Property guide-lines, however, are beginning to be put in place to safeguard the interest of the University in joint industry-academe research. “Hopefully when the time comes that our policies are tested, we will respond properly with the right motivation and right thoughts in mind,” said Dr. Razon. Interestingly enough, Dr. Razon even reported that some donors have not made contact with the University after giving their contributions.

Even as degree programs are continually being overhauled to meet the needs of the commercial work-place, it is apparent that the University has a long way to go in realizing the more substantial fruits of industry-aca-deme partnerships, especially in the area of research.

DLSU Research: Counterflow

“The dangers of a corporate-thinking University without a formidably solid teaching and research infrastructure are not readily visible, but are nevertheless clear.”

The LaSallianNovember 200510 The LaSallianNovember 2005 11

CONSTRUCTSCONSTRUCTS

Corporate cademicsPAULO JOSE MUTUC AND ROSS VERGEL DELANTAR

The LaSallianNovember 200512 The LaSallianNovember 2005 13

ALEJANDRO ALMENDRAS IV, KRISTEL KAYE CHUA, ROYCE ROBERT ZUNIGA

CreepingMediocrity

Joseph de Guzman could be described as hot off the press. He had just graduated from DLSU, and was feeling very special and privileged. After all, he came from a very distinguished school. Al-though his diploma wasn’t accompanied with medals or honorable mentions, he felt that his alma mater’s reputable name was enough to give him an edge over the thousands of graduates applying for a higher-than-minimum-pay job. But two weeks after his march, he was surprised to be faced with the iron fist of the real world at so soon a time. Job-hunting was not in his lexicon back in college, nor did he ever think of the possibility that he would become unemployed. Pages and pages of submitted resumes, unreturned calls, and failed interviews floated in Joseph’s mind. Now, he hoped that he did have a medal or an honorable mention. “It would have made a difference,” his interviewer had put it bluntly.

Nothing and everything has changed with the world; in our dog-eat-dog economy, the rich and the lucky remain on top, while the poor and the less fortunate, well, remain at the bottom. But graduates today are facing a lot more disconcerting problems than a six-digit salary ambition or family planning. They are faced with the hoarding of their better counterparts. Companies today only want the best of the best. And at this stage, too late perhaps, they realize the real meaning in their once complacent and mediocre behavior in college – a behavior that would cost Joseph a lot more than the tuition fees his parents paid for his education at DLSU.

Middle GroundAre we of only ordinary or moderate quality--in short, mediocre?

Although ordinariness is indeed very normal among many students in DLSU, this once inconspicuous characteristic has begun to evolve and spread in varying degrees within the campus. An astonishing 62 percent of students surveyed within the six colleges admit that the mentality of being “average” has infected them and their friends. This revelation brings a flurry of questions to the community. One is whether time has eroded discipline, and has ceded to today’s culture that emphasizes freedom, enjoyment, and immediate gratification. Another is whether DLSU itself has permitted this behavior to bypass its guidance. Many students are positive that DLSU is one of the best universities, nonetheless. 76 percent still believe that it is one of the most prestigious schools in the country.

According to Milette Zamora of the Marketing Department, “Each generation has a totally different standard for excellence and a totally different standard for mediocrity.” Times have indeed changed; whether it was driven to an overhaul by the youth of to-day or the other way around, professors are constantly evolving to

In an attempt to fully understand the uni-versity’s current state, one must ask how DLSU is faring – in terms of educating its students, developing their awareness, addressing social problems, and coping with the times. A closer encounter with the people housing the institution – profes-sors and students alike, revealed different views on their beloved school.

“The Lasallian community must remember not to sugarcoat our very own

education.”

majority of the student population, this apathetic behav-ior towards lectures, homework, society, and culture contribute greatly to their mediocrity. Zamora, however shares a different outlook on students’ “indifference,” “All students have a great sense of apathy . . . As long as you know what you’re doing and the consequences of whatever it is that you’re about to do, don’t cry, deal with it. Move on. That’s what we teach our students here – life. And in the classroom, I try to teach as much of it as I can,” she shared.

Conversely, Simoun Ferrer, Student Council (SC) Vice President for Activities, believes that Lasallians are not truly apathetic, “I don’t think that they [students] are re-

ally apathetic. They just have different interests and it is up to the student leaders to address the needs that they have.”

Students’ apathy appeared to have a connection with their sentiments towards DLSU – 71 percent of students surveyed said that DLSU is overrated. Dean Barbara “Barbie” Wong of the College of Education (CED), how-ever, believes that DLSU deserves the esteemed academic standing that it currently enjoys. “Actually, the labels that have been given to [De] La Salle are not given by society. They

have been given by PAASCU or CHED. They already have set standards and we applied. We have met all of them [standards]. So, I can say, since we have met those standards, our standard for teaching is good. We showed them proofs – grades, physical facilities, our program,” the CED Dean revealed.

Apathy of students inside DLSU is just a microcosm of what is happening in the national scene. In a Philip-pine Daily Inquirer article entitled Catholic schools vow to seek truth about Arroyo, Monsignor Gerardo Santos, director of the Manila Archdiocesan Parochial Schools Association, quipped, “The number of students apathetic to the situation is growing; I think we need to once again go back to our sense of history which our youth needs to cultivate a sense of nationalism.”

meet the mercurial minds of students. One of the ways by which teachers try to meet the demands of their students is by attending a teaching workshop like ROLES. Teachers who are having problems communicating their ideas to their students attend this seminar in order to know how to adapt to Lasallian environment and to improve their teaching skills.

On their own opinions however, 77 percent of those surveyed believe that student organizations are instrumental in quelling their complacency possibly because of the holis-tic nature of these activities. Student organizations’ direct positive effect on academics is hard to ascertain though.

Another interesting case to note is that students sur-veyed cited the main reason for their mediocre-tendencies is “a lack in Administration’s motivation for students.” However, Zamora said, “It’s up to you to motivate and to pressure your peers to do better because we can only do so much and we have to meet halfway. It’s up to you, the students, to make sure to choose your teachers prop-erly.” Ironically, majority of students also admitted that their own lack of involvement contribute to their ineffectuality. Others comment that the trimestral system is not able to fully cover the essence of the courses they are taking. In the frenzy to finish the contents of the syllabus to cope with the system, these students submit to their own level of mediocrity. What is most disturbing from these findings is the fact that mediocrity breeds a more negative social predicament – apathetic behavior.

Uninterested, That’s All “We may have found a cure for most evils; but it has

found no remedy for the worst of them all – the apathy of human beings.” Helen Keller truly hit the nail on its head. Apathy, according to 72 percent of respondents, exists in the community. It is not farfetched to doubt that for the

CONSTRUCTS CONSTRUCTS

ICONS

DLSU formally recognized that both Mark Lester Benitez and Timoteo Gatchalian III “may have some personal responsibility over these (ineligibil-ity) incidents” and that De La Salle “understands their vulnerability given their age and sincere de-sire to be part of the University’s men’s basketball team.” This and other issues surrounding the two Green Archers were revealed in a press conference held last Oct. 26 at the Hyatt Regency in Roxas Boulevard.

Both Benitez and Gatchalian were key play-ers of Jose Rizal University (JRU) NCAA Junior’s Basketball team. Looking back at the two players’ performances in the UAAP seasons, it is no question that they have not performed to the level of stars like Joseph Yeo and Mark Cardona. The inescap-able questions that comes up in the mind of every Lasallian is then: Was sneaking their entries into DLSU “worth” it? Were their contributions to the Green Archers significant that their having falsified documents merited the media hype and the possible heavy punishment on the school?

Let the numbers talkThough highly recruited by other schools in his

high school years, Mark Benitez spent his collegiate career as a role player for the Green Archers. In his first University Athletics Association of the Philip-pines (UAAP) season, Benitez contributed fairly to the team averaging 4.1 points and 3.4 rebounds in 17.2 minutes of play. Donning jersey number 15, he produced quality minutes coming off as a substitute for De La Salle’s frontcourt and had a season-high 11 point, seven-rebound performance

against the NU Bulldogs on Aug. 2, 2003.In the following season, Benitez was one of

the key role players in the Green Archers 2004 championship run. He averaged 4.6 points and grabbed 3.7 rebounds per game in that season, in which he had a career-high 12 points and added six rebounds in a big win against UST on July 29 of that year.

The recent UAAP season showed a slowing down in Benitez’ career as he could only muster a 2.5 point per game scoring clip in limited minutes on the hardcourt.

Also a recruit from JRU High School, Tim Gatchalian joined the Green Archers as a third string point guard for the team, competing for minutes with TY Tang and JV Casio. In the Archer’s 2003 rookie-laden line-up, Gatchalian played in only 11 games and scored a total of 17 points that season. He saw less time on the floor during the 2004 campaign as he played in 10 games and did not appear in any Final Four game. Gatchalian was later cut from the team due to academic concerns.

DLSU averaged 81.7 points and 46.2 re-bounds in the 2005 seaason, from ubelt.com.

Both players also played for the ICTSI-La Salle team in the PBL in 2004.

Yet the performance of a player can not be gauged fully on numbers alone. Hustle in every play contributes to more effective defense. Effec-tive implementation of the coach’s system makes scoring easier for the team and lessens the pres-sure put on the team’s go-to guys. Running up and down the court, screens set, loose balls gathered, even moral support – these valuable facets of bas-ketball are invisible in the statistics, yet no team could reach the championship without these.

Pay the price Though their contributions were not astonish-

ing, the price that both Benitez and Gatchalian have to pay is of great consequence. Unfortu-nately for the two, Dr. Carmelita Quebengco, DLSU-Manila Executive Vice President said that their ineligibility has negated not only their athletic careers but their academic stays in De La Salle. Being ineligible to enter the University, all of their academic units were nullified.

“The moment we got the confirmation from the Department of Education (Dep-Ed), they became ineligible immediately. We told them, you will not get any credits taken. That in itself was the sanction to the players,” stated Dr. Quebengco. However, she assured that the University will be supportive of the future of the players especially in their academics. “I have told the players that if they want to finish college, we will help them get into a high school first to finish their high school. And if they want to enter college, we will also help them,” closed Dr. Quebengco.

With their admission of fielding in ineligible players in their men’s basketball team, De La Salle faces the possibility of being suspended from UAAP. The University reiter-ated its earlier statement that they will abide by the decision of the UAAP Board in relation to the mat-ter. “Like we said, we will accept the decision of the UAAP Board. We trust the UAAP to make a good decision regarding the matter,” Dr. Quebengco added.

However Br. Armin Luistro, FSC, President of the De La Salle System pointed out that the University was transparent in this case. “Personally, if the UAAP suspends us for other reasons, I’ll take that,” said Luistro. “But if we get suspended because the school was negligent, or deliber-ately covered its tracks or hid some-thing, I will fight this [the suspension] up to the Supreme Court,” added Luistro, showing the same valor seen in him during political rallies these past few months. Such statement has gained applause among alumni who were present during the “Hyatt 2” press conference.

Br. Armin also made clear about speculations on the possible changes to take place. “We are also careful of what we are to change. We don’t want to be in the extreme of being reactionary to this whole incident. With the issue being gone the proportions beyond the school, I think we have to allow the heat to die down.”

When asked about the effect of these findings to DLSU, Br. Armin responded, “A major overhaul is certain. This is a wake up call for us for the whole sports development program.”

Bro. Armin also clarified that “Part of what we are most con-cerned here is the values formation of our athletes. I think that will have to be a part of our whole program.”

‘UP TO THE SUPREME COURT’

One clickTechnology surely plays an integral role in the learning process

of Lasallians today. Nevertheless, it resembles a double-edged sword that could either help in the development of students or feed their penchant for mediocrity.

Dr. Barbie Wong believes that collating information today is definitely easier than before because of technology. Students could easily acquire pertinent data that would help in their studies by just surfing the internet. “During our time, it was really more difficult to find the materials. A lot of time was spent on doing those things. Now, you cannot compare in terms of amount of time. Nowadays, the things we were doing in 10 hours could be done in 10 minutes because of technology,” Dr. Wong reveals.

As Zamora shared, “Technology has changed the way you study . . . In our time, we have to find the page. Now, the computer finds it for you. Unfortunately, the computer chooses the wrong page. The problem there is, you don’t find other pages because the search engine just struts out one to you. So, that’s what you get, that’s what you print, that’s what you submit.”

As a result of blind reliance on what the computer provides, and without critically analyzing the data that the computer presents, students tend to submit mediocre outputs to their teachers and in turn, teachers give them average grades.

Undeniably, finding school materials is easier for students to-day. With just a click of the mouse, they will have everything they need. Today, what is to be done with technology and the materials that one acquires from it spell the difference between excellence and mediocrity.

We, the Student Leaders Indeed, a good mixture of academics and involvement is

needed to make a student holistic. In the past, DLSU has positioned itself actively on both University and national issues when it comes to student involvement. Even the students were active and played a great role in tackling political issues. Apparently, there has been a shift from that kind of perspective today. “What happens is that, in joining political parties, students really don’t become politically mature; rather they become election driven,” Student Council Sec-retary, Kate Lim shares. On issues, students should also be able to draw out their concerns through political parties. An organization is bonded by its virtues and ideologies, and not by the good mar-ket it produces. Simoun Ferrer supports, “Political parties have the

highest membership [among organizations]. Unfortunately, they are not able to mobilize their members or if they do so, [they are] only waiting for the coming student elections.”

It’s not all about publicizing students’ rights because the real challenge is educating the students as regards the roles they should portray and making them realize why they should serve their pur-poses. Through good dialogue and experience for the students, the face of apathy can be erased.

Backfire

What’s keeping Lasallians busy? Are we striving for excellence and setting priorities? Or has the image of DLSU become a mere glorification of what it has established? The Lasallian community must remember not to sugarcoat our very own education. There is a need to cure the existing cancers of our institution before it metastize. For in DLSU’s strive for excellence, we must overrule obscurity— leniency, apathy, and mediocrity.

80 percent of the respondents are still proud to be called Lasallians. The question is: do you deserve to be called one? As Denis Gutierrez of the Marketing Department challenged, “That’s for your generation to answer.”

The survey is taken out of a population of 377 students from the six colleges in De La Salle University. 62% admit that they have settled for mediocrity in their academic performance. This can be related to apathy prevalent in the campus, as attested by 72% of the respondents. However, support for student organizations remains at a high rate – 77%. Although 63% admit that they have failed to protect the university’s image, 71% claim that DLSU is overrated. But a towering rate of 80% among those surveyed are still proud to be called Lasallians.

PHOTO BY ERIC SIYARTWORK AND GRAPHICS BY JAN JAUDIAN

Benitez and Gatchalian:

The LaSallianNovember 200514 The LaSallianNovember 2005 15

DONELLE GAN, DON STA. ROSA, AND REUBEN EZRA TERRADO

CONSTRUCTS

WERE THEY WORTH “IT?”

MICHELLE ANDREWS, JULIUS FABREAG, JED GONZALES, AND CELINE HERNANDEZ

Des Hernandez definitely knows what the saying “No pain, no gain” means. After all, this has been the adage that has led her to suc-cess.

After nailing a spot in the UAAP line-up in her rookie year, it seemed like her season was full of promises. Just as when her volleyball career was starting to flourish, ACL caught hold of her in one of her trainings. For five months, Hernandez wasn’t allowed to play, forcing her to sit out the rest of her freshman year.

The injury never broke her spirit; instead, it made her a stronger athlete as she made a powerful comeback in 2002. Though the Lady Spikers finished the season as runners-up, it was just the start of Hernandez’ breakout performances.

During her third playing year, Hernandez was one of the key play-ers for the Lady Spikers’ championship run against the FEU Tamaraws. It was also her most memorable year as they had to beat the UST Tigresses twice in the semifinals before reaching the finals round. In addition, Hernandez was also hailed as that season’s MVP.

Last year, Hernandez together with Maureen Penetrante, led the Lady Spikers once again to its second title. This season, the 20 year old volleybelle, who is well-known for her fast plays and running spikes, delivered once again for the Lady Spikers as the Taft-based squad brought home a rare three-peat championship. However, a third championship wasn’t the only thing in store for Hernandez because she also won her second MVP honors.

At present, Hernandez has finally fulfilled her childhood dream. She now trains with the Philippine National Volleyball team. With her sheer talent and winning personality, this volleybelle will certainly go a long way.

DESIREEHERNANDEZ

Joseph Yeo, Khristine Prado, Faith Dimak-iling, and Desiree Hernandez- what do these athletes have in common? Besides being members of championship teams, they all have made names in their re-spective sports. But one thing stands out among the rest- their love for De La Salle and the game. The LaSallian takes a deeper look at how these stars have evolved through the years.

With superstars dominating the Green Archers’ roster during his freshman year, Joseph Yeo wasn’t able to create some noise. However, he managed to redeem himself in the years to come and even ended his collegiate career with a bang.

Hailing from Xavier School, Yeo didn’t have things easily going for him. First, he had to adjust to Franz Pumaren’s system, take a backseat from his usual scoring role in high school basketball, and play second fiddle to sensationalized rookie, Mark Cardona.

In 2001, he scored an average of 3.4 points for every nine and a half minutes per game. Not bad for a rookie but the performance was still lacking. Nevertheless, the Green Archers, led by Mike Cortez and Ren Ren Ritualo, went on to win the championship against the Ateneo Blue Eagles.

As his playing time doubled on his sophomore year, Yeo started to showcase his skills. His points started to increase, while also chipping out in the defensive aspect as well. Despite the fact that the Archers failed to defend their crown, it was not a complete loss for Yeo as he was touted to be one of the top gunners alongside Cardona to lead DLSU in the following year.

2003 was a rebuilding year for the Green Archers as half of the team was made up of eight rookies. However, it was a different scenario for Yeo who was then slowly breaking out from his usual performances. Together with Cardona, the duo tried to lead the young De La Salle team but still fell short of getting into the finals.

In the following year, the Green Archers were destined for success. Despite a slow start, Coach Pumaren’s troops managed to peak at the right time as they won nine straight games, and eventually went on to bring home the crown. Yeo also had his own share of success, amazing the crowd with his flashy moves and nerve-wracking shots.

With Cardona leaving for professional basketball, Yeo was assigned to be the main man for the Green Archers this season. He had to lead his team on the court while scoring precious points in the other end. Though the Green Archers were considered to be the underdogs prior the season, Yeo proved them wrong as he and the rest of the Green Archers finished the year at second place.

Individually, Yeo shot and defended more than what was expected of him, thereby earning him a slot in the coveted Mythical Five lineup. Yeo has already dominated high school and college basketball. Will he also do the same in the PBA?

YEOJOSEPH

Who says girls and basketball don’t mix?Well, not in the case of Khristine Prado as basketball had blended really well in her life. In fact, she even turned out

to be one of the best players in the women’s division after bagging the MVP award this year.Prado played high school basketball with the School of St. Anthony cagebelles. However, pressure was not yet felt

during those times. As she pursued a higher level of playing which was collegiate basketball, Prado started to feel that she was faced with something more than what she had really bargained for.

In 2001, Prado stood out from a bunch of basketball hopefuls but that didn’t guarantee her a slot in Coach Juno Sauler’s starting five. Besides the fact that the Lady Archers were full of basketball hotshots, Prado was still young and had a whole lot to learn.

On her rookie and sophomore year, Prado slowly adjusted to the competitiveness of collegiate ball. In addition, she had to focus in developing a stronger presence inside the paint by practicing her post-up moves. As she gradually improved her defense, the Lady Archers continued their dominance in the UAAP as they bagged the championships in 2001 and 2002.

As the Lady Archers lost center Princess Mariano due to graduation, Prado was assigned to be the starting center for the team. Undaunted by the task, Prado lived up to the job and even helped out with the Lady Archers’ offense. However, all good things had to come to an end as the Lady Archers fell short of their fifth championship run.

In season 67, Prado turned out to be the person in charge as she averaged 13.2 points and 9.9 rebounds, secur-ing her a spot in the Mythical Five roster. She continued her dominance in her final year, scoring 20.1 markers per

game while grabbing an average of 11.1 rebounds as well. Though the Lady Archers weren’t able to make it to the Final Four, Prado’s efforts weren’t left unnoticed. In fact, she was a shoo-in for the Mythical Five and

even went all the way to bring home the MVP honors.Now that her basketball career has come to an end, Prado will never forget how basketball has

influenced her life. It is through this sport that she has gained friendship, development of her skills, and maturity as a person.

Next year, Prado won’t be around the hardcourt anymore; nevertheless, she still believes that with hardwork, self-confidence, and dedication, the Lady Archers would be back on cham-

pionship ground once again.

KHRISTINEPRADO

Knights. Bishops. Rooks. Sounds unusual? Not for Faith Dimakiling as her chess career was launched at an early age through the

influence of brother Oliver Dimakiling, a three-time UAAP MVP.For the past five years, Dimakiling has shaped up to be one of the strongest forces in the UAAP chess

circuit. She started off on the right track after bagging the Rookie of the Year honors. In addition, she also won a gold medal in Board three during her freshman year.

That was just the beginning for Dimakiling. On her second year of play, she skipped Board 2 and im-mediately moved up to Board 1. The decision turned out to be one good move as the Lady Woodpushers clinched its first ever UAAP title.

For the next two seasons, her team ended up in third place positions; nevertheless, that didn’t stop this well-rounded player from yearning for more. Though the Lady Woodpushers fell a spot short from winning the title, Dimakiling is still proud of her team’s run this year. Individually, she brought home a bronze medal after playing Board 1 for the last time.

As Dimakiling prepares herself for the real world, she will never forget how chess has become a huge chunk of her everyday life. She will definitely miss the tight bonding with her teammates, rigorous training, and support of the DLSU community. Given the chance to play again for De La Salle, she would be willing to go through it all over again, this time around, she will try to balance her time better and focus more on training by joining less affiliations.

Dimakiling has not only proved herself to be an intelligent player but she has also been a queen in her own way, displaying excellent leadership to finish her chess career on a high note.

FAITHDIMAKILING

Four shadesof Green

PHOTOS BY SHANA BANIEL AND CHYNNA CHAN

The LaSallianNovember 200516 The LaSallianNovember 2005 17

ICONSICONS

Players win the games. The coach loses it. This cliché goes to show the burden a coach has on his back

in every game; however, this line doesn’t seem to be applicable to Franz Pumaren.

Since he started coaching the De La Salle Green Archers, the team has finished respectably; if not, it has went on to win it all. And in the world of collegiate basketball where players come and go and criticisms continue to rise, his accomplishments had made Pumaren even more outstanding.

Coaches, collegiate or professional, have their systems as their personalities. This is what separates Pumaren from the other coaches. His system has not just earned him his name in the UAAP but it has also been responsible for the overall success of the Green Archers.

Pulling out from the grass rootsThe importance of having blue chip players coming in every

year is not to be denied. These athletes ensure the continuity of the basketball tradition DLSU is all accustomed to. When veteran star players have already exhausted their eligibility years, the need to

find young talents becomes more essential than ever. The transition from one batch to another would become more seamless if the talent is already present. The team would be more adept in coping with the loss of a key player because a young gun is already waiting on the wings, ready to shine.

De La Salle’s continuous success is about finding individual talents and polishing them together to become a deadlier and more cohesive team. Pumaren, together with his entire coaching staff, should be given credit on how they spot talents from all over the country and their excellence in developing them. But De La Salle’s image as the premier basketball destination for all aspiring collegiate players also assists the team in acquiring these sought-after young guns.

The tale of the Fab 5The starting five for any basketball game is indispensable

because they usually set the approach on how the game would be played. When a team started off the wrong foot, it is usually very difficult to get back on track because the opposing team might have already built a large lead and gained the natural force of

momentum. Pumaren’s system does not carry any peculiarity on how it sets the starters. What gives his system the edge is how the whole aspect of player rotation is being devised and utilized.

Games on the early part of the season would see an experiment-ing De La Salle basketball system; the rotation is not yet consistent, the starting five is always open to modifications, and the delegation of duties is usually fluctuating.

But as the season approaches its middle part, Pumaren would show a more consistent approach on player rotations. The starting five from this point is usually what would be utilized throughout the remaining part of the season. The hierarchy of relievers (bench players) would also become steadier. Players are expected to have already instilled in their minds what their respective roles are the moment they step on the court. Except for some minor tweaks, De La Salle is good to go from that point on.

Stars are shining brightlyFreedom is achieved when one is free from restraints. It enables

an individual to act how they want to act, do what they like to do, and in basketball terminologies – play and showcase, in an unadulterated manner, their skills.

Mike Cortez blossomed when he was given the freedom to run the team and take matters to his own hands. Mark Cardona and Joseph Yeo had breakout performances during their final years because they were also emancipated from the clutches of a rigid and authoritative coaching system.

The go-to guys in Pumaren’s tenure as coach are composed mostly of guards. Except for Don Allado, Ren-Ren Ritualo, Dino Aldeguer, Cortez, Cardona, and recently Yeo are guards that have been in the forefront of the Archers’ offense. The guards of Pumaren have consistently had different arsenals. Cortez, Yeo, and Cardona are more known for their slashing moves to the baskets. On the other hand, Ritualo, JV Casio, Aldeguer, and BJ Manalo were considered to be the outside specialists of the team.

It’s about recognizing the skills and potential of players. Franz Pumaren has this extraordinary keen eye on spotting, beneath his roster, a star that could top all stars. And once he sees it, he would always fling it to the galaxy of stardom and let it shine there – freely and brightly.

FrontlineMark Telan, Jun Limpot, and Noli Locsin – these were the past

forwards of De La Salle that were responsible for putting the points on the scoreboard for the Archers. Not in the Pumaren system. The forwards and centers under the Pumaren system were more of bruisers, enforcer types of players. Adonis Sta. Maria, Willie Wilson, Carlo Sharma, and Jerwin Gaco gave added presence in the middle as they clogged the lanes, grabbed rebounds, blocked shots, and defended the other team’s low post threat. De La Salle’s frontlines don’t need to score since the guards do the damage.

The Pumaren system relies on screens, ball movement, and moving without the ball. The big guys have a role to play as they provide intimidating screens for their guards, who off the screens have an open sight at a long distance shot or a good lane to the basket for an easy score. This is the centerpiece of almost all of its plays in the halfcourt offense. Posting up is almost a last resort.

Versatility is the keyRyan Araña. Willie Wilson. Mark Cardona. Three players

from different De La Salle eras. What do they have in common? Aside from helping DLSU’s cause for basketball crowns, they are the guys that embody what every La Sallian aspires to become – to

be versatile and become masters of their domain. In the world where multitasking is ever important, Pumaren’s

system employs guys who could do it on both ends of the floor. It is not enough that one can score; he must also have the skills and the heart to run for loose balls, play defense honestly and consistently, and shift from one position to another when the situation calls for it. Yes, it’s good to be a pure point guard or small forward but wouldn’t it be sweeter when one can shift comfortably from being a point to playing the two spot or from being a small forward to playing the point? It would certainly bring up some mismatches that the team could exploit to rout their adversaries.

That feared full-court pressDefense wins championships? Tell that to the Green Archers.Of course, the Pumaren system will not be complete without

the dreaded full-court pressure defense. Coaches of the opposition have spent most of their precious scouting and practice time on how to even contain this dilemma of a defense. The peskiness of the guards has become a household name in Pumaren’s press. He may go with a one-guard press who is pesky enough to pressure the point guard. Or he can go to a press involving all the wingmen to bother the ball handler and the intended receivers.

It creates problems in the opposition’s offensive patterns. It makes bringing down the ball to the frontcourt a challenge to the point guards of the league, who, if not composed enough, will make poor offensive decisions on their part. And even if the point guard crosses the halfcourt stripe, valuable time has already been shaven off for them to set up a decent play.

More often than not, the pressure defense has led to numerous fastbreak opportunities for easy baskets at the other end, another hot commodity of the Archers. A barrage of turnover points energizes the Animo crowd which rubs on to the players – something that is very much an intangible factor for the Green Archers.

Conditioned ArchersEmploying a full-court press all game long, in addition to the

halfcourt game of screening, ball movement, and moving without the ball, needs players who are up to it, well-trained, and well-con-ditioned to do the task. This is where the training program of De La Salle basketball comes into play. The conditioning of the players has been, bar-none, the most underrated, and even unnoticed to some, facet of the Pumaren system. For without this trait, operating the system of Pumaren will not even be possible.

The Archers have a conditioning coach in its fold in the name of Dan Rose, maybe the only kind in the UAAP, responsible for the conditioning of the players. This season and in the past seasons, it was evident that it worked for the Archers. Whether it is in the cool Araneta Coliseum or the oven-hot Blue Eagle Gym, the players’ conditioning seems to have responded in any conditions, a far cry from their opponents in Season 68. Cramps, sprains, or even ACL injuries are a rarity in Pumaren’s players. Except for Manalo, the Archers never had a player who had a major injury in the tenure of Pumaren.

Pumaren’s system has obviously worked wonders for the Green Archers. His coaching brilliance has given the University 100-plus victories during his term, eight Final Four appearances in as many chances, seven Finals stints, and more importantly, five champion-ships in eight years, an achievement that has put him among the coaching greats in Philippine college basketball.

The Green Archers did it with different players, different op-ponents, but only ONE coach on its fold.

Now who says players win the games?

umarenConnectionPREUBEN EZRA TERRADO AND REY CHRISTIAN SIKAT

ICONS

the

PHOTO BY ERIC SIY

The LaSallianNovember 200518 The LaSallianNovember 2005 19

ICONS

EARLENE CLARISSA CHING AND JEWELLYN GAY ZARENO

Every year, De La Salle aspires to bag the general championship title. Despite continuous efforts, DLSU still lags behind perennial leader UST; nevertheless, the school still prides itself for being one of the contenders when it comes to basketball and volleyball.

From 2000 to 2004, De La Salle had been dominant in these sports. However, this year has been an exception as the Lady Spik-ers were the sole team to bring home the glory.

Has DLSU lost its spark? Or have other schools just gotten bet-ter? Maybe yet, this is simply not DLSU’s year in the UAAP.

With Mon Jose, Ren-Ren Ritualo, and ROY Mike Cortez handling the reins for the Green Archers, nothing went wrong for this squad. As a team, they dominated the hardcourt, bagging their third-peat championship.

Ritualo was once again the court general. Mark Cardona was the sensational rookie. With these two taking care of the Green Archers’ offense and the rest of the Green Archers chipping in as well, the green and white squad ended up as victors once again.

Despite the departure of Ritualo, the Green Archers still managed to have a good start as they swept the first round of elimina-tions. However, as the season progressed, the Green Archers lost their momentum and surrendered their crown to their archrivals, the Ateneo Blue Eagles. Overall, this season turned out to be a learning experience for the four-time champions.

Roussel Ocampo. Jill San Diego. Debbie Santos. Manalo twins. The Lady Archers simply had an all-star cast. The team was not centered on just one hero so without a doubt, the Lady Archers went all the way to bring home their second title.

The Lady Archers were unstoppable. With Roussel Ocampo playing her final year and Ginny Velarde breaking out from her usual performances, the Lady Archers finished the season with a clean 12-0 record and another championship in hand.

Losing head coach Juno Sauler and star player Ocampo didn’t take its toll on the Lady Archers as they clinched their fourthvv straight crown. The Lady Archers displayed poise, experience, and a lot of heart throughout the entire season but in the end, it was Velarde’s four pressure-packed free throws in the finals that sealed the win for the Taft-based squad.

This was not the year for the Green Spikers as there weren’t enough players to lead the young team. Lacking in ex-perience, the team had no choice but to settle for fourth place.

Another year older, another year better. True enough, the Green Spikers improved from their former fourth place finish and even brought home its first ever volleyball championship. Team captain Janley Patrona delivered the cudgels for the Green Spikers while rookie AJ Mallari manned the defensive zone. Patrona also won the MVP, Best Spiker, and Best Server honors to prove his domi-nance on the court.

After losing Patrona due to academic reasons and other veteran players, the Green Spikers were back on the starting line once again. Errors during endgames and fatigue turned out to be costly as the Green Spikers failed to defend its crown when it lost to the UST Tigers in the finals round.

Second best. With power-house FEU dominating the vol-leyball scene, De La Salle contin-ued to settle as the runner-ups. Rookie Maureen Penetrante and the improvement of services were the bright spots for the Lady Spikers but a championship title needs more than that.

It was the same old story for the Lady Spikers. FEU went home with the champion-ship again while the Lady Spikers ponder why they continue to lost to the FEU Lady Tama-raws and remain as runner-ups.

FEU is just too good to be true. They swept the eliminations round to clinch their third straight title. On the other hand, the Lady Spikers took second place by virtue of a better quotient against the UST Tigresses as both teams ended the eliminations with identical 11-3 scorecards.

Maureen Penetrante’s blocks, De-siree Hernandez’s spikes and Chie Saet’s precision setting- the keys to winning a championship. With hunger for the crown and revenge in their mind, the Lady Spikers had to defeat UST twice in the semifinals in order to arrange a finals match against the Lady Tamaraws. From that point on, the Lady Spikers proved that they were the better team as they trounced the Lady Tams in the finals.

Lady Spikers-epitome of domi-nance. The Lady Spikers went all the way, sweeping the eliminations and winning their second straight crown. Penetrante was also dominant in her own way as she bagged the MVP, Best Blocker, and Best Spiker honors.

It certainly is an excellent year for the Lady Spikers. After their domi-nance over the Shakey’s V league, they went on to lead the pack in UAAP women’s volleyball and win their third consecutive crown. The team might have not been as invincible and dominating as before after losing key player Maureen Penetrante but this year’s line-up remained potent and relatively intact. There were several surprising performances by other squads that created a little challenge in the eliminations but that didn’t stop them from making their way to the finals. They outclassed Adamson University in a best-of-three match-up, accordingly giving DLSU its only championship title for the UAAP first half.

While their female counterparts seemed to be having all the blessings in the world, the Green Spikers continue to experience a decline in their finishes as they finished the season at fifth place. The departure of several veterans from last year’s roster proved to be too heavy to handle as the team took an early vacation after a loss against Adamson finally pushed them out of contention.

The season ended earlier than usual for the Lady Archers as they fell one game short of reaching the semifinals. Though there were last minute attempts from the squad to improve their standing by pulling upsets on powerhouses Adamson and Ateneo in the second round, this was still not enough for them to grab a slot in the Final Four. Despite having a potent line up at hand, the coaching staff strived to come up with the right combination on the floor. In addition, the girls also encountered several bad breaks in the middle of the season and struggled to stage a winning streak.

It was another come-from-behind entry to the UAAP finals for the Ar-chers this season. After falling to a 6-4 standing and encountering several controversies along the way, the Archers proved their detractors wrong once more as they managed to squeeze their way in to meeting the FEU Tamaraws again in the finals. Déjà vu, you say? Not quite, as the squad didn’t have any saving three-point shot this time to pave the way for another championship. They sure had their chances but failing to convert at the remaining seconds of the game became a detrimental factor to their loss. Nevertheless, it was a good finish for the squad as they gave a good fight despite having the clear disadvantage in height and experience.

The team of destiny. Prior to the season, the Green Archers were tagged as the underdogs. Nonetheless, the team led by Cardona had a huge turnaround in the second round, winning nine straight games. The Green Archers became stron-ger individuals and with JV Casio’s three-pointer in the remaining seconds of Game 3, the trophy was back on De La Salle’s side once again.

Despite gallant efforts and vigorous preparations, the Lady Archers weren’t able to finish the season with flying col-ors as they were defeated by the Ateneo Lady Eagles in the semifinals round, thus resulting to another third place finish. Nev-ertheless, Coach Jose’s troops managed to step up as they learned to play more together and matured into the players they ought to be.

After having the time of their lives last season, the Green Spikers failed to make a repeat as they succumbed to pow-erhouses FEU and UP, thus resulting to a fourth place finish. Though Hansel Go and AJ Mallari exhausted their playing years, it still wasn’t enough to make them last till the finals round.

The Green Spikers are back in the game once more. With returning super-star Janley Patrona leading the team together with AJ Mallari and Pio de Cas-tro, the Green Spikers had no problems in setting up their plays. Their thirst for the championship and consistency with their offense were the keys as the Green Spikers were back on championship ground for the second time.

The arrival of new coaches Mon Jose, Dominic Uy, and Regina Jose, as well as the addition of eight new rookies, meant an adjustment season for the de-fending champs. The team had a shaky start due to some injuries but it managed to come back together and end the sea-son with five straight victories. However, the wins weren’t enough as the Lady Archers fell to the third spot after years of being queens of the hardcourt.

With the unavailability of veterans, the Green Archers winded up in fourth place, a far cry from their former fin-ishes. Entering the second round with a 5-2 scorecard, the young Archers squad, which was composed of eight rookies, suffered a string of uncharac-teristic losses, thus resulting to their early elimination.

Green Archers

According to former OSD Director Danny Jose, one factor why some De La Salle sports have grown to be dominant is the establishment of the Enrique Razon Sports Complex. With the complex, the athletes had the facilities at their disposal. They now have a place where they can really train.

In addition, the support for all the De La Salle sports has slowly increased through the years. The University supports all the players, coaching staff, and team managers. The players in return, dedicate their lives to their respective sports and try their best to bring glory to De La Salle.

This year is an exception. A lot of the first half sports weren’t able to regain their dominance. In fact, some of them weren’t even able to make it to the Final Four. The reason? “ We weren’t able to get the recruits we really wanted, ” Jose stated.

LadyArchers

GreenSpikers

LadySpikers

20032002 2004 200520012000

Evolution of De La Salle’s basketball and volleyball teams

Through the Years

Reason for dominance

The LaSallianNovember 200520 The LaSallianNovember 2005 21

ICONSICONS

Image clearly matters, especially for an institution holding a revered position in Philippine education such as De La Salle University but it is not everything. Images can be nothing but illusions woven by the very best spin doctors around yet it can also be an inextricable combination of substance and style.

Within an institution such as De La Salle, the threat of contro-versy that can impact its reputation is often imminent. Certainly, the University has had its share of controversies from the alleged siphoning of money from the AUDPRAC fund in the Accountancy Department to the recent Green Archer ineligibility controversy. How the latter is being handled by the University provides a relative extremum upon which to observe DLSU’s “controversy-handling” skill.

Disclosure It is clear in every Lasallian’s mind: what began as a concern

among college registrars quickly spiraled into a heated issue receiving the national media’s scrutiny and shaking the school’s credibility.

Recapitulating, the University disclosed that it had unwittingly fielded two academically ineligible athletes in its men’s basketball team over the last three seasons and offered to relinquish last year’s championship and this year’s runner-up status. This move reflected honesty and repentance – signs of transparency – virtues that DLSU highly regards as an institution.

In the aftermath of the press disclosure, Coach Franz Pumaren was quoted in Philippine Star article Was Benitez a victim or culprit? as saying, “In my eight years as (De) La Salle coach, I’ve recruited more than 10 marquee players who were turned down because they were academically ineligible… So if a player not academi-cally eligible was accepted, there had to be something wrong in the admissions process.”

DLSU EVP Dr. Carmelita Quebengco had said it is not the University’s job to authenticate all documents as it is not a govern-ment requirement. “The assumption is that – people are honest and they will submit only authentic documents.” Moreover, checking all documents would lengthen the process and may be detrimen-tal to applicants. However, she has clarified that there is now an agreement that enrollment for students with hand-carried admission documents will become official only after authentication.

When the news spilled out to national media, many feared that the repercussion would damage the school’s reputation, Dr. Quebengco shared. “A lot of people say ‘how are you going to resurrect the image of De La Salle?’” But she believes that the University has not lost anything. “It was an honest mistake and the mistake there was that we trusted.” Neither does she consider being truthful and transparent a fault. For her, what would be shameful to know is that the school was fielding an ineligible player and engaging in a cover-up.

Regarding the possibility that the UAAP may want to conduct its own investigation spanning the last 10 years, Quebengco ex-pressed that she would be amenable to the prospect provided that all the other schools in the UAAP will be subjected to the same and DLSU is not singled out.

Br. Armin Luistro revealed, “There will be a reassessment of the Sports Development program (in DLSU). There will be a major overhaul of the process.” He encouraged people to “allow the heat to die down,” and noted that “every sports controversy is a source of division and a lot of finger pointing. We should speak publicly about it without sweeping things under the rug.”

The image game Every organization, for profit or not, has its own strengths, flaws and vulner-

abilities. It is but normal for most organizations to play up their assets and conceal their troubles from those on the outside as each interaction often involves a certain level of confidence and trust.

De La Salle has one entity doing just that – the Marketing Communication Of-fice (MCO), which executes the school’s overall marketing and imaging efforts to enhance public perception and position DLSU as a world-class institution. in fact, the MCO organized the Hyatt presscon, which included a set design and a promotional documentary of DLSU.

The question that now arises is: Where do the lines of image and confidentiality, openness, and transparency merge and separate?

This question is crucial for educational institutions as they do not merely provide the usual goods and services. They are after all in the business of shaping minds, inculcating values, and preparing students for life outside its borders. Furthermore, there is a need to immediately address concerns that can affect students and the community, whether it is mostly an internal matter or an issue thrusting the University to the public sphere with the clear potential to wreak havoc on its external image. Nonetheless, transparency does not entail a juicy tell-all or a slew of accounts from unequally reliable sources. It is best to have a degree of coherence and the oppor-tunity to retain propriety.

Over the last few months in battling for governmental change, DLSU has emerged as a strong educational unit. However, it seems to have considerable cracks within its own system. If the university demands transparency from the government, it must start with itself. Not only must De La Salle contend with issues concerning the national government’s integrity, it is urgent for it to uphold its own integrity while assigning proper accountability and maintaining grace under this volley of fire.

More questions than answers As promised, a press conference was held at the Hyatt Regency

on Oct. 26 to share the preliminary findings of the four-man com-mittee. Information from the Administration regarding the issue was limited during the investigation and was mostly coming from the Office of the Executive Vice President. The probe conducted by DLSU tagged statistician Raul Lacson as the hander of the falsified documents to the two Archers. It also implicated assistant manager Manny Salgado as having knowledge of the falsification.

A sentiment after the press conference was that it raised more questions than the answers it gave. As put in The Philippine Star article DLSU head to contest UAAP ban, “There was no explosive revelation as to who are responsible for the mess...” Servillano dela Cruz, a La Salle High School Batch 56 alumnus, stole the limelight when he accused Br. Armin of being the biggest hypocrite La Salle has produced and asked,” How could they (Benitez and Gatchal-ian) fail the government exam and pass the (De) La Salle exam?”

Allegations that Lacson and Salgado have been used as scapegoats have also been floated. It was also reported in the Oct. 28 issue of the Philippine Star that a relative of one of the players implicated claimed whitewash. Furthermore, according to Manila Times article Franz believes La Salle probe findings ‘factual’, the UAAP board was not satisfied with the results of the probe and “will now conduct its own inquiry and may seek the help of the National Bureau of Investigation.”

On its part, DLSU has clarified that the investigation is still ongoing and that the information presented were those that were verifiable. It was also stressed that the University was not involved in an intentional attempt to withhold information and had to follow certain procedures.

Dr. Quebengco said, “As long as you are telling the truth, you have nothing to worry about... The uppermost in my mind is that to ensure that trust is not broken.” Adding to this, DLSU President

ISABELLE REGINA YUJUICO

Long before the “cheap shot” incident involving Arwind Santos and Manny Salgado and the ineligibility issue came into the fray, there was the De La Salle University (DLSU)-College of St. Benilde (CSB) conundrum, which involved now PBA stalwart, Jun Limpot, Mark Benitez’s fellow Jose Rizal University (JRU) High School standout, Johnedel Cardel, and Jonas Mariano.

This controversy centered on the eligibility of the latter three cagers to play for the Green Archers during the early 1990s, given the al-legations that they were enrolled in CSB; thus, as a separate entity from DLSU, player-sharing should not be permitted.

However, then Green Archers’ coach Derek Pumaren belied the accusations saying that, “none of my boys were ever enrolled in St. Benilde that’s why nothing has come out of the gossip.”

Contrary to his coach’s statement, Jonas Mariano said that, “Starting this semester, we were all enrolled at La Salle Main. None of us are from St. Benilde anymore.”

The controversy truly took the UAAP bas-ketball world by storm. The blurring of the lines between DLSU and CSB exacerbated the problem. Sports enthusiasts and students alike were confused as to what the real relationship of CSB and DLSU is.

To settle the score, DLSU’s registrar office was consulted and it was then confirmed that the three players were enrolled in DLSU. They trans-ferred the moment the controversy erupted.

Source: A Question of Identity (Annex-Y Supreme Court GR No. 109002)

Handling

Limpot, et al Conundrum

CONTROVERSY “As long as you are telling the truth, you have nothing to worry about... The uppermost in my mind is to ensure that trust is not broken.”

-Dr. Quebengco

PHOTO BY LEXIE YU

BY ROYCE ROBERT ZUÑIGA

The LaSallianNovember 200522 The LaSallianNovember 2005 23

STANDPOINTSSTANDPOINTS

MENAGERIE EDITOR

ART & GRAPHICS EDITOR

EDITOR IN CHIEFASSOCIATE EDITOR

MANAGING EDITORUNIVERSITY EDITOR

SPORTS EDITOR

PHOTO EDITORCIRCULATIONS MANAGER

OFFICE MANAGER

Paul Darwynn GarilaoDonelle GanLuis Emmanuel De VeraRoyce Robert ZuñigaJuan Carlos ChavezEarlene Clarissa ChingJan Michael JaudianEric SiyAlejandro Almendras IVKristel Kaye Chua

CORRESPONDENTS

ARTISTS

PHOTOGRAPHERS

LAYOUT CREDITS

COVER CREDITS

Joyce Anne Alfonso, Ross Vergel Delantar, Paulo Jose Mutuc, Francesca Sta. Ana, Dianne Mar-gareth Tang, Nicole Tangco, Jose Francisco Un-son, Reuben Ezra Terrado, Don Eric Sta. Rosa, Rey Christian Sikat, Isabelle Regina Yujuico, Jewellyn Gay Zareno, Michelle Andrews, Julius Fabreag, Jed Gonzales, Celine Hernandez, Jensen Ching, Roshan Nandwani

Carvin Choa, Ian Roman, Richard Rustum Gut-tierez, BC Uy, Gerard Philip So Chan

Lexie Yu, Josef Lim, Tianel Espiritu, Chynna Chan, Shana Baniel

Luis Emmanuel De Vera, Jan Michael Jaudian

Eric Siy

ADVISER Noelle Leslie Dela Cruz

The LaSallian has its editorial office at 502 Bro. Gabriel Connon Hall, De La Salle University, 2401 Taft Avenue, Manila 1004. TLS can be contacted through the tele-phone number 5244611 loc. 701, or through its e-mail address, the_lasallian@yahoo.com. All contributions are subject to editing for clarity or space. None of the contents of this publication may be reprinted without the express written permission of the Editorial Board.

LaSallianThe

The bastion of issue-oriented critical thinking.ANNIVERSARY SPECIAL