By Danilo P. Padua, PhD
responded to.”
No permit, no exam. This was a pervasive policy in almost all schools before, private or public, including State Universities and Colleges. Being a part then of the university faculty, I also implemented this.
We thought that this is one way to instill discipline in our students.
I asked some of my students before why they had no clearance from the university. Clearance means, students have no obligations, specially financial, from the university under their names. It is a prerequisite for an exam permit. Many of those who were not cleared actually had money given by their parents/guardians to pay their dues to the university.
But why are they not cleared? According to my inquiries, many of them used their money for personal purposes or “luho”, for their barkadas, etc. This is where the thought of student discipline comes in. And so the No permit, No exam policy is obviously a fit.
However, there were others who had legitimate reasons such as death of the family provider, usually the father; forced to help some relatives/ friends who were hospitalized or in dire need of cash; their money was actually lost through theft; and temporarily diverted the money to buy some of their necessities. Here, compassion is in vital play.
I have been approached by several students before at various times, and asked to be helped in their predicament. Some of them were never my students in my classes. They told me of their pitiful situations. After evaluating what they told me and how they narrated their stories to me, and convinced that they were truthful, I did three things: One, I signed promissory notes in the cashier’s office as guarantor of their financial obligations; two, I shelled out my own money to help them (male or female) without expecting that they will pay back although they said it is a loan; and three, I made an agreement with them if they were my students, that I allow them to take the exam on condition that I will not check their papers until they had paid their total dues. I applied what was the best choice and acceptable for the student.
Fortunately, all those that I guaranteed dutifully paid although some of them took some time to pay. A handful of those I handed money came back to repay, even 1 or 2 years later. I did not accept their “payment” of course except for one who insisted as he graduated already and with a good job.
Most of those who approached me had real, truthful and pitiful stories that are needed to be heard, understood and properly responded to.
This is why when Pres. BBM signed into law R.A. 11984 – An act mandating public and private educational institutions to allow disadvantaged students with unpaid tuition and other school fees to take the periodic and final examinations and for other purposes (also known as: No permit, No exam Prohibition Act) last Feb 26, 2024, I was so elated with a long approving smile.
Thanks to “Tolome”, er Sen Ramon Bong Revilla Jr. the main author of the Law. Yes, I agree that the No Permit, No Exam policy was traumatic to many students with legitimate reasons. I have seen that myself. It had an effect on the result of their exams later, as some students volunteered to me.
With R.A. 11984, students will really have a better fighting chance to perform more satisfactorily in their academic struggles.
The law covers all public and private institution s for basic and higher education, tech-voc institutions in courses exceeding one year.
The Coordinating Council of Private Educational Assoc of the Phil (COCOPEA) welcomes the Act. In fact, they profess that they are quite understanding of the plight of their students.
Look at this provision of the Law. Part of Sec 4 somehow details the mandate of educational institutions and DSWD to the disadvantaged students. It says:
This Act shall be without prejudice to the right and power of educational institutions to require the submission of promissory note, withhold records and credentials of students and such other legal and administrative remedies available to them for the collection of unpaid dues
DSWD shall issue the necessary certificate on the disadvantaged status of a student due to calamities, emergencies, force majeure , and other good and justifiable reasons in accordance with rules and regulations to be issued by the DSWD…
Provided finally that educational institutions may voluntarily, without need of the certification mentioned herein, allow a disadvantaged student with outstanding tuition and other fees, to take examinations and release their relevant records and credentials in accordance with its policies, rules and regulations.
That’s fair enough.
Question is, “Is there a safeguard in the implementation of the No permit, No exam Prohibition Act?” According to “Tolome”, there is. Only qualified students, as determined by DSWD, will be benefitted.
I just don’t know, how that could be truthfully done. Hopefully, it will work perfectly fine.
By the way, Senator Revilla also principally authored R.A. 11982 Expanding the Senior citizen Act of 2016. This is a law in which octogenarians and nonagenarians will be given additional monetary incentive . This is based on Senate Bill No. 2028 filed by Sen Bong Revilla and approved by the Senate and a similarly approved counterpart House Bill.
The above laws were done without fanfare, no grandstanding by any senator. Sen. Revilla had done them even while filming a popular TV series where his character is Bartolome, or “Tolome” for short. All the while, the senator had complete attendance in the Senate sessions.
Compare that with a current insistence by both Houses of Congress where they intend to gleefully hang a popular figure in front of national and international media for supposed violations that are criminal in nature, thus, hearing has to be in the proper court of law. Everyone will have their more than one minute of additional fame, in aid of legislation? (or election according to my friend?)
If ever the “public hanging”, este hearing, pushes through will it result in the enactment of a new law? Abangan**
