Official Report on the Policy Symposium on the Male Uniform Policy
In congruence to the mandate of the Supreme Student Council to be a bastion of student’s rights and welfare, the symposium on the male uniform policy was successfully held last September 16, 2011. As planned, the symposium was held twice, once in the Main campus for the male students of the Department of Political Science, School of Business and Economics, and the College of Education; and once in the Talamban Campus for the male students of the College of Engineering, College of Arts and Sciences, and the College of Architecture and Fine Arts.
The speakers of the symposium in the Main Campus were: Sir Patrick Torres of the Department of Political Science; Sir Neil Kintanar of the Department of Psychology; Ma’am Zona Hildegarde Amper from the Department of Sociology/Anthropology and History; Sir Alan Tabanao from the Department of Economics. Everything was the same in the afternoon except that a faculty member from Religious Education and another faculty from Philosophy were added to the roster of speakers. They spoke about the existence of the male uniform in the lens of their own fields. The political scientist talked about the uniform and the constitution; the economist on the costs and benefits; the sociologist on the social context of the uniform; the psychologist on the effects of uniform on the perception of others.
There was an overwhelming support from male students as there was a high turn-out of male students who attended the symposiums. The symposium in the Main Campus was attended by 800 male students, while the symposium in the Talamban Campus was attended by 1,500 male students. The discussions were very informative and the open forum of both symposiums were marked with interesting questions and comments from students which made the whole activity interactive, as there was an exchange of ideas from faculty members and students.
The Referendum on the Male Uniform Policy was held the week after the symposiums were held, September 23, 2011, which was spearheaded by the Commission on Elections of the Supreme Student Council. According to the Report of Miss Dixie Jane Patay, COMELEC Chairperson for the current administration, the referendum had a total voter turnout of 2,081 votes. Here is a table of the breakdown of voters:
COLLEGE/DEPARTMENT TOTAL NUMBER OF VOTERS
College of Architecture and Fine Arts 474
College of Arts and Science 443
College of Education 72
College of Engineering 643
Department of Political Science 54
School of Business and Economic 395
MAY 31, 2011
Closed door meeting SSC and USC President with cabinet. Agreed to conduct the referendum with a proviso that it can only be had after conducting an academic discussion on the issue.
The official result of the Referendum on the Male Uniform Policy, which posed the question, “Are you in favor of the continuous implementation of the male uniform policy?” is as follows:
REFERENDUM OFFICIAL RESULTS
The referendum was conducted in partnership with department co-curricular organizations, and voting precincts were either inside department offices or in the lobbies of college buildings.
In support of the Carolinians’ meaningful pursuits,
USC SSC Councilor AY 2011-2012
Fr. Bucia said they discussed on it 3 to 4 times. It has been forwarded to the Board of Trustees but the board returned the issue to the cabinet for decision.
THEY WILL RETAIN THE UNIFORM POLICY.
THIS REPORT WAS SUBMITTED TO FR. ELENO BUCIA, VPAA:
October 24, 2011
Fr. Eleno Bucia, SVD
Vice-President for Administration
University of San Carlos
Dear Fr. Bucia,
Greetings to you in Christ!
Here is the official result for the MALE-UNIFORM POLICY REFERENDUM held last 30 September 2011. There were five (5) colleges and one (1) department covered as show in Table 2. The following colleges were not included as they are not covered by the uniform policy and/or they have a standard mandatory uniform to follow: College of Health Professions, College of Law, and Graduate School.
The referendum posed the following question: “Are you in favor of the continuous implementation of the male uniform policy?”
TABLE 1 shows the official vote turn outs. As seen in the first table, there is a third column presenting the “void” votes. These are the ballot returns where students made erasures to their votes; thus, unclear whether they voted for “yes” or “no.”
TABLE 2 shows the number of voters per college.
Thank you very much.
Dixie Jane N. Patay
SSC COMELEC Chairperson