The Lesson Plan

(NOTE: In my entry on Cho Seung-Hui, I promised some comments on the discipline situation in Pisay. I discovered that I don’t need to write an entirely new entry since I wrote one a year ago that clearly expresses my views. Also note that this was written just before the Gelyn Fabro case broke out. I would have sharpened my statements then.)

This afternoon, my unit discussed the initial reactions on the newly implemented haircut rule in the high school. Last Monday, the [male] students felt the full force of the law as some were sent to a barber the school rented just for that day, or were threatened with an incident report.

The new rule went like so: teachers would inspect the haircut and if the student violates once, he would would be given a verbal warning and be asked to cut his air. On the second offense, his parents would be informed and on the third (and supposedly final) offense, the student will face an incident report.

This is imposed above the traditional prescriptions in the handbook, which most teachers felt wasn’t being implemented enough. The above rule is also supposed to be punitive and should encourage compliance.

Right off the bat, I felt that it wouldn’t work. But to be fair to my colleagues and given all the time and resource constraints, it was worth a shot. I crossed my fingers.

It wouldn’t work for the simple fact that it is already February. Implementing a rule this late in the year would raise questions as to why it wasn’t implemented earlier. The new rule is then perceived to be merely an afterthought and not something to be taken seriously. From a student’s point of view, there is only less than a month of school left, why bother?

Another reason why it failed (and to a degree it did), is because of inconsistency in implementation. Not all teachers would inspect, and those that did inspect had different punitive responses. Some prodded the guys to the barber, others dumped incident report after incident report. Rules are never taken seriously when they are implemented inconsistently.

Honestly, I feel that the new haircut rule is too little, too late. The goal is simple — to make sure students have the proper haircut — however, the intent is not — that students follow the rules on their own accord. At the end of the day, that is what we want to happen: that they cut their hair and keep it short without us telling them to. The new rule will at least guarantee that they cut it short once, but I really doubt that they’ll develop the conscientiousness to cut it again.

I have to say that the Philippine Science High School has the most liberal code of conduct I have ever seen. To say it is like college is to put it lightly. When I first came in, one of my first questions was, “what are the punishments we give the students when they do this? That?” The simple answer was this, “just file an incident report and let the committee decide on what to do.” What? That’s it? To be honest, I was shocked. For an institution that demanded excellence from its students, it was pretty lax when it came to discipline. While offenses have been identified in the code of conduct, everything else from investigation to judgment is left to a committee who is initially far removed from the initial context of the crime. By the time judgment is passed, the student has already felt that he or she has “gotten away with it.” And often, they do get away with it save for the major offenses.

In our meeting earlier, I shared my observation that the school lacks a clear “standard” when it comes to discipline. There is also no code of punishment to fit the offenses and make sure they don’t happen again. For instance, offenses are categorized basically into two: minor and major. Major offenses are those punishable by suspension or dismissal, minor offenses merely merit a reprimand. In other words and based on the law, students can get away with an infinite number of minor offenses. Coming to school in incomplete uniform is an example of a minor offense, and the student for all he cares, can come to school in incomplete uniform everyday because he will eventually get away with it. The only time he can be compelled to stop is when a committee decides that he has committed a major offense, for instance, disobedience and disrespect of school authorities.

And to add, the school lacks a clear standard because everything is ultimately up for discussion on a committee level. Every school year, this committee changes and so do the perspectives that come along with the individual members. For instance, mental health and stability are always touchy topics, and the verdict shifts depending on who’s sitting down. Do we file a case against someone mentally unstable? (I am one to say, yes, if only to deter similar cases, sane or insane, in the future. On my part, I’ll make sure they get the help they need while on suspension.) We teachers who are often the clear and present witnesses of such offenses are constrained to filing incident reports, and pray that the committee metes out the punishment we could have given right then and there.

From my experience as a student in the Ateneo High School, offenses were categorized by punishment starting from the least severe (jug) to the extreme (dismissal). Every single offense from coming in late, to having long hair, to cheating, to hitting on your hot math teacher had a punishment that came with it and any teacher is authorized to mete it out. Only the extreme, dismissal-bound cases are put up for discussion and every student has a clear sense of what things they should not do.

[OFFENSES IN THE ATENEO HS: Jug - you will be made to write either a long essay or a series of repeated sentences to fill one or two bond papers / Post - you will be made to stand straight, usually under the sun, for one or two hours, number of hours can be accumulated / Class Post - for class offenses like coming to class late, being noisy, disrespecting the teacher, failing to pass a class project, etc. / Suspension (1-day, 2-day) - self-explanatory / Dismissal - self-explanatory // Yes, there are offenses when you fail to serve your jug or post.]

Also, if an offense is done more than once, the punishment is elevated. While not wearing your ID will give you a jug, committing that several more times will elevate it to a post.

Then the punishment also increases as you progress up your years. For example, coming in with long hair will be counted as incomplete uniform (jug) if you’re in 1st or 2nd year, but will be counted as a violation of school authority (post) if you’re in 3rd or 4th year.

(STORY: Once I’ve heard of a class that was given a 2-day CLASS SUSPENSION. That really sucked. A longtest was scheduled on the day of their suspension and THEY ALL MISSED IT. When the class returned, all the teachers continued their lesson as if they never left. They missed two whole days of new lessons.)

The rules and punishments are built into the culture of the Ateneo High School, and the students are often self-regulating. Of course, this code exists for the precise reason that there are offenders; no school is perfect. But at least, they don’t end up splitting hairs or like we do, cutting hairs. There is no need to wait for judgment day. You get what you give and if you don’t like it, don’t do it again. That simple.

But let me make this clear: I’m not blaming or putting our students down. I have to admit, they have the best attitudes over-all and are still better than most private school students even without a strict code of conduct. My only concern is that if we wish to truly develop a culture of discipline, we have to start by clearly codifying our expected behaviors from our students, the offenses they should not commit, and the punishments they would face with every offense. To put it bluntly, our current code of conduct is not enough. It is too simple, lax and open to (mis)interpretation. Rules are never taken seriously when they can be worked around.

I have several recommendations at this point. First, we can continue enforcing the new haircut rule if only to emphasize proper grooming and conduct. But at the same time, we should enforce every other aspect of the dress code from the shoes, the fingernails, hair colors and IDs. If not, then we can forget about the haircut. Also, we should standardize our punitive responses and make sure we all respond the same way. Perhaps, the class adviser should take the lead in all this so that the subject teachers don’t have to punish one student the whole day. (Just imagine if one was caught with long hair in the first period. He would have about nine incident reports when the day is over!)

In the long run, we need to seriously sit down, review and revise the code of conduct to make it more modern, responsive and equitable. And if this pulls through, the soonest we can implement is already next school year (2006-2007). I understand that there is a new one in progress, but administrative politics is somehow slowing it down. That is another matter for another time.

In fairness, the new haircut rule is built on good intentions but it only addresses the problem of improper haircuts and nothing else. Others allude to this eventually teaching our students to be more responsible and obedient, but that will never happen as long as we’re lax and inconsistent on everything else. Nonetheless, we all know Pisay scholars are good and in many ways they’re the best. But we aren’t much of a help if we can’t get them to be better. Perhaps we can begin going down that road by walking it ourselves.