Thursday, July 14, 2011

Tempest over academic rank | BusinessWorld Online Edition

A friend shared a link on Facebook today that caught my attention. What was going around the University as a nasty rumor was true after all. It is, for me, a very disappointing and very disturbing development. It goes to show how ambitious some people can be. There's another word - avarice - which probably best describes the person accepting such an arrangement thinking (and believing) he can get away with it. To quote one former government official, "Moderate your greed!"

Tempest over academic rank | BusinessWorld Online Edition
Solita Collas-Monsod

Should the president of the University of the Philippines automatically be conferred the highest academic rank in the university? Yes, says one group, citing Section 14 of the University Charter of 2008 (Republc Act 9500), which states that “The President of the university is the chief academic officer, head of the university, and chief executive officer of the university.”

The logic is that if you are the chief academic officer, you must also have the highest academic rank, which in the university means a Professor 12 -- and if you don’t have it, it should be conferred on you at the earliest possible time.

The most conspicuous members of the group who think this way are Dean Edna Co, of the National College of Public Administration and Governance (NCPAG), and Dr. Prospero de Vera, a faculty member of the same college and currently UP vice president for public affairs.

But how did the issue arise in the first place? Well, apparently, Co, on her own and without the knowledge/consent of the Academic Personnel Committee (APC -- the committee which passes on faculty appointments and renewals) of the NCPAG, wrote to UP President Alfredo Pascual on March 14, inviting him to be a faculty member of the NCPAG -- an invitation which was accepted with alacrity (the next day) by Pascual.

But it was only nine days later, during the meeting of the College APC, that Dean Co announced what she must have considered a coup: that the UP president was going to join the faculty. This naturally took the APC by surprise, but since the invitation had already been extended and accepted, the APC considered it a “fait accompli” and made no demur.

What was also surprising was Co’s announcement to the APC that President Pascual was going to bring to the college his own item -- a Professor 12 item that “would stay with the College when he leaves.” Now a dean cannot on her own transfer an item to her unit -- which led one of those present at the meeting to surmise that Quezon Hall (read, the UP administration) was involved in the process even before the NCPAG was apprised that he would be a member of its faculty. But the overall implication seems to be that neither the faculty of the NCPAG, nor its APC were active participants not only in the decision to invite the president to be a member of the faculty but also in recommending his professorial rank.

Suffice it to say that after two more meetings (a second APC meeting and a faculty council meeting) during which questions were raised as to what Pascual would teach, and whether he was qualified to be a Professor 12 -- and resolved to the satisfaction of the dean -- a letter was sent to Diliman Chancellor Caesar Saloma recommending the appointment of President Pascual to the faculty of NCPAG as Professor 12.

At this point, a word on Saloma: an internationally recognized physicist, multi-awarded both as a researcher and a teacher, Saloma was dean of the UP College of Science (and before that head of the National Institute of Physics). While dean (automatically head of the college APC), he was legend for insisting on the strictest compliance with the criteria for academic promotions.

What Saloma did when he received the NCPAG letter was to go strictly by the rule book (no exceptions for anyone, not even the president of the university). He sent the recommendation letter to the Diliman (campus-wide) Academic Personnel and Fellowships Committee (APFC) of the University Council for evaluation.

Nothing can ever be kept secret in the university, and by this time, the Diliman community was abuzz with rumors and speculation, waiting with baited breath for the results of the evaluation.

The APFC having submitted its evaluation to Saloma, he summoned (on May 17) the NCPAG APC (Dean Co was abroad at the time) and informed them of the APFC’s action: in brief, the APFC returned the appointment papers of Pascual for two reasons: 1)Need and 2) Rank. With respect to the first reason, the APFC pointed out that the justification given by the NCPAG for the appointment of Pascual did not indicate the need for his services -- except to say (are you ready for this, Reader?) that he was an “intellectual giant,” and other words to that effect -- an assertion which failed to impress the members of the APFC. With respect to the Rank issue, the APFC ‘s evaluation, based apparently on the CV of Pascual, was that he qualified for the rank of Assistant Professor 3 -- which is about 33 steps behind a Professor 12.

During that meeting, the college secretary reported to the body that upon instructions of the dean, she called up the president to find out what course he wanted to teach. The reply, as reported, was that it was never Pascual’s intention to handle a course. What he had in mind was just to deliver a few (3 or 4) lectures. It was clear therefore that this could not be a full-time faculty appointment, not even a regular lecturer but perhaps only a guest lecturer.

The chancellor said that he would return the papers to the college for it to reconsider the recommendation. Which he did, the very next day, with a cover letter to the same effect.

One would have thought that would be the end of that. An all’s well that ends well sort of situation. But no.

Dean Co, on her return, was not having any of it. In the subsequent (June 13) faculty meeting, she asked faculty colleague Popoy de Vera (as mentioned above, currently UP vice president for public affairs) to speak. It was De Vera who read Section 14 of the University Charter: “The President of the University is the chief academic officer, head of the university faculty and the chief executive officer of the University. The President of the University shall exercise the powers specifically provided for in this Act, those determined by the Board, those which pertain to the office of the president of a university, and those which are related or necessary to its functions. The Board shall determine the compensation of the President of the University.”

And based on this provision, De Vera then reportedly concluded that neither the University Council, nor the APFC had any jurisdiction over the matter, but only the Board of Regents. He reportedly also pointed out that when Edgardo Angara was UP president, the UP College of Law appointed him Professor 8 (then the highest academic rank). When a faculty colleague pointed out in rebuttal that Carlos P. Romulo was appointed Associate Professor, and that only after two years into his UP presidency, De Vera ignored the comment. Dean Co then averred that she would not consider a rank lower than Professor 12 for President Pascual.

So what is the situation now? Co wrote Chancellor Saloma that the NCPAG is taking the position that it is the Board of Regents (BOR) who should decide on the matter. Slap. And she has written to the BOR asking them to appoint Pascual as Professor 12 of the NCPAG. The letter is not coursed through channels (i.e., Chancellor Saloma) but sent directly to the BOR. Double slap.

Do Co and De Vera have the right of the matter? Not according to what has to be the majority of the academic community. According to one, to be the chief academic officer cannot and should not be equated with having the highest academic rank -- while an executive position is bestowed on a person who heads an institution, an academic rank is earned according to specific criteria. An analogy is used (by a dean): the President of the Philippines is commander in chief of the armed forces. But he is not given the rank of General, much less a four- or five-star general.

The major point, though, is that the academic community holds their academic ranks dearly. One colleague tells me that it took her 30 years to become a full professor, and another 15 years to achieve Professor 12. It is earned, after evaluation according to set criteria. And the evaluation is done not by administrators, but by academics.

And the message is: Being the president of the country is a matter of politics. Being the president of the university, is a matter of politics. But being a Professor 12? That is a matter of academics. And never the twain should meet.

No comments: