Issue We're Talking About

X* is a promising student of Saint Jude Catholic School. She has been active in two organizations and performs quite well. She was eventually assigned as the president of one organization and an officer of the other. X is a very dedicated student to both these orgs because of her vivid interests in them.

However, the time came when school authorities announced that starting this school year, students are required to join one and only one organization of the seventeen open to the high-school Judenites. Upon knowing this, X had a hard time deciding which org to leave and which to give all her time to. Because it was only announced recently before the opening of classes, she barely had time to think it over. In the end, she left the org she painstakingly worked hard for to lead the other org she was assigned to lead.

This is just one of the scenarios that illustrates the consequences of the "One Org per Student" policy in Saint Jude Catholic School implemented only during the waning days of the summer vacation.

According to the authority, this rule was implemented to increase the productivity of the students and the organizations alike. The school learned from the past that some students join an org just to have something to write in their college application forms or just because their friends are members (or officers) of the org and think that being part of one is pure fun. Because of this, the org gets to have a large pool of members with only a small percentage working hard for the production of outputs.

The authority also mentioned that because a student may join different orgs, he/she will have a difficult time moving to and fro his/her orgs and that having different jobs will be a hassle to the student. Leading more than two orgs for example can be very stressful. Forcing a student into only one org will then make him/her concentrate on his/her org of choice and give his/her time fully to that org.

The last reason is time conflict. Every second and fourth Saturday of the month after Mass (3:00 in the afternoon) is "org time" which lets the members of the various orgs meet for an hour and do their plans etc.. I quote from the authority, "You cannot be in two places at the same time, so you can really choose only one org."

Well, at first glance, these reasons (and some more others) seem plausible. Somehow, they make sense. However, there is a slight fault in the logic of the reasons and I have things to say to bombard such outrageous claims by the school.

Let us admit that some students, who usually are the less responsible and capable, are indeed joining orgs especially during their fourth years just to have something to write in their college application forms. What about the more deserving and more dedicated students? Will the school reprimand these capable students to reach their full potential? Will the school give the students who used to be part of more than an org to have a difficult time in deciding which org to stay and which org to leave, as shown in the given scenario above?

And furthermore, it is not correct to conclude that because having multiple orgs is detrimental to the productivity of orgs, a one-org-per-student policy will increase productivity. This, by the way, is a fallacy in logic called hasty generalization.

Here is an example. A Chinese org was formed this school year, with members who are simply looking for incentives in their Chinese subjects because of their poor grades. First of all, what is the goal of this org? Is it just to give incentives to students taking for granted their Chinese subjects? And what do you expect from these kinds of students in an org whose tasks include cooking, memorizing Chinese songs, Wushu, and acting? In short, this Chinese org is plain stupid and useless if all it will do is cater to such students.

The same goes for the other orgs. The productivity of orgs is not correlated to the number of orgs its members joined but correlated to the capability, skill, and responsibility of its members. The productivity of orgs is greatly dependent to their goals. If what an org will do is just give incentives to students who are "forced" really to cook, act, or dance, then might as well dissolve the org because it serves no vital purpose to the vision and mission of the school.

Going back to the responsibility of org members, this brings me to my second reason. It is not the right of the school or any authority to disallow any student from being an officer of multiple organizations. Even before a student chose to become an officer, he/she already weighed both sides of the situation. It is his/her choice of accepting a greater load and responsibility. He/She already knows that the load is heavy, and he/she already knows that it can be handled.

Why not look at some great students of SJCS? Take Giselle Yeo (batch 2004), Clarissa Tio (batch 2006), and Annabellee Chua (batch 2007) for example. What is similar to these three ladies aside from being consistent honor students, being class valedictorians, and being Miss Alma Mater of their respective batches? They led various organizations with esteemed capabilities and they served their orgs very well. And they did not just join a single org -- they served almost three orgs, and they did not only serve as members -- they also held key positions in the other orgs aside from the one they led. There are also many other brilliant students who may not be as great as these three ladies but have similar credentials and great capacity.

These very students themselves are perfect contradictions to the reason stated above that having multiple orgs is detrimental to productivity and a hassle to the students. Does the school question and doubt the capability of its students? If yes, why bother teaching them and molding them into better people?

And if the school questions the time conflict of the orgs as well as the students, then why not look for another time to hold another meeting(s)? At least the other meeting(s) for the week can serve as "backups" for those who attended another org meeting. In the gravest of cases, members can inform their co-members of the agenda right?

I myself suggested to utilize the first and third Saturdays and Thursdays as days for the backup meetings; however, the authority immediately disapproved of such. The first and third Saturdays are reserved for homeroom; this is understandable. But regarding Thursdays, the authority simply said that teachers need to go home and cannot stay very long in school.

We all know that work takes place Mondays thru Saturdays. In the case of SJCS, there are no classes on Thursdays except PE for high school. Aren't teachers required to go to school on Thursdays? And is it not the duty of teachers to watch over student activities of their respective orgs? If they are simply going to reason out that they need to go home early, that is simply preposterous. What about the other teachers that stay until four in the afternoon? Have the teachers become lazy and taken for granted the students? Aren't they paid for each working day and for overtime?

I also understand the reason why the school does not want to totally entrust outsiders not affiliated to SJCS in managing school organizations (such as the case with the swimming varsity two years ago, or the Rovers for the Scouting Movement). But if the teachers will just simply go home early in a standard working day, I don't see any other reason why this alternative is plausible. And in the Scouting Movement's case, the Rovers are not even outsiders because its members are all alumni of SJCS.

In addition, I would also like to stress out that the reasons the authority stated are already based on the assumption that the policy is already in action. That is why reasons like time conflict were given when in fact the cause of the time conflict is less org time and the policy itself.

The school should take into consideration other factors aside from the students. In mathematical terms, count the complement. Looking from the other side may yield better and more brilliant solutions.

Therefore, before implementing such a heavy-impact policy, the authority should first look into the organizations themselves and not the students. If the school is after productivity, then make sure that the orgs are in themselves productive, unlike an org that serves no purpose to the students except additional incentives or gives no significant production at all. Judenites are practical and responsible people thus giving them the privelege to bear the load of managing and leading their members. Time conflict is not a problem if the school will be determined enough to allot more time for orgs.

Why is the school giving the students a hard time? Why does it take for granted students like X and many, many others who wish to give their dedication to multiple orgs?

Why does the school question and doubt the capabilities of its own students?

*The name of the student has been withheld to protect her identity.