SINCE THE institutionalization of the old core curriculum in the 1950s, the Integrated Ateneo Formation Program (InAF) has been an integral component of the University’s educational framework. With the establishment of the Office of Social Concern and Involvement (OSCI) in 1975, the InAF program has since proceeded to mold generations of students as “professionals-for-and-with-others” and “servant-leaders engaged in various fields of endeavor.”

In pursuit of this goal, InAF is structured into four distinct programs corresponding to a certain area of focus distributed to each college year-level. Though the introduction of the new academic curriculum in 2016 brought some changes to these programs, the legally-mandated National Service Training Program stays consistently enforced in InAF as the National Service Training Program Preparatory Leadership Undertaking for Sophomores (NSTP-PLUS).

However, over the years, concerns about the effectivity of the old curriculum’s program have arisen. As these issues come to light, opinions have been sourced to further corroborate the concerns and highlight the issues that the new curriculum will improve on.

At your service

As described in the NSTP Act of 2001, citizens have a responsibility to preserve the security of the State. This is fulfilled through the rendering of personal, military, or civil service—coursed through the following NSTP components: the Reserve Officers’ Training Corps, Civil Welfare Training Service, and Literary Training Service respectively. Through NSTP, the State aims to promote civic consciousness as well as inculcate patriotism and nationalism. However, interpreting and instilling said goals are to the discretion of implementing institutions like universities. Consequently, this gives rise to different NSTP experiences and results.

For instance, a detailed study from Rizal Technology University yielded a positive reception of their NSTP program. However, it also highlighted the inadequacy of funds and the lack of administrative support as outstanding problems. In addition, The LaSallian reported on narratives of students who detailed recurring accidents during their NSTP immersion. Instead of comforting the students, their formator berated them for supposedly not taking the program seriously and for “not [praying] hard enough,” further blaming the students for the accident.

When asked about Ateneo’s interpretation of NSTP’s principles, OSCI Director for Programs Eugene Panlilio articulated his response through NSTP-PLUS’ expected learning outcomes (ELO). The ELOs indicate that after the program, students must “critically reflect on their experience…analyze [this] using the Sustainable Lives and Livelihood framework in the context of vulnerabilities, demonstrate socio-emotional skills in their NSTP engagements, and effectively apply [these newly learned] skills in the area.”

Live and let learn

For many students, the NSTP-PLUS experience is one of enjoyment and self-growth. But for others, it is a grim awakening to the realities faced by some of society’s sectors. Such are the results when bearing in mind some of NSTP-PLUS’ core principles of civic engagement and social formation.

Junmar* and Beth*, AB Communication juniors who underwent NSTP-PLUS during the first and second semesters of their sophomore year shared their insights on the immersion experience. Junmar was first designated to a farming community to help the locals with harvesting and selling produce. He also visited the area proper twice in a span of a month to experience the residents’ everyday life. Similarly, Beth’s immersion in Isla Verde involved observing her community’s communication patterns and proposing solutions to facilitate more effective discourse.

Before visiting their partner community, Beth’s section was taught that the locals should not be perceived as helpless or desperate. Instead, the residents were their partners in understanding realities beyond campus confines. As such, Beth’s formators encouraged the students to think critically about the issues of their areas by creating potential solutions for them.

However, Beth’s experience made the engagement difficult. On her first night, she was shocked after a local from the area joked that the students were there “para ma-observe…ang (so you can observe the) poor.” What’s more, upon giving her foster father a token of rice, he laughed and said the area was abundant in food and water; medicine was what they needed. This concern was only brought to the attention of the formators when Beth raised the issue in a synthesis session.

While discerning whether the activities the participants engaged in were beneficial to their partner communities, AC*, another student who underwent NSTP-PLUS, believed that her presence was somewhat appreciated. “[We provided] companionship for the elderly foster parents…we were able to play with the younger kids,” she said. Additionally, AC discussed possible initiatives with the barangay captain that could help the community, such as aiding in the study of agriculture and other possible sources of income.

Alma matters

NSTP-PLUS is geared towards the physical interaction and development of the students with marginalized communities. Junmar and Beth agreed that participating in the program requires the ability to identify with Filipinos despite their diverse backgrounds. Junmar says, “[It is having] an open mindset [so as] to integrate yourself so that you get to be more understanding and… to see things [in a broader] perspective.”

However, the student body holds sentiments on the program that bring forward NSTP-PLUS’ debatable effects on its participants. RG*, a student who participated in the program from the old InAF curriculum, put it lightly by saying, “I just feel like some students don’t value it as much as others.” AC noticed that “medyo pilit siya… hindi taos-puso na ginagampanan ng iba yung trabaho (It was kind of forced…others weren’t genuinely carrying out the job),” recalling how her batchmates reacted sourly to the community’s impoverished conditions. She believes that the program would be more fulfilling if students saw it as an opportunity rather than an inconvenience.

Likewise, Junmar expressed dismay on the lack of coordination between OSCI and the area heads as well as the lack of a structured schedule of activities. “They seemed to do everything on the spot…then suddenly there were some foster parents who [backed] out…Even foster parents didn’t know what was happening,” he remarked. Indeed, amidst the efforts of the program lie pitfalls, such as the need for better communication with partners in the area proper, that if not addressed, may develop into larger issues that would be difficult to remedy in the future.

“OSCI is aware that it is not the most liked program and we sometimes feel the resistance of students,” Panlilio said. “It is not a perfect program but…OSCI will always be open to the suggestions of students and faculty on how to make the program more effective for students and the community.”

In spite of its shortcomings, the respondents believe that NSTP-PLUS carries the potential to be an effective program in fostering lasting social responsibility among students. “[It serves] as good exposure…the initiatives part of it is very beneficial to society,” AC explained. Furthermore, Junmar similarly noted that some students from his section were eager to maintain their engagement with the community after the program’s end. Although OSCI highly encourages this, it currently does not have provisions in place to support students in reconnecting with their areas once they had fulfilled their required hours.

There are scarce efforts to assess whether NSTP succeeds in instilling deep-rooted civic consciousness on a nationwide scale. There also remains little avenue to hear about the NSTP experience from the side of partner areas across the country. However, with the launch of the new core curriculum in 2016, OSCI has the opportunity of reviewing the issues and suggestions collated from the student body and its partners over the years. Now restructured and renamed PUNLA under the new curriculum, only time will tell if the shortcomings of its predecessor were addressed.

*Editor’s note: The names of the respondents were changed to protect their anonymity.

What do you think about this story? Send your comments and suggestions here: tgdn.co/2ZqqodZ