Archer's Freedom Wall
#ArchersFreedomWall8579
To our Lasallian Community and Administration,
When I, and I’m sure other students as well, entered DLSU SHS, we did so with trust. We enrolled with full trust that the commitments laid out to us in that signed admission letter would be honored. Throughout our entire Senior High School, we worked hard—there were countless sleepless nights spent poring over lessons, projects, and exams, all while stressing about whether we would meet the required 2.0 grade. Plenty of us sacrificed time, sleep, peace, and opportunities outside of DLSU due to the promised path toward college admission. We held on to the belief that with enough effort, diligence, and perseverance, we would be triumphant in securing a stable future in the University.
Yet, now in the final year of Senior High School, there was a sudden shift in what was initially promised. What was once made clear and REPEATEDLY reinstated in black-and-white and orientations, that our SHS grades would serve as the basis for the Academy Lane, has been replaced with the DSHAPE prequalification system. An exam taken two years ago suddenly became the basis for our whole future. An exam that we took without even knowing that it would dictate not just the two years ahead of us, but also the four years that we have yet to explore and be educated about. This abrupt change, implemented without proper notice or agreement before we even began our life in the University, has left many of us confused, disheartened, and questioning whether our efforts in Grade 11 were even valued and accounted for at all.
It is more than just a change in process—it affects the lives of every SHS student, whether ID124 or ID125.
Students have been planning their academic paths based on the original agreement, and a major policy shift midstream is extremely unfair. At a time when Grade 12 students should just be focusing on finishing their year, mentally preparing for college, and still slowly getting used to DLSU, we are instead thrown into panic or stress over a system we were never pre-oriented about, much less given the chance to prepare for.
For some, this means feeling like all their sacrifices were meaningless. For others, this means facing the challenge of starting all over again, not because of their own shortcomings, but because the rules of the game were changed at the last minute. At the time of writing, I’m sure that most students no longer feel secure that DLSU would uphold any commitments they promise, and what is supposed to be a meaningful and hopeful year before college suddenly turns into one shadowed by fear, uncertainty, and maybe, regret.
In more technical aspects, the admission letter was SIGNED by the office of the registrar, which led many to believe that what was written was final, irrevocable, and effective until the batch graduates. Changing the terms of the Academy Lane mid-way is a BREACH of that agreement and actively hurts the reliability of the University when it comes to institutional commitments. With the release of the new signed email regarding the prequalification system, how can we be reassured that it won’t change again? That the University won’t once again pull the rug under the SHS community, time and time again?
If it isn’t clear yet, I am not opposing the prequalification system in its entirety. Sure, the system may not be the best, but if it is what the institution wants and the students agree to it, then there is not much to be done. However, I am criticizing when and how the system was implemented. If DLSU wants to shift to this system, then it is valid as they have the right to do so. But, they must know how to PROPERLY apply the system, such as executing it in future batches that are yet to take the DSHAPE, not retroactively to ID124, who NEVER consented to such conditions nor were even made aware of such.
To the DLSU-M SHS Administration, I, along with other students, urge you to seriously reconsider this decision. It is not too late to fix how unfairly SHS students were treated. We were promised one thing, and without warning, the rules were suddenly changed. Sure, one may defend themself and say, “It’s hard to go back on our word,” or “The new Provost orientation covered this,” but the reality is, you’ve already gone back on your word by breaking the original agreement. If DLSU has reversed its decisions before, revised its policies, and revoked its promise, there is no reason you cannot do the same now.
Though I do not expect this letter to amount to a monumental difference nor to change the administration’s mind overnight, I write with the hope that this letter will urge the administration to reflect deeply on the welfare of its students before implementing life-changing policies in the future. Although the tides will not shift immediately, we cannot simply sit and accept a system where institutions trample on our voices without consequence. To stay silent is to allow future batches to be subjected to the same injustices, suffering from sudden shifts that rob them of stability and fairness. Speaking up is not only fighting for what was promised to ID124s, but also about ensuring that succeeding batches will not have to endure the same uncertainty and broken promises.
The University prides itself on the Lasallian values and concern for its students. Right now, those words ring hollow. If DLSU truly wants to uphold its mission, then it must start by making this right.
Our concerns deserve to be heard, and our trust deserves to be honored.
發表於: Sept. 10, 2025, 11:38 a.m.