Another AMACC Complaint
Sunday, December 18, 2005
Captain's Log Supplemental Stardate -318962.75
I saw this letter in one of the message boards of AMAES's criticizers:
September 28 2005
Mr. Romulo Bungubung
AMA Computer College
Las Piñas City
Dear Mr. Bungubung:
Please consider this as a formal protest in behalf of my daughter Judith A. Abad, and her co-proponent, Ralph Leenard Asprer, regarding the grades given to them for their Thesis B and other relevant matters as follows:
a. 75% grades for PRELIMS (Prelim Quiz 1=75, Prelim Quiz 2=75, Prelim Class Standing=75 and Prelim Exam=75);
b. 75% grades for MIDTERMS (Midterm Quiz 1=75, Midterm Quiz 2=75 Midterm Class Standing=75 and Midterm Exam=75);
c. 75% grades for FINALS (Final Quiz1 = 75, Final Quiz2 = 75, Final Class Standing = 75)?
Please furnish us a full evaluation of how these grades were arrived at, the criteria and methods applied, etc.
2. According to your Ms. NIZA DEL ROSARIO, late submission of software was the only basis for giving the proponents an NFE grade. The glaring fact is, submission of software was VERBALLY ANNOUNCED ON THE DATE OF DEADLINE ITSELF. Beforehand, NO FORMAL ANNOUNCEMENT WAS POSTED IN THE BULLETIN BOARD, hence not everyone concerned was able to comply with the rush VERBAL ANNOUNCEMENT. By the time the proponents were ready to submit their software, MS. DEL ROSARIO was nowhere to be found in school. When Judith finally reached her by cell phone, she said they could submit the software to her on the day of GRADE DISTRIBUTION. But again, MS. DEL ROSARIO never showed up. During the demos, she refused to tell the proponents their grades, but assured she will inform them later. But it never materialized. This is plain incompetence on the part of MS. DEL ROSARIO. She is unprofessional because she cannot even handle simple scheduling or announcements. When complaints come in, she makes a disappearing act.
3. Per records of the registrar, it is incredible that almost all students who were enrolled in Thesis B last trimester (1st trimester S.Y. 2005-2006) also got 75% on their grades. Please don’t offer generalities as an excuse for my daughter’s grades. In the case of my daughter and her co-proponent, they CERTAINLY DO NOT DESERVE 75%. Why will they get the same grade of 75% given to those who underwent RE-DEMO or RE-DEFENSE? THEY NEVER HAD ANY RE-DEMO NOR RE-DEFENSE. Something smells fishy here.
4. Due to the numerous hassles, roundabouts, and shabby treatment, you have been giving my daughter and her co-proponent unwarranted delays have set in to bar processing of their transcripts and diplomas.
It is therefore obvious that you have taken up the cudgels against my daughter on a personal level. Past unpleasant incidents which were subject of our previous discussions on the scheduling of their defense, which I was made to believe were not ill motivated are now coming out clear. You can fool people most of the times, but not all the time. It is amazing how as Dean of BSIT graduating students, you out rightly signed the Summary of Grades prepared by Mr. Nathaniel Pari-an, purportedly newly appointed Thesis Coordinator. How was Mr. Pari-an able to sign for the grade inputs, when he had no direct participation in the development of the Thesis even though he was part of the defense panel. As Dean, you cannot claim that you have no concern why my daughter’s grades suddenly plunged. Of the numerous students at AMA Las Pinas, you and Judith were in constant touch because of her active participation in campus activities, seminars, etc. notwithstanding her consistently high academic record. If the past Thesis Coordinator or Instructors are no longer around, the burden of contacting them should not be imposed on my daughter. Recorded inputs cannot be entirely relied upon unless the instructor can be confronted. If you will recall, this erroneous way of computing final grades had happened when my daughter and her instructor recomputed her final grade on the Rizal subject.
I know where my daughter stands academically. Please refer to her transcript of records. There is no need to point out straight to your face why she should not be disqualified for honors. Because of the anomalous 75% grades you undeservingly manipulated, you blocked her qualification for honors. Stop making fools out of us. It’s either you and your staff particularly MS. NIZA DEL ROSARIO are a bunch of nincompoops or you are simply using your position to give in to your personal whims to the detriment of your students. Either way, you are definitely a liability to AMA and the mission it emblazons.
We are now therefore taking steps towards elevating this matter to higher AMA Authorities to give justice to my daughter.
Very truly yours,
Angelina A. Abad
The Directress, AMA Las Pinas
The Office of the Registrar, AMA Las Pinas
The Office of the Administration: Chairman Amable R. Aguiluz V, DBA
The Office of the Administration: President Amable C. Aguiluz IX
Hmmm... *evil laugh*
*Computer end log*
Love my blog? Then subscribe by entering your email address below. You will receive blog updates directly to your inbox.