Ene 14, 2015


—Malaking bagay na mailagay sa minutes ito. Happy Sunday!

—available eight thirty to eleven

—Awaiting the prudence of the group. I thought it had already been explained. If there's to be a meeting, I hope it'll be official and definitive.

—Baka masama ang loob kaso pinaghintay.

—Andito na siya . . . hinihintay ang 10 minutes, prep, ganyan. Pwede nating i-live tweet ang okasyong ito.

—ok po. after lunch

—Grades aren't defensible in my view.

—Late bloomer, maybe. I don't think even the post-grade grades will cut it (TOR 2 of 3).

—Good AM. Are we still considering the CHED-type super-GE proposals active? (Ex. Ethics, Critical Perspectives in Communication, Filipino GE, etc.)?

—Are these proposals still working on the assumption that we'll teach in the interdisciplinary mode, each course taught by teachers from different colleges? Can't we entertain the possibility of keeping the non-super non-champion GE framework? I can imagine courses like "Critical Perspectives in Communication" and "Workplace Communication" taught (perhaps more effectively) by our faculty. We to ours, they to theirs.

—tomorrow am pls, thanks

—Trying to look for possible candidates . . .

—Parang okay naman po ang lineup na yan. Available pa sana, kahit isa.

—ok w 1pm
—Have been thinking about yesterday. The prof makes the right point, and not merely the anti-large class sort of lip service we get from admin (and other closet proponents). However, this method is extreme, and I find nothing admirable in compromising so many just to make a point. It's playing with lives. Proponents of indiscriminate application of large class take the blame for putting us in positions like this, making a culture out of it, playing with many more lives in the process.