University of the Philippines Manila

The Health Sciences Center

National Service Training Program
Padre Faura, Ermita, Manila

Learning Portfolio for 1st Semester A.Y. 2020-2021

by:

Alon, Mikhael Paulo M.

January 2021
Synopsis:

This semester has been very challenging for practically everyone. What I thought would
be a regular freshman experience ended up being a slew of online meetings and anxiety-filled
nights as I struggled to learn in these tumultuous times. I must admit that, at times, I feel like I
have failed in the implicit task vested in me by that congratulation letter from the Office of the
University Registrar informing me of my admission into this course: that of fulfilling my full
potential as a scholar of the Filipino people, studying to be able to help construct a better future.

Which is why I am happy that, as I sailed this ocean of back-breaking academic loads
and mind-breaking topics, I found islands of calm: peaceful oases that, albeit temporary and
fleeting, managed to take my tired mind off of the worries of navigating these rough seas and
allowed me to actually enjoy my UPM journey. I am grateful for the National Service Training
Program for presenting me with opportunities to take a breather from physics and listen to
eloquent speakers talk about interesting topics as complex and disparate as national security and
gender issues. I definitely absorbed a lot from these talks, as well as from the learning
assignments my group mates and I accomplished afterwards. I am grateful for all I’ve learned
about life beyond academics that this course has helped me realize. Thanks!

Learning logs:
I managed to attend only a few of the synchronous sessions because of scheduling issues.
Nevertheless, I feel like I was able to grasp the gist of most of the topics explored in the talks
from the activities the group did after. I tend to do a little philosophical exploration in my spare
time, and I think that this subject has presented many good things to think about. In brief:

Tatak UP. What does it mean to be from UP? Not just to study here, but to live and
breathe in the culture that permeates the halls, walls, and grounds of the institutions said to be
the premier university in the country? Based on my severely limited experience (especially now
that I haven’t even personally been to the campus), I think it’s safe to say that UP is a very
liberal place, relative to the rest of the nation. Even at a glance, through the myopic, narrow
perspective offered in this online setup, one can find all sorts of things here at UP, from the orgs
and clubs to the high-level teaching to the quirky people. In a word, UP is noise. It is loud,
chaotic, often shocking to the uninitiated, but not necessarily discomforting. I can imagine the
auditory essence of UP being, simultaneously, the low hubbub of quiet classroom conversation
(the ‘bassline,’ for acads do come first!), overlaid by the typical chatter of campus culture;
strong as well is the counter-culture, the weird energy of the individuals and the loners, the loud
voices of the charismatic, the ambitious, the ultra-artistic, the entrepreneurial, and the very
scholastic; there is, of course, no lack of brainpower, and the atmosphere rings heavily with
cleverness and wit (I sincerely believe that intelligence is as often a state of mind as it is a
characteristic); finally, on top of everything, suffusing all the notes and trills of every working
instrument in this bewildering orchestra, is the muted roar of ideological freedom.

I’ve said a lot; the point is that (this is vastly oversimplified, of course) the University
of the Philippines is a melting pot of diverse ethnicities, philosophies and ideas from all around
the country. As one of the only state universities that offers truly free, quality education, open
to all students from all walks of life from all over the archipelago, this is only to be expected.
Consequently, the culture must be a liberal one by necessity, for no institutional unity at all
would arise otherwise. The only thing that makes UP exclusive is its high academic standards;
combining all three- diversity, ideological freedom, an intellectual environment- inevitably
yields a collection of radicals, a society of individuals sharing that same formative experience
and outspoken in their convictions.

Sometimes these convictions are controversial beliefs; sometimes the overpowering

ideological ferment within campus inspires some to sally forth and to struggle, to turn their
ideals into reality; and true, sometimes this struggle goes too far. But free choice is critical to
the intellectual liberty fostered in the University and all the great achievements attributable to
its graduates and associates. The infamous red light shone upon the University and other liberal
institutions like it, those vague yet no less toxic slurs of ‘socialism’ or ‘terrorism,’ are simply
thrown by those who misunderstand (or insist on misunderstanding) this fierce adherence to
personal ideology. It’s misguided to think that just because UP does not restrict the intellectual
and ideological growth of its students, it actively seeks to turn them into communist rebels.
Accusations of this kind actually reflect the reason for UP’s penchant for ‘controversial’ beliefs:
maybe something really is wrong with a country where progressive views and libertarian
institutions are denounced for going against the status quo, for struggling for change. In the face
of these accusations, the UP community grows ever more distinct as a specific kind of people
in the national consciousness: as intellectuals, maybe, or as terrorists even; definitely
individualistic, certainly idealistic. Whether or not those ideals are ideal for redefining society,
or whether society needs to be redefined, or whether those ideals will stand up to the crushing
torpor of reality is irrelevant; what matters is that idealism to sally forth and fight for the change
one believes in even existed in the first place. That is essential- the will to struggle, against all
odds. For me, that is what it means to be in this University. That is tatak UP.

Bayan, Bayani, Bayanihan. During this lecture session, the concept of heroism was
explored in greater detail that I’d ever cared to think of before. I personally always thought of
it as the capacity for great, life- and perhaps world-changing deeds. Not necessarily singular,
push-the-nuclear-button-or-not kind of acts, either: even those class of decisions as choosing to
be a doctor and going on to save hundreds of people in the operating room, or deciding to be a
motivational speaker and inspiring online viewers to live better lives, or getting into finance and
stimulating a country’s economy; I was convinced that they’re all acts of heroism. And I guess
I wasn’t wrong, really; to be a hero is indeed to act above and beyond what is expected of you,
in such a way as to influence the lives of other people for the better. And yet during this talk, I
was made to realize that heroism can simultaneously be even simpler and yet deeper than those
grandiose, sweeping exploits that I associated so closely with the word itself.

For even such small actions as holding a parent’s hand while they recover from an
illness, or maybe they don’t, and instead you hold the tears back so their passing would be as
peaceful as possible; or to swallow a mean joke even as you’re irritated with your best friend
who’s been stony-faced and solemn for days, and instead give out a compliment or a pat on the
back; or to refrain from giving bad reviews for that food delivery guy who’d arrived with your
dinner ten minutes late in the pouring rain, apologizing profusely because he’d been delivering
all night so your beloved premium deluxe ice-cream sandwich had partially melted, and instead
offering thanks and a towel; they are all acts of heroism. What is different from giving kind
words to someone who needs it and pulling a child out of the way of an oncoming vehicle? The
consequences of inaction are greater in one of them, perhaps, but the moral principles that urge
one to act are the same. I now believe that we are all guided by a moral compass, and heroism
is the decision to move our lives in the direction in which that compass points, regardless of the
scale of the action (to risk one’s life in pulling that child out of the oncoming vehicle’s way or
to risk one’s social standing by befriending the sad, weird kid in class who was apparently being
bullied) or the difficulty of accomplishment (helping police solve a homicide even if it means
going against an influential family or helping an elderly stranger across the road).
 I also understand that the direction of one’s moral compass may not necessarily point in
the same direction everybody else’s do; in such cases, I do not wish to condemn nor praise one
who persists in treading their chosen path, even if society declares them evil and immoral. I
merely note that it takes courage to continue to struggle, even against the status quo. Besides,
who can tell whether the direction that one’s actions point towards is the way of absolute
goodness, if it even exists? Maybe given time, as the magnetic North Pole of the Earth shifts
every half million years or so, history will conclude that what was considered going the wrong
way then actually was the correct action now. Such is heroism, I guess; its definition may not
change, but the context of the deeds which were committed in its name changes with the times,
and as with all things, the directions we walk in our lifetime are subject to the impartial judgment
of the centuries. May we all walk the paths our heart knows are true and good, and may we all
always find the strength to keep walking in the only direction that matters- ever onward.

National Security. As with most government policies, the lofty ideals encapsulated in
the National Security Policies (NSPs) for the Aquino and Duterte administrations often meet
disappointing outcomes when it comes to their implementation. It seems like there is some
unfathomable gap between the policymakers and the government employees who carry out
those policies. And even in those occasions where implementation works to a certain extent, it
seems like a particular quirk of the Philippine bureaucratic system that, come next
administration, the progress achieved by that particular program is either reversed by some new,
worse policy, or simply drowned in a sea of other, defective programs. Why, though? Why must
the little sliver of improvement that was the relative success of the wang-wang campaign be
rendered insignificant compared to the endless trove of irregularities that constantly plagued the
Aquino government? Why must the seemingly well-intentioned, earnest desire of whoever
actually wrote NSP 2017-2022 for the Filipino people to become secure in their own nation
become so terribly warped that Duterte’s war on drugs became a war against the poor and
marginalized, bringing nothing but bitter tears to the families of EJK victims and blind fears to
those who were, and are, afraid they’d be next? This question must not go unanswered, for how
can the Philippines be a secure nation when every change of administration is already another
plunge towards an uncertain future?

Disaster Preparedness. According to the DRRM module and to Professor Genaro

Cuaresma, who talked on disaster management last October 28, long-term resilience to disasters
is one of the current key goals not only of the Philippines, the third-most disaster-prone country
in the world, but of many nations all over the globe. And while the strides taken by government
and other stakeholders in the country’s vulnerable industries and communities are
commendable, it seems to us that there remains much, much more to be done in improving the
administration’s and the Filipino people’s mindset and capabilities with regards to disaster
mitigation. For one, the fact that military elements, in the form of the Department of National
Defense (DND), the Civil Defense Office (CDO) and the Armed Forces of the Philippines
(AFP), head the National Disaster Coordinating Council (NDCC) is something that ought to
change considering the push to integrate S&T into DRRM. Civilian experts from a variety of
S&T fields should be ushered into advisory positions in the NDCC, for the advancement of
quality, science-based decision-making at the highest level. Other things these S&T experts
could do is help facilitate the development of technologies beneficial to disaster mitigation as
well as developing industry and social infrastructure that is both productive and resilient. And
of course, the main comment and probably the strongest criticism we as a group could agree
upon is our discomfort with the continued romanticization of the resilience of the Filipino
people in the face of calamity. Although our group acknowledges the efforts of the
administration on national and local levels to alleviate the suffering of the victims of natural
disaster, we believe that it is high time that Filipinos are no longer portrayed as a courageous
and humorous people who smile in the face of adversity, but shown as what they really are: a
people whose resilience has long since been taken for granted by countless administrations that
never did enough. It is painfully clear even to youths like us that the most pressing crises of
recent years were disasters that went or are still going under-addressed by the government (e.g.
Yolanda, Marawi, and COVID). To make the Philippines a truly resilient nation, it is
prerequisite that expert opinion is able to influence national policy, that technologies and
systems are continuously upgraded and improved in the context of globalization and scientific
advancement, and that integrity of the highest order is instilled into every level of society. Only
then will the suffering of vulnerable minorities become a thing of the past; only then will the
Filipino become able to sleep soundly in the night, knowing that calamities and disasters are
things to be endured no longer; only then will survival become not the product of miracles but
of preparedness.

Overall:
My NSTP journey had been satisfying to say the least. I truly feel that I was able to learn
things which I otherwise wouldn’t have, and the talks given by the guest speakers were truly
interesting. I think that all of the lectures I attended were the high points of this course, and the
ones I missed were the feel-bad lows. I really enjoyed writing essays and stuff for this subject’s
requirements, as I felt that my creative side was really getting engaged with all the philosophical
exploration and literary exposition I attempted to produce. I also like the fact that I managed,
through the NSTP mentors, to ask some of the guest speakers more than a few questions about
certain things I was curious about in the lecture material. In the end, though, I must say that I
do have some regrets, including the group dynamics with my coursemates in our group,
NSTaPphy. I think that the prospect of writing so freely for the group outputs got to my head a
little bit, and I fussed unnecessarily over our submissions. I now feel like I impugned my fellow
group members’ personal opinions and edited their contributions to our work a little too much
because I got overly concerned about the literary value of our group essays. I forgot that the
purpose of those activities was to sharpen our own perceptions and improve our personal
interpretations of the things discussed in the lecture sessions. Looking back through my learning
logs, I think that my own observations on the diversity of UP as a whole were lost on me,
because I focused too much on my own work and imposing my interpretations on my group
mates instead of allowing for intellectual discourse. I also think that my musings on heroism
were particularly thoughtful and I see the value in applying what I wrote down there in my
everyday life from now on. I wish I could have started being more heroic long before the start
of this course; even in the middle of this semester, I wish I could have been kinder to everyone
I interacted with. Such is the profoundness of the morality of man, and going above and beyond
the expectations of society in the directions your heart leads you.

Reflection:
I used to think that classes like NSTP were boring as hell, but I’ve realized that they can
be really engaging, informative, and transformative if managed correctly. I used to think that it
would be impossible to hold philosophical and technical discourses on complex scientific,
political and social issues without lengthy personal conversations, face-to-face, but I’ve realized
that technology has gotten us so far as the ubiquity of such modern-day miracles as near-
instantaneous communication over great distances as to allow for discussions of the caliber that
the lecture sessions were able to provide. Because of these, I will live a little happier in the
knowledge that humanity has come so far, and will work to ensure that it will continue to prosper
in the future. I’ve also realized that there remains so much more knowledge to be known in the
world, even while I’ve remained stuck at home. I now believe that there are a lot of things left
for me to discover as long as I’m prepared to work hard for it. However, I still wish that this
NSTP class could have gone on longer because I truly enjoyed it. Nevertheless, I leave this
course satisfied in my acquired wisdom, because I know that there will be even more
opportunities for learning in the future, and that life is good as long as I keep on going in the
direction my moral compass instructs me to go.

Conclusions and Perceived future Directions:

I must continue to dream, to reach greater heights. Direction: ever onwards.