By Kaela Aidelynne Orcullo and Alyanna Theresa Gabas
From facilities to school community, the accessibility for the Persons with Disability (PWDs) population in Silliman University (SU) has been substandard. With SU presumably promoting ‘inclusiveness’ among its values, the present facilities and its lack of expansion and improvements are contradicting their stated principles.
The availability and quality of accessibility features for PWDs vary across different buildings and departments within the university. Significant inconsistencies noted by some students, however, prove to be different from /the institution’s values of committing to providing facilities that cater to all students.
Renzo Mananquil, a PWD and psychology student, expressed that SU’s PWD-accessible features are “still not available” throughout the campus but have improved throughout the years.
Mananquil noted that since he began studying in SU, some physical facilities have been added such as ramps on stairways, railings in restrooms, and PWD sign boards in hallways and stairways.
However, he pointed out that many of these features are either newly built or still under construction. He brought up instances in which uneven pathways and non-functional elevators became a hindrance to him especially regarding safety while walking.
Among its eight-point comprehensive goals, SU listed “world-class facilities, innovative systems, and processes responsive to the needs of the stakeholders.” The institution is also continuously working towards providing efficient accessibility for PWDs.
According to Engr. Lorena S. Mariño, officer-in-charge of SU Facilities Management (FM), accessibility in an educational context extends beyond mere physical access.
It encompasses not only the ease with which individuals can navigate buildings and utilize facilities but also their ability to access knowledge, educational materials, and essential support services that foster an inclusive learning environment.
Accessibility features across campus
While elevators are available in some buildings, Mananquil observed that they are often non-functional, particularly in Ausejo Hall (AH) where he has most of his classes.
This forced him to rely on ramps, which, while available, do not always provide a seamless or safe experience for individuals with disabilities.
“It is accessible, however, some facilities were non-functional. I am after the safety of all students and if the elevator doesn’t work then it would be better to use the stairs with ramps to go to our classrooms,” Mananquil stated.
Marc Aba, a PWD student from the School of Public Affairs and Governance (SPAG), expressed the same sentiments.
“The current accessibility features available for PWD’s inside the grounds of Silliman University are quite limited from what I have observed. There are ramps in certain areas but besides that, there isn’t much to say and see as far as this matter is concerned,” Aba said.
At the Angelo King (AK) building, Mr. Severino Torres, an instructor at the Institute of Rehabilitative Sciences (IRS), noted the availability of ramps, grab bars, handrail, low seat toilets, and a parking space for PWDs.
However, Torres pointed out a critical flaw. “We have two ramps: one ramp is way too steep.”
Meanwhile, IRS Dean Dr. Lily Bautista also expressed concern on the usability of their ramp which has been compromised by external factors.
“We do have a ramp coming into the building but it’s problematic because other people use the same area for motorbike parking,” Bautista explained.
The College of Business Administration (CBA), on the other hand, presents a different scenario.
“There is currently the ramp in the middle of the building and that’s our only accessibility feature available,” according to CBA Governor Lia Bungabong,
This singular ramp, while helpful, may not be sufficient to address the diverse accessibility needs of all PWD students within the college.
Richella Barot, an economics student, commented that the incline of the ramp is too high, further expressing her concerns over the lack of grip stating that it is “really insufficient and generally dangerous.”
Opposite to the CBA Building, the AH building offers a more comprehensive set of features, including a ramp and an elevator.
However, College of Arts and Sciences (CAS) Associate Dean Dr. Alana Leilani Cabrera-Narciso noted that the elevator’s functionality has been inconsistent.
Narciso pointed out that the elevator was functional last year for a short amount of time but was suspended yet again, citing potential dangers of students trapped in the elevator as one of the reasons for the suspension.
“It’s just that we decided that it has to be closed because, or at least for now, you have to suspend the use of the elevator because we wanted to prevent emergencies. It would be scary for students to get stuck in the elevator,” Narciso said.
While notices have been put up such as elevator guidelines, usage tips, and emergency contact numbers, she emphasized the need for caution, as these measures may not always guarantee a swift resolution in case of emergency.
Moreover, the commitment for inclusive access to knowledge is a positive aspect of the university’s overall accessibility efforts.
Sufficiency of features
Whilst new buildings prioritize ramps and elevators, older ones often lack these essential accommodations, as emphasized by Mariño. This disparity creates an uneven environment, where accessibility is dependent on the specific location within the campus.
Bautista’s observations at AK building also underscored the issue of sufficiency.
“Not sufficient, but not efficiently used,” she stated, referring to the ramp blocked by motorbikes. “Because it’s there, however, there’s like barriers all the time [that is] blocking it and […] you should have no barriers to [these] areas, right?”
She highlighted the importance of not only providing accessibility features but also ensuring that they are consistently available and free from obstructions.
When asked about the adequacy of the existing ramp in CBA, Bungabong responded, “I would say the one ramp is already sufficient since it is placed in the middle which makes going to classrooms easier.”
However, she stated that her assessment may not account for the diverse range of mobility impairments and other disabilities that students may have.
Building-specific challenges
The accessibility of SU’s classrooms and facilities is closely linked to the availability and quality of features in each building. In the AK building, Torres noted that while all classrooms and facilities on the first floor are accessible, reaching the second-floor presents a significant challenge due to a ramp that is “way too steep.”
Bautista further explained, “We do have a second floor. So if we do have to bring patients here, it’s hard for us to bring them to the second floor. [The incline is] about 45 degrees. It’s steep.”
Considering the access challenges presented at the CBA building, it is important to consider other facilities on campus that also face accessibility issues. The classrooms in the CBA building are generally accessible, however, the reliance on a single ramp may not adequately address the diverse needs of all students.
Conversely, the AH building aims to provide accessible classrooms and facilities, but the elevator’s inconsistent functionality undermines these efforts.
Narciso brought up an incident in which she saw just how much accessible facilities mattered. “It’s just that [at] AH, [we] took it upon ourselves because we saw one student going up to the fourth floor. His legs were differently abled, so we wanted to provide more access,” she said.
“Everybody goes to all the GE courses. It’s the College of Arts and Sciences that handles all the GE courses. If we should offer all these polymorphic facilities, it should be first in the AH,” Narciso added.
Progress and potential
In recent years, SU has made some progress in enhancing accessibility, particularly in new building projects.
“I believe the integration of ramps, elevators, and PWD comfort rooms are a notable change in recent years,” Mariño stated.
However, Bungabong contrasts this sentiment, arguing that there have been “no improvements in recent years.”
Torres echoed the same sentiment, noting the lack of any significant efforts to enhance accessibility.
“From what I have observed, there were barely any improvements in enhancing accessibility within campus grounds,” Aba also stressed.
Future plans by the university include identifying parking areas for PWDs and integrating ramps into older buildings while preserving their historical value.
Given the structural limitations of AH, the building is awaiting elevator repair and is exploring options for improving accessibility,
Bautista also revealed that a new building is also planned for the Rehabilitation Science Center with better accessibility.
Recommendations
To create a more inclusive and equitable learning environment for all students, Bautista expressed that SU should prioritize conducting a comprehensive needs analysis to determine the number of PWD students. This includes identifying departments and facilities with the “greatest accessibility needs.”
Additionally, Torres emphasized that SU must ensure that all ramps are “accessibility law compliant” with Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Standards for Accessible Design, possessing a 12-inch horizontal run for each vertical rise.
The ADA Standards for Accessible Design state what is required for a building or facility to be physically accessible to people with disabilities.
On the other hand, Narciso recommended a continued follow-up with the FM department as well as the SU administration regarding elevator repairs and improvements
“Regular maintenance and prompt repairs are essential to ensure the reliability of elevators. We also have recommendations for the administration in 2023, I think we came up with a strategic plan for the entire university to take a look at comprehensive changes,” Narciso stressed.
Preserving historical structures
In terms of preserving historical structures within campus, Mariño highlighted that continued efforts should also focus on integrating accessibility features into older buildings without compromising their historical value.
Aba raised his idea of conducting a structural evaluation of the buildings and facilities within university grounds, citing Katipunan Hall (KH) as one of the university’s oldest buildings with an apparent lack of accessibility features.
“While it is true that the building is a heritage [site] that has historical value, it does not change the fact that improvements need to be done to cater to the needs of its inhabitants, which are the students and faculty,” Aba stated
In response, Narciso said, “There are so many considerations, for example, structural integrity. We can make changes inside but we cannot tamper with how it looks outside.”
“For KH, we don’t have the ramp, and we cannot do much about it for now because we’re going to ask permission from the National Historical Commission for that one,” she added.
Silliman University has demonstrated a commitment to providing accessibility for PWD faculty and students, particularly in new constructions and renovations. However, significant gaps remain especially in older buildings and the consistent maintenance of existing facilities.
By considering the recommendations from its stakeholders such as prioritizing needs analysis and ensuring compliance with accessibility standards, SU can create a more inclusive environment that empowers persons with disabilities to navigate the campus without difficulty, ultimately aligning with SU’s values of inclusivity and accessibility for all.
These initiatives will not only aid the PWD population, but the Silliman community as a whole. #
