The emergence of the 'burgis' class within State University Colleges raises critical questions about admission processes. Additionally, this prompts us to consider whether to apply the principles of equality or equity to this issue.
Burgis was coined from the word bourgeoisie, which refers to people with the most power and wealth. In the Marxist context, it denotes the capitalist class. In Filipino slang, it is pronounced as it is spelled—bur-gis—and carries the same meaning as the original term.
Recently, issues have emerged surrounding burgis students attending State University Colleges (SUCs). The topic ignited controversy when concerned TikTokers and netizens shared their observations and proof of the presence of the burgis class in the University of the Philippines (UP). Additionally, claims of bias in the UPCET (University of the Philippines College Entrance Test) selection process have further fueled the debate. However, before delving into the burgis controversy, it is essential to understand the selection process employed by SUCs. Do these institutions rely solely on entrance exams, or do they consider other factors that affect the likelihood of acceptance?
A closer look at most SUCs' enrollment procedures reveals that they aim to prioritize applicants who truly represent the nation’s population. In addition to entrance exam results, they consider socio-economic and geographic factors. According to the UP website, the selection process involves four subtests, school ranking, and socio-economic and geographic considerations. While specific selection details are not publicly available for all SUCs, the Polytechnic University of the Philippines (PUP) includes an entrance examination. Other institutions, like the University of Makati (UMAK), prioritize residents of their town, conduct interviews on a case-by-case basis, and require entrance exams. If entrance exams dominate the selection process, this implies that above-average or more privileged students are more likely to pass—potentially limiting opportunities for others.
Equality or Equity?
Given the reality that millions of Filipinos rely on education as their path to upward mobility, the issue of state universities admitting burgis students naturally raises concerns. It prompts fundamental questions: What is the true purpose of state universities? And who should they serve?
This is where the concepts of equity and equality come into play. Equality emphasizes treating everyone the same, regardless of differences in social class or circumstances. In contrast, equity considers each person’s unique needs and conditions, ensuring that help is provided based on those needs. So, we must ask: What is the true mission of state universities? If their goal is to implement the state’s objective of providing free education for all, why are the students most in need often left behind?
If we compare opportunities, burgis students enjoy several advantages—they have financial stability to meet their needs, better access to academic resources, and a supportive household environment. Conversely, students from low- and lower-middle-income families face multiple challenges, including limited resources, disruptive home environments, financial instability, and the need to work while studying. It is, therefore, reasonable to assume that burgis students are more likely to succeed in entrance exams, as they experience fewer stressors than their less-privileged counterparts.
In this fight for equitable access to education, let us not tear each other down but stand together to demand an admissions process that truly reflects the needs of the Filipino people. For state universities to live up to their mission, they must ensure that those most deserving of education receive what is rightfully theirs. Only by applying equity—not just equality—can we achieve a system that offers genuine opportunities for all.
The time to act is now. Education for all must not remain a lofty slogan but become a reality that no one—regardless of privilege—can deny.
Comments