By Samuel C. Villa Jr., associate professor at Cebu Technological University Main Campus-Dumanjug Extension
“College students are old enough to protect themselves.” At first glance, that sounds reasonable. They are adults, after all. They can wear masks, stay indoors when possible and make sensible decisions. They can even decide what to eat for lunch without asking their parents for permission. But when the air itself becomes the hazard, we may need to ask a more uncomfortable question: Does being an adult make a student less vulnerable to unhealthy air?
The recent discussion about exempting college students from class suspension amid the haze has understandably stirred reactions. The argument is simple: elementary and high school students need greater protection because they are younger, while college students are presumed capable of taking care of themselves. As a college associate professor, I understand the desire to keep classes going. Every suspension creates an academic domino effect. Lessons have to be moved, activities rescheduled, examinations adjusted and professors suddenly discover that the semester calendar has fewer days than their syllabi require. Sometimes, it feels like we are trying to squeeze a four-month semester into three months and a prayer.
But I also understand the students’ concern. Students may be adults, but their lungs do not have college degrees. Haze does not check whether you are in Grade 6, Grade 12, or a graduating college student before entering your lungs. Air pollution does not look at a school ID and say, “Ah, college student — this one can handle it.” The issue, therefore, should not simply be whether college students are old enough to protect themselves. The better question is whether the actual air quality makes face-to-face classes reasonably safe in the first place.
If the air outside is unhealthy, telling students to wear masks and protect themselves may be practical — but it also raises another question: Why should students have to travel through unhealthy air to attend a class that could perhaps be conducted online? Of course, we cannot suspend classes every time the weather becomes slightly unpleasant. If we did, some students might enthusiastically pray for rain every Monday morning. But haze is different from an ordinary cloudy day. When air quality reaches unhealthy levels, the concern is not convenience. It is exposure.
There is also an important distinction between suspending face-to-face classes and suspending learning. Education does not have to stop simply because students are temporarily kept out of the classroom. Online classes, asynchronous activities, modules, research work and other flexible learning arrangements can help maintain academic continuity while reducing unnecessary exposure. We learned this lesson during the pandemic. We discovered that classrooms can exist beyond four walls, although many professors also discovered that saying, “Can you hear me?” repeatedly is apparently part of modern pedagogy.
As an educator, college students must learn independence, responsibility and resilience. But resilience should not mean exposing them unnecessarily to unhealthy conditions. We should teach students to face difficulties — not manufacture difficulties for them. Perhaps the real challenge is not choosing between safety and education, but finding a way to protect both.
This is where Scripture offers a fitting reminder. Philippians 2:4 says, “Let each of you look not only to his own interests, but also to the interests of others.” Students may be capable of protecting themselves, but institutions must also consider their collective welfare. Education is not merely about completing requirements; it is about demonstrating that people matter.
Another fitting reminder is found in Proverbs 22:3: “The prudent see danger and take refuge, but the simple keep going and pay the penalty.” Prudence does not mean panic. It means recognizing a legitimate risk and responding wisely. If conditions make face-to-face learning unsafe, temporarily moving classes online is not surrendering to inconvenience; it may simply be an exercise in good judgment.
And this is where the familiar words of Desiderata become strangely appropriate: “Go placidly amidst the noise and haste.” Only this time, there is a little more “haze” involved.
Let us remain calm, but let us not become complacent. Let us protect learning, but let us also protect learners. College students may be adults. They can make decisions, take precautions and certainly be responsible for their own safety. But institutions also have a responsibility to create an environment where students do not have to choose between attending class and protecting their health. After all, the purpose of education is to prepare young people for the future — not to see who can survive the longest commute through unhealthy air.
As teachers, our responsibility is not merely to finish the syllabus. It is to care for the people sitting in front of us. Sometimes, the most responsible lesson we can teach is not found in a textbook, PowerPoint presentation, or classroom discussion. It is simply this: When the air is unsafe, staying home is not a weakness. It is wisdom.
And if we can keep learning while keeping our students safe, that is not a suspension of education at all.
That is education doing what it is supposed to do — putting people first.
