By Samuel C. Villa Jr., associate professor at Cebu Technological University Main Campus-Dumanjug Extension
A university is supposed to be a place where students learn to ask questions. Sometimes, however, those questions become louder than the lectures.
The recent student protest at Cebu Normal University (CNU) is more than a disagreement over a campus policy. It raises important questions about student rights, gender inclusivity, institutional dialogue and the kind of learning environment universities should create.
On Thursday, Aug. 13, 2026, students mobilized to call for changes to a university advisory concerning personal appearance and gender expression. The controversy involved policies on matters such as hair color, facial hair, makeup, nails, tattoos and cross-dressing. The protest also coincided with the cancellation of CNU’s “Grand Balik Eskwela” acquaintance party, which the university described as a precautionary measure for safety and security.
Whatever one’s position on the policy, one principle deserves emphasis: students have the right to be heard.
A university should not be afraid of students who ask difficult questions. In fact, questioning is part of education. We teach students to analyze assumptions, challenge ideas, examine evidence and defend their positions. It would be rather ironic if we encouraged critical thinking inside the classroom but discouraged students from practicing it outside the classroom.
At the same time, student activism carries responsibility. Protests should remain peaceful, respectful and mindful of the safety and learning needs of others. Students should be able to express disagreement without intimidation, while universities should be able to address legitimate concerns without immediately treating dissent as a threat.
Most importantly, policies involving appearance and gender expression deserve thoughtful consultation. A student’s hairstyle, clothing, makeup, or manner of self-expression may seem like a minor administrative concern, but for the student involved, it can touch questions of identity, dignity, belonging and equal treatment.
This is where institutional dialogue becomes essential.
Instead of allowing disagreement to grow through social media posts, rallies and counter-statements, universities should create meaningful spaces where students, faculty, administrators and relevant offices can sit down and talk. Not every student’s demand will necessarily be granted and not every institutional policy will satisfy everyone. That is democracy — and sometimes democracy is basically a very long meeting where everybody wants the last word.
But dialogue can prevent disagreement from becoming division.
There is also a practical concern: instructional delivery.
When campus activities are canceled, tensions rise, or students and faculty become preoccupied with conflict, the academic mission can suffer. Teachers need classrooms where they can teach. Students need classrooms where they can learn. No university wins when the day’s most important lesson is interrupted by a dispute that could have been addressed through earlier consultation.
The goal, therefore, should not be to silence student voices or to dismiss institutional authority. The goal should be to build a university where student rights and academic responsibility can coexist.
CNU has an opportunity to turn this controversy into a lesson — not just for its students, but for the institution itself.
After all, education is not merely about teaching students what to think.
It is about teaching them how to think, how to disagree, how to listen and how to make their voices matter without silencing others.
And perhaps that is a lesson worth keeping long after the protest banners come down.
