ams yes report ay 2013-2014

2 | AMS Year-End Status Report 2013-2014

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Aspects of Development 3 Vision and Mission Statement 3 Direction/Thrust 3 Organizational Chart 4 Project Outcomes 4 Financial Reports 9 Evaluation of Goals 11 OD: Membership Formation 11 OD: Project Management 14 OD: Internal Communication 18 CC: Mathematical Instruction 20 CC: Mathematical Excellence 23

Best Efforts for the School Year 25 Organizational Development Effort 25

Core Competencies Effort 27 Synergy Effort 28

Follow-up Action from Mid-Year Recommendations 29 Conclusion 30 Appendices 31

AMS Year-End Status Report 2013-2014 | 3

The Year-End Status (YES) Report 2013 - 2014 Ateneo Mathematics Society (AMS)

Loyola Schools Office of Student Activities (LS-OSA) Ateneo de Manila University

I. ASPECTS OF DEVELOPMENT IN THE ORGANIZATION

a. Vision and Mission Statements Organization Vision This organization envisions itself as a community of Math enthusiasts, holistically formed to be men and women for and with others, that uses Math as a tool or instrument in building a culture of confidence and service in the Ateneo and in the greater society. Organization Mission This organization has the mission to:

i. Build a community of math enthusiasts, by establishing relationships among members of the organization, the Ateneo community and the greater society;

ii. Become socially involved in addressing the needs and concerns of the community formed;

iii. Achieve math excellence by 1. facilitating the sharing of mathematical ideas among math enthusiasts, 2. introducing to and enriching mathematical ideas and concepts of persons

who are not mathematically inclined in such a way that they will appreciate and see Mathematics as both useful and fund and,

3. striving to advance mathematical proficiency of persons within the organization and with other groups of similar nature both on and off campus.

b. Direction/Thrust for the school year

Lifting off from a year that concluded in innovation, the Ateneo Mathematics Society set its direction this year towards making these efforts have more impact on the members. Thus, this year, our focus was to drive the projects closer to its stakeholders through engendering formation and fostering relationships within and among members. The first level of approach towards this was to set systems that allowed for more interaction and discussion. This year, we test-ran the Suits system in place of the previous family systems. Also, in terms of project management, we resolved to provide more support for member-forming activities. We also gave focus towards projects that sought after the formation of project managers, core members, and promising leaders. Towards its external stakeholders, we aimed to drive impact by making people more aware of our vision as a math organization. Through the several re-inventions within the projects, we tried to make people more involved into seeing math as more than a contest or a seminar. All of these could not have been done without fixing internal communication systems - from how key information travels from the Executive Committee down to the members, and back up. Individual consultations were done systematically through the pools and departments, as well as to key offices such as Office of Student Activities and the Math Department.


Overall, we envisioned this year as the year where we set minimum adjustments to sustain previous efforts, and direct more attention towards member formation and participation, in order to embody mathematical excellence as a whole organization.

c. Organizational Chart

d. Project Outcomes

Date Implemented Effort/Activity Description and Highlights

Year-long Agimath+

Agimath+ continued to provide reliable tutorial services for different math subjects of all LS students. Starting AY 2013-2014, the Tutors Pool conducted several class review sessions for freshmen math majors.

Year-long Core Apps

Members applied to be part of core groups for the first and second semester projects of AMS. The selection process was left to the discretion of the project heads.


Year-long Crazy Math Journal Releasing its first ever online issue, the Crazy Math Journal featured facts, trivia, problems and interesting articles related to math.

Year-long DPoolong

To acquaint the members of DPool, two DPoolongs were held, one at the start of each semester. The program consisted of introductions, project sign-ups, and bonding over snacks.

Year-long

ExeCom Meetings

The Executive Committee held weekly meetings to level-off, discuss updates on pool and department activities, resolve conflicts, tackle decision points, and delegate tasks.

Year-long Logistics Core Trainings

The Executive Vice President arranges training sessions in order to orient the logistics core members on the OSA, OAS, and LS processes involved in reserving venues, among other logistical concerns.

Year-long MathApp Snackout

The Math Applications Department conducted snack-outs throughout the semester to gather and bond its members through games, snacks, and experiences sharing.

Year-long Problem of the Week

Three math-related problems of varying difficulty were given every week for AMS members to answer and earn points for their respective cards in the Suits System.

Year-long Problem Solving Seminars

The first three Problem Solving Seminars of the school year were given by professors of the Mathematics Department. The topics tackled were AM-GM Inequality, Binary Variables and Pigeonhole Principle.

Year-long Project Core Meetings

The core team of each project holds regular meetings to brainstorm, track progress, discuss pertinent points, and delegate tasks in preparation for project implementation.

Year-long Project Core Evaluations

At most two weeks before implementation, the core team gathers, discusses, and evaluates planning and implementation of their projects, and also gives recommendations for the next core team.

Year-long Project Core FGDs

The first meetings of project core teams are allotted for levelling-off, introduction and briefing about their assigned project, setting success indicators, and discussing evaluations and recommendations from previous years.

Year-long Project Presentations

The heads of each project present pre-final preparations, program flow, and other relevant information to the ExeCom before project implementation. The ExeCom then provides input and last-minute suggestions to improve on.

Year-long Suits System The members of AMS were divided into 52 cards and four suits. The members compete in obtaining points for their cards and suits through


participating in events and accomplishing Suits activities.

Year-long T-Shirt Project

Members were asked to participate in a shirt design contest, and the winners had their designs printed and sold as “Infinitees” to raise funds for AMS projects.

Year-long ExeCom Skills Training

The members of the ExeCom underwent training sessions for a more diverse and useful skill set with themes such as Photoshop, financial procedures, letter writing, facilitating, and dancing.

January 11 and 18

Freshmen Mathematics Interclass Competition (FMIC)

FMIC is an interclass math competition that aims to review the contestants for their midterms and provide an avenue for them to experience calculus in a fun and competitive way.

January Ateneo Mathematical Olympiad (AMO)

AMO is a culminating activity for Ateneo High School and Grade School students where they can compete and test their mathematical problem solving skills after a year-long training.

January Math Conference: Into the Deep

The second day of MathCon explored the world of finance. Experts in the field shared how math is applied in finance and explained the workings of the finance world.

February Math Conference: Detour

The last day of the first Math Con coursed through the application of math in the social setting, with topics on poverty and population statistics, information technology, and Philippine education.

March 1 Year-End Party: Frostburn

YEP is the culminating celebration of the organization. Notable members and projects were acknowledged in their efforts and success. The new set of officers were also inaugurated.

April 8-9 Transition and Evaluation Seminar

The outgoing and incoming members of the ExeCom discussed possible measures to address the prevailing issues of the organization and shared essential information that would help the incoming officers in their responsibilities.

April 19-21 Planning Seminar

With guests from departments and pools, the ExeCom tackled pertinent issues in the organization and laid down plans for the incoming school year.

April 23-30 Pool Applications

AMS members were invited to join DPool, SPAm, MaFiA, and department pools. The process involved an online application and interviews with the deputies and department pool heads.

April 25-May 2 Project Head Applications

Members applied to be project heads of the 11 major projects of the year. The process involved submission of application forms and panel interviews. The ExeCom held a deliberation session afterwards.

May 14 Project Head General Assembly

The 33 chosen project heads from the ExeCom deliberations attended an assembly that informed


them of their assigned projects, responsibilities, and provided an opportunity for them to level-off with their co-PHs.

June 14, November 4

Formation Seminar

The formation seminar was able to aid the Project heads and the Core team in managing the projects of AMS throughout the year. This also allowed them to bond with their core teams and know each other on a more personal level.

June 15 Math 101

Freshman math majors were invited to attend a prep-course with talks on the typical life of a math major and prospective careers of graduates. An afternoon bonding activity was also conducted to conclude the event.

June 17, November 8

Blueprint

Blueprint was launched this year to give math majors a prep-course and overview for their major subjects. Students who already took the subjects were invited to share their experiences and survival tips.

June 24-28 AMS RecWeek The organization was able to recruit 373 members, both math and non-math majors, for the school year.

July 1-5 Interview Week

The Interview Week served as an introduction of the organization's Executive Committee, its structure, projects, pools and other new systems to its members. This also allowed the ExeCom to know more about the new members.

July 8-12 Tambay Week Tambay Week aimed to bond AMS members through different activities and games.

July 18 First GA

AMS officially welcomed its members to the organization. The structure and projects of AMS were explained, followed by a Suits bonding activity and dinner.

July 22-26 Explora Mathematica

A new project this year, this week-long math exhibit showcased to the LS Community the different applications of math in the field of sports, arts, beauty and many more.

August 10, 17, 24, 31 Camp Math 20

Now on its 20th year, Camp Math engaged more than 200 students to the wonders of math through its interactive talks and activities, and fostered relationships among them.

August 23 Suits Day The members of the four suits engaged in an afternoon of fun, games, and friendly competition in order to win points for their suits.

September 7, 14, November 9

Sipnayan 15

Sipnayan is a challenging math competition with grade school, high school and college divisions. This year, Sipnayan released an Omnibus, which compiled the best questions of the competition throughout its 15 years.

September 20 DPool TrainSem DPool was able to hold a Photoshop seminar which aimed to teach basic program tools. The project was open to all the organization's members.


October 16-18 Leadership Training Seminar 2013

Now on its third year, LTS offered its 35 participants a three-day seminar at Tanay Adventure Camp. It was an avenue to find their passion for leadership. Participants were immersed in talks about leadership, group activities, and processing sessions.

October 19-20 Planning and Evaluation Seminar

Projects and activities during the first semester were evaluated, while plans for the second semester were discussed.

November 11 Department GAs

The three departments welcomed their old and new members during the start of second semester. The department heads relayed the different activities for the semester and the members bonded over food and GDs.

November 11-15, December 2-5

Novfest Tambay Week

Novfest Tambay Week provided avenues for members of the organization to bond and get to know each other. There were mini-games, jamming sessions and movie screenings.

November 16, 30 AMS Sportsfest Members from each year level compete with other batches in friendly basketball, volleyball, and badminton matches.

November 20 Novfest Clash

Clash is a friendly general information quiz bee between 50 students and a math professor. This year AMS had Mr. Lemuel Martin and Mr. Luigi Cortez to play for the Clash.

November 25 Novfest Jacobian Cup

Jacobian Cup is a trivia contest on general knowledge. Students from the LS community competed against each other in groups of three.

December 2 Discernment Talk

With talks from three leaders from the Ateneo community, this event aimed to help potential candidates answer questions such as “Am I ready?” “What do I choose?” “Why AMS?”

December 5 Novfest Culminight

Culminight officially ended the 1-month celebration of NovFest. Members showcased their talents through performances.

December 9 Positions Talk The members of the ExeCom talked about their responsibilities and experiences as officers to help potential candidates in their discernment.

December 12 MathCon Day 1 MathCon, now on its second year, focused on math in weather patterns and climate change and math in population aging and disaster management.

December 20 XMath: Winter Solstice

With music, games, bonding activities, performances, and dinner, the members bonded and celebrated the holidays with their AMS family.

January 6 Elections GA Rules and guidelines to be followed for campaigning and elections were presented to the aspiring candidates of the AMS elections 2014.

January 22 Miting de Avance

Candidates for the next ExeCom presented their vision and platforms for AMS next school year, followed by a question and answer portion afterwards.


e. Financial Reports

Statement of Receipts and Disbursements 2nd semester, SY 2012-2013

DCB Fund Report as of February 6, 2013

DCB Fund Beginning Balance, as of March 31, 2012 181,718.93

Subsidy from ADMU

Operational Budget 30,000.00

OSA Project Grant 2011-2012 17,632.72

Seminar

Planning Seminar 27,292.02

Planning & Evaluation Seminar 10,000.00

Leadership Training Seminar 8,075.28

93,000.02

Less: Expenses from

Operations:

AMS Website 2,985.00

Family 2011-2012 927.30

Core Evaluations 2,019.00

Miscellaneous 3,808.75

Seminar

Team Building Activity 10,302.50

Formation Seminars 3,037.25

Planning Seminar 29,811.26

Planning & Evaluation Seminar 10,940.51

Leadership Training Seminar 73,892.30 137,723.87

Excess (Deficit) from ADMU Subsidy 136,995.08

Cash Receipts: (Inflows: Sponsorships, sales, donations, fees collected, etc)

Recruitment Week Registration Fees 24,000.00

CampMath 65,295.00

Sponsorship:CampMath 2,000.00

AGIMATH+ Tutorials 2,700.00

Sipnayan 28,650.00

Leadership Training Seminar Fees 30,450.00

Sponsorship: AMS Week 5,000.00

Solicitations: MathSaya 40,000.00

TOTAL CASH RECEIPTS 198,095.00

Cash Disbursements: (Outflows)

Ma101 3,222.40

RecWeek 2,562.50

First GA 12,031.25

CampMath 81,489.75


Sipnayan 40,184.25

MathSaya 44,822.25

MathCon 6,319.25

Xmath 12,000.00

AMS Week 12,295.02

Family 2012-2013 2,495.90

Tambay Weeks 3,393.50

DPooL 1,140.15

MaFiA 1,664.50

QMP 502.50

Other Disbursements(Overtime Pay) 4,104.76

TOTAL CASH DISBURSEMENTS 228,227.98

Excess (Deficiency) of Receipts over Disbursements -30,132.98

Fund Ending Balance, as of February 6, 2013 per ledger 106,862.10

Unposted Transactions (Transactions not yet reflected to ledger)

I . Deposits :

II. Disbursements : (Direct payments to suppliers/ Reimbursements thru check and PCVs)

Total Unposted Transactions 0.00

Fund Ending Balance, as of February 6, 2013 after unposted transactions

106,862.10

Statement of Receipts and Disbursements

Per CAO Ledger as of January 29, 2014

Actual Proposed (for projects)

AMS Starting Balance (4-30-2013) (a) PHP 92,078.90

RECEIPTS Actual Proposed (for projects)

OSA Budget Allocation PHP 30,000.00 OSA Subsidy PHP 6,316.00 OSA Subsidy PHP 18,375.00 OSA Subsidy (MathCon) PHP 2,979.60 OSA Subsidy (LTS) PHP 38,307.00 RecWeek Revenues PHP 31,815.00 Camp Math Revenues PHP 304,000.00 PHP 90,000.00 Sipnayan Revenues PHP 297,500.00 PHP 130,000.00 InfiniTee Revenues (Partial) PHP 11,299.27 AMS Tutorial to AEA PHP 650.00 LTS Registration Fees PHP 63,000.00

RECEIPTS TOTAL (b) PHP 741,241.87

DISBURSEMENTS Actual Proposed (for projects)


Operations TrEvSem PHP 6,616.00 PlanSem PHP 27,360.13 Seniors' Farewell PHP 14,167.50 AMS ExeCom FormSem PHP 3,500.00 AMS FormSem1 PHP 4,900.00 Supplies PHP 914.00 Privilege Card PHP 5,015.10 RecWeek PHP 1,020.60 AMS Tambay Week PHP 3,000.00 AMS Website PHP 2,050.00 AMS ExeCom ID PHP 189.00 MaFiA GA PHP 1,200.00 Suits Day PHP 388.45 LTS PHP 118,064.40 PlevSem PHP 18,685.00

Subtotal (c) PHP 207,070.18

Projects Ma101 PHP 10,136.81 PHP 9,000.00 First GA PHP 24,276.25 PHP 26,000.00 Explora PHP 7,168.25 PHP 5,000.00 Camp Math PHP 156,217.70 PHP 73,000.00 Sipnayan PHP 231,973.75 PHP 82,000.00 NovFest PHP 49,449.90 PHP 51,500.00 Subtotal (d) PHP 479,222.66

EXPENSES TOTAL (c + d) PHP 686,292.84

Excess (Deficit) (a + b - c - d) PHP 147,027.93

II. EVALUATION OF THE GOALS OD: Membership Formation

Goal: To create a better functioning AMS through more involved and active members – members who are aware of the organization’s mission and who are devoted to fulfilling it by giving feedback rather than mere attending.

Status:

Not Achieved 0 1 2 3 4 5 Achieved

Success indicators: 1. To have at least 65% of all members be retained after the first semester. 2. To have an average of 65% attendance in all member-forming activities. 3. To have at least 50% of all members attend the First Semester Focus Group Discussion

(FGD)

Explanation Impact on participants

In an effort to encourage members to make a more informed decision regarding their home departments, and also to let them explore activities of all departments without retention requirement constraints, the ExeCom introduced the 1-1-1 retention

New members got a better idea of what it meant to join a department, and the retained members were able to make informed decisions regarding their department of choice during the second semester. Meanwhile, the non-retained


rule wherein new members choose their departments during the second semester, if they are retained. Their requirements for retention are to attend at least one activity of each department during the first semester, with extra credit considered for pool activity (Appendix B.I.1).

The retention after the first semester was only at 63.06%, close enough to the goal of 65% (Appendix B.I.2). The organization looks at the several factors that could have attributed to this: o The Suits System, which was supposed

to aid the internal communication of the organization, was not effective. It did not rally the people to be invited in the events, despite several ICs and one grand Suits Day.

o Another factor could be the fact that the Freshmen and new members did not have any home department in the first semester. Not having a department could have meant that there was no support structure to inform them of their retention status and the many other opportunities by which they could make up for it.

Three out of four Member Relations Projects achieved at least 65% attendance. With this, almost all Member Relations projects have increased impact this year.

Tie-ups with the Math Department, especially Open House and MA101, were great efforts in trying to reach out to the freshmen.

The Suits system was not fully developed. On its first year of implementation, there were only a few attendees on the first Suits Day due to conflicts on the long exams of the math majors even though ICs were done regularly with the card keepers to relay information (Appendix B.I.3). o The card keepers were not fully aware

of their roles and the members of the ExeCom were not as hands-on as they should have been.

o 52 groups proved to be too many to handle in terms of following up on the progress of each group and relaying information.

members can still explore all activities of AMS and choose their departments next year, if retained.

Less than half of the new members were retained during the first semester, possibly because of the lack of encouragement they could have otherwise gotten from belonging in a home department (Appendix B.I.2).

Overall, since member formation is the focus of the AMS thrust this year, the efforts of the organization were geared towards this and most of these were successful. As a positive effect, members became more aware of the mission of the organization and became more involved in actualizing it.

The number of active members increased this year when compared to last year (Appendix B.I.11). There used to only be a small group of people who were always attending events. This year, there are more diverse groups of members who are continually active in AMS throughout the year.

As individual consultations were not conducted regularly, the new members were not deeply informed of the activities and avenues of participation. Only the members who made an effort to get to know the organization understood what AMS has to offer.

The Department GAs were helpful in making the members get to know each other and their respective department. The GAs also mitigated the aforementioned dilemma.

The Formation Seminar program was very helpful to the core members, especially the simulations or situational tasks e.g. reservation procedures for logistics core members. The members enjoyed and bonded while learning a lot from the event, as reflected through the high evaluations (Appendix B.I.6).

The LTS was a very high impact project that heavily influenced its members to step up, whether their learnings from the LTS were applied in AMS or not. Aside from the leadership that was developed among them,


Only the Math Applications Department held a snack-out during the first semester. This was due to the reliance of the ExeCom on the Suits system. Recognizing this, the ExeCom adjusted during the second semester by refocusing on the departments. The Department General Assemblies (GAs) were well-attended by the freshmen and the new members (Appendix B.I.4).

Only 36 people attended the first semester Focus Group Discussion, with the Executive Committee as facilitators. Despite promotions, this low attendance could be attributed to schedule conflicts, particularly with long exams.

The day-long Formation Seminar (FormSem) during the first semester aimed to train and orient the core members and project heads of first semester projects on their duties and responsibilities. It also served as an avenue to bond the core teams and introduce them to each other. At least 65% of all project core teams were able to attend, with at least two heads per project. The event also garnered an overall rating of 4 out of 5 (Appendices B.I.5 and B.II.1).

Because of schedule constraints, the FormSem for the second semester was condensed into a mini-event with a one and a half hour program. It was attended by 75 core members who listened to talks and participated in GDs.

In line with the thrust for the year, AMS increased the number of participants in its annual three-day Leadership Training Seminar (LTS) from 20 to 36, out of the 48 applicants. The ExeCom was able to attract more participants this year because of an easier written application form, but made up for it by a more specialized interview process (Appendices B.I.6 and B.I.7).

The ExeCom continued the apprenticeship program initiated during the previous year, entitled “Wear Our Shoes,” with the purpose of giving an opportunity for interested members to get to know the responsibilities of the incumbent officers. It also let them learn through experiencing different situations, such as sitting-in during ExeCom meetings. The program

LTS also formed strong ties and relationships among its participants, especially among the small groups. This also had positive effects for AMS as these groups became more participative in AMS events.

Officers who ran for positions during the current AMS elections were properly guided by the incumbents, helping them make a fruitful discernment period and an informed decision.

Participants of the apprenticeship program had a deeper understanding became more aware of the concrete tasks that the ExeCom handles, both on the position-specific and general scales. They also learned a lot through different activities and ICs with their mentors.

The increase in budget enabled the core groups to focus more in improving the programs of the said member forming projects and deliver well. While increase in budget does not automatically lead to increase in participation, it is through this ease of financial constraint that members are able to avail more from the projects (more services, more enjoyment, etc).

The Freshmen were exposed to a full day of orientation as to what it would be like as a math major. The program was designed to deepen their insights regarding the program and provide them more time to interact with their batchmates - unlike the previous’ Freshmen experiences. Conversely, the upperclassmen who volunteered for the project also got a chance to interact with other math majors.


loosely followed a syllabus to aid the officers in their mentoring (Appendix B.I.8). There was a total of 32 (distinct) apprentices who engaged in the program (Appendix B.I.9).

In support of the member formation goal, we increased the budget allowed for said projects. Due consultation with the Chief Finance Officer was done before the budget is approved (Appendix B.I.10).

All Freshmen math majors attended the Ma101. What enabled this to happen is the imposition of required attendance from the OrSem committee and the Math Department. The program garnered a rating of – 4.59 out of 5 from the participants.

Recommendations 1. Card keepers should be given a proper and formal orientation so that they are fully aware

of their responsibilities. 2. Should the Suits system be continued, there should be a more effective grouping scheme.

Also, Suits activities must be integrated into the organizational calendar immediately so that Suits Days do not get discontinued and postponed to make way for other AMS activities.

3. There should be incentives for attending the FGDs so that more people will attend. 4. Provide more efforts in recognizing individual AMS members. Use a personal approach

in dealing with and getting to know the members in order to make them feel more welcome into the organization.

5. Go back and make use of naturally existing groups—blocks, departments, among others—and integrate member forming activities with these, rather than create new groups.

OD: Project Management

Goal: To maximize impact and observe efficient use of resources in project planning and implementation through proper transitioning, orientation, and documentation mechanisms.

Status:


Success indicators 1. To obtain an average overall rating of 4 out of 5 in participant, core and faculty evaluations. 2. To have at least 80% of the core team present during the pre-planning Focus Group

Discussion (FGD) and the post-project evaluation. 3. To make sure that the total expenses of each project do not exceed the budget specified by

the Chief Finance Officer. 4. To collect all project documentation requirements and financial statements (specified by the

Deputy of Documentations and the CFO) at most two weeks after the post-project evaluations/FGD.


Of the seven major projects (that have already been concluded) of AMS, First GA, Math 101, Camp Math, Sipnayan, and XMath achieved overall ratings of at least 4

The increased budget for some projects had a good effect for the core because it gave them the opportunity to improve the project for the participants.


out of 5. FormSems and Blueprint also achieved overall ratings of at least 4 out of 5 (Appendix B.II.1).

Explora Mathematica achieved a rating of 3.80 out of 5. The project heads and the Executive Committee did not have a standard basis in the planning and implementation since it was a new project. NovFest achieved a rating of 3.75 out of 5. This was mainly caused by poor promotions that caused low participation in some of the events (Appendix B.II.1).

Project core teams of the 11 major projects held pre-planning FGDs facilitated by their respective department heads. Documentation and evaluation from last year’s implementation were discussed.

Except for those who held their FGDs during semester breaks, all pre-planning FGDs were attended by a majority of its core members i.e. at least 80% (Appendix B.II.2).

Success indicators and corresponding consequences (if SIs are not fulfilled) were formulated by the core team during pre-planning FGDs. This assisted the Executive Vice President in customizing participant evaluation forms according to the demands and nature of the project (Appendix B.II.3).

Core evaluations were conducted one week after the last day of the project implementation. Core teams enumerated and discussed the strengths, weaknesses, threats, and opportunities of their projects. They also formulated recommendations for future implementation.

Camp Math, Sipnayan, and Novfest went over the specified budget. The increase in the Camp Math and Sipnayan expenses were due to a higher participant turn out for Camp Math and a higher demand for the Sipnayan Omnibus, respectively. However, these expenses balanced out with a higher revenue from both projects. Increase in NovFest expenses were due to the high expenses in shirts that were underdetermined during budgeting and overtime charges for renting the Grade

Participants in the pre-planning FGDs were able to discuss a concrete action plan based on last year’s recommendations and prepared remedies in order to avoid last year’s problems in implementation and planning.

The pre-planning FGD served as the first core team meeting, and thus it enabled core members to level-off with each other and have an expectations-setting session. It also allowed the project core team to establish initial rapport.

The pre-planning FGD allowed core teams to brainstorm on creative ideas for their project. Likewise, the success indicators and consequences formulated by the core team themselves worked as an incentive and inspiration for them to work harder in achieving the goals of the project.

Core members tended to work towards remedying the shortcomings of the project from previous years. To address this, Department Heads made the project core teams aware of other long-standing problems in implementing their respective projects.

The project presentations allowed the ExeCom to address concerns regarding the project’s program flow, financial logistical matters, among other dimensions. This also allowed the project heads to collect suggestions and implement the necessary changes before the actual project execution.

Detailed program flows were used by the ExeCom to see to it that implementation ran smoothly. Project heads were also able to systematize task assignments and to increase accountability by identifying point persons in the core teams.

Logistics core team training sessions were effective in discussing the basic system; however, more of the peculiar and specific problems were consulted with the Executive Vice President. Core members became more aware of logistical processes and they thus had an easier time in handling their responsibilities.

Project core teams were able to negotiate with the Chief Finance Officer regarding


School Covered Courts for the SportsFest (See Financial Reports).

Project heads of all major projects were able to present their pre-final plans to the Executive Committee at least one week before the scheduled implementation. The two-week minimum was not followed for projects whose implementation dates were immediately after resumption of classes (after semester breaks) but was followed for other projects.

Every project core team must submit their Detailed Program Flows (DPFs) to the ExeCom at least three days before project implementation. This was followed by most project core groups. Those who did not comply were allowed, but with the condition that their DPFs had to be more specific and comprehensive, taking account the comments of their respective Department Heads.

Logistics core team training sessions were held per project in order to orient logistics core team members about the systems in OAS and OSA pertaining to reservation of venues.

Documentations and Promotions core members were given training sessions by the Deputies concerned. These seminars were centered on the use of Adobe Photoshop for making promotional materials.

Budget hearings were not conducted this year. In lieu of budget hearings, individual consultations between the Project Heads and the Chief Finance Officer were held. Project core teams in AMS are not accustomed to this practice, as seen during the first part of the first semester.

Likewise, no code for financial procedures was constructed this school year. Instead, procedures and processes were made known by the Chief Finance Officer to the finance core team members during the course of project planning.

Quorum was defined by all project core teams as a necessary condition for decision-making. Some project-meetings in both semesters did not reach quorum due to bad

budget allocations given sufficient reasons, thereby allowing projects to pursue their plans with less financial restrictions.

The Project Black Book performed as a guide for secretariat committee in their compilation of post-project documents that will be submitted to the Deputy for Documentations.

Details from the Project Black Book enabled informed core team of useful statistics and recommendations. Thus, they had a clearer picture of what they needed to improve on for this year’s implementation.

Because of the failure to observe quorum, some decisions concerning projects were delayed, but were easily resolved through online polls on Facebook groups.

The promotional strategy ensured quality control, transparency, and well-informed members.


scheduling (e.g. conflict with long exams and hell weeks).

The Project Black Book was also accomplished by the Secretary-General, the Deputy for Documentations, and the Deputy for Promotions before the first semester. The document condensed documentations from last year’s projects to guide this year’s core teams in their proceedings in planning, implementing, and evaluating their projects.

Department meetings (i.e. meetings among project heads and department heads) were deemed unnecessary since all scheduling were done during the Planning Seminar (PlanSem). However, Department Heads still met regularly with their respective project heads and relayed all pertinent agenda to other ExeCom members during weekly meetings.

Not all core teams (four out of seven) were able to submit their project documentation within two weeks after their last day of implementation. This is due to the fact that these projects fall near the moratorium and the core team cannot meet to discuss about their documentations.

All promotional materials were submitted to the Deputy for Promotions. The Deputy then gives permission to post the material using different media.

Recommendations 1. Scheduling activities for the year should continue to be settled and discussed as early as the

PlanSem so that possible conflicts could be avoided. 2. Department Heads should continue to work closely with the project heads to bridge the

gap between the ExeCom and the project core team. 3. Strengthen compliance to the two-week deadline for project documentations. Provide

additional incentives if necessary. 4. The schedules of the core members should be discussed early on to set a convenient time

of meeting for everyone and to avoid not achieving quorum during meetings. 5. Internal communication among core teams should not be restricted to posts on online

groups. Core teams should also utilize text messaging and e-mails for pertinent points. 6. Continue to formulate success indicators and the corresponding consequences during pre-

planning FGDs to synchronize the core team’s perception of what they have to accomplish for the project and to continue to serve as motivation.

7. Continue to customize participant evaluation forms in order for project core teams to receive feedback that is specific to their project.

8. Construct a Code of Financial Procedures that enumerates important transactions per project based on best practices to be followed by the future Chief Finance Officer and finance core teams.


9. Hold ICs between the Project Heads to discuss the expenses instead of a Budget Hearing. These should be held earlier (preferably one month before the project) to have better preparation for the expenses and to have time to look for more options. The ExeCom will follow up the core team’s financial health during project presentation

OD: Internal Communication

Goal: To improve existing communication systems utilized by project core teams and create effective information dissemination strategies.

Status:


Success indicators 1. To conduct individual consultations (ICs) with at least 65% of all members. 2. To have at least 50% attendance in batch Focus Group Discussions (FGDs). 3. To have at least 80% attendance in core FGDs. 4. To have an average rating of 4 out of 5 for promotions in all AMS events. 5. To have the core teams miss at most only two deadlines (i.e, project presentation schedule,

submission of Detailed Program Flow, submission of documentations, etc), if not none.


The Member Relations Department Heads conducted ICs with the 52 card keepers from the Suits System. They were tasked to conduct casual individual consultations with their respective card members.

Not all card keepers were able to conduct ICs with their members because of factors such as personal conflicts and unresponsiveness of their members.

Project heads had ICs with their respective department heads. They, in turn, were tasked to conduct ICs with their project core teams and pool members if the need arises to follow-up on their individual performances.

The Tutors Pool heads and the Academics Department Heads made it a point to IC their tutors.

Instead of conducting separate batch FGDs, the ExeCom conducted a first semester FGD instead, which was open to all members. The event was attended by 36 members (Appendix B.III.1).

Except for those who held their FGDs during semester breaks, all pre-planning FGDs were attended by a majority of its core members i.e. at least 80% (Appendix B.II.1).

Some online promotional materials were not released earlier than the target date due to conflicts with the Creatives team.

Conducting ICs with the card keepers enabled the ExeCom to track the progress of each card and to find out the kinds of relationships established within each cards as well as problems experienced by the card keepers.

The ICs with card members aimed to ask them about their stay in AMS and encourage them to be more active. However, this had little impact because not all card keepers were able to conduct ICs effectively.

The ExeCom was always updated with project core activity, concerns, and problems encountered through the constant updates from project heads. The project heads mostly did not conduct ICs, but voiced out general concerns during project core meetings instead.

ICs with the Tutors Pool proved to be an effective way of improving the selection process of tutors and ensuring that they are prepared for their tutorial sessions.

The small group discussions during the first semester FGD enabled participants to determine the problems of AMS and assess the needs of its members. The FGD was effective in making the participants more aware about the issues of AMS.

The pre-planning FGDs were helpful for the core members because they got a chance to level-off and become more


Promotions in the form of text messages (UnliOnes) were often sent to all the members of the organization usually at least three days before the event.

Deadlines were mostly met by the core teams. There were instances of late submissions for complete project documentations, but project core teams never went past two accounts of missing their deadlines.

The card keepers and suit heads of the Suits System were tasked to relay important information about AMS activities and events to their members.

The AMS website was launched in August to provide another medium for disseminating information that concerns a bigger audience such as announcements from AMS to the LS community or contest participants, KYAM, Math Mania, and recaps of events. Services also include links to tutorial services and LT Archives. (Appendix B.III.2).

The ExeCom proposed amendments to the Constitution in order to clarify certain points and to distinguish roles more clearly. However, it was not passed because it did not reach the quota of votes for approval. A number of members voted and gave their comments on the constitutional change, raised questions, and gave recommendations (Appendices B.III.3 and B.III.4).

The Secretary-General and Chief Finance Officer released a Mid-Year Status Report in efforts geared towards transparency of operations within the organization (Appendices B.III.5 and B.III.6).

informed about the project that they are handling.

Personal text messages received from assigned promotions volunteers increased the members’ knowledge about upcoming events of AMS.

Projects with late release of promotional materials had lower participant turnout. However, the text blast system was very effective in ensuring that despite late promotions, the members can still be aware of the events of AMS.

Not all the card keepers and suit heads did their job of disseminating information to their members and encouraging them to participate. This is because some cards have not developed strong ties with each other and the card keepers do not feel accountable enough to fulfill their duties, despite ICs with the MemRel department heads and constant reminders from the ExeCom.

Because the Suits System was not very effective in informing the members of AMS activities, some members were not properly informed of them and they did not feel encouraged to participate. However, other means of communicating AMS matters to them, such as the text blast system, remedied this issue.

The release of the Mid-Year Status Report allowed the members to have a greater buy-in towards the organization, as they were made more aware of the financial status and project outcomes. It ensured the members of the accountability of the officers towards their organizational duties. The report also sparked inspiration towards fellow organizations to come up and release their own status reports.

Recommendations 1. The members of the ExeCom should conduct formal mid-semester ICs with as many

members as possible, instead of just relying on the department heads, project heads, and card keepers.

2. Encourage project heads to influence their core teams to have an IC culture so that they can regularly check up on each other.

3. For documentation, a constant reminder of their deliverables and date of submissions by respective department heads and the Deputy for Documentation helps teams meet deadlines.


4. Promotions core members assigned to every project must be constantly reminded with their roles and responsibilities as core member.

5. Stricter deadlines should be enforced to the DPool core members. 6. Trainings and seminars to increase the creativity skills of the documentations and promotions

pool must be held more frequently during a semester for a more skilled and informed manpower.

7. ICs must be strictly implemented among core teams, pools, and departments. 8. Continue release of status reports to the entire organization.

CC: Mathematical Instruction

Goal: To deepen the understanding for Mathematics by providing quality educational services and projects that address the needs of a wider range of audience.

Status:


Success indicators 1. To have a total of at least 100 tutees avail the services of Agimath+. 2. To obtain an average rating of at least 4 out of 5 in the evaluations of tutor sessions. 3. To archive at least 60% of the total number of Math long tests per Math course for the

school year and provide them as sample LTs. 4. To achieve an average rating of at least 3.5 out of 5 in mathematical relevance from the

evaluation of the participants of Sipnayan, Camp Math, and MathSaya.


The Tutors’ Pool revised their structure to allow for clearer communication and more efficient distribution of tasks among its members (Appendix B.IV.1).

A total of 281 students were tutored by Agimath+ for this school year. 32 students were from one-on-one tutorials, approximately 48 students were from group tutorials, and 201 students were from class tutorials. Most of the tutees came from the class tutorial service, which was given more attention this year compared to last year. Of the 62 one-on-one and group tutorials requests, 48 were accomplished, 10 were cancelled, 2 were unsuccessful and 2 were invalid. The cancelled requests were mostly due to weather conditions and problems in rescheduling. The 2 unsuccessful requests were due to the unavailability of tutors while the 2 invalid requests were due to failure of the students to follow the 3-day notice rule (Appendix B.IV.2).

The sufficient number of tutors (42) in the Tutors Pool was able to provide reliable services to majority of the LS students who were in need.

The class tutorial service was efficient in gathering students having the same math subjects and thus, was able to provide tutorial services to more students with less resources. Three class tutorials so far were given to freshman math majors in order to prepare them for their long tests as they engaged in their math curriculum.

The 3-day notice rule of the Tutors Pool was inconvenient for some students who needed urgent tutorial services.

The promotions done by the Tutors Pool and Mathematics Department increased the awareness of students about Agimath+.

Based on the evaluations, the Tutors Pool was able to provide a relatively good and effective service to the students.

The hardcopy archives of Math long test questionnaires stored in the AMS room were sorted properly by the Archivists’ Pool Heads, providing all borrowers an easier time of finding the questionnaires they needed. However, the borrowing process was not revised, with borrowers still not using the Borrower’s Log Sheet.


Aside from the online and room-to-room promotions done by the Tutors Pool, the professors from the Mathematics Department also helped in promoting Agimath+. This has helped in increasing the number of students availing the different tutorial services (Appendix B.IV.3).

Of the 188 students who attended the class tutorials and were able to answer the evaluation sheets, average ratings of 4.04, 4.44, 3.82, 4.07, 3.86, and 3.90 were given to the criterion difficulty of material, venue, clarity of discussion, schedule, promotion, and effectiveness respectively, for an overall rating of 4.02 over 5 (Appendix B.IV.4).

There was one tutorial session in the first semester that garnered ratings of below 4 (over 5) for lack of clarity and effectiveness in discussion. This was a session that was handled poorly by the tutors assigned. After the incident, supplementary review materials were emailed to the affected participants in order to compensate for the ineffectiveness of the service. Moreover, the Tutors Pool Heads made sure that tutors were more prepared, especially for class tutorials. On the other hand, ratings for tutorial promotions that scored below 4/5 signifies that it can still be intensified in order to reach out to more students.

The Archivists’ Pool collected and scanned Math long test questionnaires, and managed these in both the online database and the hardcopy archives. 25 long test questionnaires were collected so far, among the total 191 target for the academic year. However, being a relatively new pool, its methods for collection and operation are still not heavily founded among its members.

The Academics Department Heads and the President, along with the respective representatives of the Office of Social Concern and Involvement (OSCI) and the Mathematics Department, decided that the structure of the stakeholders in their involvement in the AMS-member

The online database of Math long test questionnaires provides an easier method for borrowers in need of study aid. Moreover, the organization’s Tutors’ Pool also refers to this online database to base the exercises they use for tutorial sessions.

With the slow improvements in updating the Math long test archives, in both the hardcopy archive and online database, students use older questionnaires, with some having different exam coverage.

AMS is not an official partner of the NSTP program this year. This is due to the fact that AMS could not find nor fill a concrete role in the program. Nevertheless, there were still efforts to reach out and help in as much as the organization can. o The officers, particularly the

President, had constant ICs with Ms. Ophalle Alzona of the INAF Program and the Math Department regarding possible future re-partnership of AMS with the program.

o Members of AMS who were still interested in the program helped out by serving as manpower for special activities such as NSTP Skills Training.

The participants were able to know what to expect from their major subjects and their teachers. Different studying tips were also imparted from the speakers to the participants.

Camp Math participants learned a lot on math topics from lectures given by professors from the math department. They were able to apply what they learned from these lectures through the activities conducted after the talks. Although overall, there could have been more lectures on math since the participants mostly looked forward to the more interesting albeit not math-heavy activities such as the Amazing Race and bonding activities.


exclusive National Service Training Program (AMS-NSTP) would be that the OSCI would be in charge of the area visits, the Mathematics Department would be in charge of the class modules, and the organization would be in charge of providing area leaders from the organization. However, despite the Academics Department Heads best efforts to gather area leaders from the organization, most of the students have conflicting schedules with the area insertion and heavy academic workload, which prevented the organization of providing a support system for the members of the AMS-NSTP program. Dr. Debbie Verzosa and Mr. Clark Go of the Mathematics Department, joined the area insertions of the program frequently, serving as the support system the organization intended to provide the students.

During the first semester, Blueprint for the Freshman math majors was incorporated in Ma101, while the Blueprint for the remaining three year levels was held on June 17, 2013. The project reached its success indicator of having at least 20 participants per year level (Appendix B.IV.5). Moreover, Blueprint was very much appreciated and found useful by the math majors, as supported by the evaluation from sophomores, juniors and seniors (Appendix B.II.1).

During the second semester, the Blueprint scheduled on November 8 was cancelled due to the Super Typhoon Yolanda. As an alternative, the invited speakers were asked to make audio visual presentations, which were compiled and posted in the Facebook group for math majors to watch.

After the four days of Camp Math 20 filled with activities, lectures, and games for the 223 participants (high school students), the project garnered an over-all rating of 4.51 out of 5 from participant evaluations (Appendices B.IV.6).

Recommendations 1. Revisit the AMS-NSTP partnership next year.


2. The Tutors Pool should provide more class tutorial services and also increase promotions in order to reach out to more students.

3. The Tutors Pool should conduct trainings at least once a semester in order to improve more the skills of its tutors.

4. The Archivists’ Pool can tap the block and batch representatives of the Sanggunian ng mga Mag-aaral ng mga Paaralang Loyola ng Ateneo de Manila to aid in the collection of Math long test questionnaires.

5. The Archivists’ Pool should have a better structure for the collection, scanning, updating, and maintenance of Math long test questionnaires in the hardcopy archives and the online database.

6. The hardcopy archives in the AMS room should have a proper and convenient borrowing process, for both the borrower and the assisting AMS member.

7. All Math long test questionnaires should be sorted according to subject, long test number, and exam coverage, to better help all students.

8. Continue Blueprint and try adding core subjects to the talk. 9. Include more math-related activities and lectures in Camp Math.

OD: Mathematical Excellence

Goal: To revive the culture of mathematical enthusiasm among more students by providing different avenues that will increase their level of engagement and deepen their appreciation towards Mathematics.

Status:


Success indicators 1. To have at least 40 participants attend the Problem Solving Seminars (PSS). 2. To achieve an average overall rating of at least 4 out of 5 in each Problem Solving Seminar. 3. To have at least 150 participants in Sipnayan, Math Conference (MathCon), MathSaya and

Camp Math. 4. To release at least 2 issues of the Crazy Math Journal for the whole year.


Problem Solving Seminars (PSS) were not able to gather at least 40 participants, having 25 participants for the first two installments and 21 participants during the last PSS day. Despite receiving an average score of 4.58 out of 5 for schedule and 4.34 out of 5 for promotions, the low attendance is highly attributed to majority of the math majors scheduled to have exams right after the scheduled PSS (Appendix B.V.1).

Each of the three PSSs for the year achieved at least 4 out of 5 for component ratings. Each PSS received an overall average rating of at least 4.64 out of 5, with all three ratings averaging at 4.65 out of 5 (Appendix B.V.1).

Sipnayan had a total of 659 participants: 369 in high school, 247 in grade school, and 43 in college division. The low

With PSS 2 being one of the most attended in the series, and its topic being Binary Variables, most of the participants found the material discussed to be new and interesting. PSS 2 served to be an introduction to a topic to be covered in the higher years of the AMF program. The participants agreed that they enjoyed PSS 2 despite having a difficult topic for beginners.

Overall, the three PSSs have so far made participants appreciate math more. The participants found the lectures to be very informative, with majority of them saying that they learned a lot from the speakers.

Sipnayan was able to challenge the participants through its questions and unique mechanics in the final round. Some of the participants may have been


number of participation in the college division can be attributed to the lack of popularity of the contest among college students in Metro Manila and also to the Super Typhoon Yolanda, which hit the country a day before the contest.

For the criterion “My overall appreciation of math increased because of the contest”, Sipnayan received an average rating of 3.74, 3.79 and 4.54 from the high school, grade school, and college divisions respectively. These relatively low ratings for high school and grade school division are probably due to the very difficult questions in the contest, as proven by the 3.47 and 3.60 ratings from high school and grade school respectively, for the criterion “the questions were of reasonable difficulty”. Nevertheless, Sipnayan still received overall ratings of 4.01, 4.01, and 4.38 from the three divisions, as it continues to be one of the most challenging math competitions in the country (Appendix B.V.3).

Camp Math 20 had a total of 223 participants from 36 different Private and Science High Schools all-over Metro Manila (Appendix B.IV.7). This has shown a big improvement compared with last year due to the absence of external factors like the Habagat that affected Camp Math 19.

MathCon Day 1 was attended by 189 participants from the LS composed of AMS and Non-AMS Members. Its topics focused on Math in Disaster Risk Management and Population Aging, and Climate Change.

Both Camp Math and MathCon exceeded their target of at least 150 participants.

The Crazy Math Journal Team has released its 1st online issue during the first semester entitled “Ars Mathematica.” The issue features interesting articles like an interview with Dr. Jumela Sarmiento, Math Department faculty, movie review in a mathematical perspective, mystery and doodle games, the mathematics behind human connectedness, and paper folding. The second issue is expected to

discouraged because of the difficult questions.

Both Camp Math and MathCon participants appreciated the lectures and activities that the projects have offered. They have also seen the relevance and applications of Math on specific fields like population, climate change, literature, etc. However, they still see that there is a lack of more concrete examples on how Math is being used.

After several years, the Crazy Math Journal (CMJ) has finally been released. This has encouraged the writers to share their skills in coming up with interesting articles regarding math to the public. Moreover, this opens up the opportunity for the readers to see Math in an enjoyable way rather than the usual classroom type lectures.


be released this second semester during the last day of MathCon hard copy form (Appendix B.V.4).

Recommendations 1. The schedule of Problem Solving Seminars should avoid conflict with the academic

schedule of math major students as much as possible. 2. PSS could increase attendance if it will be open to the whole LS community and will have

better promotion strategies. 3. Decrease the difficulty of questions in Sipnayan. 4. Intensify promotions for Sipnayan college division. 5. Reevaluate the need and impact of Sipnayan college division and consider not pushing

through with it next year if turnout and impact is projected to be equal to or lower than this year’s event.

6. Make a tracking system for CMJ in order to know the statistics of the readers. Also, put an evaluation system to gather more data on what the readers want to read.

7. Think of ways on how to prevent the decline of attendance for each Camp Math Day. Also, foresee any external problems that may affect the turnout of participants.

III. BEST EFFORTS FOR THE SCHOOLYEAR Organization Development Effort

Name of the Effort First General Assembly

Description of the Effort The First GA is where AMS members officially start the school year together. Applicants and old members alike are oriented on subject matters about AMS like organizational structure, projects and pools, projects, and activities. This is also the first Member Relations department event that includes all AMS members. Aside from these, the First GA serves as an avenue where applicants can meet, mingle, and bond with their fellow members. One important highlight of the First GA was the introduction and utilization of the SUITS System. The thrust of the ExeCom this year focuses on Member Formation and the SUITS System was one way to address this.

Objectives To officially start the school year with AMS

To welcome and distinguish official members of the organization from the applicants.

To orient the members with the nature of the organization.

To inform the members on the events of the organization.

Avenue wherein members can sign-up for pools they are interested in.

Avenue wherein members can interact with fellow members

Results and Evaluation The First GA this year, relative to the past, was vastly improved. The theme for this year was “Alice in Carnival,” which was an “Alice and Wonderland” theme and a carnival theme combined. The core team decided that it was best to separate the informative and


the interactive parts of the GA. This ensures that the audience will not be distracted, that they listen attentively, and focus on the important matters discussed during the informative part.

The first part of the GA, was held in Leong Hall. The atmosphere was quite formal but not too serious. Although there were times wherein people got distracted from the talks, the mini-GDs, the video presentations, and the incorporation of the theme into the aesthetics kept the audience’s attention. These new ways of informing members was innovative and successful. Members were properly informed on AMS matters.

During the next part of the GA, members of the same card and suit interacted for the first time in the school year through participating in friendly competition of games and activities against other cards. This was held in MVP Roofdeck. The core team had initial concerns that not everyone might participate, so the GDs and activities were structured in a way that makes each member of a card interact with each other. Also, the core team decided to go with number-friendly GDs. Although this was logistically difficult, most of the GDs were enjoyed by the participants. Afterwards, dinner was served, and sign-ups for both pools and department pools were opened. Despite the slightly ineffective layout and the lack of laptops for efficient sign-ups, everyone was able to choose and sign-up for pools they were interested in.

There were 309 attendees out of the 373 applicants for membership, including the core team, volunteers, and ExeCom.

Despite logistics and programs problems, the First GA received good ratings. Overall, the First GA was rated 4.35 out of 5. The first part of the event was rated 4.41 out of 5. This rating reflects how informative the event was to the members. The second part of the event was rated 4.28 out of 5. This rating shows how much members had fun with the activities and GDs prepared for the Suits System (Appendix C.I.1).

Core Competencies Effort

Name of the Effort Sipnayan

Description of the Effort Sipnayan is a friendly math competition that advocates mathematical excellence and appreciation. It is open to all grade school, high school, and college students in the National Capital Region and nearby provinces. Now in its 15th year, Sipnayan aims to continue its prestige in challenging students for mathematical excellence, especially with the release of a Sipnayan Anniversary


Omnibus—a collection of the finest of Sipnayan questions—as a documentation of Sipnayan’s fifteen years of success.

Objectives To have a friendly competition where students can compete with other students across NCR and gauge their mathematical abilities

To encourage members to volunteer for the project and have a better appreciation for mathematics

Results and Evaluation Sipnayan 15 carried the theme, Go the D15tance, based on the famous card game, Monopoly Deal. With this theme, the competition mechanics applied the categories algebra, combinatorics, number theory, and geometry into property colors; and action cards Just Say No, Sly Deal, Forced Deal, and Go to Jail during the final round. Also, winning meant forming three sets—getting six points in the form of property cards, from three different property colors or categories.

The Sipnayan Anniversary Omnibus was created, edited, and compiled by the Sipnayan Core Team, the Academics Department Heads, and selected members of the Question Makers’ Pool. With three volumes—one for each Sipnayan division—the best questions throughout the fifteen years of Sipnayan were included, supplied with an answer key and solutions to selected questions. This new feature of Sipnayan furthered its aim of promoting mathematical excellence. Moreover, it also advanced mathematical instruction, as the Omnibus can serve as a study aid for anyone interested in furthering their mathematical abilities and for future participants of Sipnayan as well.

The popularity and success of the Sipnayan Anniversary Omnibus resulted from the high sales of the Omnibus, far from the expected sales of 90 pieces—40 for High School, 30 for Grade School, and 20 for College.

There was a total of 659 Sipnayan participants—369 from High School, 247 from Grade School, and 43 from College. Both Sipnayan High School and Sipnayan College improved in attendance compared to the previous years’. Sipnayan High School had a 13.89% increase, while Sipnayan College had an 18.6% increase. Despite the increase in Sipnayan College participant attendance, it was still below the minimum target of 50. This is due to the Yolanda rain storm the day before the event. The decrease of 7.83% in Sipnayan Grade School participant attendance was due to two other mathematics contest held on the same date.

Sipnayan received generally good ratings, garnering an overall rating of 4.01 for both High School and Grade School divisions, and 4.38 for the College divisions. Moreover, all divisions fulfilled the success indicator for


Mathematical Instruction to attain an average rating of 3.5 out of 5 in mathematical relevance, with ratings of 3.74, 3.79, and 4.54, for High School, Grade School, and College divisions, respectively (Appendices B.II.1 and B.V.2).

Despite problems of question interpretation, question difficulty, and hosts’ skills in reading mathematical terms, Sipnayan was still a success. It had high ratings in its evaluations, an improvement in participant attendance, and a warmly welcomed new feature. Furthermore, Sipnayan was able to advocate mathematical excellence and mathematical instruction in its efforts to continue its tradition and prestige as a highly esteemed mathematics competition.

Synergy Effort

Name of the Effort Camp Math

Description of the Effort Camp Math is a project that caters to students of private and science high schools that runs for four Saturdays, whose aim is to promote mathematics. Faculty members and students within the Ateneo give engaging lectures and hold various activities that are not only fun, but enrich the knowledge and foster interest in mathematics among the participants.

Objectives To boost members to volunteer and promote mathematics to younger audiences. The project envisions presenting math in a different yet enjoyable way that would excite the members, and hopefully ripple to the participants.

To provide avenues for math appreciation outside the classroom environment through the different talks, group dynamics, and other related activities.

To promote mathematical instruction and mathematical excellence.

Results and Evaluation The theme for this year was Camp Math University, which was inspired by the Monsters Inc. University movie. The high school participants got a glimpse of what it was like to study in university through activities such as a mock enlistment, among others.

Math was incorporated into the group dynamics and amazing race stations of Camp Math. Some of the usual games have been modified by connecting them with certain math concepts like probability, geometry, statistics, etc.

This year’s Camp math has added a portion for classroom lectures on the third day. They have invited math professors and teaching assistants from the Math Department to teach special topics on different advanced math subjects such as Advance Calculus, Discrete Mathematics, and Statistics.


Outside speakers were also invited to share the applications of Math in specialized topics. Ms. Iris Orprecio, last year’s speaker in MathCon, talked once again about math in literature and Ms. Jessamyn Encarnacion, from the National Statistics Office, shared how they utilized math and statistics in their field of work.

Camp Math 20 had a total of 223 participants from 36 different Private and Science High Schools all-over Metro Manila (Appendix B.IV.7).

The event garnered an over-all rating of 4.51 out of 5 from participant evaluations (Appendix B.II.1).

IV. FOLLOW-UP ACTIONS ON THE MIDYEAR RECOMMENDATIONS

Recommendations Status and Follow-Up Action

1. Evaluate the progress of your thrust on membership involvement and development to have a better picture of what other suitable initiatives to be done in the coming semester.

The Suits system was implemented during the First GA but there were not enough follow-up activities done to sustain its impact to the participants and relationships between them.

Efforts done after focused instead on batches of members and the members as a whole, mainly through Novfest.

Participants of the semester-end FGD gave feedback on member-forming efforts of the organization.

The bucket list activity for the Suits system will serve as a concluding activity for all Suits activities.

2. Practice early submission of requirements and project proposals for proper and effective implementation of activities and of course, taking into consideration the internal communication processes of the organization.

Core teams observed stricter following of the timetable. If a deliverable is passed late, core teams will incur a fine.

There were constant reminders to project heads on deliverables.

Department Heads continued ICs with project heads in order to remind them of their responsibilities.

3. Maintain the good and strong working relationship with your moderator and home department.

Members of the Executive Committee talked to the moderator to present status reports, asked for feedback regarding project decisions, and asked for the guidance and cooperation of the department when needed.

Project heads are encouraged to consult with Dr. Garciano and relevant Math Department counterparts regarding planning of their projects.

Members of the math department were regularly consulted in discussing tie-up projects such as tutorial services and AMO.

4. Be mindful of the policies and regulations to minimize violations

There were constant reminders to project heads and pool heads on reservation procedures and other LS, OAS, and OSA systems.


related to the guidelines set for student activities.

Relevant ExeCom members review official letters before signing them.

Logistics core trainings continue to be held to brief core members on procedures for reserving venues and equipment in accordance with LS policies.

There were no incurred violations for AMS during the second semester.

V. CONCLUSION This year, much of the organization's energies were directed toward internalization, to buttress the very foundation of AMS—its members. But the thrust came with the challenge of finding a balance between promoting interpersonal relationships and fundamental systems in the organization. In spite of the many impediments, AMS continued to drive to its goal of forming holistic members and fostering quality relationships. Throughout, the organization realized that the approach with regards to member formation may sometimes be best left to the natural coming-together of people, rather than to the imposition of artificial structures. With paramount efforts, the organization re-strategized towards the building up and deepening of relationships nurtured this year. However, this is not to discount the numerous breakthroughs the organization had with its projects, particularly Sipnayan, Camp Math, and the First GA—all of which were markedly successful and prolific in engaging the members and promoting mathematical excellence among internal and external stakeholders. This year also featured strengthened ties with the Mathematics Department as manifested in the moderator’s increased presence in the planning, execution, and evaluation of projects and efforts and in the more open communication between the members and Math Department. What has to be done in the future, however, is to build on sustainability while always keeping in mind the thing that unites the members—the love for math. Based on this year, AMS has most certainly kept true to this direction.

VI. SIGNATORIES MA. ELEANOR R. RESERVA SAMANTHA GRACE I. CRUZ President Secretary-General JEANNE PAULINE R. PINEDA RICA ISABEL S.M. DOROTEO Deputy for Promotions Chief Finance Officer DR. AGNES D. GARCIANO Moderator


APPENDICES Appendix A: Midyear Progress Report


Appendix B.I.1 Retention Requirements for Semester I A.Y. 2013-2014

Appendix B.I.2 Retention Statistics as of Semester I A.Y. 2013-2014

Member Pool Total Retained Percentage

Academics Department 52 36 69.23%

Member Relations Department 44 37 84.09%

Math Applications Department 59 47 79.66%

No Department (new member) 194 93 47.94%

Executive Committee 14 14 100.00%

Total 360 227 63.06%

Target 65.00%

Appendix B.I.3 Suits Day Attendance Sheet

ID # Name Year & Course Department Suit

114064 Tumambing, Nyl 3 BS MA ExeCom Hearts

101546 Fontanilla, Marianne 4 BSM AMF MemRel Clubs

101314 Doroteo, Rica 4 BSM AMF ExeCom Clubs

132092 Juan, Eunice Rozel 1 BS MA New Member Spades

134259 Tuparan, Trixie 1 BS MA New Member Clubs

132299 Lim, Adrianne Nicole 1 BS MA New Member Diamonds

100905 Chua, Paula Micah 4 BSM AMF Acads Clubs

104196 Zamoranos, Claro Gabriel 4 BS CTM MemRel Spades

090871 Chua, Sammy 5 BS APS-ACS Acads Clubs

133899 Sularte, Alawi 1 BS AMF New Member Spades

131563 Famador, Joel Jr. 1 BS MA New Member Spades

134446 Ward, John Aldrin 1 BSM AMF New Member Hearts

104080 Virata, Russell 4 BSM AMF ExeCom Clubs

113816 Talusan, Day 3 BSM AMF MathApp Diamonds

111986 Javier, Joaquin Alfonso 3 BSM AMF MemRel Diamonds

122024 Jamias, Janille Erika 2 BSM AMF MathApp Clubs

114164 Vasquez, Iversen 3 BSM AMF MathApp Hearts

110880 Chua, Gari 3 BSM AMF Acads Hearts

134285 Urbiztondo, Earl Danielle 1 BSM AMF New Member Clubs

130551 Blanco, Ian Carlo 1 AB PoS New Member Spades

130167 Cortes,Clarice 1 BSM AMF New Member Hearts


120653 Calanog, Luis Miguel 2 BS ME MemRel Diamonds

131767 Gealogo,Vergel Ephraim 1 BS MA New Member Spades

122433 Macatol, Jude 2 BSM AMF Acads Hearts

130739 Canlas, Christian Dale D. 1 BSM AMF New Member Diamonds

100403 Barretto, Nathaniel D. 4 BSM AMF MathApp Clubs

124201 Ventilacion, Benica A. 2 AB POS MathApp Clubs

103453 Santos, Renz Martin S. 4 AB DS MemRel Hearts

132450 Luna, Czarina G. 1 BS MA New Member Diamonds

094172 Castillo, Jones 5 BS ECE MemRel Clubs

124337 Yap, Jurel 2 BS AMF MemRel Diamonds

110171 Amin, Jara 3 BS MGT MemRel Diamonds

110021 Ablang, Gaby 3 BSM AMF Acads Hearts

113356 Rimando, Nigel 3 BSM AMF Acads Hearts

122912 Ong, Giovanni 2 BSM AMF MemRel Hearts

123199 Pulido, Yani 2 BSM AMF MemRel Diamonds

103179 Reserva, Elly 4 BSM AMF ExeCom Diamonds

111060 Cruz, Sam 3 BSM AMF ExeCom Diamonds

113704 Sison, Beatrice 3 AB EC ExeCom Diamonds

104052 Villanueva, Regine 4 BSM AMF ExeCom Hearts

104204 Zhang, Zixin 4 BSM AMF ExeCom Spades

103109 Ragos, Alicia 4 BSM AMF ExeCom Spades

Total Attendees 42

Appendix B.I.4 Department General Assemblies Attendance

Department Total Attended Percentage

Academics 115 26 22.61%

Math Applications 115 41 35.65%

Member Relations 115 38 33.04%

Note: Attendance count does not include the members of the ExeCom present during the Department GAs. Appendix B.I.5 Formation Seminar Attendance

Project PHs present Total core Core attended Percentage

Math 101 3 13 9 69.23%

First GA 3 20 14 70.00%

Explora 3 11 8 72.73%

Camp Math 2 18 12 66.67%

Sipnayan 3 15 11 73.33%

Total 14 77 54 70.13%

Note: All project core teams have three project heads (PHs).


Appendix B.I.6 Leadership Training Seminar Application Form and Interview Process Application Form (first screening)

Interview Questions (second screening)

A. General 1. What kind of leader do you consider yourself as? Follow up: What aspects of leadership

do you consider as your strengths? 2. Describe how you work with a team. Do you invest in personal relationships with team

mates? Or do you keep a certain distance from them to maintain a degree of professionalism? Why?

3. Name a person who has tremendous impact on you as a leader. How did this person affect you? Follow up: What is your motivation to lead?

B. Situational 1. You are the overall head of a project. During planning, you foresee that the project

would not meet your success indicators (the project will fail) because the core is uncooperative, among other problems. Would you rather resign as a project head (there will be someone appointed to take your place, but you don’t know who she/he is yet) or would you rather stick with the project and, most likely, fail? Explain your answer. Note: There is no win-win situation here.

2. You are heading a project. During its planning stage, you delegated the tasks to your team mates. However, they remain idle and seem to have an excuse every time you follow up on them. Your members don’t have the initiative and they lack a sense of urgency. How will you address this problem?

3. You wanted to be the group leader of a class project, but somehow, your group mates convinced another classmate that he should be the one to lead. You know that he tends to go missing-in-action at times, but you respected the group decision. However, the deadline is already near and nothing has yet been accomplished. For this class project, all group leaders automatically get an A, which is why you are reluctant to do more work than the leader. What will you do?

4. *If you only had 24 hours left to live, what would you do and why? *Note: This question is optional; it is designed to get to know the interviewee’s personality better. This may be skipped. Appendix B.I.7 Leadership Training Seminar Participant List

Surname First Name Yr. Course

Aberin Ma. Chrislyn B. 2 BSM AMF

Ablang Maria Gabrielle S. 3 BSM AMF


Abrera Marvic Dale 3 BSM AMF

Andres Carlos Rafael 2 BSM AMF

Avila Anna Maria M. 1 BSM AMF

Blanco Ian Carlo B. 1 AB PoS

Castelo Christian Arvin D. 2 BSM AMF

Chua Arianna Natasha I. 1 BSM AMF Chua Gari Lincoln C. 3 BSM AMF Constantino Konstantine Luis A. 1 BS MA Dela Cruz Kristian B. 2 BSM AMF Deypalan Mariefel Nicole Y. 2 BSM AMF Dumbrique Jakov Ivan S. 2 BSM AMF Fenix Bianca Louise M. 2 BSM AMF Garcia Joelle Mae J. 1 BSM AMF Gealogo Vergel Ephaim D. 1 BS MA Lim Kristina Eleanor L. 1 BSM AMF Lopez Marc Christian M. 2 BSM AMF Mendoza Claudine R. 1 BSM AMF Ngo Raenelle Ean A. 1 BS ME Obogne Junna Faith N. 2 BSM AMF Ong Justin Mivan V. 1 BSM AMF Ong Hans Bryan Geremy C. 1 BS ME Ong Giovanni N. 2 BSM AMF Payba Janna Nissi S. 1 BSM AMF Perdices Ma. Monica Isabel V. 2 BSM AMF Pulido Adrian John D. 2 BSM AMF Silvestre Luis Jr., S. 3 BS MA Somera J. Kaye Anne R. 3 BSM AMF Sularte Alawi J. 1 BSM AMF Sy Julius Vincent C. 2 BSM AMF Talusan Daniel V. 3 BSM AMF Tan Benson Michael T. 1 BS ME Tan Jason Allan 1 BSM AMF Ward John Aldrin C. 1 BSM AMF Yu Rebecca Georgia V. 3 BS MA

Appendix B.I.8 Apprenticeship Syllabus

I. (Nov. 25 – 29) Yapak a. Leveling off and ICs b. Distribution and discussion of syllabus

II. (Dec. 2 – 6) Tsinelas a. Discussion of roles and responsibilities b. Discussion of AMS calendar

i. Administrative calendar ii. Major projects iii. Departmental and Pool activities

c. Discussion of Goals Form Output 1: Project Evaluation

III. (Dec. 9 – 13) Running shoes a. Briefing of the Constitution version 2013 b. Briefing of the Code of Internal Procedures c. Processing through ICs


i. Discernment talk ii. Positions talk iii. Elections talk

Output 2: Discernment-related output IV. (Jan. 6 – 10) Sneakers

a. ICs on upcoming elections b. Submission and processing of Output 2.

V. (Jan. 13 – 17) Dancing shoes Skills Training Seminar

VI. (Jan. 20 – 24) High Heels Gettting to know other stakeholders a. Math Department b. Office of Student Activities c. Office of Administrative Services d. Council of Organizations of the Ateneo

VII. (Jan. 27 – 31) Leather Shoes Performance Management System Forms a. Goals Form b. Activities Form c. Year-End Status Report and Presentation Output: PMS Forms

VIII. (Feb. 3 – 7) Boat Shoes Position-related project/activity

IX. (Feb. 10) Graduation Appendix B.I.9 Apprenticeship List

Surname First Name

Yr. & Course Mentor 1 Mentor 2

Aberin Chrislyn 2 BSM AMF Deputy for Promos -

Abrera Marvic 3 BSM AMF President CFO

Adriano Reina 2 BSM AMF Deputy for Promos -

Calanog Luis 2 BSM AMF SecGen Deputy for Promos

Chua Darren 1 BSM AMF MemRel DH Deputy for Promos

Cruz Samantha 3 BSM AMF President -

Cuajunco David 1 BSM AMF Acads DH -

Dee Camille 2 BSM AMF Acads DH -

Deypalan Nicole 2 BSM AMF EVP -

Dumbrique Jakov 2 BSM AMF MemRel DH -

Fenix Bianca 2 BSM AMF MemRel DH -

Francisco Rehli 3 BSM AMF EVP CFO

Garcia Joelle 1 BSM AMF MemRel DH -

Lopez Marc 2 BSM AMF Deputy for SP -

Novales Rad 3 BSM AMF Deputy for Promos -

Ong Hans 1 BS ME Acads DH -

Perdices Monica 2 BSM AMF SecGen -

Pineda Jeane 3 BS CTM MemRel DH -

Rimando Nigel 3 BSM AMF Acads DH -

Serafico Luigi 3 BS MGT President Acads DH

Silvestre Luis 3 BS MA MemRel DH -

Sison Beatrice 3 AB EC President EVP


Sy Julius 2 BSM AMF EVP Acads DH

Tan Benson 1 BS ME President MemRel DH

Tanglao Angelo 1 BSM AMF MemRel DH Acads DH

Tengco Shaira 3 BS MA EVP -

Tumambing Nyl 3 BS MA SecGen -

Urbiztondo Earl 1 BSM AMF Deputy for Promos -

Utleg Miguel 1 BS ME SecGen -

Varquez Shannen 3 BSM AMF SecGen CFO

Vasay Neil 1 BS ME EVP -

Yap Jurel 2 BSM AMF President Deputy for SP

Appendix B.I.10 Member Relations Budget Comparisons

Budgeted Actual

Project A.Y. 2012-2013 A.Y. 2013-2014 A.Y. 2012-2013 A.Y. 2013-2014

Math 101 ₱ 4,000.00 ₱ 9,000.00 ₱ 3,222.40 ₱ 10,136.81

First GA ₱ 10,000.00 ₱ 26,000.00 ₱ 12,031.25 ₱ 24,276.25

Novfest ₱ 16,000.00 ₱ 51,500.00 ₱ 35,000.00 ₱ 49,449.90

XMath ₱ 10,500.00 ₱ 18,000.00 ₱ 16,671.75 ₱ 18,150.00

Appendix B.I.11 Comparative Retention Statistics of A.Y. 2013-2014 and A.Y. 2012-2013

Sem I 2013-2014 Sem I 2012-2013 Sem II 2012-2013

Member Pool/ Dept.

Total Retained % Total Retained % Retained %

Acads 52 36 69.23% 173 93 53.76% 91 52.60%

MemRel 44 37 84.09% 135 89 65.93% 92 68.15%

MathApp 59 47 79.66% 83 49 59.04% 54 65.06%

New 194 93 47.94% - - - - -

ExeCom 14 14 100% 14 14 100% 14 100%

Total 360 227 63.06% 405 245 60.49% 251 61.98%

Note: As a new rule implemented only in A.Y. 2013-2014, new members include new applicants and non-retained re-applicants. Thus A.Y. 2012-2013 statistics do not include “new members”. Appendix B.II.1 Participant Evaluation Summary of all Concluded Projects

Criterion FormSem 1 Math101 First GA Explora Camp Math

Attendance 4.56 4.92 4.34 3.45 4.53

Equipment 4.46 4.43 4.38 4.09 4.60

Program 4.73 4.62 4.27 N/A 4.56

Hosts 4.64 4.64 4.33 4.36 4.63

Speakers 4.64 4.43 4.32 4.18 4.39

Venue 4.52 4.16 4.46 4.63 4.39

Food 4.46 3.43 3.95 N/A 4.37

Schedule 4.36 3.31 3.83 4.27 4.42

Promotions 3.53 4.60 4.17 4.36 4.48

Overall Rating 4.42 4.59 4.28 4.35 4.51


Criterion Formsem 2 Sipnayan Blueprint

GS HS College

Attendance 4.58 4.39 4.33 4.28 4.37

Equipment 4.24 4.06 4.30 4.59 4.41

Program 4.37 4.11 4.08 4.28 4.38

Hosts 4.40 4.03 4.13 4.03 4.17

Speakers 4.54 N/A N/A N/A 4.60

Venue 4.55 4.25 4.38 4.76 4.49

Food 4.38 N/A N/A N/A N/A

Schedule 4.22 3.97 4.10 4.48 4.52

Promotions 3.85 3.82 3.83 4.21 4.02

Overall Rating 4.39 4.01 4.01 4.38 4.54

Appendix B.II.2 Pre-planning Focus Group Discussion Attendance Note: All pre-planning FGDs (excluding those held during breaks) were attended by a majority of its core members i.e. at least 80%

First GA Explora Mathematica Camp Math Sipnayan

Chrislyn Aberin Carmela Buncio

Luis Calaong Rizza Detosil Len Garces Mae Lim

Cam Mamaril Gere Muzones

Gio Ong Luis Silvestre

Bee Sison

Nats Barretto Franz Tolosa Charles Ngo Levy Rose

Marika King Gere Muzones Jean Aquino

Jayhan Regner Jasmin Fernandez Nicole Deypalan

Ken Coseto

Jason Khu Aibeemae Cua

Wai Yiu So Carlo Nuñez Patricia Tan

Arron Paul Sese Levy Rose IV

Sabs Constantino Nicole Deypalan

Anne Liangco Kristian dela Cruz

Arvin Castelo Jayhan Regner

Jasmin Fernandez Len Garces

Rehli Francisco Luigi Serafico* Elly Reserva*

Migs Peñamante*

Mary Kryslette Bunyi Henry Morco

Shaun Wesley Que Zernon Ezra Chan

Fernandina Ko Jude Raphael Lo Jay Pangilinan

Jose Lyndon Tan Christian Jil Benitez Camille Tyrene Dee

Ella Julienne Eralino, Julius Vincent Sy.

Jennifer Ang Ferdinand Briones

Aubrey Mae Patupat Ralf Martz Sulague

Brandon Yeung

Appendix B.II.3 Project Success Indicators Note: All project core teams achieved their success indicators. Blueprint

1. Have at least 20 people attend per batch. 2. Achieve an overall rating of at least 3.75 out of 5.

Camp Math

1. Have a total of at least 120 participants. 2. Achieve an overall rating of at least 4 out of 5. 3. Have at least 20 volunteers for each day of the event, excluding the core team and

ExeCom.

http://www.facebook.com/mastershakedude

http://www.facebook.com/mastershakedude


Explora Mathematica 1. Have an attendance of at least 150 (30% non-math majors). 2. Have at least 75% of the candy wrappers in the “yes” box. 3. Achieve at least 4 out of 5 from core evaluations.

First GA

1. Have 90% of the attendees able to name a member from each year level. 2. Achieve 4 out of 5 rating for enjoyability of event. 3. Achieve 4 out of 5 rating for informative content of event.

FormSems

1. Have at least 66.66% of each core team to attend. 2. Have at least 2 project heads from each project to attend. 3. Achieve an overall rating of at least 4 out of 5.

Math 101

1. Achieve an overall rating of at least 4 out of 5. 2. Have at least 70% of the freshmen math majors attend the event. 3. Have at least 10 volunteers excluding the core team and the ExeCom.

Sipnayan

1. Achieve an overall rating of at least 3.75 out of 5. 2. Have at least 317 HS participants. 3. Achieve an overall rating of at least 3.75 out of 5 from core evaluations. 4. Achieve an overall rating of at least 3.75 out of 5 from the Math Department.

XMath

1. Have at least 90 attendees except core team. 2. Have at least 4.5 out of 5 overall rating from participants’ evaluations. 3. Have each participant name at least 2 new acquaintances.

Appendix B.III.1 First Semester Focus Group Discussion Output

Promotions are not visible

Activity problems

Core teams lack motivation

Poor member participation

Promotions are not visible

Not enough time Promotions are not visible


Activity problems

Activity problems


Core teams lack motivation

Not enough time


Note: The participants determined the top 4 problems that the organization encountered during the first semester through pairwise ranking.


Appendix B.III.2 AMS Website Interface (Screenshot)

Appendix B.III.3 Summary of Constitutional Amendments


Appendix B.III.4 Ratification of Constitutional Amendments Votes

ID # Vote ID # Vote ID # Vote ID # Vote

1 103179 Approve 45 134291 Approve 89 134101 Approve 133 120756 Abstain

2 102739 Approve 46 134446 Approve 90 130695 Approve 134 123021 Approve






8 130935 Approve 52 122354 Abstain 96 120510 Approve 140 132826 Abstain






14 113985 Approve 58 112754 Approve 102 114006 Approve 146 111986 Disapprove




18 130436 Abstain 62 133011 Approve 106 122912 Approve 150 110982 Approve


20 123896 Approve 64 133963 Approve 108 130226 Abstain 152 133288 Approve
















36 103453 Approve 80 110185 Approve 124 101314 Approve 168 110171 Disapprove

37 110880 Abstain 81 123188 Approve 125 133899 Approve 169 111732 Approve



40 123702 Approve 84 120120 Approve 128 113495 Disapprove 172 112823 Approve





Summary

Total Votes 176

Valid Votes 145

Abstain 11


Disapprovals 3

Valid Approvals 131

Needed Approvals 136

Appendix B.III.4 Member Concerns on Ratification of Constitutional Amendments

My only concern is that will this new ratification be able to ensure the quality of the executive board members in the following years since there would be a lot of positions to fill.

There should be an option PER amendment. What if i want to approve one amendment and reject the other?

Maybe in the next summarized amendments, there could be a side-by-side comparison to make clearer the changes made.

Informing AMS members of the changes

"""The Deputy for Special Projects position was removed"" does that mean from the executive board or the ExeCom itself? If the latter, to whom will the Deputy for Special Projects burden be transferred to? Go AMS <3"

wording :) sa article Five section 3, to me it sounds better na active participation instead of residency lang though retention implies some form of activeness din

To the officials concerned: Everything sounds promising. That, I can tell you. But until what time should we wait for this constitution to take over the current one? I understand the urgency of the matter and I wish as well that this is followed now. But, that is unconstitutional by definition because the constitution that is proposed will only be effective next semester. I understand that there is also a change in the provision for constitution change, i.e., that it will be effective immediately, but until that constitution is effective (which will happen next semester) this provision is nothing but a proposal. This means that however this new constitution forwards immediate implementation, the current constitution, which should be followed up to the point of proper execution and ratification of the new constitution, should be followed. Nevertheless, the little supplements made to the earlier constitution, i.e. the definition of all actions currently up to the discretion of the Executive Board and the like, do not pose as unconstitutional with regards to the current constitution. This is the reason I am abstaining. However, I would like you not to think that I am against the change. Everything about the proposed constitution changes sound very promising, considering the skeptic that I usually am. And lastly, I may be wrong. I don't exactly have the current constitution memorized like the back of my hand. I do pray that the necessary steps are done to ensure that the new constitution does not trample any part of the current constitution in a way that disregards some parts of it. Thank you so much for reading this concern. I am also happy to discuss this with you all. Sincerely, Gabs Zamoranos

None, it's a good thing that you made this.


Risk of cheating in the method of ratification (other people using ID numbers). There are points of improvement, but its for the general good of the org.

1. Article 3. "To allow easier adjustments in the following years," <-- what 'adjustments' do you mean? 2. Article 4. "full-fledged" is a vague term, and I think that "retained" is a clearer wording. 3. Article 5. Why are the deputies removed from the execom? 4. Article 5, Section 4, d, x. What's supposed to be in the blank? 5. Also, who is now assigned to manage the AMS website? 6. Article 8. I agree that impeachment /= dismissal. :)

ARTICLE V, SECTION 4 states that the president is automatically the (viii) chairperson of the Electoral Board, but ARTICLE VII, SECTION 3 states that the head of the Electoral Board shall be appointed by the Execom. I think it will be clearer if you change the latter to (b) headed by the President. ARTICLE V, SECTION 5 -- you might want to define a "school year." Will it include summer semesters? ARTICLE VII -- maybe add a section on parties? Just so people know that they have options in running - as independent candidates or as part of a party. ARTICLE VIII, SECTION 9 -- "... shall deliberate on what to do with the vacated position" ---> "... shall deliberate on probable measures regarding the vacated position" (or something like that!! Para lang mas tunog Consti?) ARTICLE VIII, SECTION 10 -- why will the EVP assume presidency? Won't the IVP be a better fit because he/she handles everything internal? I think that before branching out, an org must first be stable within. And because of the IVP's nature, it would make sense for him/her to assume presidency. I think. ARTICLE VII, SECTION 10 (f) -- same as above "what to do" --> "probable measures" OTHER COMMENTS -- 1. You might want to add a section on pools so that they may be backed up by this constitution as "official" business of the AMS 2. Just for clarity, org structure may still be further defined and shown through a diagram or something 3. You may want to also include a section about the constitution being available to all. Maybe under article i or article iv. CIP ARTICLE III, SECTION 4 (C) letter of "excuse", not "apology" because another part of the CIP mentioned the need for a letter of excuse (not apology). And it, i think, sounds.. kinder hehe (D) deputy pools still called "deputy" pools? I feel like calling them associate pools would make more sense especially since all deputy positions have been rebranded as associate vp positions (E, 3c) if card keepers are mentioned here, I think that there should be another section explaining the card structure being implemented in the AMS That's it!!! I hope I'm not coming off as arrogant or something. Masyado lang ako maraming free time kaya marami akong napapansin huhu Missing everyone and good luck with everything! :-)


Appendix B.III.5 Mid-Year Status Report on Projects


Appendix B.III.6 Mid-Year Status Report on Finances

Appendix B.IV.1 Tutors’ Pool Organizational Chart

Figure 1: 1st semester organizational chart Figure 2: 2nd semester organizational chart Note: Roles were more flexible under the 2nd semester structure. Appendix B.IV.2 Tutorial Services Statistics

Type of Tutorial

Accomplished Cancelled Failed to be Tutoried

Invalid Requests

Total Tutees

One-on-one 32 6 1 1 32

Group 16 4 1 1 48

Organization 0 1 0 0 0

Class 5 0 0 0 201

Total 53 11 2 2 281

TPH

Math Dept Point Person

TPH

UAO Point Person

TPHAll other tutorial

Requests

TPH TPH

Deputy Deputy Deputy Deputy


Appendix B.IV.3 Tutorial Services Promotional Materials (with procedure)

Appendix B.IV.4 Participant Evaluations for Class Tutorials

Tutorial Ma18 LT1 Ma18 LT2 MA11 LT2 MA11 LT2

Criterion Rating Average

Difficulty 4.39 4.35 3.72 2.62 4.04

Venue 4.68 4.60 4.36 3.13 4.44

Clarity 3.83 4.33 4.07 1.29 3.82

Schedule 3.97 4.42 4.27 2.73 4.07

Promotion 4.28 4.14 3.61 1.93 3.86

Effectiveness 4.08 4.35 3.96 1.40 3.90

Overall Rating 4.21 4.37 4.00 2.18 4.02

Appendix B.IV.5 Blueprint Attendance

Year Level Attendees Population Percentage

1st year (Math 101) 87 89 97.75%

2nd year 27 82 32.93%

3rd year 23 71 32.39%

4th year 20 52 38.46%

Note: The original registration sheets were lost; except for the 1st year, these numbers only reflect the number of people who returned their evaluation sheets to the organizers. Appendix B.IV.6 Blueprint Participant Evaluations Summary

Criterion Rating

Attendance 4.37

Equipment 4.41

Program 4.38

Hosts 4.17

Speakers 4.60

Venue 4.49

Schedule 4.52

Promotions 4.02

Overall Rating 4.54


Appendix B.IV.7 Camp Math Attendance

Day Participants Volunteers

1 198 4

2 180 11

3 156 10

4 166 4

Total TNTs 34

Total Participants 223

Total Schools 36

Appendix B.IV.8 Camp Math Participant Evaluation Summary

Criterion Rating

Attendance 4.53

Equipment 4.60

Program 4.56

Hosts 4.63

Speakers 4.39

Venue 4.39

Food 4.37

Schedule 4.42

Promotions 4.48

Overall Rating 4.51

Appendix B.V.1 Problem Solving Seminar Participant Evaluation Summary

Day 1 Day 2 Day 3

Criterion Rating

Attendance 4.07 4.00 4.45

Equipment 4.69 4.38 4.90

Program 4.57 4.50 4.90

Hosts 4.54 4.75 5.00

Speakers 4.78 4.70 5.00

Venue 4.57 4.54 4.72

Schedule 4.42 4.70 4.64

Promotions 4.46 4.30 4.27

Overall Rating 4.66 4.64 4.66

Appendix B.V.2 Sipnayan Participant Evaluation Summary

GS HS College

SI-related ratings Rating

Registration was efficient, requiring little effort 3.98 4.05 4.69

Transition to testing areas was efficient 3.90 3.79 4.55

The mechanics were clearly delivered by hosts 4.00 4.05 4.28

The mechanics were fair to all competitors 4.25 4.36 4.55

The contest was engaging and fun 3.74 3.62 4.31

The questions were of reasonable difficulty 3.60 3.47 4.39

It would be better if the questions were easier 4.41 4.17 3.68

The judges were effective in their role 4.00 4.01 4.25

My overall appreciation for math increased 3.79 3.74 4.54

If possible, I will join Sipnayan again next year 4.13 4.24 4.75

Note: See Appendix B.I.1 for the default component ratings.


Appendix C.I.1 First General Assemby Participant Evaluation Summary

SI-related ratings Rating

The program and activities were enjoyable 4.15

I learned a lot about AMS and its activities 4.41

I met and had fun with other AMS members 4.25

Note: See Appendix B.II.1 for default component ratings.

ams yes report ay 2013-2014

Documents

math organization

organization mission

community of math enthusiasts

ateneo community

school year

math excellence

year recommendations

mathematical excellence