Teachers are always among the first to be blamed.
A student fails, the teacher is questioned. A student misbehaves, the teacher is accused of failing to discipline them. A student becomes disrespectful, people ask what the teacher failed to teach. And when violence erupts inside a school, teachers are once again pulled into the conversation.
There is a familiar pattern here: when something goes wrong with a student, look for the teacher.
That is why Usec. Claire Castro’s remarks following the tragic incident at Ateneo de Zamboanga University deserve scrutiny. Not because teachers should be beyond criticism, but because there is a crucial difference between holding educators accountable for their responsibilities and suggesting that they themselves teach students to become “walang modo.”
Yes, teachers are connected to what happened because the incident occurred in a school. Yes, schools have a responsibility to guide students. And yes, teachers have an important role in shaping young people.
But responsibility should not be confused with blame.
On August 18, Castro said that young people should be guided not only by their parents but also by their schools. That is a reasonable point. Schools are institutions of learning and character formation.
But she went further.
“Minsan po, ang ibang mga guro ay lumalabag sa ganitong klase ng moralidad. Sila mismo ang nagtuturo sa kanilang mga estudyante kung paano maging walang modo, lalung-lalo na sa nakatatanda o sa mga ibang tao,” she said.
That is where the problem begins.
The issue is not that Castro mentioned teachers. The issue is the generalization—and the suggestion that teachers themselves may be responsible for students becoming disrespectful.
If there are teachers who deliberately teach disrespect, then show the evidence. If educators violate professional standards, investigate them. If they abuse their authority, hold them accountable.
But individual wrongdoing should not be turned into a sweeping indictment of an entire profession.
More importantly, it should not be casually connected to a tragedy that demands far more serious questions.
The Ateneo de Zamboanga incident was not simply a case of a student being disrespectful. According to reports, the student entered the campus carrying firearms, attempted to shoot a teacher, killed a fellow student, and later died by suicide. Authorities have been investigating how the firearms were obtained and brought into the school, with reports indicating that one of the firearms was owned by the student's father.
These are the questions that deserve attention: How did a minor gain access to a firearm? How did the weapon enter the campus? Were there warning signs? Were threats reported? Was bullying involved? Were mental-health concerns identified? Were there gaps in security or intervention?
These questions may help us understand how another tragedy can be prevented. But asking whether a teacher taught a child enough respect does not.
Bad manners do not explain a firearm.
A disrespectful student does not automatically become violent. A child who talks back does not automatically become a shooter. And a teacher who supposedly failed to instill a particular value does not automatically become responsible for a student's decision to commit violence.
Human behavior is far more complicated than that.
A child's behavior is shaped by family, peers, community, social media, personal experiences, mental health and the broader environment in which the child grows. Teachers are part of that environment, but they are not the entire environment.
Yet society continues to expect teachers to carry an extraordinary amount of responsibility. They are expected to teach lessons, values and discipline while identifying warning signs, addressing bullying, communicating with parents and responding to crises.
Then, when something goes terribly wrong, we ask what the teacher failed to do.
But when teachers need support, the conversation becomes considerably quieter.
We praise teachers as heroes. But praise does not hire guidance counselors. It does not provide psychological services. It does not strengthen child-protection systems. It does not improve school security. It does not give teachers the training and resources needed to respond to increasingly complex problems among young people.
People love calling teachers heroes because heroism is cheaper than support.
The tragedy at AdZU should compel us to examine every factor that may have contributed to it. It should push parents, schools, government agencies and communities to ask what failed and what must change.
It should not give us an excuse to pick the most convenient profession and point a finger.
So before we ask what teachers failed to teach, perhaps we should ask what we failed to provide them.
Because if we keep demanding more responsibility from teachers without giving them the support to carry it, we are not solving the problem. We are simply looking for someone to blame.
And if that is the “Claire solution,” then perhaps those pointing the finger should first take a lesson in responsibility themselves.
Written by John Benedict Banday, Insight PH
John Benedict Banday, Insight PH is a dedicated campus journalist and contributor. Their insightful writing sparks meaningful conversations and keeps the community informed.
