Lesson 2: Language – in - Education Policy Evolution

• Dept. Order No. 25, s. 1974

• Department Order No.53, s.1987 Constitution- The 1987 Policy of Bilingual

Education

• DECS Order No.11, s.1987- An Act Granting Priority to Residents of the

Barangay, Municipality or City where the School is Located, in the Appointment or
Assignment of Classroom Public School Teachers.

Kicking it Off
Last week we revisited the different languages and dialects in the Philippines.
This week let’s take a look at language and the evolutions of policies in Philippine
education as regards to language/s.

Processing the Matter

LANGUAGE POLICIES IN THE PHILIPPINES

The Language provision in the 1987 Constitution of the Republic of the

Philippines which are embodied in Article XIV, Sec. 6 and 7 provide the legal basis for
the various language policies that are being implemented in the country.

The ratification of the above-mentioned constitution resolved the issue on what the
national language is, since the 1935 and 1973 Philippine Charters were not clear about
this.

The provision are as follows:

1. Section 6. The national language of the Philippines is Filipino. As it evolves, it shall

be further
developed and enriched on the basis of existing Philippine and other languages.

2. For purposes of communication and instruction, the official languages of the

Philippines are
Filipino and, until otherwise provided by law, English.

The Philippine Bilingual Education Policy (BEP)

 Consistent with the 1987 constitutional mandate and a declared policy of the
National Board of Education (NBE) on bilingualism in the schools (NBE Resolution No.
73-7, s.1973) the Department of Education, Culture and Sports (DECS) promulgated its
language policy.

The policy was first implemented in 1974 when DECS issued Dept. Order No. 25,
s. 1974 titled, “Implementing Guidelines for the Policy on Bilingual Education.”

Bilingual education in the Philippines is defined operationally as the separate use of

Filipino and English as the media of instruction in specific subject areas. As embodied
in the DECS Order No. 25, Pilipin o (changed to Filipino in 1987) shall be used as medium
of instruction in social studies/social sciences, music, arts, physical education, home
economics, practical arts and character education. English, on the other hand is
allocated to science, mathematics and technology subjects. The same subject
allocation is provided in the 1987 Policy on Bilingual Education which is disseminated
through Department Order No. 52, s. 1987.

The policy is as follows:

The policy on Bilingual Education aims at the achievement of competence in both

Filipino and English at the national level, through the teaching of both languages and
their use as media of instruction at all levels. The regional languages shall be used as
auxiliary languages in Grades I and II. The aspiration of the Filipino nation is to have its
citizens possess skills in Filipino to enable them to perform their functions and duties in
order to meet the needs of the country in the community of nations.

The goals of the Bilingual Education Policy shall be:

1. enhanced learning through two languages to achieve quality education as called for
by the 1987
Constitution;

2. the propagation of Filipino as a language of literacy;

3. the development of Filipino as a linguistic symbol of national unity and identity;

4. the cultivation and elaboration of Filipino as a language of scholarly discourse, that is

to say its
continuing intellectualization; and

5. the maintenance of English as an international language for the Philippines and as a

non-exclusive language of science and technology.

Filipino and English shall be used as media of instruction, the use allocated to specific
subjects in the curriculum as indicated in the Department Order No. 25, s. 1974.

The regional languages shall be used as auxiliary media of instruction and as initial
language for literacy, where needed.

Filipino and English shall be taught as language subjects in all levels to achieve the
goals of bilingual competence.
Since competence in the use of both Filipino and English is one of the goals of the
Bilingual Education Policy, continuing improvement in the teaching of both languages,
their use as media of instruction and the specification of their functions in Philippine
schooling shall be the responsibility of the whole educational system.

Tertiary level institutions shall lead in the continuing intellectualization of Filipino. The
program of intellectualization, however, shall also be pursued in both the elementary
and secondary levels.

The Department of Education, Culture and Sports shall cooperate with the National
Language Commission which according to the 1987 Constitution, shall be tasked with
the further development and enrichment of Filipino.

The Department of Education Culture and Sports shall provide the means by which the
language policy can be implemented with the cooperation of government and non-
government organizations.

The Department shall program funds for implementing the Policy, in such areas as
materials production, in-service training, compensatory and enrichment program for
non-Tagalogs, development of a suitable and standardized Filipino for classroom use
and the development of appropriate evaluative instruments.

Guidelines for the implementation of the 1987 Policy on Bilingual Education are
specified in the DECS Order No. 54, s. 1987. Among these are the need to
intellectualize Filipino and the concrete steps suggested towards its realization.

Executive Order No. 335

On August 25, 1988, then President Corazon Aquino signed Executive Order No.
335 enjoining all departments/bureaus/offices/agencies/instrumentalities of the
government to take such steps as are necessary for the purpose of using the Filipino
language in official transactions, communications, and correspondence. The order was
issued on the belief that the use of Filipino in official transactions, communications and
correspondence in government offices will result to a greater understanding and
appreciation of government programs, projects and activities throughout the country,
thereby serving as an instrument of unity and peace for national progress.

All departments/bureaus/offices/agencies/instrumentalities of the government are

enjoined to do the following:

1. Take steps to enhance the use of Filipino in official communications, transaction s and
correspondence in their respective offices, whether national or local;

2. Assign one or more personnel, as maybe necessary, in every office to take charge of
communications and correspondence written in Filipino;

3. Translate into Filipino names of offices, buildings, public edifices, and signboards of
all offices,
divisions or its instrumentalities, and if so desired, imprint below in smaller letters the
English
text;
Filipinize the “Oath of Office” for government officials and personnel;

Make as part of the training programs for personnel development in each office the
proficiency in the use of Filipino in official communications and correspondence.

The Commission on the Filipino Language, formerly Institute of Philippine/National

Language, is ordered to formulate and implement programs and projects for the full and
effective implementation of the objectives expressed in the Executive Order.

The Language Policy of the Commission on Higher Education

In 1994, Republic Act No. 7722, creating the Commission on Higher Education
(CHED) was signed. This Act which is known as the “Higher Education Act of 1994”
provides that the CHED shall be independent and separate from the DECS and attached
to the Office of the President for administrative purposes only. Its coverage shall be
both public and private institutions of higher education as well as degree-granting
programs in all post-secondary educational institutions, public and private.

One of the first steps undertaken by CHED was to update the General Education
Curriculum (GEC) of tertiary courses leading to an initial bachelor’s degree covering four
(4) curriculum years. This was done to make the curriculum more responsive to the
demands of the next millenium.

The requirements of the new GEC are embodied in the CHED Memorandum Order
(CMO) No. 59, s. 1996. Listed under miscellaneous of this CMO is its language policy
which is as follows:

In consonance with the Bilingual Education Policy underlined in DECS Order No.
52, Series of 1987, the following are the guidelines vis-a-vis medium of instruction, to
wit:

1. Language courses, whether Filipino or English, should be taught in that language.

2. At the discretion of the HEI, Literature subjects may be taught in Filipino, English or
any other
language as long as there are enough instructional materials for the same and both
students and
instructors/professors are competent in the langu age.

Courses in the Humanities and Social Sciences should preferably be taught in Filipino.

DO 52, S. 1987 – THE 1987 POLICY ON BILINGUAL EDUCATION

May 21, 1987
DO 52, s. 1987
The 1987 Policy on Bilingual Education
To: Bureau Directors
Regional Directors
Schools Superintendents
Presidents, State Colleges and Universities
Heads of Private Schools, Colleges and Universities

1. The provision of Article XIV Section 7 of the 1987 Constitution states:

“For purposes of communication and instruction, the official languages of the
Philippines are Filipino, and until otherwise provided by law, English.
The regional languages are the auxiliary official languages in the regions and
shall serve as auxiliary media of instruction therein.”
2. In consonance with this mandate the declared policy of the Department of
Education and Culture on bilingualism in the schools (NBE Resolution No. 73-7,
s. 1973), the Department of Education, Culture and Sports hereby promulgates
the following policy:
1. The Policy on Bilingual Education aims at the achievement of
competence in both Filipino and English at the national level, through the
teaching of both languages and their use as media of instruction at all
levels. The regional languages shall be used as auxiliary languages i n
Grades I and II. The aspiration of the Filipino to enable them to perform
their functions and duties as Filipino citizens and in English in order to
meet the needs of the country in the community of nations.
2. The goals of the Bilingual Education Policy shall be:
1. Enhanced learning through two languages to achieve quality
education as called for by the 1987 Constitution;
2. the propagation of Filipino as a language of literacy;
3. the development of Filipino as a linguistic symbol of national unity
and identity;
4. the cultivation and elaboration of Filipino as a language of
scholarly discourse that is to say, its continuing intellectualization;
and
5. the maintenance of English as an international language for the
Philippines and as a non-exclusive language of science and
technology.
3. Filipino and English shall be used as media of instruction, the use
allocated to specific subjects in the curriculum as indicated in Department
Order No. 25, s. 1974.
4. The regional languages shall be used as auxiliary media of instru ction
and as initial language for literacy where needed.
5. Filipino and English shall be taught as language subjects in all levels to
achieve the goals of bilingual competence.
6. Since competence in the use of both Filipino and English is one of the
goals of the Bilingual Education Policy, continuing improvement in the
teaching of both languages, their use as media of instruction and the
specification shall be the responsibility of the whole educational system.
7. Tertiary level institutions shall lead in the continuing intellectualization of
Filipino. The program of intellectualization, however, shall also be
pursued in both the elementary and secondary levels.
8. The Department of Education, Culture and Sports shall cooperate with
the National Language Commission wh ich, according to the 1987
Constitution, shall be tasked with the further development and
enrichment of Filipino.
 9. The Department of Education, Culture and Sports shall provide the
means by which the language policy can be implemented with the
cooperation of government and non-government organizations.
10. The Department shall program funds for implementing the Policy, in such
areas as materials production, in-service training, compensatory, and
enrichment program for non-Tagalogs, development of a suitable and
standardized Filipino For classroom use and the development of
appropriate evaluative instruments.
3. This Order supersedes previous Orders on the Bilingual Education Policy that
are inconsistent with it.
4. This Order shall take effect immediately.

(SGD.) LOURDES R. QUISUMBING

Minister

Reference: Department Orders: Nos. 9, s. 1973 and (25, s. 1974)

Allotment: 1-2-3-4–(M.O. 1-87)

To be indicated in the Perpetual Index under the following subjects:

COMMUNICATION ARTS
COURSE OF STUDY, COLLEGIATE
COURSE OF STUDY, ELEMENTARY
COURSE OF STUDY, SECONDARY
LEGISLATION
POLICY
RULES AND REGULATIONS

DO_s1987_52

I. IMPLEMENTATION OF THE BILINGUAL EDUCATION POLICY

A. Early Childhood Education

The two official languages, Filipino and English are used as the media
of instruction for 5 -year -old children in the preschool education.
However, these children have already developed their first language at
home but they did not learn this language by formal instruction. They
acquired it from their family members and adult interactions. This is the
language that the children used for basic communication at the earliest
ages, thus may be considered as the child’s thinking language.

The next dominant languages learned at this level are Filipino and
English. In many instances, the children from the non -Tagalog areas
learned these languages simultaneously, thus producing childhood
bilingualism that emerges naturally through classroom activities in
learning communication skills: listening, speaking, reading and writing.
They also learned numeracy, sensory- perceptual, socio-emotional,
motor and creative skills in either Filipino or English.

Observations of teachers show that they predominantly used the local

language in most of the lessons so that children specifically in non-
Tagalog areas understood what to do or the teachers translated the
 Filipino and English words to the local language. Likewise, children tend
to answer in mixed language using the local language and Filipino or
local language and English (BEE Monitoring Report – 2003 to 2005).

B. In the Primary Grades

Children used Filipino as the medium of instruction in learning Civics and

Culture (Sibika at Kultura) in Grades I-III, Geography, History and Civics
(Heograpiya, Kasaysayan at Sibika) in Grades IV-VI, Makabayan which
includes Character Education, Music, Arts and Physical Education in
Grades I-VI, Home Economics and Livelihood Education (Edukasyong
Pangtahanan at Pangkabuhayan) in Grades IV-VI and Filipino as a
subject in all grade levels. On the other hand, children learned
Mathematics (Grades I-VI) and Science (Grades III-VI) in English as the
medium of instruction and learn English as a subject in all grade levels.

Many teachers believed that the use of Filipino as the medium of

instruction promotes oneness in thought as a nation and pride in being
Filipino, preserves cultural and national identity enabling Filipinos to
celebrate their commonalities as a people and h elps Filipinos
understand each other even if they belong to other regions. It also
promotes development of reading skills because Filipino is the language
of mass media which most children have access to.

Children were observed to learn Filipino easier because of its regular

transparent orthography and mother tongues of children have usually
Filipino vocabulary, hence, children enjoyed Filipino literature.

The learning of English at this level had been supported by most

teachers and parents. The early exposure of children to the sounds
(phonology and semantics) of the English language promoted
familiarization with the language. This was enhanced by educational
programs in radio and television as well as print materials which were
widely present in many environments. In classrooms, there were more
reading materials in English than Filipino as well as in the different
learning areas. But assessment results show that children have not fully
mastered the skills in listening, speaking, reading and writing targeted
for the primary level.

A study was conducted by the Bureau of Elementary Education,

Department of Education, known as the Lingua Franca Education
Project. The project aimed at defining and implementing a national
bridging program to develop initial literacy. Through the bridging
program, an alternative curriculum in acquiring basic literacy and
numeracy skills was implemented to make children functionally literate
with the local lingua franca as the language of instruction. All subjects in
Grade I were taught in the lingua franca. Filipino was taught orally but
the initial reading stage (reading readiness and beginning reading) was
taught in the lingua franca. English was introduced in the second
semester.
 The project was first implemented in 1999 with the issuance of DECS
Memorandum No. 144 s. 1999, “Lingua Franca Project” until 2003. Experimental and
control schools were selected from every region. The schools were located in the
poorest municipalities. The experimental schools were given the option to select which
lingua franca to use: Tagalog, Cebuano or Ilocano.

The study showed that children who learned to read and write in the first
language before learning a second language were not only successful second
language learners but also excelled among their peers who were not taught in their first
language. Reading in the first language developed self-confidence and there was
smooth transfer of learning from the first language to the second language.

The study was corroborated by a study conducted under the Basic Education
Reform Agenda (BESRA) in 2005. It showed that the abilities of Filipino children to
transfer their literacy skills from Filipino to English were demonstrated with their word
reading/decoding abilities. However, the lack of linguistic or language competence
compromised English language performance because it lacked the direct route to
sentence comprehension.

For some Muslim learners, the local or regional language at home was not used
in schools. Their exposure to Filipino and English radio or television programs and
newspaper were virtually unavailable. Consequently, these students lacked proficiency
in the use of Filipino or English and for this, they felt discriminated so they dropped out
during the primary grades because they found it difficult to learn the two languages.
This shows how the transition from a local language to Filipino and English at the
beginning of elementary school is a learning barrier not only for many Muslim learners
but also non- Muslim learners in remote areas. It serves as a deterrent factor for
continuing their schooling (USAID, May 2007).

Language instruction in Philippine schools should therefore take such

differences into consideration. English language and literacy instruction should
integrate the acquisition of word reading, vocabulary, and story comprehension.
Meaning should always be integrated with the more mechanical skill of decoding to
ensure text-level meaning which is better achieved among bilingual children. Filipino
language and literacy instruction should focus more on the quicker acquisition of
decoding skills to approximate their already advanced language abilities. This suggests
that instruction in Filipino should address text level skills at a faster rate than English
instruction.

Since the Philippines is a multilingual nation and children have different first
languages across the country, future studies should investigate whether the findings
described above are consistent with children whose first language is not Tagalog (i.e.,
Cebuano, Bicol). It is likely that their performance in both English and Filipino will be
consistent with the English language data in the present study because they will be
learning both Filipino and English literacy skills whilst they are acquiring oral language
skills in these two languages. Should
such results be derived, localization of first language literacy should be considered and
the implementation of the Bilingual Education Policy across the country should be
reviewed (Ocampo, 2002; 2005).

DECS Order No. 11 s. 1987

DECS Order No. 11 s. 1987 was issued in the pursuance to Section 3 of Republic
Act No. 8190 known as “An Act Granting Priority to Residents of the Barangay,
Municipality or City where the School is Located, in the Appointment or Assignment of
Classroom Public School Teachers”.

The Order provides the guidelines to be followed in hiring teachers where it clearly
stated that the first priority shall be residents of the barangay where the public
elementary school is located which allows the use of local language specifically where
local culture should be enhanced in cultural minorities.

REFERENCES

DO 52, S. 1987- THE 1987 POLICY ON BILINGUAL EDUCATION. Retrieved f rom

https://www.deped.gov.ph/1987/05/21/do-52-s-1987-the-1987-policy-on-bilingual-
education/

Esperitu, C. (n.d.). Language policies in the Philippines. Retrieved f rom

https://ncca.gov.ph/about-ncca-3/subcomm issions/subcomm ission-on-cultural-
disseminationscd/language-and-translation/language-policies-in-the-philippines/

Quijano, Y. and Eustaquio, O. (n.d.). Current policies governing the use of language in Philippine public
schools. Retrieved from
https://www.seameo.org/seameoweb2/images/stories/Projects/2008_MotherTongueBridgeLang/Polici
es/papers_and_pdf/Philippine_MotherTongue_Policies20jan08.pdf