Strengthening DepEd's English program

The proposed law on the English language principally authored by Congressman Eduardo R. Gullas and approved recently by the House is entitled An Act to Strengthen and Enhance the Use of English as the Medium of Instruction in Philippine Schools. If passed into a law it will dismantle the 30-year bilingual program of DepEd aimed at creating a citizenry competent in the use of English and Filipino. Adopted on the basis of a mere administrative fiat, that program was a faulty measure right from the start.

For one thing, how could competence on the use of Filipino be developed when this language did not (and does not) yet exist? The short-sighted recourse was to interpret Filipino as Tagalog. So for a quarter of a century school children have been forced-fed on Tagalog to the neglect of English. The outcome has been an educational disaster which is not only a shame to this nation but also a mill-stone to its economy.

The almost unanimous decision of the congressmen to junk DepEd's ill-conceived language program could not have been more timely. Presently the department is on the take-off phase of its basic education curriculum one major component of which is Makabayan, a cocktail of five subject areas all taught in Tagalog. An intensification of the bilingual thrust, the new curriculum appears designed to complete the inroad of Tagalog in the school system. Indeed, one state university has been very outspoken in its advocacy of Tagalog as the medium of instruction for all subjects in all levels!

But with HB 4701 becoming into a law this will not happen. The bill provides, among others, that "English, Filipino or the regional language may be used as the MOI in all subjects from pre-school until Grade II". It also mandates that while English and Filipino shall be taught as separate subjects in all levels in the elementary and secondary, only English shall be the MOI in all academic subjects from Grade III to Grade VI and in all levels in the secondary.

These provisions leave only Physical Education and Technology and Home Economics which may be taught in Filipino. However, the bill is silent on what their MOI should be, hence, a school head may decide to use English even for these non-academic subjects. Simply put, this bill authorizes the use of English as medium of instruction in all subjects in all levels of basic education, except in Filipino taught as a subject. This was actually the language policy before 1974 when that maligned bilingual program was introduced. This was the one factor that made our educational system the envy in Asia in those days.

The big question now is whether the Senate would dance to the tune of the House on this issue. It is an opposition Senate and its knee-jerk reaction is likely to be negative. Moreover, elections are only eight months away and the thought of Luzon votes could make reelectionist senators reluctant to give a thumbs-up to the bill.

Congressman Gullas, with his usual positive outlook, is hopeful the honorable senators would rise above partisan politics and give his legislative initiative the support it deserves. One good thing, he said, is that Senate President Villar is assuming the chairmanship of the education committee in a concurrent capacity. And since Villar is an economist it is likely that he would look at the language issue from an economic viewpoint, in which case the possibility of getting his support is high.

Once approved HB 4201 would be a landmark educational legislation. Its impact of course would not be immediate for language mastery takes years. But after six years the quality of high school students is expected to be better and when they enter college they would be much more prepared academically.

Needless to say, raising the caliber of our graduates takes more than a mere shift in the medium of instruction. A lot more are needed: Competent and motivated teachers, enough supplies of books and teaching devices, availability of science equipment, reasonable teacher-student ratio and others. But this congressional initiative is a step in the right direction. If anything, it is an indication that our lawmakers are increasingly aware of the need to revitalize the country's educational program.

For years that chamber has pussy-footed in its response to the widening gap between funding and school needs. As more and more kids troop to schools more and more radical adjustments in the budgetary share of education is needed. To say that education is already getting the biggest slice in the money pie is not enough. What is enough is when every child has enough of what is needed to develop his full potentials such that when he leaves school he can hold his own among his peers in other countries.

* * *

Email: [email protected]