Commentary: Martial law and the mis-education of our youth

 By:  Ricardo Ma. Duran Nolasco
The Philippine Daily Inquirer, Sep. 21, 2012

When declared martial law, Ferdinand Marcos ushered in the bilingual setup of using two second languages (mostly English) in education. Marcos saw the education system as his primary vehicle to perpetuate the warped values of his so-called New Society, with disastrous historical consequences. Rather than promote genuine literacy, the bilingual policy only contributed to the miseducation of generations of Filipinos. The damage done to our national psyche is immeasurable. As it is, we are still a nation in search of our soul.

It took us 40 years before realizing the folly of this policy. We have replaced it with a new one called mother tongue-based multilingual education (MTBMLE).

Despite the change, functional illiteracy and low quality instruction continue to victimize us like the plague. The Philippines is missing targets for net enrollment ratio in primary education by 17.2 years, for primary grade completion rate by 10.2 years and for the literacy rate of 15-24-year-olds by 9.1 years.

I celebrated International Literacy Day 2012 with education stakeholders in Mindanao on two occasions, one at the University of Southern Mindanao (USM) in Kabacan, Cotabato, on Sept. 6-8 and the other at Ateneo de Davao University on September 15.

In Kabacan, where Ilocano, Binisaya, Ilonggo and Maguindanaon communities dominate, I delivered three talks. The biggest audience—close to 2,000—came on Sept. 8, International Literacy Day, which was also the 51st anniversary of USM’s College of Education, where I was guest of honor.

On that occasion, I encouraged the tertiary education institutions to help overcome the serious shortage of teachers for MTBMLE by designing at least four types of teacher training programs:

The incorporation of MTBMLE into existing professional teaching programs, where education majors learn how to apply second language acquisition theories.

One-year “fast track” certificate programs for graduates with nonteaching baccalaureate degrees that would equip them with the required pedagogical skills and knowledge for the MTBMLE classroom.

Three- to four-week intensive workshops for experienced certified teachers to become effective in an MTBMLE environment.

Training programs for teaching assistants who are fluent in the local language (L1) but do not have the educational background to qualify for the regular teaching profession.

These parateachers have proven to be effective in situations where the regular teacher is fluent in the official language but does not know the L1 of the learners.

On September 6 and 7, there was an assembly for students and a one-day seminar for teachers. Numerous queries on the whys and wherefores of L1-based instruction and doubts on the program’s effectiveness and sustainability were aired. I sought to dispel these doubts by citing the local and international evidence. I assured the teachers that there are available resources that they can access online, and referred them to education institutions that they can rely on for training. But I could not hide my disappointment over the Department of Education’s “early” exit policy as well as the haphazard implementation of this policy.

Other speakers at the one-day seminar for teachers were: Bonna Duron of Save the Children who talked about their pilot programs in South Cotabato that included B’laan and Maguindanaon communities; Mhawi Rosero of University of the Philippines’ Layap who spoke on language documentation and research; Cito Casquite who gave a lecture on the characteristics of stage 1, 2, 3 and 4 stories for learners as they progress from beginning literacy to fluency; and Noemi Dumalaog who gave a teaching demonstration using Ilonggo on the story about the big-mouthed frog.

I met with USM officials led by Jesus Antonio Dirije, president; Tony Tacardon, academic affairs vice president; and Leorence Tandog, dean of the College of Education. They liked the idea of USM hosting a 3-day national MTBMLE seminar-workshop in February 2013 in time for International Mother Language Day.

The Davao forum was a collaborative project of USM, Ateneo de Davao University, Translators Association of the Philippines and SIL Philippines. Pam Castrillo and Cecile Van Zante led the activities.

The following issues were discussed at the Davao forum:

Pilot programs in Cotabato City and South Cotabato by SIL and Save the Children show children in MTBMLE schools outperforming those in bilingual settings, becoming confident speakers in school, and beginning to write in their native language outside of the school setting.

Parents now participate more in the education of their children because they can understand the language used in school.

The question of Filipino identity is dependent on how Filipinos value their own ethnic identities.

The tertiary education institutions have their work cut out for them because on their shoulders rest the primary responsibility of training our existing and future teachers under the new mother-tongue-based paradigm.

Finally, I wish to invite the public to another forum-workshop titled “Math-talino sa Unang Wika: Teaching the Early Grades Math Curriculum in the First Language.” This will be held on Oct. 6, 8 a.m.-5 p.m. at Palma Hall 400, College of Social Sciences and Philosophy, UP Diliman, Quezon City.

(Dr. Ricardo Ma. Duran Nolasco (rnolasco_upmin@yahoo.com) is an associate professor in linguistics at UP Diliman.)

Glimpses: Come home, sons and daughters

By:  Jose Ma. Montelibano
Originally Posted at Philippine Daily Inquirer Sept. 13, 2012

Does anyone know how much money Filipino-Americans send to their families in the Philippines? I am told it is $8 billion annually or about P340 billion. I am not sure if Filipino-Canadians are included in this amount. Either way, the amount is staggering.

Does anyone know how many Filipino-Americans remit money home? Well, the latest available study of Asian-Americans pinpoint Filipinos somewhere at the top with 52% of them sending money to the Philippines.

Does anyone know how many balikbayan boxes are sent to the Philippines by Filipino-Americans? I don’t, I simply do not have the data. But the Bureau of Customs may, and, of course, the forwarders doing business in the US if they can consolidate their business volumes. And then, there are more balikbayan boxes sent whenever disaster strikes.

Does anyone know how much Filipino-Americans earn in the United States? I don’t, but I have a good idea. Using the per capita income of Americans, and knowing Filipino-Americans earn just as much if not more, then we can safely assume that it is upwards of $160 billion.
Does anyone know how much Filipino-Americans spend to live in the US? In the year 2000 or 2001, a marketing study mentioned that Filipino-Americans spend $50 billion a year. That figure is estimated to be between $60-70 billion today.

Does anyone know how much the IMF, the World Bank, the ADB, and the US Exim Bank lend to the Philippines every year on the average? I don’t, but anyone can ask the Central Bank or get the figures from government reports. I am willing to conclude, though, that it cannot be more than $2 billion annually.

What’s the point of all these questions?

We have our own people, Filipino-Americans, who left in search of a dream they could not see becoming true in the motherland. They struggled as strangers in another land, as minorities competing against a powerful mainstream, and decades later finally making it.

The cost was steep – separation, homesickness, cold winters, and often enduring being regarded as less than equal. Beyond the cars and houses and modern way of life, we often do not see the pain and loneliness.

And too often, too, we do not understand the longing they bear quietly for their people, their homeland. We see the material trappings but not what we take for granted – being where we are, the natural belonging with one another and the only land Filipinos can call their own.

Why don’t we make it easy for them to have their reunion? Why don’t we court them to visit, to stay, maybe even live out the rest of their lives here? Why don’t we roll out the red carpet so they can invest here, or give outright grants to the poor we do not know how to take care of anyway? Why not serve the needy and weak with their time, talent and treasures?

Why do we bow and curtsy to financial institutions whom we do not wish to be submissive to anymore? Why don’t we reach out to our own people in America and explain how a few billion dollars a year, as investment in our own people, land and future, can change history with them as the heroes they can be?

We spend so much effort and resources to reach out to other peoples and nations, yet give nowhere enough appreciation and importance to sons and daughters of our motherland. Ask the Central Bank and our Finance officials what $8 billion does to our economy? Ask the Secretary of Tourism what millions of Filipino-American tourists can mean, not just with their visits and expenses here, but more so with their promoting the Philippines. Ask the Secretary of Foreign Affairs just how an awakened Fil-Am sector can facilitate a truly friendly relationship with the US?

We can go down the line of departments and ask them how 4 million Filipino-Americans who earn more than $160 billion a year and send $8 billion of that to their families in the Philippines can do to make them achieve their goals faster and better. These are our flesh and blood, patriots in exile, comrades in the war against poverty, fellow dreamers for the future generations.

While we are at it, we can ask the Professional Regulatory Commission and the Department of Health why they are not rolling out the red carpet for Filipino-American doctors, nurses and volunteers who spend their own money and time to care for the poor through their medical missions that the PRC and the DOH cannot serve. We have to ask these agencies what they have done, and plan to do, with maybe twenty million Filipinos begging for medical treatment because they never had it.

The most important question that must be answered before the nation – why are Commissioners of PRC making it difficult for Filipino-Americans to help? If they cannot anymore attend to the poorest for lack of funds, the DOH should beg Filipino-American doctors to please arrange for more medical missions.

I plead to our brothers and sisters in America not to give up on our people, especially the poor. I plead for them to remember how they, too, stayed faithful to their dream against all odds. They must subordinate their distaste and revulsion for a bureaucratic attitude and give the welfare of the sick among the needy higher priority. They must not allow the poor to suffer by letting the PRC get away with the worst kind of behavior in a moment of great change in our country.

I ask Filipino-Americans to let their love for the motherland and the common good to be their highest motives and greatest joy to serve. If officials in the PRC can betray the public trust so casually, Filipino-Americans can teach them about generosity, humaneness and patriotism. Please prepare for thousands of medical missions and defy the selfishness of regulatory officials with your determination to care and share. If you can find the heart for the poorest among our race, and show it, many more among us may yet learn to do the same.