Why schools are failing our children (2)

Commentary

By: Magtanggol T. Gunigundo I
Philippine Daily Inquirer
9:19 pm | Friday, November 25th, 2011

Many Filipinos think that a learned person is one who can speak English fluently. This is clearly a residue of our colonial mentality that looks up to a foreign language as superior to Philippine languages.

This kind of thinking has seriously undermined students’ learning in Mathematics, Science and the other subjects. In 2008, the UP National Institute for Mathematics and Science Education (UP Nismed) stated that “most students, even high school seniors, (cannot) understand what they are reading and (neither can they) do the necessary calculations to solve scientific problems.” According to UP Nismed, one of the culprits for this sorry state is the language of instruction (LOI).

The Philippines participated in the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) tests in 1995, 1999, 2003 and in 2008.  During those years, most of the world prepared for and took the tests in their first or native language (L1). Our country chose a second language (L2), which is English, in each occasion and came out a consistent bottom placer in these tests.

According to UP Nismed figures, an overwhelming 91 percent of Filipino test takers use English in their homes sometimes or never at all. If English is the language of learning, then we would expect Filipino students who always speak English at home to score higher than those who seldom or never use English as a home language.

Our 2003 TIMSS scores, however, paint a different picture. Filipinos who never use English at home scored higher (320) than those who always speak it (317). Those who sometimes speak it at home outperformed (377) those who almost always speak it (343). Of the four groups, those who always speak English at home scored lowest.

The 2007 TIMSS results show Asian countries like Chinese Taipei, Hong Kong, Japan and Korea dominating the field. Non-Asian countries like Hungary, the Russian Federation, England, Italy, Latvia, the United States, the Czech Republic and Kazakhstan also performed well, but most of them do not speak English as an L1.

People are not aware that there is a correlation between L1 use in education and economic development. According to Steve Walter of the Summer Institute of Linguistics, countries whose population have access to L1 education are the most developed, while those countries whose people are denied L1 education are the least developed.

In crafting the curriculum for the K-12 program, education authorities must seriously consider the current language-in-education research.

The most pressing issues are as follows:

1. The curriculum should underscore the goal of basic education as learning to read, speak, write and think fluently in the L1 on academic topics in pre-school and throughout the elementary grades. In contrast, the old system recognizes the acquisition of English and Filipino as the first priority in judging children’s achievement.

2. It should recognize that oral language development is a prerequisite for both L1 and L2 literacy. The old approach has been to teach English and Filipino as if these were the L1 of most Filipino learners. As many educators have said, we don’t learn an L2 by learning to read that language. Building L2 comprehension and teaching children how to verbally respond appropriately in the L2 should be the focus of L2 learning in the early grades.

3. It should affirm that creating a strong foundation in the L1 requires at least six years of formal schooling in the L1 as LOI (but eight years is better). It should also provide for the L1 as a subject all the way up to the secondary level, rather than up to Grade 3 only, as specified under the Singaporean and Malaysian models.

4. It should reinstate Science as a separate subject beginning Grade 1, instead of merely integrating science concepts into the English or “Makabayan” subjects.

To effectively implement an L1-based K-12 curriculum, the Department of Education and other education stakeholders must do the following:

1. Provide pre-service and in-service teacher education to ensure that teachers can engage in effective pedagogy in both L1 and L2 and have enough knowledge of the subject matter for the academic level they teach. In this regard, a strong partnership with tertiary education institutions is imperative.

2. Create a model kit of L1 materials in all the subjects initially from K-3 and in the biggest Philippine languages and ready language communities. The kit shall contain the irreducible minimum of types of teaching and learning materials that an L1 teacher needs, including exemplars, teacher’s guides and reading primers.

3. Promote policies that position parents as first teachers and that encourage parent and community involvement in the L1-based MLE program.

This coming Feb. 16-18, 2012, the 2nd Philippine Conference-Workshop on MTBMLE will be held at the Punta Villa Resort in Iloilo City. One of the event’s highlights is the launching by the DepEd of its model set of L1 materials in all subjects from K-3. Demo-teaching sessions and workshops on how these materials are to be used will be held.

Magtanggol T. Gunigundo I is the representative of the second district of Valenzuela City and a deputy majority leader in the House of Representatives.

http://bit.ly/vZzvrm