Written Report in MTB-MLE

C. Legal Foundation

Aure, Hannah Elizabeth

Basañes, Teresita
Belostrino, Angeline
Dy, Jasper
Fundano, Khyla
Gabriel, Janine
Hinojales, Leanne Angedel
Parumog, Anna Marie
Odtohan, Angel
Yang, Jessica

BECED II-14
January 27, 2021

Main Topics
A. Language Policy and Planning

Foundation of MTB-MLE in the Philippines

Local Language Policy and Planning

 
1999 – The Lingua Franca Project

DO 80, s. 1999 or the “Lingua Franca Education Project” headed by the former
Education Secretary Andrew Gonzales aimed to implement a national bridging program from
mother tongue to Filipino and English. Implementation process of this project was to use the
participating experimental school’s lingua franca as the medium of instruction in teaching Grade
1 students. Communities using Ilocano and Cebuano are to teach Wika (Filipino) orally using
their lingua franca, while those who use Tagalog would teach Filipino as a subject. English
would then later be introduced in the second semester. The positive results of this project paved
the way for educators to develop a curriculum using the community’s lingua franca as the
medium of instruction.

In addition, Raul Roco insisted that Bicolanos should also be taught in their mother
tongue, adding Bicolano and other vernacular languages of the provinces residing near Bicol to
the existing Lingua Franca Project. 
 
2006 & 2008

In the year 2006, Cebu 1 district Representative Eduardo Gullas Jr. presented the
st

“English Only Bill” or House Bill 1399 aiming to boost English competency and become more
globally competitive by having English as the primary mode of instruction at schools. According
to Representative Gullas, “English is the world’s working language. It is also the language of
technology. Young Filipinos with inadequate English skills may risk getting marginalized in the
lucrative global labor market of the future.” However, this bill was countered when
Representative Magtanggol Gunigundo produced a multilingual education bill that encourages
the use of local languages in the Philippines as the medium of instruction inside the classroom
beginning from grade one through grade six. This has further progressed and has been made
known in D.O 74 s. 2009.
 
2010 - Lubuagan Experiment (2005 – 2010)

The Lubuagan Experiment is a long-term case study conducted by Duguiang and Dekker
to identify the outcome of Mother Tongue-Based Multilingual Education in the Philippines.
During the study, major schools from the municipality of Lubuagan in the province of Kalinga
were divided into two groups. The group that uses the local language of Lugbuagan served as the
experimental group and the group that utilized Filipino and English as the medium of instruction
was the controlled group. In the year 2007 – 2008, the results showed that grade 1 experimental
group had better performance compared to the Grade 1 controlled group and this was also seen in
the Grade levels of 2 and 3.
2012- Enhanced Basic Education Act of 2013 ( R.A 10533)
In the year 2012 with the help of the Enhanced Basic Education Act of 2013 ( R.A 10533)
Mother Tongue-Based Multilingual Education’s role has been acknowledged as essential in
shaping the formative years of the learners.

International Language Policy and Planning

1953 – UNESCO: Mother Tongue Serves Multiple Purposes

“It is axiomatic that the best medium for teaching a child is his mother tongue. Psychologically,
it is the system of meaningful signs that in his mind works automatically for expression and
understanding. Sociologically, it is a means of 26 identification among the members of the
community to which he belongs. Educationally, he learns more quickly through it than through
an unfamiliar linguistic medium.” (UNESCO, 1953, p. 11)

1999 – UNICEF: value of mother tongue

“There is ample research showing that students are quicker to learn to read and acquire other
academic skills when first taught in their mother tongue. They also learn a second language more
quickly than those initially taught to read in an unfamiliar language.” (UNICEF, 1999, p. 41)
  
Language Policy and Planning Models 

1. Spolsky Language Policy Components

        Language has been always highly political and it's fundamentally intertwined with identity.
As such, governments have created policies in order to either promote or ban certain languages.
Language policy is what a government does officially through either legislation or court
decisions to determine how a language is used, cultivates language skills needed to meet national
priorities or to establish the right of the people to use and maintain a language.

      Bernard Spolsky assumed that language policy has three interrelated but independently
describable components: practices, beliefs and managements. Language practices are the
observable behaviors and choices – what people actually do. They are the linguistic features
chosen, the variety of language used. Language Beliefs, on the other hand, is the value the
certain person placed on the language. In this instance, most often, the language regularly used is
placed higher in value than those that are not. Lastly, language management is defined as any
actions made to influence language practices. It is the intervention made by the language
manager aimed at shaping the way a policy is enacted. Language manager is mostly associated
with individuals or documents possessing legal authority.

     The scope of language policy varies from country to country. Although nations, historically,
have used language policy as a way to promote one's official language at the expense of others,
many countries now have policies designed to protect and promote ethnical and regional
languages.
2. Ricento and Hornberger's Language Policy & Planning Model

Having Spolsky’s theory of language policy, Ricento and Hornberger complimented it

and enhanced the Language Policy and Planning model. They consider actors which are
interrelated to each other.

The model consists of three levels which are the National as the language and policy
statements, Institutional as the parents in the community and Interpersonal as the teachers in the
classroom. This model will show how these levels interact to influence implementation at the
classroom level. Ricento and Hornberger represent the model as an onion wherein there is a layer
which makes the onion-as-a-whole. They believed that these three levels needed to have a
connection with each other. This model suggests that language policy is not only defined by
national level statements but also with the local levels.

The role of each actor varies in this model. Giving them the right to make policies is a
good move but confusing and complicated. Hence, having someone who will teach and promote
one’s language is important.

B. Language Policies in the Philippines 

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

Throughout the Philippine history, language is considered to be a relevant topic because it

reflects the identity of people and the nation. Due to different colonizations, Filipinos have been
exposed to a variety of traditions and customs that heavily influence their culture, even in means
of communication. The presence of globalization has put a big impact and pressure on the quality
of education that is being delivered to the Filipino students, hence; a need to incorporate
bilingual education in the curriculum and learning fields became mandatory to all institutions
and schools to develop competent and flexible students that can keep pace with the national and
international education standards.

  The 1987 Policy on Bilingual education aims at the achievement of acquiring Filipino and
English language to be the medium of media and instruction at all levels. 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.

From this, we can infer that these efforts are done to produce highly intellectual and
globally competitive students that understand and embrace their own language while adapting
the commonly used. On the other hand, it is highly suggested that the educational sector and
legislators should re-evaluate this policy and revisions must be made because recently passed
laws are all about extracting the Filipino subjects in the curriculum of tertiary/college levels that
would possibly result in a loss of appreciation and use of Filipino’s own language. 

2. Executive Order #335 s. 1988 - ENJOINING ALL

DEPARTMENTS/BUREAUS/OFFICES/AGENCIES/INSTRUMENTALITIES OF THE
GOVERNMENT TO TAKE SUCH STEPS AS ARE NECESSARY FOR THE PURPOSE
OF USING FILIPINO LANGUAGE IN OFFICIAL TRANSACTIONS,
COMMUNICATIONS AND CORRESPONDENCE

Article XIV, Section 7 of the Constitution of 1987 states that for the purposes of
communication and instruction, the official languages of the Philippines shall be Filipino and,
unless otherwise provided by law, English. On August 25, 1988, Executive Order #335 was
signed by President Corazon C. Aquino directing all government departments, offices, agencies,
and instruments to implement the use of the Filipino language for transactions, communications,
and correspondence. The order is an attempt to promote the use of the Filipino language in
government offices and establish unity and peace in the Philippines for national development.

The Executive Order instructed all departments, bureaus, offices, agencies, and
instrumentalities of the government to utilize the Filipino language in communications,
transactions, and correspondence in their offices. It also assigned personnel in every office who
will be responsible for all communications and correspondence written in Filipino. This order
required government institutions to translate the names of offices, buildings, public offices,
signboards of all offices, its instrumentalities, and oaths of the office into the Filipino language.
It also required government personnel to master the use of Filipino in official communications
and correspondence as part of their development training.

The Commission on the Filipino Language (CFL), formerly known as the Institute of
Philippine Languages was ordered to devise and execute programs and projects to be adopted in
the education system as well as to other government institutions to ensure that the objectives in
the Order are efficiently enforced. In the educational setting, Executive Order #335 required all
government personnel including teachers, school staff, and administrators to use the Filipino
language in communications and transactions. They must promote and be proficient in Filipino
to accomplish the objectives of the Order. Also, the Commission on the Filipino Language was
tasked to do the following: campaign the value of Filipino as a tool for national progress;
translate all materials into Filipino; training of personnel in the use of Filipino; monitoring and
submitting progress reports of implementation; and creating other methods for successful
implementation. In accordance with the Order, government offices, personnel, even teachers,
schools, and school administrators are expected to support and use the Filipino language.

3. DO 74, s. 2009 - Institutionalizing Mother Tongue-Based Multilingual Education (MLE)

 From the results of local and international studies, it revealed that the use of mother
tongue or first language shows promising results when it comes to improving outcomes in
learning and for promotion of an inclusive education. In addition to that, studies like the Lingua
Franca Project revealed three important things that made the relevance of MTB-MLE sound for
today's education. As stated here are the three; learner's quickly learn to read at their first
language, where in our second point, those students who have learned to read and write at their
first language makes it easier to learn their second and third language, wherein they can write,
read, and speak as well. 

As stated, here are the important things we should remember regarding the issued order: 

D.O 74 s. 2009 

1. The lessons and findings of various local initiatives and international studies in basic
education have validated the superiority of the use of the learner’s mother tongue or first
language in improving learning outcomes and promoting Education for All (EFA).
2.  Mother Tongue-Based Multilingual Education, hereinafter referred to as MLE, is the effective
use of more than two languages for literacy and instruction. Henceforth, it shall be
institutionalized as a fundamental educational policy and program in this Department in the
whole stretch of formal education including pre-school and in the Alternative Learning System
(ALS).
Through this DepEd mandatory order, we can assure a more meaningful learning and
education that is for all through language, specifically the Mother Tongue/Native Language of
each individual student. As it shows promising results for its implementation, the downside is
that the department, schools, and other administrators may still lack of fundings, and may keep a
little skeptical with the issued department order. However, revisions, more research, and
communication within the internal and community affairs can widely help the implementation. 

4. 2012 DO 16, S. 2012 – GUIDELINES ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE

MOTHER TONGUE-BASED- MULTILINGUAL EDUCATION (MTB-MLE)

To officially implement the Mother Tongue-Based Multilingual Education (MTB-MLE)

policy in the Philippines, the Department of Education presented guidelines for the nationwide
implementation of MTB-MLE in K-12 program on February 17, 2012. Listed below are the
specific instructions of how the new policy will work as the school year 2012-2013 will start:

1. Starting School Year (SY) 2012-2013, the Mother Tongue-Based-Multilingual Education

(MTB-MLE) shall be implemented in all public schools, specifically in Kindergarten,
Grades 1, 2 and 3 as part of the K to 12 Basic Education Program. The MTB-MLE shall
support the goal of “Every Child-A-Reader and A-Writer by Grade 1.”
2. The Lingua Franca Project (1999-2001) and the Lubuagan Project (1999 to present) have
provided valuable inputs in the implementation of the MTB-MLE. Nine hundred twenty-
one (921) schools including those for children of indigenous people have been modeling
MTB-MLE with support from the following:
a. Basic Education Assistance for Mindanao (BEAM);
 b. Third Elementary Education Program (TEEP);
c. Translators Association of the Philippines (TAP);
d. Save the Children, and the Summer Institute of Linguistics (SIL).
3. Eight (8) major languages or Lingua Franca and others as cited below shall be offered as
a learning area and utilized as language of instruction for SY 2012-2013:
a. Tagalog;                 g. Hiligaynon;
b. Kapampangan;        h. Waray;
c. Pangasinense;        i. Tausug;
d. Iloko;                      j. Maguindanaoan;
e. Bikol;                     k. Maranao; and
f. Cebuano;                 l. Chabacano

With this policy, schools in rural areas will strengthen their culture and will integrate
unity unto us young Filipino learners as we together explore and learn new knowledge inside the
class. MTB-MLE policy aims not only to teach and promote our national language Filipino but
also to give importance and appreciation to other regional languages here in the Philippines.
Language is very important to our culture as it is the foundation of every race. It will also
improve the learner's academic performance.

5. Republic Act No. 10533 “Enhance Basic Education Act of 2013”and Republic Act 10157
“The Kindergarten Education Act”

Former President Noynoy Aquino signed up the law Republic Act No. 10533 or the
“Enhance Basic Education Act of 2013” on May 15, 2013, a law that implements the K-to-12
Program which covers Kindergarten up to Senior High School, completing the whole 12 years of
basic education. It targets to create holistically developed and skilled Filipino graduates. Also,
this new implemented curriculum allows the graduates to get better work opportunities.

Republic Act No. 10533, otherwise known as the Enhanced Basic Education Act of
2013, has extended the years of studying in basic education from 10 years to 12 years. The said
improvement of the program has been presented in the basic education system over senior high
school. Identifying the requirement for extra support to learners due to the additional two years
in basic education, the State, through RA10533, further expanded Republic Act 8545 (RA 8545)
to provide financial aid to qualified grade10 completers entering senior high school. Under
Republic Act No. 10533, Mother Tongue is used as the medium of instruction from kindergarten
to Grade 3 to achieve mastery of knowledge proficiencies. On the other hand, starting Grade 4 to
Grade 6 teachers will use English and Filipino as their language of instruction. 

The Enhance Basic Education Act of 2013 is absolute and it is existent. The Department
of Education and the whole nation come across a huge challenge in our educational system.
Especially in these trying times, Most of the learners are not able to comply with the
requirements and standards given by the educational institution. Because not all of us are
privileged enough to follow and comply on what they are demanding.
Republic Act (RA) 10157, otherwise known as “The Kindergarten Education Act,”
provides that the curriculum is designed to cater to the needs of the learners with special needs or
children who are gifted, those with disabilities, and other diverse learners by adopting services in
addition to the standards provided, such as Headstart Program for the Gifted, Early Intervention
Program for Children with Disabilities, Early Intervention Program for Children with
Disabilities, Kindergarten Madrasah Program (KMP), Indigenous People (IP) Education, and
Catch-Up Program for Children under Especially Difficult Circumstances. The implementing
rules issued by the DepEd make sure that the needs of children, regardless of location, health,
gender religion and station in life, are covered.
 This law made kindergarten an integral part of the basic education system in the Philippines.
The law states, thus:
* Kindergarten education is hereby institutionalized as part of basic education and for school
year 2011-2012 shall be implemented partially, and thereafter, it shall be made mandatory and
compulsory for entrance to Grade 1
* Medium of Instruction. – The State shall hereby adopt the mother tongue-based multilingual
education (MTB-MLE) method. The mother tongue of the learner shall be the primary medium
of instruction for teaching and learning in the kindergarten level. However, exceptions shall be
made to the following cases:                    
  (a) When the pupils in the kindergarten classroom have different mother tongues or when
some of them speak another mother tongue;
 (b) When the teacher does not speak the mother tongue of the learners;
(c) When resources, in line with the use of the mother tongue, are not yet available; and
(d) When teachers are not yet trained how to use the MTB-MLE program.
In such exceptional cases, the primary medium of instruction shall be determined by the
DepEd aligned with the framework being used in the elementary level including teacher training
and production of local resources and materials under DepEd Order No. 74, series of 2009. The
DepEd, in coordination with the Commission on Filipino Language and in close collaboration
with academic and research institutions concerned with education, shall formulate a mother
tongue-based multilingual framework for teaching and learning: Provided, That the DepEd will
include teaching strategies as defined in Section 7(c) which aims to introduce and eventually
strengthen the child’s understanding of English, which is the official language.

Kindergarten is now a compulsory requirement before a kid can enroll in grade school.
The medium for instruction shall depend on the language the child is mostly exposed to while
growing up preceding to enroll in Kindergarten. The mother tongue states to the different
regional languages including Filipino, Cebuano, Ilocano, etc. which will be the medium of
instruction in the place where the Kindergarten is located.

6. CMO No. 59, Series of 1996 - New General Education Curriculum (GEC)

When the Commission on Higher Education (CHED) was established in 1994, one of its
first movements was to make the General Education Curriculum (GEC) more responsive to the
demands of the next millennium. The new GEC is embodied in the CHED Memorandum Order
(CMO) No. 59, Series of 1996 and listed under its miscellaneous are the language policies. 
In consonance with the Bilingual Education Policy enunciated in DECS Order No. 59,
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 that language. 
3. Courses in the Humanities and Social Sciences should preferably be taught in Filipino. 
These policies provide equal importance to both Filipino and English which directly
reflects CHED’s initiative to uphold the aims of Bilingual Education Policy— to achieve
competence in both languages through their teaching and their use as media of instruction.
Moreover, it shows how DECS and CHED work together towards language proficiency, creating
students and graduates who are nationally and globally competitive. 

7. DepEd ADVISORY No. 398, s. 2012

In compliance with DepEd Order No. 39, s. 2009
MASTER OF ARTS IN EDUCATION PROGRAM WITH SPECIALIZATION IN
MOTHER TONGUE-BASED MULTILINGUAL EDUCATION (MTB/MLE)

To enhance the quality of the instructors who teaches the subject MTB-MLE, The
Philippine Normal University, who is renowned as the “Center for Excellence” and the
“National Center for Teacher Education” by the virtue of Republic Act No. 9647, opens a course
for the the people who wants to pursue a Master’s Degree in specializing the subject Mother
Tongue-Based Multilingual Education. Stated below is the DEPED Advisory No. 398, s. 2012
which supports PNU in upholding the said certain course. This advisory also contains the aim of
PNU’s program in equipping the graduate students who will pursue MTB-MLE and the
requirements they need to pass to be qualified in taking the said course.

DepEd ADVISORY No. 398, s. 2012

In compliance with DepEd Order No. 39, s. 2009

August 17, 2012

MASTER OF ARTS IN EDUCATION PROGRAM WITH SPECIALIZATION IN MOTHER

TONGUE-BASED MULTILINGUAL EDUCATION (MTB/MLE)

The Philippine Normal University (PNU) will conduct the Master of Arts in Education Program
with Specialization in Mother Tongue-Based Multilingual Education (MTB/MLE) this school
year (SY) 2012-2013.

The Program aims to equip the teacher with:

 knowledge of theories and principles in Multilingual Education (MLE);

 sufficient repertoire of methods and techniques in teaching language from the MLE
classroom;
 various means of adapting and developing materials for MLE;
 techniques for designing and implementing MLE lessons;
  the capability to do classroom research in the MLE classroom; and
varied means of assessing learning in the MLE classroom.

The Program is open to applicants seeking admission to the graduate program for the M.A. Ed.
with specialization in MLE must be an AB/BS English/History degree holder; BSE/BSESE
major in English/Filipino/Reading graduate with General Point Average (GPA) of 2.0/85% or
better.

With this said course that’s been established for the Master’s Degree takers, the guarantee
of having a quality and excellent education about MTB-MLE in the Philippine setting will
slowly progress. This can also be a good starting point in enriching Filipino’s own language and
at the same time, culture. 

References:
(2013, May 15). Retrieved from https://www.officialgazette.gov.ph/2013/05/15/republic-act-no-
10533/

Alonzo, R. (2015). Understanding the K to 12 Educational Reform.August 4, 1999 – DO 80, s.

1999 – Grade I Class Program for Experimental Schools in the Lingua Franca Education Project.
Retrieved from https://www.deped.gov.ph/1999/08/04/do-80-s-1999-grade-i-class-program-for-
experimental-schools-in-the-lingua-franca-education-project/

Burton, L. “Mother Tongue-Based Multilingual Education in the Philippines: Studying Top-

Down Policy Implementation from the Bottom Up”

CMO 59 s. 1996. (n.d.). Retrieved January 25, 2021, from https://ched.gov.ph/cmo-59-s-1996/

Cruz, I. (2007) “Sonia Roco on Language” Retrieved from

https://isaganicruz.wordpress.com/2007/03/23/sonia-roco-on-language/
DEPED (2012, August 17). DepEd ADVISORY No. 398, s. 2012. Retrieved January 26, 2021,
from https://www.deped.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/DA_s2012_398.pdf
DEPED, P. (2012). “Kindergarten Education Act of 2012” (Republic Act No. 10157). Retrieved
2021, from https://www.deped.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/KINDER-FAQ.pdf
“DepEd Pushes For The Use Of Mother Tongue To Develop Better Learners” Retrieved from
https://nicanorcibunaelementaryschool.files.wordpress.com/2012/05/mother-tongue-dm1.pdf

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

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

Espiritu, C. (n.d.). Language Policies in the Philippines. Retrieved January 25, 2021, from
https://aboutphilippines.org/files/Language-Policies-in-the-Philippines.pdf

Executive Order No. 335, s. 1988: GOVPH. (1988, August 25). Retrieved from
https://www.officialgazette.gov.ph/1988/08/25/executive-order-no-335-s-1988

“Gullas Bill To Revive English As Language In Classrooms”. Retrieved from

https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/497837/gullas-bill-to-revive-english-as-language-in-classrooms
H.B. No. 162: Gunigundo Multilingual Education Bill. Retrieved from from
https://mlephil.wordpress.com/2010/09/04/h-b-no-162-gunigundo-multilingual-education-bill/
Llego, M., & About The Author Mark Anthony Llego He is the brain of TeacherPH.
Growing up being surrounded by educators. (2018, April 20). Kindergarten Education Act.
Retrieved January 31, 2021, from https://www.teacherph.com/kindergarten-education-act/
Ongkiko, R. (2013) Bridging the Gap: Enhanced Basic Education through K-12 Retrieved from
https://www.worldservicesgroup.com/publications.asp?action=article&artid=5735

Tan, N. (2014). Policies on the use of the Filipino language. Retrieved January 25, 2021, from
https://www.rappler.com/newsbreak/iq/policies-filipino-language
Villalba,(2013). MOTHER TONGUE AS MEDIUM OF INSTRUCTION: PARENTS’ AND
TEACHERS’ ATTITUDES AND PUPILS’ LISTENING COMPREHENSION

Walter, S., & Dekker, D.  (2010) ”Mother Tongue Instruction In Lubuagan: A Case Study From
The Philippines” Retrieved from https://mlephil.wordpress.com/2011/12/02/mother-tongue-
instruction-in-lubuagan-a-case-study-from-the-philippines/