Why the Filipino subjects should be flexible & diverse

This concept note provides 10 reasons why the Filipino language requirement in the New
General Education Curriculum should be open to all Philippine languages

CHED issued Memorandum Order No. 04, Series of 2018, which requires HEIs to teach
Filipino and Panitikan subjects “in all higher education programs as part of the New General
Education Curriculum” effective Academic Year 2018-2019. This policy was issued in
compliance with a Supreme Court En Banc Resolution dated April 21, 2015.

Considering the aforementioned CHED Memo and Supreme Court Resolution, it is clear that
Filipino language subjects (6-9 units, i.e. 2-3 subjects) will be rolled out in the coming
academic year.

While the extra burden of 6-9 required units is not ideal, and goes against CHED’s efforts to
slim down the Gen Ed curriculum, CHED has the unique opportunity to make these units
more flexible. In particular, CHED can support a liberal interpretation of the Filipino
language requirements to include all Philippine languages. In other words, any
Filipino language (whether Tagalog, Ilokano, Pangasinan, Cebuano, Maranao, or IP language,
etc.), or combination thereof, should qualify towards the fulfillment of the 6-9 Filipino units.

Why is this a good idea?

1. It aligns with and supports the Philippine Constitution. Article XIV, Section 6
declares, “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.” In other words, the national language is not only Tagalog, but should
include other languages to better reflect the country’s diversity. Allowing other
Philippine languages to be taught as part of the 6-9 Filipino subjects shall facilitate the
enrichment of the national language, as envisioned by the Constitution. 1 Forbidding
them, on the other hand, shall stunt their ability to contribute to the evolution of the
1
Instructors will be able to teach a regional language in one semester, for example, then in another semester
could teach the national language, pointing out similarities and differences, and presenting examples of how they
influence each other.
 national language. Therefore, expanding the scope of the Filipino language subjects
shall in no way contravene the Constitution nor the Supreme Court. Filipino subjects
shall still be offered; it is simply that the content and style of teaching will vary.

2. It will help preserve native languages and cultural diversity. The Philippines
is a multilingual country—with more than 170 native languages (Ethnologue, 2018)—
informally (yet incorrectly) called dialects. Unfortunately, many of these languages are
endangered. Being excluded from most levels of education, media, and government
does not help. The Living Tongues Institute of Endangered Languages classifies the
Philippines as one of the Top 10 “language hotspots” of the world, which has a specially
rich but fragile linguistic diversity. Philippine languages are therefore a priority for
teaching, learning, and research. Allowing HEIs to teach them as part of the Filipino
language requirement will be an effective mechanism for their preservation and
propagation, saving Filipino heritage for posterity.2

3. It supports academic freedom. The Constitution states, “Academic freedom shall

be enjoyed in all institutions of higher learning” (Article XIV, Section 5), which is also
enshrined in the Higher Education Act of 1994 (R.A. 7722). HEIs should be given the
freedom to select which Filipino languages to teach for the Filipino subjects. This is
especially important for Teacher Education Institutions (TEIs), which need to prepare
future teachers to teach in the mother tongue as per DepEd’s Mother Tongue-Based
Multilingual Education (MTBMLE). Some HEIs have already developed subjects in
local languages, such as Mariano Marcos State University and Saint Louis College
(Ilokano), Leyte Normal University (Waray), Cebu Normal University (Cebuano),
Western Visayas State University (Hiligaynon), Holy Angel University (Kapampangan),
and others. These universities prove that teaching Philippine languages is feasible;
their experience and syllabi can can be shared with other universities as examples.

4. It more accurately reflects the purposes of general education. In most liberal

arts universities around the world, students are expected to take up a certain number of
language units as part of their general education, but they have choice over the
language they take. The goal is for students to experience what it is like to learn/study a

2
CHED actually received funding for the development of Gen Ed instructional materials in Filipino and regional
Philippine languages two years ago, but the regional languages have been seemingly overlooked as no materials
have been made yet.
 language, rather than be unilaterally dictated to learn a specific language. Language
education develops foundational skills that can be applied for lifelong learning.
Allowing HEIs to offer more than one Filipino language will enable students to choose
their desired language and still develop general knowledge, skills, and values.

5. It will allow Filipinos to learn their own languages, and each other’s
languages. For too long, Filipinos have been unnecessarily restricted in their
language options in higher education. Non-Tagalog people have had to learn Tagalog
(disguised as “Filipino”), but Tagalog people have not had the chance to learn other
Filipino languages. Having a flexible Filipino language requirement will open up
opportunities for Filipinos to learn each other’s languages, provide more
communication options, prepare them for inter-island travel and work, build mutual
respect and appreciation, and strive for “unity in diversity” (Constitution, Article XIV,
Section 14).

6. It will fulfill international obligations and expectations. The right to learn and
use one’s mother tongue, and the right to a pluralistic, equitable education system are
promoted in international instruments such as the UN Declaration on the Rights of
Persons Belonging to National or Ethnic, Religious, and Linguistic Minorities, and the
UNESCO Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity. By allowing Philippine
languages to be taught in fulfillment of the Filipino language subjects, the government
would be guaranteeing these rights and honoring these commitments.

7. It will provide more employment opportunities. If any Filipino language can be

used/taught in the Filipino subjects of the new General Education curriculum, then not
only instructors who are proficient in Tagalog will be able to teach said subjects, but
also those who are proficient in other Philippine languages as well. This will create
more dynamic, diverse, and inclusive Filipino language departments. Writers, poets,
linguists, researchers and teachers of different Filipino languages could be tapped to
share their expertise. As mother tongue-based multilingual education (MTBMLE) is
now institutionalized in the K-12 system, there is a growing pool of people—teachers
and future graduates—with proficiency in Philippine languages.

8. It will make the Filipino subjects more interesting for students. By the time
students have reached the first year of college, they have already taken 12 years of
 Filipino subjects. Filipino, as taught in lower levels, provides very little exposure to the
diversity of Philippine languages and contains much repetition. Opening up the
Filipino language requirement to various Philippine languages will go beyond what
students learned at the basic level. It will also encourage HEIs to come up with
innovative syllabi for the 2-3 Filipino subjects they are required to offer. For example,
one HEI might opt to teach a regional language (e.g. Waray) the first semester, using
Waray, and teach Tagalog the second semester. The third semester could delve into the
similarities and differences between the two languages, and their respective
contributions to the national language. A second HEI might opt to teach about
Philippine languages, using Filipino as a medium of instruction. And of course HEIs
could also choose to teach Filipino the conventional way, as they have done in the past.

9. It is appropriate, considering existing legal and political uncertainties.

CHED was compelled to reinstate the Filipino subjects because of a Temporary
Restraining Order (TRO). A TRO is a stopgap measure issued without a hearing,
awaiting further investigation. No final decision by the Supreme Court has been made.
Another uncertainty is the administration’s push toward a federal system of
government. Under a federal system, with a new Constitution, many functions will
devolve to State and local governments, including language and education policies. In
anticipation of the probable diversification of such policies, it is therefore prudent to
adopt a pluralistic and flexible implementation of the Filipino language subjects.

10. It safeguards the rights of indigenous peoples. The Indigenous Peoples’ Rights
Act of 1997 (R.A. 8371) gives indigenous peoples (IP) and indigenous cultural
communities (IPPs) the right to “education in their own language, in a manner
appropriate to their cultural methods of teaching and learning” (Chp. VI, Sec. 30).
The Act further states, “the State shall endeavor to have the dignity and diversity of
the cultures, traditions, histories and aspirations of the ICCs/IPs appropriately
reflected in all forms of education” (Chp. VI, Sec. 31). CHED Memo No. 4 s. 2018,
however, mandates all HEIs to teach Filipino language subjects. If only one language
is to be used in these subjects, and all students are mandated to take them, then this
policy could violate indigenous students’ rights. By contrast, if CHED will permit any
Filipino language to be used in the mandated subjects, including IP languages, then
CHED will ensure that General Education is more appropriate to IP communities and
will safeguard their right to education in their own language.
Considering the aforementioned reasons, it is appropriate, advantageous, just, and legally
sound for CHED to issue a memorandum that promotes an inclusive and flexible
implementation of the Filipino requirements. To wit: HEIs may include any Filipino
language(s) in their proposed syllabi of the Filipino subjects. Please refer to the document,
“How the Filipino subjects can be more flexible & diverse” for some examples how.