Reynaldo V. Tanglao, Jr Dr. Ma. Jhona B.

Acuña
ELE 706

A Reaction on English Language Teaching, Curriculum Innovations and Implementation

Strategies; Philippine Experience

Dinah F. Mindo’s article entitled “English Language Teaching, Curriculum Innovations

and Implementation Strategies: Philippine Experience” gave a comprehensive background on
how English Language Teaching had evolved in the Philippines. It also specified the different
teaching strategies that were used to improve the learners’ ability in utilizing the English
language based on purposes and societal needs. Several revisions on the curricula were made
during the 106 years of ELT as per the time of writing the piece.

These periods or movements are as follows: The Speak, Read and Write Movement
(1901-1925); The Indigenization of English Movement (1925-1935); The Vernacular and Wikang
Pambansa (1935-1950); English as a Second Language Movement (1950-1974); The Bilingual
Education Movement (1974-1993); and Communicative Language Teaching Movement (1993-
Present). First, The Speak, Read and Write Movement was focused on unifying the archipelago
of the Philippines since every region had its own native language. Secondly, The Indigenization
of English Movement gave importance on integrating Filipino customs and ideals. Thirdly, The
Vernacular and Wikang Pambasa were allowed to be used as a support in teaching the English
Language especially in the primary levels. Then, English as a Second Language Movement in
which the vernacular language was the medium of instruction in the first two grades. Next, The
Bilingual Education Movement introduced the macro skills in English (listening, speaking,
reading, writing, and thinking in English). And lastly, The Communicative Language Teaching
was started and was focused on the aspects of communication which could be used by the
learners for learning science and mathematics and for further learning in tertiary level and/or a
vocation.

The Philippine’s English Language curriculum has undergone a lot of changes in the past
years. We, Filipinos, have changed the curriculum depending on the needs of the society. We
have been familiar with it and as a result, we have become complacent. If we evaluate the 6
periods/movements, the first 2 are about gaining knowledge/being proficient in English.
Though still critical in the succeeding ones, English was sidetracked since the local language was
allowed to be used in teaching the English language. Most teachers probably would have used
their local language in disseminating knowledge because it was “easier”. As a result, learners
were not fully immersed in an English-speaking environment. And as the population aged,
those who were not fully immersed in the language became the adults and couldn’t teach
English to their children properly. For me, this might be the main reason why there is a
continued decline in the English proficiency of Filipinos. To remedy this, applying the 1st and/or
2nd period would be ideal. If all subjects were taught in English, then the students would be
forced to learn the English language.