How the Filipino subjects can be more flexible & diverse

This document illustrates how the Filipino language requirement of the New General
Education Curriculum can be made more dynamic, inclusive, and respectful of Philippine
languages and cultures.

Through a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO), the Supreme Court proscribed CHED from
excluding Filipino core courses from the new General Education Curriculum. 1 However, it
made no mention of how these courses should be implemented. Of course, the specifics of
course content, pedagogy, and staffing are the purview of CHED and HEIs.

CHED has issued Memorandum Order No. 04, Series of 2018, which requires HEIs to offer 9
units of Filipino for fields of study related to Humanities, Social Sciences, and
Communication; and 6 units of Filipino for other fields.

CHED can make the implementation of these Filipino units more flexible, innovative, and
inclusive by allowing any Philippine language (e.g. Tagalog, Hiligaynon, Kapampangan,
Manobo, etc.) to be taught and/or used in the context of these units, at the discretion of the
HEI. This move is both constitutionally sound and has numerous advantages (see document,
“Why the Filipino language subjects can be more flexible and diverse”).

1
CHED had legitimate reasons for designing the new Gen Ed curriculum (CMO 20, s. 2013) the way they did,
without the language requirements, which they thoroughly outlined in the report they submitted to the Supreme
Court (SC). Some of the reasons included: 1) the English and Filipino language subjects that used to be taught in
the first year of college will be covered in Senior High School (SHS); 2) Specialized language subjects do not
really match the criteria of general education; 3) Instructors of English and Filipino can transfer to SHS, and also
avail of CHED’s K-12 transition services for displaced faculty, like scholarships, grants, job assistance, etc.
Therefore, it cannot be said that immediate and irreparable injury, loss, or damage would result from the
implementation of the new Gen Ed, as claimed by the TRO applicants; 4) The Constitution’s statement that “the
Government shall take steps to initiate and sustain the use of Filipino” does not explicitly demand the inclusion
of Filipino as a requirement in the Gen Ed curriculum. The Government can initiate and sustain the use of
Filipino in the education system in different ways. Indeed, the inclusion of Filipino in all levels of basic
education, and allowing HEIs to use Filipino as a medium of instruction (and even providing them with syllabi
translated into Filipino), already demonstrates initiation and sustenance; 5) Contrary to the claim of the SC
petitioners, CHED did conduct consultations about the new Gen Ed curriculum; 6) With the removal of the
English and Filipino language requirements, the Gen Ed curriculum was leaner, thus reducing financial and time
burden on students. It would also mean that students could take more electives to suit their interests and needs.
Meanwhile, HEIs would have more room to offer additional subjects beyond the Gen Ed curriculum; 7) The
removal of Filipino/English subjects from the Gen Ed curriculum does not stop an HEI from mandating such
subjects within their own institution; and so forth.
But how can such flexibility be achieved?

The most recent CHED Memorandum about the teaching of Filipino units as part of the new
General Education curriculum (CMO No. 4 series 2018) does not delve into the nuances of
multilingualism and the diversity of Philippine languages. Nor does it mention that Philippine
languages are essential ingredients for development of Filipino, as declared in the
Constitution. Without explicit encouragement to broaden the scope of the Filipino subjects,
most HEIs will end up teaching them the same as before, centered on Tagalog, without
considering the inclusion of other Philippine languages.

Therefore, it is hoped that CHED will issue a follow-up memorandum to convey

flexibility in how HEIs implement the mandated Filipino subjects, and provide
examples of possible adaptations. The memo could encourage HEIs to develop
innovative syllabi that reflect the diversity of how Filipinos use languages.

The following is sample text of a memo that could reflect these points:

Subject: Further Guidance on the Implementation of CHED Memorandum No. 04, Series Of 2018

In accordance with the pertinent provisions of Republic Act RA (RA) No. 7722, otherwise known as the
Higher Education Act of 1994, and in compliance with a Supreme Court En Banc Resolution dated April 21,
2015, the Commission on Higher Education issued Memorandum Order No. 04, Series of 2018, promulgating a
policy on the offering of Filipino and Panitikan subjects in all higher education programs as part of the New
General Education Curriculum. The Commission hereby provides further guidance on the implementation of
CMO No. 04 s. 2018:

Background

The 1987 Constitution provides that Filipino is an evolving language that “shall be further developed and
enriched on the basis of existing Philippine and other languages.” (Article XIV, Section 6). Estimates of the
number of existing Philippine languages ranges from 149 (Komisyon ng Wikang Filipino, 2015) to 175
(Ethnologue, 2018). The Constitution also mandates that “the State shall foster the preservation, enrichment,
and dynamic evolution of a Filipino national culture based on the principle of unity in diversity in a climate of free
artistic and intellectual expression.” (Article XIV, Section 14).

Meanwhile, 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” (Chp. VI, Sec. 30) and that
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).
 Implications for the implementation of CMO No. 04 s. 2018:

As stated in CMO No. 04 s. 2018, Filipino and Panitikan subjects shall be offered in all higher education
programs as part of the New General Education Curriculum in Academic Year 2018-2019.

To facilitate the enrichment of Filipino by Philippine languages, to foster the preservation and evolution
of a dynamic, diverse Filipino culture, and to secure the rights of indigenous peoples, HEIs are permitted to
include the teaching, studying, or use of Philippine languages in the aforementioned Filipino and Panitikan
courses.

HEIs are encouraged to create syllabi that are appropriate to the language use, needs, and priorities of
the students and communities they serve, and that also respect the diversity of Philippine languages, literatures
and cultures.

In the exercise of their academic freedom, HEIs shall have flexibility in developing the content, structure,
term length, and pedagogy of the required Filipino subjects, and what Filipino languages shall be integrated
therein as they contribute to the national language and Philippine society as a whole.

The Commission encourages HEIs to likewise diversify their Filipino Departments to include instructors
and researchers of various Philippine languages, at the discretion of the HEI.

The following are examples of how HEIs might innovate their Filipino course offerings as part of the New
General Education Curriculum, provided they meet the required number of units (6-9):

Sample offerings for Filipino subjects (6 units):

Example A.
 3 units—local, indigenous, or regional Filipino language (e.g. Cebuano, Tagalog, Maranao, etc.)
 3 units—national language

Example B.
 3 units—Filipino orthography (students could learn about the spelling systems of example
Philippine languages, local and national)
 3 units—Filipino grammar (students could learn about the grammar Philippine languages, local
and national)

Example C.
 3 units—Languages of the Philippines (number, classification, geographic area, evolution,
status, etc.)
 3 units—Language documentation, mapping, and translation

Example D.
 3 units—Philippine languages and society (functions of languages, domains of use, relationship
to culture, identity, and heritage, etc.)
 3 units—Language policy and planning (critical analysis of different perspectives and models of
language planning; monolingual vs. multilingual; pure vs. amalgamated; standardization vs.
localization; assimilation vs. pluralism; comparison of Filipino language policies to other
countries)

Sample offerings for Filipino subjects (9 units):

 Example A.
 3 units—local or indigenous Filipino language (e.g. Kankanaey, Subanon, or other)
 3 units—regional Filipino language (e.g. Tagalog, Ilokano, Hiligaynon, or other)
 3 units—national language

Example B.
 3 units—regional Filipino language (e.g. Waray)
 3 units—national language
 3 units—translation (students learn the principles of translation, and practicing translating the
languages they know)

Example C.
 3 units—Tagalog (or other Philippine language) in the time of Rizal
 3 units—modern Tagalog varieties (students will explore how Tagalog dialects vary from place
to place)
 3 units—Tagalog and other languages’ contribution to the national language

Example D.
 3 units—Filipino pidgins and creoles (e.g. localized versions of Filipino, such as Davao Bisaya-
Tagalog, Bisakol, Chavalog, etc.)
 3 units—standardized Filipino
 3 units—Filipino language development (local and national level; critique of different approaches
e.g. natural vs. constructed; Tagalog-based or amalgamation; foreign influences; developing
local languages alongside national language; changes in attitudes over time; etc.)

Example E.
 3 units—Philippine language practices (e.g. code-switching, borrowing, diglossia, neologisms,
functions, etc.)
 3 units—Philippine languages and society (e.g. debates and political movements for and against
the national language, revitalization of local languages, roles of languages in education,
changing policies and perspectives, relationship to identity and culture, etc.)
 3 units—Future of Philippine languages (e.g. how Philippine languages are used in government,
media, schools, etc., and the process of intellectualization)

The above examples are merely illustrative of how Filipino offerings in the new Gen Ed curriculum can
be flexible, inclusive, and reflect the diversity of Philippine languages and cultures. Panitikan subjects can be
likewise diverse, including literature of indigenous and regional languages. Accordingly, HEIs are encouraged to
innovate their Filipino and Panitikan curricula as appropriate. Colleges and universities that already have
subjects featuring or incorporating Philippine languages are invited to share their syllabi for capacity-building
purposes.

In compliance with CMO No. 08 series 2018, HEIs are allowed to submit the final new or revised
curricula in the first trimester of AY 2018-1019.