REYMART M.

MARTINEZ
BPED 1 – 1C

Lesson 1 - Making Sense of the Past: Historical Interpretation

LEARNING ACTIVITIES
Essay
1. What temporal layers and sequences between subjects' perspectives do expert
history teachers address in deliberately designed lessons from a multiperspectivity
approach on three different topics?

For too many ways to understand the past, another crucial principle to consider is
multiperspectivity. This can be described as a method of seeing historical events,
personalities, inventions, cultures, and communities from various angles. This suggests
that there are a plethora of forms in which we can see the universe, one of which can be
equally true and, at the same time, equally partial. The historian chooses which sources to
use. What interpretation to emphasize, depending on his end goal. Historians may place a
certain philosophy on their subjects, and may also include a single reason for an
occurrence without contemplating any potential causal theories. These are only a few
examples of how a historian may make mistakes in historical inference, explanation, and
explanation. With multiperspectivity as a historical approach, we must recognize that
historical meanings entail inconsistencies, uncertainties, and ambiguities, which are often
the source of opposition.

2. What considerations for or against introducing specific subjects' perspectives do

expert history teachers have?

Almost all of the teachers' lessons addressed multiple temporal layers and
multiperspectivity functions. However, teachers' emphasis on temporal layers and
function varied across lessons. There were four types of reasons for or against
incorporating new topic perspectives: functional, moral, pedagogical, and realistic.
Furthermore, teachers participated in normative balancing," which implies that not all
viewpoints were considered to be similarly true or politically beneficial, indicating where
multiperspectivity stops.
Lesson 2 - The First Catholic Mass
LEARNING ACTIVITIES
Essay
1. What is the significance of knowing where the first Mass in the Philippines was held
for us Filipinos?

The significance of this event for students and the young generation is
understanding of Filipino Society. The reason is that post-colonial Filipino society
continues to revolve around the faith. Also, it helps us to understand how our pre-
Hispanic ancestors lived before the arrival of Europeans and how they were integrated
into western society, a fact of ourselves today.

The first mass in the Philippines is actually an exciting chapter although, for
elementary and high school students, this event is marred in intrigue, manipulation,
deceit, and politics. It’s a topic not suitable for a young audience. All we need to know
for now is that the first mass was held during the arrival of Ferdinand Magellan and that
the first indio Christians (Indian, of the east indies) were the Rajah Humabon and his
family, king of Sugbu (now Cebu). In a sentence, the significance of the first mass in the
Philippines is because you need to understand yourselves as Filipinos and why the
Roman Catholic Church has so much influence in your daily lives.

2. What happened in the first Mass in the Philippines?

The first documented Catholic Mass in the Philippines was held on March 31,
1521, Easter Sunday. It was conducted by Father Pedro de Valderrama of Ferdinand
Magellan's expedition along the shores of what was referred to in the journals of Antonio
Pigafetta as "Mazaua". Today, this site is widely believed by many historians and the
government to be Limasawa off the tip of Southern Leyte, However, until at least the
19th century, the prevailing belief was that the first mass was held in Butuan. This belief
is maintained by some, who assert that the first mass was instead held at Masao, Butuan.
To end the conflict for the issue about the first mass, the National Historical
Commission of the Philippines panel adapted the recommendation and unanimously
agreed that the evidence and arguments presented by the pro-Butuan advocates are not
sufficient and convincing enough to warrant the repeal or reversal of the ruling on the
case by the National Historical Institute. It is further strengthen by the evidence that it
was only after 22 years, in 1543—when a Spanish expedition led by Ruy López de
Villalobos landed in Mindanao.
Lesson 3 - The Cavite Munity
LEARNING ACTIVITIES
Guide Questions
1. What caused the Cavite Mutiny?

The mutiny was sparked on January 20, 1872 when the laborers received their pay
and realized the taxes as well as the falla, the fine one paid to be exempt from forced
labor, had been deducted from their salaries.

Initially, both Montero and Izquierdo scored out that the abolition of privileges
enjoyed by the workers of Cavite arsenal such as non-payment of tributes and exemption
from force labor were the main reasons of the “revolution” as how they called it,
however, other causes were enumerated by them including the Spanish.

2. Did GOMBURZA lead Cavite Mutiny? Explain your answer

Yes. The Cavite Mutiny led to the persecution of prominent Filipinos; secular
priests Mariano Gómez, José Burgos, and Jacinto Zamora—who would then be
collectively named GomBurZa—were tagged as the masterminds of the uprising.

3. What happened in Cavite Mutiny?

Cavite Mutiny, (January 20, 1872), brief uprising of 200 Filipino troops and
workers at the Cavite arsenal, which became the excuse for Spanish repression of the
embryonic Philippine nationalist movement. The three subsequently became martyrs to
the cause of Philippine independence.

Lesson 4 - The Rizal Retraction

LEARNING ACTIVITY
Guide Questions
1. Who are the sources of the conflicting accounts or analyses on the Rizal retraction?
 The sources of the conflicting account of the Retraction of Rizal were Fr. Vicente
Balaguer, one of the Jesuits priests who visited Rizal during his last hours. Padre Pio Pi, a
Jesuit superior. Rafael Palma, is a lawyer, educator, and politician. Roman Ozaeta,
translated the writings of Palma and Austin Coates, the Assistant Colonial Secretary.

2. What are their accounts or analyses? How are they similar to and/or different from
one another?

Fr. Vicente Balaguer claimed that he managed to persuade Rizal to denounce

Masonry and return to Catholic fold. He’s the one who solemnized the marriage of
Josephine Bracken and Rizal, hours before his execution. In 1917, Padre Pio Pi issued an
affidavit recounting his involvement in the said retraction of Rizal. Unlike father
Balaguer, he was involved only because he kept the retraction letter. He did not witness it
at all but he’s the one who claimed the he kept the documents safe. Rafael Palma is the
author of Biografria de Rizal which is all about the life of our National Hero and his work
won in a literary contest in 1938 but the publication was postponed because of the World
War II Roman Ozaeta argued that retraction of Rizal was a fraud made by the Catholic
Church because they wanted to show everyone that Rizal bowed down and said sorry to
them before his death. It is hard to believe that it’s true because they can’t show the
original copies to everyone even Rizal’s family. Austin Coates argued that when Rizal’s
family and close peers saw the article about his retraction, they immediately said that it
was ecclesiastical fraud. The Archbishop was the one who wanted his retraction. He used
Balaguer to make everyone believe it and Balaguer on the other hand claimed that he
succeeded in persuading Rizal to reconcile with the Catholics. But Coates was arguing
that there was no written retraction and Rizal believed before God so he had nothing to
retract.

3. Which among the accounts or analyses do you consider the most convincing and
reliable? Why? Research more about these resources to come up with a sound
answer.

Research more about these sources to come up with a sound answer. Roman
Ozaeta’s account is most convincing and reliable. He argued that retraction of Rizal was
a fraud made by the Catholic Church because they wanted to show everyone that Rizal
bowed down and said sorry to them before his death. It is hard to believe that it’s true
because they can’t show the original copies to everyone even Rizal’s family. He also
gave 7 reasons why it isn’t true. He also gave 7 reasons why it isn’t true.

- 1st – the documents were kept as a secret and the original copy was not found
until now.
 - 2nd – when the family asked for the original copy of the said document, they
denied it.
- 3rd –his burial was kept as a secret and his cadaver was said to be kept by the
people of the church instead of the family.
- 4th – in spite of what he contributed and did for our country, no masses were
said for his soul or funeral.
- 5th – he was not really buried in the Catholic cemetery in Paco but in the
ground without any cross or stone to mark his grave.
- 6th- he was considered among the persons who died impenitent and did not
received any spiritual aids.
- 7th – lastly, there was no moral motive for the conversion. Why would he
reconcile himself to the rites of the religion which he had fought?

Lesson 5 - The First Cry of Revolution

LEARNING ACTIVITY
Guide Questions
1. Who are the three primary sources of the story? How did they participate in the
revolution?

The first primary source in the First Cry was Dr. Pio Valenzuela. He is a Filipino
physician and revolutionary leader. At the age of 23, he joined the society of Katipunan, a
movement which sought the independence of the Philippines from Spanish colonial rule
and started the Philippine Revolution. Together with Andrés Bonifacio and Emilio
Jacinto, they formed the secret chamber of the society called Camara Reina. The second
primary source was Santiago Alvarez. He is a revolutionary general and founder and
honorary president of the first directorate of the Nacionalista Party, was born in Imus,
Cavite. He was known as Kidlat ng Apoy (Lightning of Fire) because of his inflamed
bravery and dedication as commander in the battle of Dalhican, Cavite. He was popularly
acclaimed the "Hero of the Battle of Dalahican". Lastly, Guillermo Masangkay. One of
the first members of the Katipunan, played a key role in the Filipino-American War as a
revolutionary general. He claimed cédulas were torn more than once – on the 24th as well
as the 26th.

2. According to the accounts, where and when did the first cry of revolution happen?
 According to Dr. Pio Valenzuela, the First Cry of Philippines Revolution of 1896
happened on August 23,1896 at Pugad Lawin, now part of Project 8 in Quezon City.
While Santiago Alvarez stated that the revolution happened on August 24,1896 in Bahay
Toro. In an interview with Sunday Tribune, Guillermo Masangkay said that it happened
on August 26 in Balintawak. However, he changed in another interview published in the
newspaper and he said it was began on August 23 that is similar to Valenzuela
assertation. But Masangkay later changed again the date when his granddaughter cited
sources that the original date was August 26.

3. What is the significance of the tearing of the cedulas? What did the cedulas signify?

Cedula is any of various official documents or certificates in Spain, Latin

America, or the Philippines such as: a permit or order issued by the government and
personal registration tax certificate in the Philippines. Andres Bonifacio and a number of
Katipuneros tore their cedulas, signifying their protest against Spanish colonial rule. It
signaled the start of the Philippine revolution against Spain.

4. What are the similarities and differences among the three accounts?

The tearing up of cedulas held on August 23

The places where the cedulas torn were different.

Katipunan meetings took place from Sunday to Tuesday or 23 to 25 August at

Balintawak.
Averred that the Katipunan began meeting on 22 August while the Cry took place on 23
August at Apolonio Samson’s house in Balintawak.

The date where the First Cry happened were different from the other accounts.
The first Cry of the revolution did not happen in Balintawak where the monument is, but
in a place called Pugad Lawin. Referred to the place of the Cry as Tandang Sora’s and
not as Juan Ramos’ house.

5. How does the National Historical Commission Philippines verify or authenticate the
historical accounts?

The National Historical Commission of the Philippines verify or authenticate the

history accounts via deeper evaluation or accurate research, as well as the information
must be preserved indicated the historical accounts.

Lesson 6- The Tejeros Assembly

LEARNING ACTIVITY
Guide Questions
1. How did the two rival factions of Katipunan - Magdalo and Magdiwang - come
about?

Katipunan factions, not just the Magdalo and the Magdiwang factions, came
about because each town where the Katipunan was present had a chapter. The Magdalo
(inspired by the name of St. Magdalene, the patron saint of Kawit) was the Katipunan
organization of that town while the Magdiwang comes from the town of Noveleta.

Now for the rivalry, this situation happened after the initial victories of the
Katipunan against the Spanish forces. After the victory at Imus on September 3, 1896,
Emlio Aguinaldo who belonged to the Magdalo faction emerged as the most popular
leader. His men as well as the Katipuneros of the town of Imus defeated a superior force
of Spaniards led by General Ernesto Aguirre. The general”s sword was captured by
Aguinaldo’s men and it became his personal sword after that. The Magdiwangs on the
other hand, were also a strong force. Its leader, Mariano Alvarez was the uncle of
Katipunan supremo Andres Bonifacio. The Magdiwangs claimed that the Magdalos
borrowed guns from them but never returned them. The other faction also made the same
claim. To solve the rivalry which was causing divisions and distrust among the rebels.
When the Spaniards renewed their offensives, territories formerly won by the
Katipuneros were retaken.

To heal the rifts, Andres Bonifacio was invited to come to Cavite to unite the two
factions. But he made the fatal mistake of allying himself with the Magdiwangs when he
accepted the title of Haring Bayan ng Katagalugan in the said faction. He should have
stayed neutral in the dispute between the two groups. And being not from Cavite and not
having won any victory over the Spaniards, he was viewed with suspicion and treated
with disrespect down by the people of the province. Even as he claimed to be the
Katipunan Supreme leader and founder of the movement (he was not alone actually,
There was Ladislao Diwa and Teodoro Plata among the original founders of the
Katipunan), Bonifacio could not command the loyalty and obedience of the rebels in
Cavite because not all of them were Katipuneros (many were not sworn in as
Katipuneros). The only way to unite the rebels was to abolish the Katipunan (which was
supposed to be a secret organization but was no longer a secret when the revolution broke
out) and to form a new revolutionary government that would include non-Katipuneros.

2. Who were the sources of the historical accounts? What were their roles in the
Katipunan?

 Artemio Ricarte y Garcia (October 20, 1866 – July 31, 1945) was a Filipino
general the Philippine Revolution and the PhilippineAmerican War. He is regarded
as the Father of the Philippine Army and the first Chief of Staff of the Armed
 Forces of the Philippines though the present Philippine Army grew out of the
forces that fought in opposition to, and defeated the Philippine Revolutionary
Army led by General Ricarte. Ricarte is also a notable for never having taken an
oath of allegiance to the United States Government, which occupied the
Philippines from 1898 to 1946.
 Santiago Virata Alvares (July 25, 1872 – October 30, 1930) was a Revolutionary
General and a founder and honorary president of the first directorate of the
Nacionalista Party. Also known as Kidlat ng Apoy because of his inflamed bravery
and dedication as a commander of Cavite’s famous battles, he was celebrated in
present day Cavite City as the Hero of the Battle of Dalahican.
 Andres Bonifacio (November 30, 1863 – May 10, 1897) was Filipino
Revolutionary Leader and the president of the Tagalog Republic. He is often called
as the Father of the Philippine Revolution. He was one of the founders and later
Supremo or Supreme Leader of the Kataastaasan, Kagalanggalangang Katipunan
ng mga Anak ng Bayan or more commonly known as KKK, a movement which
sought the independence of the Philippines from the Spanish colonialism rule and
started the Philippine Revolution. He is considered a de facto national hero of the
Philippines.

3. Why did Andres Bonifacio declare the election results as null and void?

Bonifacio, accepted the decision but not before insisting on a recount of the votes.
Supporters’ such as Severino de las Alas made aborative efforts to help make Bonifacio
the Vice President. However, Daniel Tirona objected that the post should not be occupied
by a person without a lawyer’s diploma. He suggested a lawyer like Jose Del Rosario is
qualified and suitable for the position. Bonifacio was insulted, demanded that Tirona
retract the remark. When tirona made to leave instead, Bonifacio drew a pistol and was
about to fire at Tirona, but stopped when Ricarte tried to disarm him. Bonifacio then
voided the convention as Supremo of the Katipunan.

4. What are the similarities and differences among the three accounts?

The all served the Katipununan. Bravely fought for liberty and freedom
of the Filipino people against Spaniards. They are all under the Magdiwang
Party. Unlike Ricarte and Alvarez, Bonifacio couldn't finish his education. He
was a self-educated and studied foreign literature to understand the nature of
revolution.
 6. How can the three accounts contribute to your understanding of the first Philippine
Republic?

It enlightened me about the Tejeros Convention, not only that, I also learned how
the lection happened and who were the ones elected at that time. I also learned that
Tejeros Convention was the meeting help between the Magdiwang and Magdalo factions
of the Katipunan at San Francisco de Malabon, Cavite on March 25 1897. These are the
first presidential and vice-presidential elections in Philippine history, although only the
Katipuneros were able to take part, and not the general people.

SUMMATIVE TEST
Research on the proliferation of fake news nowadays. In particular, read on the following
articles accessed from these websites:
1. "What is fake news? How to spot it and what you can do to stop it" by Elle Hunt
(2016, The Guardian) https://www.the guardian.com/media/2016/dec/18/what-is-
fake-news-pizzagate

“Fake news has rapidly become a catch-all term to discredit all kinds of
stories. We need to be smarter at recognizing and combating outright fabrication”
by Elle Hunt.

Provide you with false, misleading, or deceptive information used to make a

decision or take action. It can be dangerous to do something without having all the facts,
but it can be just as detrimental to do so based on inaccurate information. Whether it’s
political, medical, academic, or personal, you need to be able to recognize when the
information you are taking in can be trusted to help you make an intelligent, fact-based
choice.

To stop this spread, share responsibly. Much as it might depress you to think in
such terms, you are an influencer within your own social network: put in the legwork
above, and only post or share stories you know to be true, from sources you know to be
responsible. It's the "take only photographs, leave only footprints" for the post-truth era.
You can help shape the media you want, too. Withhold "hate-clicking" on stories you
know are designed to make you angry. Pay for journalism you value. And if you have
connections on Facebook who think Onion stories are real, break it to them gently.
Friends don't let friends share fake news.
2. "Fake news" by Ana Marie Pamintuan (2017, The Philippine Star)
http://www.philstar.com/opinion/2017/06/26/171316/fake-news

“The good (and real) news is that the platforms most widely used for
spreading fake news are moving together with media organizations and the academe
to address the problem. And social media giant Facebook, criticized for its role in
the spread of hoax news (and in countries such as the Philippines, trolls), is at the
heart of the battle.” By Ana Marie Pamintuan.

Some fake news is real stories that are reported incorrectly because the publisher
was not very thorough or wanted to exaggerate a story. This type can have many negative
impacts: if people keep seeing stories that are factually incorrect, their trust in social
media and news stations may decrease which will become a problem if people stop
believing reports that are true.

However, some people write completely imaginary stories deliberately, to prank

people into believing something that's not true, or to get people to view their other posts
and websites. This news can cause people to make misinformed decisions. In the 2016
US presidential election, hundreds of fake news stories were spread around about both
candidates and lots of people think this caused citizens to base their votes on false stories!

If people only read and send stories that appeal to their own views, they are
basing their views on 'confirmation bias.' They can get trapped in one viewpoint, which is
repeated over and over again on social media, which is called an 'echo chamber'. If this
view is based on fake news, people can get trapped in a false version of reality and
struggle to understand what is really going on around them.

So to reduce the effects of false information, people should try to reduce its
visibility. Everyone should try to avoid spreading false messages. That means that social
media companies should consider removing false information completely, rather than just
attaching a warning label. And it means that the best thing individual social media users
can do is not to engage with false information at all.