The Implications of the Exclusion of Filipino, Philippine Literature, and Philippine Constitution

Among the Core Courses in the General Education Curriculum in College

The Implications of the Exclusion of Filipino, Philippine Literature, and

Philippine Constitution Among the Core Courses in the
General Education Curriculum in College

Ednave, Ronald E.
College of Teacher Education, President Ramon Magsaysay State University, Sta. Cruz, Zambales, Philippines 2213
(ednaveronald06@gmail.com)

___________________________________________________________________________

Abstract

General Education Curriculum is a rapport that lays the foundation of the holistic
intellect of a person. It includes various courses that are ground works for all the
undergraduate students. Recently, the Supreme Court (SC) has ruled with finality on the
exclusion of Filipino, Philippine Literature, and Philippine Constitution among the core
courses in the General Education Curriculum (GEC) in college, as implied in the CHED
Memorandum Order No. 20, series of 2013. Thus, a study on the implications of this order
was made. A questionnaire was carried out as a gathering tool to gather information coming
from the respondents. There were six (6) respondents in the study and they were the faculty
members of President Ramon Magsaysay State University (Sta. Cruz Campus). The
participants were selected accordingly and purposefully for this research.
An owl amounted to six (6) themes was used as a simulacrum of the entire study.
Findings revealed that three (3) of the six (6) respondents were not in favor of the CHED
Memorandum Order No. 20, series of 2013. The responses (cool analysis) were exactly
transcribed; for this reason, the spelling and all the grammatical errors written are remained
to be as it was. The corresponding themes (warm analysis) are shown in the Figure 1: An Owl
as a Representation of the Implications of the CMO No. 20, series of 2013. Cultural
degradation is the commonality on the answers of the first set of respondents. It is the loss of
a particular culture through assimilation, lack of interest, or vanishing of a language or patois.
Language and ethnic culture are very closely linked. It could also be forced upon a group,
such as certain practices being outlawed. The other set emphasizes thorough instruction, in
which the respondents were pro on the issue. So long as the instruction is complete with
regard to every detail, it prompts a fine line between the Enhanced Basic Education
Curriculum (K to 12) and the tertiary education.
Unemployment and flexibility are two opposing themes that mirror the implications
on part of the teachers. More than thousands of teachers will lose their jobs; anyhow, their
flexibility is being challenged to pursue study that is linked on today’s demand. On the other
hand, students that are lacking depth of intellect are the main concern of the three (3) cons.
The three (3) pros however evinced that students learning new course content like foreign
language and more of their specializations are parameters to their development as 21st century
learners.

Keywords: exclusion; core courses; general education curriculum; college; cultural

degradation; thorough instruction; unemployment; flexibility; lacking depth of intellect;
learning new course content

1|Page
Ednave, R. E., December 2019

Background of the Study

General Education is the portion of the curriculum common to all undergraduate

students regardless of their major. It exposes them to various domains of knowledge and
ways of comprehending social and natural realities, developing in the process, intellectual
competencies such as critical, analytical and creative thinking, and multiple forms of
expression; and civic capacities demanded of membership in the community, country, and the
world.

For this reason, general education is distinct from specialized learning. The former
introduces students to different ways of knowing; the latter focuses on a particular discipline.
General education is oriented toward broad or wide-ranging understandings, while
specialized learning is directed at more theoretical and technical knowledge. As such, general
education undergirds the entire undergraduate education curriculum and cannot be expected,
by itself, to deliver all the objectives of higher education. The prerequisite to the success of
general education is the consonance of its goals with those of higher education. (Article I:
Curriculum Overview, CHED Memorandum Order No. 20, series of 2013)

The fundamental purpose of higher education is not only to develop knowledgeable

and competent graduates in a particular field, but also well-rounded individuals who
appreciate knowledge in a general sense, are open-minded because of it, secure in their
identities as individuals and as Filipinos, and cognizant of their role in the life of the nation
and the larger community. (General and Higher Education, Article I: Curriculum Overview)

General education thus lays the groundwork for the development of a professionally
competent, humane and moral person. It also prepares the Filipino for the demands of 21st
century life and the requisite abilities to anticipate and adapt to swiftly changing situations, to
think innovatively, and create solutions to problems. General education enables the Filipino
to find and locate her/himself in the community and the world, take pride in and hopefully
assert her/his identity and sense of community and nationhood amid the forces of
globalization. As life becomes more complex, the necessity of appreciating the gifts of nature
and addressing social problems in the general education program increasingly become more
pressing.

In general education the holistic development of the person takes place in overlapping
realms:

• Individual, where the student is enabled to develop her/his identity as a person,

conscious of her/his talents, rights, and responsibilities toward the self and others;
• Filipino society and nation, where the individual is aware and proud of her/his
collective identity, and able to contribute meaningfully to the development of Filipino
society at local and national levels; and
• Global community, where the Filipino student recognizes and respects the
fundamental humanity of all, respects and appreciates diversity, and cares about the
problems that affect the world.

In sum, knowing the self, Filipino society, the world, and the environment and how
these intersect are the goals of general education. (Section 1. Goals and Context of
General Education, Article I: Curriculum Overview)

2|Page
 The Implications of the Exclusion of Filipino, Philippine Literature, and Philippine Constitution
Among the Core Courses in the General Education Curriculum in College

Introduction

As proposed in the Section 3: Revised Core Courses, Article I of CMO 20, series of
2013, the General Education Curriculum (GEC) will be reduced to a minimum of 36 units,
distributed as follows: 24 units of core courses; 9 units of elective courses; and 3 units on the
life and works of Rizal (as mandated by law). The general education courses maybe taught in
English or Filipino.

The eight core courses are: 1) Understanding the Self/ Pag-unawa sa Sarili; 2)
Readings in Philippine History/ Mga Babasahin hinggil sa Kasaysayan ng Pilipinas; 3) The
Contemporary World/ Ang Kasalukuyang Daigdig; 4) Mathematics in the Modern World/
Matematika sa Makabagong Daigdig; 5) Purposive Communication/ Malayuning
Komunikasyon; 6) Art Appreciation/Pagpapahalaga sa Sining; 7) Science, Technology and
Society/ Agham, Teknolohiya, at Lipunan; and 8) Ethics/ Etika.

The core courses are inter-disciplinary and are stated broadly enough to accommodate
a range of perspectives and approaches. Starting with the self, the courses expand to cover the
nation and the world and various ways of comprehending social and natural realities (artistic,
scientific, mathematical). Two other important dimensions are given attention:
communicating in different modalities and for varied purposes, and basic ethical
considerations that enable communities and societies to live peaceably in the face of
competing claims, opposing viewpoints, and diverse faiths and cultures.

It is implied in this section that courses like Filipino, Philippine Literature, and
Philippine Constitution are being excluded among the core courses in the GEC in college.
Various scholars, and Filipino teachers in particular, critique this move of the Commission on
Higher Education (CHED). They have been highlighting the relevance of these three courses
to the holistic development of a Filipino.

Languages play an important role in various aspects of our daily lives. Their role is
not only limited to communication, rather it extends into the vast branches of knowledge and
human sciences. Languages are capable of developing human knowledge and extending it for
the benefit of human kind. The general importance of languages justifies the need for a
scientific and objective study of the relationship between languages and education. (Zedan,
A.M., et al., 2013)

On the other hand, literature involves written works, especially those considered of
superior or lasting artistic merit. When we study literature, our horizons are broadened,
because we can learn about and come to understand people who are different from us.
Conversely, we might discover characters or poems that we really identify with—it can be
really exciting and validating to discover that your exact thoughts and feelings have also been
experienced by someone else. Because of these effects, literature encourages us to be
sensitive to the whole spectrum of human experience and to consider this when making
decisions in our day-to-day lives. Academically, studying literature also helps us to refine our
own writing skills and expand our vocabularies.

As the supreme law of the land, the Constitution is by no means self-explanatory. Yet
it is so important a document with which every citizen should be familiar as it directly and
constantly touches every aspect of his everyday life; indeed, to be respected, obeyed and
defended if our nation must grow and survive. This is the reason for the requirement that “all
educational institutions shall include the study of the Constitution as part of the curricula.”
(Art. XIV, Sec. 3[1])

3|Page
Ednave, R. E., December 2019

Statement of the Problem

The exclusion of Filipino, Philippine Literature, and Philippine Constitution among

the core courses in the General Education Curriculum (GEC) in college has been realized
through the CHED Memorandum Order No. 20, series of 2013.

CHED Memorandum Order (CMO) No. 20, series of 2013 otherwise known as the
“General Education Curriculum: Holistic Understandings, Intellectual and Civic
Competencies” is the policy cover for the revised General Education Curriculum (GEC),
which offers greater flexibility than the current curriculum. The passage of the K to 12 Law
enables such flexibility by freeing the GEC from Science, Mathematics, English, Filipino,
Literature, Humanities and Social Studies subjects that are more appropriately taught in
Senior High School. In so doing, the Law paves the way for the exposure of undergraduate
students to various dimensions of knowledge and ways of comprehending social and natural
realities “that promise to develop in the process, intellectual competencies— critical,
analytical and creative thinking and multiple forms of expression—and civic capacities
demanded of members of community, country and the world”.

The interdisciplinary approach underlying the revised GEC hews closely to the higher
education mission of “producing thoughtful graduates imbued with values reflective of a
humanist orientation (e.g., fundamental respect for others as human beings with intrinsic
rights, cultural rootedness, a vocation to serve); analytical and problem solving skills; the
ability to think through the ethical and social implications of a given course of action; and the
competency to learn continuously throughout life—that will enable them to live meaningfully
in a complex, rapidly changing and globalized world while engaging their community and the
nation’s development issues and concerns”.

Although the philosophy of liberal education underpins the GEC, the CMO
nevertheless aims to produce students “secure in their identity as individuals and Filipinos”,
“aware and proud of... [their] collective identity and able to contribute meaningfully to the
development of Filipino society at local and national levels.” And even while General
Education (GE) courses such as the Contemporary World will focus on global conditions,
they are expected to do so primarily from a Filipino perspective.

The crafting of the revised GEC started in 2012 and took almost a year of public
consultations and public hearings before the CHED Commission En Banc (CEB) finally
approved it in March 2013.

A year later, however, college teachers of Filipino courses protested the exclusion of
Filipino, raising larger philosophical questions of language and its role in the higher
education curriculum vis-à-vis the goals of the revised GEC. The protest coincided with
public discussion of real concerns with the potentially adverse impact of K to 12 on the
employment of teaching and non-teaching personnel.

In response to the petitions and position papers of teachers of Filipino, the CEB
referred the matter to the Technical Panel on General Education (TPGE) for careful review
and recommendation.

The TPGE conducted a series of zonal consultations in NCR, Luzon, Visayas and
Mindanao. Participants in the public hearings were asked for their views on proposals
received by the CHED that were clustered under two general headings:

4|Page
 The Implications of the Exclusion of Filipino, Philippine Literature, and Philippine Constitution
Among the Core Courses in the General Education Curriculum in College

On the medium of instruction

1. Teach at least nine (9) GE units in Filipino.

2. In addition to the Rizal course, teach at least 12 units of GE core courses in Filipino
(therefore, 15 units).
3. Leave the decision to teach in English/Filipino/any other Philippine language entirely
to the HEI.
4. Leave the decision to teach in English/Filipino/any other Philippine language entirely
to the individual teacher.

On the addition of Filipino subject(s) to the core courses

1. Add three (3) units of a Filipino subject on language, culture, and Filipino identity as
a GE core course.
2. Add nine (9) units of Filipino subjects as GE core courses.
3. Do not add Filipino subjects to the GE core courses.

In addition to the public hearings, the TPGE met with leaders of various Filipino teacher
organizations on 11 July 2014. Representatives from Higher Education Institutions (HEIs),
teacher organizations, and other concerned individuals and groups were asked to submit their
position papers on or before 30 July 2014.

The TPGE carefully considered and discussed at length all the positions taken by various
individuals and groups, presented their recommendation to the CEB in October 2014 and
submitted their report on 17 November 2014.

THE CHED POSITION

After long deliberations, the Commission En Banc asserts the following position on
the issue:

At its most basic, CHED believes in the fundamental role played by language in
education, as manifested in the reforms it has staunchly supported through K to 12, but also
of the role of education in the development of language—i.e., the “intellectualization” of a
language, in this case Filipino, through its use in academic discourse. To be properly
cultivated, Filipino cannot merely be taught as a subject, but must be used in oral and written
forms, across academic domains. For this reason, the Commission urges the GE faculty as
well as those teaching major courses—since the GEC constitutes only 15% of the units taken
by the typical college student—to contribute to the intellectualization of our national
language by using it.

But while the use of Filipino across academic domains is desirable, the Commission
nevertheless recognizes that the process necessitates a broader effort encompassing different
domains and can only be taken gradually, considering the array of socio-cultural, economic
and financial constraints related to a shift to the language as medium of instruction. These
include: the availability of experts with strong mastery in both the Filipino language and
specific domains, the wide use of English in academe and industry, and the possible impact
of such move on our students’ access to global knowledge and conversations.

To balance the constitutional provisions on developing the national language vis-à-vis

the academic freedom granted by the Philippine Constitution to institutions of higher
learning, the Commission proposes a two-pronged approach that will ensure the availability

5|Page
Ednave, R. E., December 2019

of course descriptions and syllabi in Filipino, and more importantly, of instructional materials
and of faculty capacity in the teaching of core GE courses in the Filipino language, while at
the same time, provide higher education institutions the freedom to respond freely to the
needs of their students.

Without changing the provisions of CMO 20, the Commission shall support such aims
by providing incentives to HEIs that opt to use Filipino in the GE courses or offer several
sections of a given course in Filipino and other Philippine languages. It shall also begin
discussions with the Komisyon ng Wikang Filipino (KWF) towards a partnership in
developing a long-term plan that integrates said effort with the wider higher education reform
agenda. This includes, but is not limited to, the provision of support and financial incentives
for the development of materials in Filipino.

Finally, the Commission recognizes that the current issue on intellectualization of the
Filipino language is closely linked with the very valid concern of Filipino professors
regarding possible displacement, a fear equally shared by many faculty members in other
disciplines, and by the Commission itself, in light of the upcoming K to 12 transition.

Apart from the support and incentives to be provided for the development of the
Filipino language, the Commission assures stakeholders concerned that a K to 12 Transition
Plan for Higher Education Institutions is currently being prepared by the Commission, in
close coordination with DepEd, TESDA, DOLE and PRC, to mitigate its possible negative
impacts, foremost on faculty, while also leveraging this period of transition to upgrade the
quality of higher education. [Statement of the Commission On Higher Education on Filipino
and the Revised General Education Curriculum (CMO No. 20, series of 2013)]

ON NOVEMBER 10, the Supreme Court (SC) lifted the 2015 temporary restraining
order (TRO) on the implementation of Commission on Higher Education (CHED)
Memorandum 20. It upheld the removal of Filipino, Panitikan (Literature) and the
Constitution as core subjects in the college curriculum.

The coverage reported the decision and provided excerpts of the ruling as well as
from the minority dissenting views of the members of the Court. But coverage failed to
reflect the deeply felt unease of the removal of subjects in language, literature and culture
from the basic education curriculum in universities. Clearly, the decision reflects the many
issues involved in our language dilemma.

Some reports touched on these and some sources questioned the impact it would have
on the formation of national values and other social questions. But the media did not break
out of the box which encased the decision to lift the TRO; which in effect supported the
paradigm shift away from core courses that used to belong to the basic general education of
Filipino students attending university. These included history and culture to insure a more
comprehensive foundation for all learning.

Because of the criticism and the plans of various stakeholders to appeal the court’s
decision, CHED has postponed its implementation. On November 14, CHED Chairperson
Prospero De Vera III said the Commission would wait for the SC’s final decision before
removing the said subjects from the core college curriculum.

Unfortunately, reports tended to treat the decision as a two-sided debate, with the
views limited only to pros and cons.

6|Page
 The Implications of the Exclusion of Filipino, Philippine Literature, and Philippine Constitution
Among the Core Courses in the General Education Curriculum in College

CMFR monitored reports from the three leading broadsheets (Manila Bulletin, the
Philippine Daily Inquirer and The Philippine Star); primetime newscasts 24 Oras (GMA-7),
Aksyon (TV5), News Night (CNN Philippines) and TV Patrol (ABS-CBN 2); as well as
selected news websites from November 10 to 20, 2018.

The court said that by removing these subjects “there would be no duplication of
subjects in Grade 1 to 10, senior high and college,” because of the changes in the general
education curriculum (GE) that were made with the implementation of the Department of
Education’s (DepEd) K-12 program.

Most of the coverage on the high court’s ruling merely recorded the wording of the
decision and those of the dissenting views. But the decision provoked a wave of protest and
criticism which the media failed to follow.

Experts say that college-level Filipino and Panitikan are more advanced compared to
high school and grade school. Reports did not delve into the benefits of this advanced
learning.

Despite its grave implications, media let slip the discussion of critical issues.
Whatever coverage there was focused on the SC ruling and dissenting views.

Coverage did not draw from other expert views evaluating the removal of these
courses from the college curriculum and the implications on the sense of nationalism among
the youth in universities. No reports explored how this would create further divide between
Tagalog-speaking “imperial Luzon” and non-Tagalog speaking Visayas and Mindanao.

Only a few reports looked into the broader impact of the memorandum on those
teaching college-level Filipino and Panitikan who may lose their jobs in its implementation.

Unconstitutional and anti-youth

Media dropped the issue shortly after the announcement of SC’s ruling and picked it
up again only when some lawmakers took up the issue. Rep. Edcel Lagman (1st District,
Albay) called the court ruling “unconstitutional and anti-youth.” In separate reports, both
Lagman and Senate President Vicente Sotto III cited Article XIV, Section 6 of the 1987
constitution categorically mandating Filipino as the national language.

Reports also cited Tanggol Wika, a group of university and college professors,
national artists and lawmakers, which argued that the CHED directive violated the Organic
Act of the Komisyon sa Wikang Filipino, the Education Act of 1982 and the Organic Act of
the National Commission for Culture and the Arts.

Unexplored leads

Dissenting views opened up leads to be explored, but media fell short of following up
on these issues. For instance, there is a need to evaluate the inclusions in the proposed
curriculum which limits core subjects to only 36 units.

Media should have also taken their cue from some advocates and questioned CHED’s
plans for the 10,000 college professors who may lose employment in the transition.

CHED Memo No. 20 is a broad issue that requires a lot of context. By limiting the
narrative to a debate, important issues are sidelined. (Paalam, Filipino? Unanswered
7|Page
Ednave, R. E., December 2019

Questions on CHED Memo 20, Media Ethics and Responsibility: Journalism Review)

May 26, 2019–The Supreme Court (SC) has ruled with finality on the exclusion of
Filipino, Philippine Literature, and Philippine Constitution among the core courses in the
General Education Curriculum (GEC) in college, as implied in the CHED Memorandum
Order No. 20, series of 2013.

In a five-page resolution, the SC en banc stood by its ruling last Oct. 9 after the
petitioners failed to present substantive new arguments that would have swayed the justices
to change their opinion.

“No further pleadings or motions shall be entertained in this case. Let entry of final
judgment be issued immediately,” said SC clerk of court Edgar Aricheta. (Source: Philippine
Star)

Significance of the Study

1. To determine the implications of the CMO No. 20, series of 2013;

2. to arouse the interests of the respondents and raise awareness to the students; and
3. to engross educational institutions and scholars on the proper handling or conduct of the
paradigm shift, which is in line with the K to 12 curriculum.

Methods

Design
The research used qualitative method. This design explored a wide array of
dimensions of the understandings, experiences and imaginings of the research participants,
the way that social processes, institutions, discourses or relationships work, and the
significance of the meanings that they generate (Mason, 2002). The qualitative approach is
informed by inductive logic, in which potential understandings of a phenomenon are derived
from the data. As such, hypotheses are formed following the collection and initial analysis of
the data, at which point additional data are often collected to assess the hypotheses in an
iterative process. Hypotheses in qualitative research often point to the role of contextual
factors that influence the phenomenon of interest, seeking to distinguish why and how
individuals with varying experiences understand the phenomenon differently. The goal of
qualitative analysis is not to produce broadly generalizable results but rather to provide
detailed or “thick” descriptions of specific situations or experiences.

Participants and Setting

There were six (6) respondents in the study and they were the faculty members of
President Ramon Magsaysay State University (Sta. Cruz Campus). The participants were
selected accordingly and purposefully for this research.
The researchers ensured appropriate measures such as consent and willingness to
participate. All gathered data were transcribed accordingly.

Mode of Analysis
To acquire authentic data, the researcher monitored the following steps of qualitative
data analysis according to Creswell (1998). First is to organize data into several forms (i.e.
database, sentences or individual words); peruse the data sets several times to gain a complete
picture or overview of what it contains as a whole. During the process, the researcher jotted
down the key points that suggest possible categories or interpretations; identified general

8|Page
 The Implications of the Exclusion of Filipino, Philippine Literature, and Philippine Constitution
Among the Core Courses in the General Education Curriculum in College

categories or themes and classified them. This helped the researcher see patterns or meanings
of the gathered data. Final step is to integrate and summarize the data of the participants.
This step also included hypotheses that state the relationships among those categories defined
by the researcher.

Ethical Consideration
The researcher significantly monitored the ethical principles of research throughout
the study. Confidentiality of responses and anonymity of respondents were strictly observed.
The researcher secured written permission from the campus director for data gathering. Any
of the respondents could withdraw participation if he/she was not anymore willing to be part
of the study.

Results and Discussion

Three (3) of the six (6) respondents were not in favor of the CHED Memorandum
Order No. 20, series of 2013. The responses (cool analysis) with the corresponding themes
(warm analysis) are as follows:

1. The exclusion of Filipino, Philippine Literature, and Philippine Constitution among

the core courses in the General Education Curriculum (GEC) in college has been realized
through the CHED Memorandum Order No. 20, series of 2013.
Are you in favor of this move of the Commission on Higher Education (CHED)? Why
or why not?

“No, first of all, studying Filipino only in the secondary

level is not enough to develop student’s competency in the
Filipino subject and language. A student cannot master one
subject or a discipline by studying it only a few times. Learning
a discipline takes time and efforts.”

“No, because these subjects are very important sources

and avenues of learning the history, culture and struggles of the
Filipino people.”

“Hindi, sapagkat pinatutunayan lamang nila ang

kawalang respeto sa ating sariling bansa sa aspeto ng
pagkakakilanlan ng batas at ng wika.”

*** CULTURAL DEGRADATION ***

“Yes, if it is included in Enhanced Basic Education

Curriculum (K to 12).”

“Yes, if these subjects can be discussed precisely and

deeply in Basic Education Curriculum. If not, exclusion of the
mentioned subjects above is not a good idea at all.”

“Yes, if it is properly discussed and well taught in the

basic education curriculum.”

*** THOROUGH INSTRUCTION ***

9|Page
Ednave, R. E., December 2019

2. What do you think are the implications of the CMO No. 20, series of 2013, to the
following:

a. teachers

“More than hundreds and thousands will either lose

their jobs, gets less number of loads, be transferred in another
department or another school.”

“Lack of enrichment to the areas of the subject matter,

decrease or lessen the subjects to be taught.”

1. Pagkawala ng trabaho ng mga guro sa asignaturang

Filipino.
2. Kawalang malay sa Wikang Filipino, Panitikan ng
Pilipinas at buong kasaysayan ng Pilipinas.

*** UNEMPLOYMENT ***

“Additional role/task for teacher and to integrate

foreign language to be taught can lead to (be) globally
competitive.”

“Let’s look at the brighter side: teachers will be more

flexible, esp. the Filipino teachers, they can still teach in college
with their specialization-well they can still use Filipino as their
medium of instruction.”

“For teachers, they can focus more on the other

subject/discipline that can be more helpful and can enhance the
specializations of the students, still they can use the language
and other subjects mentioned as basis or guide in molding their
students.”

*** FLEXIBILITY ***

b. students

“May be, ang tinuturo sa high school ay paghahanda

lamang sa college, kung tatanggalin na yung Filipino, para
saan pa yung mga inaaral nilang kasanayan, may be students
cannot able to understand further in General Education
subjects.”

“Lack of information to the said areas of studies and the

commitment to emphasize the values of learning the essence of
culture, history and laws of the Philippines will decrease.”

10 | P a g e
 The Implications of the Exclusion of Filipino, Philippine Literature, and Philippine Constitution
Among the Core Courses in the General Education Curriculum in College

1. Kawalan ng pag-asa sa mas lalong pag-aaral ng

Wikang Filipino, Panitikan at Batas Konstitusyon ng
Pilipinas.

2. Pagiging bulag sa ating sariling bansa.

*** LACKING DEPTH OF INTELLECT ***

“Advantages to the students, to learn new course subject

like foreign language.”

“Students can focus on a subject or discipline which can

contribute to their development as a 21st century learners.”

“For students they can focus more and alot time on their
specialization in their tertiary level since the above mentioned
subject were already taught and discussed on their basic
education.”

*** LEARNING NEW COURSE CONTENT ***

An owl amounted to six (6) themes was used as a simulacrum of the entire study.

Figure 1: An Owl as a Representation of the

Implications of CMO No. 20, series of 2013

Recommendation

It is suggested that, for future research, there should be more respondents and the
questionnaire used is still relevant; however, some revisions are necessary. It would take a
year or more from its implementation to know its effects, and it is a continuous study because
it touches many aspects.

11 | P a g e
Ednave, R. E., December 2019

References

CHED Memorandum Order No. 20, series of 2013

https://www.enotes.com/homework-help/why-study-literature-important-what-skills-do-
408329

https://www.statisticssolutions.com/qualitative-research-approach/

https://shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/29223/17/9_chapter%201.pdf

Media Ethics and Responsibility: Journalism Review. Paalam, Filipino? Unanswered

Questions on CHED Memo 20. Center for Media Freedom and Responsibility.
Available:http://cmfr-phil.org/media-ethics-responsibility/journalism-review/paalam-filipino-
unanswered-questions-on-ched-memo-20/

Statement of the Commission on Higher Education on Filipino and the Revised General
Education Curriculum (CMO No. 20, series of 2013)

Zedan A.M., et al. (2013). The Role of Language in Education: Arabic as Case Study.
Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences Volume 70, 25 January 2013, Pages 1002-1008
Available:https://www.sciencedirect.com/journal/procedia-social-and-behavioral
sciences/vol/70/suppl/C

12 | P a g e