ISSUES IN TEACHING AND LEARNING MULTICULTURAL LITERACY IN THE

PHILIPPINES

A number of important issues stand in the way of philippine educators attempting to

learn multicultural literacy for themselves and teach it in turn to others, which are
different from what can be found in Western literature, particularly those of the United
State.

CONFLICTING REQUIREMENTS FOR PEACE

When all is said and done, the heart of multicultural literacy is peace among
different cultures-that is, productive and non-violent interaction. It is easy to assume
that all cultures value peace to the same degree and are therefore willing to make the
same compromises in order to attain, but this is not necessarily true.

On a more personal, immediate front, I am reminded of an activity a fellow teacher

conducted in her class where she asked her students to write down how they defined
“peace.” One student revealingly wrote: “Peace is when I get what I want.”

NATIONALISTIC AND REGIONALISTIC PUSHBACK

The increasing demand for multicultural sensitivity, inclusion, and diversity in the
recent years has also given rise to resistance from groups who believe that their
identity is being “watered-down” by the needed compromises. Case in point is the
very recent proposal of “Ortograpiya ti Pagsasao nga Ilokano” by official of the
komisyon ng Wikang Filipino (KWF) in October of 2018. The proposal was met with
intense backlash from group of ilokano witters and language advocates over the
“incompetence in preparing the ilokano orthography that didn’t conform with the
existing orthography being used by the ilokano writers and experts,” claiming that the
proposed orthography was based on Tagalog and not Ilokano and that the
commision’s attempts to compel the regional language to conform to the standards of
the Ortograpiyang Pambansa (National Orthography) would “destroy the identity of
the Ilokano language” (Dumlao, 2018).

In the ensuring online firestorm, one particular individual commented on how such
regional pride is out of step with modernity, particularly with our need to be united as
a country. Now this sentiment is consistent with the muticultural literacy of being able
to put aside differences for sake of a common goal, but notice how for the Ilokanos,
national unity (as for as language is concerned) is not worth the cost of giving-up
their ability to determine the orthography of their language for themselves.

We see here that while multicultural inclusiveness is by and large a good thing, it
comes at a cost. Part of the identity of the host culture becomes diluted some form of
multicultural understanding. In effect, pushing for multicultural inclusion might very be
asking some cultures to decide which has more values: Inclusion or Identity?

We must aware that these questions are easier to answer for the culture that wants
to be accommodated (because it will cost them nothing), rather than the one that
must do the accommodating.