StatementaboutFilipinoLanguageRequirementinHigherEducation

• WesupporttheSupremeCourt’sdecision,insofarasit:o Giveshighereducationinstitutions(HEIs)thechoicetoteachFilipino,English,and

otherlocalandforeignlanguagesattheirdiscretion.Itupholdsacademicfreedomandequalityamonglanguages.

o DoesnotpreventHEIsfromteachingPhilippineliterature.o Itkeepsthenumberofrequiredsubjectstoamanageablelevel,givingstudents

moreroomtotakesubjectsalignedtotheirinterests,needs,andcareergoals.• WesupportCHED’srespectoftheruleoflaw.• WeappreciateCHEDChairmanPopoyDeVera’scouragetoactinafairandbalanced

manner,takingintoaccountmultipleperspectivesontheissue.• Wesupportacademicfreedomofhighereducationinstitutions,aconstitutionalright.• Wesupportgreaterflexibilityoflanguagepolicyinhighereducation,givingHEIsand

studentsmorechoiceoverwhatlanguagesaretaught/learnedandhowtheyareintegratedindegreeprograms.

• Webelievetheimpositionofonelanguage,nativeorforeign,isnotharmoniouswithidealsof21stcenturydemocracy,justice,equalopportunity,andsustainablenationaldevelopmentinamultilingual,multiculturalsociety.

• Ontheotherhand,weareagainstanypolicythatwouldpreventuniversitiesfromteachingorusingFilipino,English,orotherlanguagesthataresignificanttotheFilipinopeople.

• Ifeverlanguage/literaturesubjectsaremademandatoryagain,wesupportaninclusiveimplementationinwhichallnativePhilippinelanguagesandliteraturesareeligible.

• Inotherwords,ifalanguagerequirementisreinstated,itshouldbeageneral“Philippinelanguage”requirement,notrestrictedtothenationallanguage.Thus,studentswouldhavetheoptiontofulfilitbytakingsomeunitsofthenationallanguage(i.e.Filipino)AND/ORsomeunitsofanotherPhilippinelanguage(e.g.Cebuano,Ilokano,Hiligaynon,Maranao,etc.),dependingonthestudent’sinterestsandtheuniversity’sofferings.

• Similarly,Philippineliteraturesubjectsshouldreflecttheliteraturesofallregions,andcanbetaughtinFilipino,English,oranyotherlanguageasoriginallyindicatedinCHEDMemo59,s.1996.

• Tominimizecurricularandfinancialburdenonstudents,itwouldbeprudenttolimitthepossiblelanguageandliteraturerequirementstoacombinedtotalof6units.

• Weassertthatthereareavarietyofviewsonthisissue,andnogroupshouldposeasrepresentingallFilipinopeople.PeoplehavetherighttoagreewiththeSupremeCourtdecisionwithoutbeingattackedasunpatriotic.Likewise,theyhavetherighttoquestionpoliciesthatfavorFilipinolanguagewithoutbeingbrandedastraitorstothecountry.Lovefornationallanguageandloveforcountry,culture,andcommunityarenotthesame.Infact,theSupremeCourt’sdecisionisarguablyinthebestinterestoftheFilipinonation,forreasonsexpoundedbelow.

The Supreme Court’s ruling lifting the Temporary Restraining Order of CHED’s MemorandumOrder20,series2013,hascausedsignificantcontroversy.IthasbeeninterpretedastheremovalofFilipino language fromhighereducation, leading tomanyvitriolic responsesofnationalistsofwhichthemediahasgivenwidencoverage.Asan informalnetworkofacademicsand laypeoplewithacommoninterestinprotecting,promoting,andstudyingallPhilippinelanguages,wemakethefollowingobservationsandstatements:1. WhileteachingFilipinoatthecollegelevelisconsideredvitalforsome,especiallythosewho

currently teach the language and thosewith strong nationalistic sentiments, let us keep inmindthatthereisawidediversityofopiniononthisissue,andmediacoverageshouldreflectthisdiversityinabalancedway.Forsome,theSupremeCourt’sdecisionwasapainfulblow.For others, itwas awelcome relief. It is important to understand the factors behind thesevariousopinionsandsharethemwiththepublic.

2. The claim that the Supreme Court and CHED are removing Filipino is misleading andhyperbolic.TheSupremeCourtmerely ruled thatCHED’snewgeneraleducationcurriculum(CMO20s.2013)isconstitutional.Thenewcurriculumincludes36unitsofgeneralsubjects.To require a specific language subject in this curriculum,whether Filipinoor English,wouldcontravene the purpose of general education. Hence, such subjects were transferred (notremoved)toSeniorHighSchool.Thismovealsoservedthepurposeofdeclutteringbachelorprograms, which suffered under the old bloated general education curriculum of 63 units,leavinglittleroomforstudentstoexploreandspecialize.However,evenwiththetransferofEnglishandFilipinosubjectstoSeniorHighSchool,CMO20makesitclearthatanyofthenewGen Ed subjects may be taught using Filipino or English, so there is nothing preventing auniversityorinstructorsfromusingthenationallanguage.Theycouldteachallofthesubjectsusing Filipino if theywanted to.Moreover, in addition to theGen Ed subjects, universitiescould addmore Filipino subjects at their discretion, whether elective or mandatory. Thus,equatingtheSupremeCourt’srulingtotheabolitionofFilipinoissimplyascaretactic.

3. Filipino isalreadytaughtasaseparate languagesubjectfor12years(Grades1to12). Ifwehaveanyconfidenceinourowneducationsystem,then12yearsshouldbeenoughtolearnthelanguageandbeabletouseitincollege.Forexample,BritishstudentsarenotrequiredtotakeEnglish languagesubjects inuniversity,becausetheyarealreadyexpectedtoknowthelanguage.Rather,theyuseEnglishtolearnothersubjects,whetherliterature,science,history,or math. The sign of a developed language is being able to use it in advanced, technicaldomains.Hence,supportersofthenationallanguageshouldbeprioritizingtheuseofFilipinoasamediumof instructionratherthanasa languagesubject.CMO20s.2013alreadygivesthemthepowertouseFilipinoasamediumofinstructionforanyandallsubjects.

4. Supportersof requiringFilipino in collegehave ignored the fact thatFilipino isnot theonlylanguageinthecountry.ThePhilippinesismultilingual—withmorethan100nativelanguages(KWF, 2014; Ethnologue, 2018). Our Philippine languages are informally (yet incorrectly)calleddialects.Theyare justas importantas thenational language toourhistory,heritage,culture and communities. If ever there would be a language requirement in college, wesupportafairerpolicythatwouldallowtheteachingofanyPhilippinelanguage(e.g.Tagalog,Cebuano,Ilokano,Waray,Bikol,Hiligaynon,Pangasinan,Maguindanaon,andotherindigenouslanguages)towardsthefulfillmentofsucharequirement.Thiswouldpromoteequality,allow

greater understanding of our peoples’ origins, and empower our communities to createmusic,literature,film,andeducationalmaterialsintheirrespectivelanguages.

5. ThePhilippineConstitutionstates, “Academic freedomshallbeenjoyed inall institutionsofhigherlearning”(ArticleXIV,Section5),whichisalsoenshrinedintheHigherEducationActof1994 (R.A. 7722). Colleges should therefore have the choice about what languages tomandateoroffer.Itshouldbenotedthatnoneoftheworld’stop10universities,nevermindthecountriestheyarelocatedin,requireaspecific languagesubjectforalltheirstudents. Ifstudentsarerequiredtotakeupalanguage,studentshaveachoiceaboutwhatlanguagetheywilllearn.Tomandateaspecificlanguage,regardlessofitspoliticalstatus,iscontradictorytoacademicfreedomandpersonalfreedom.

6. We support greater flexibility with regard to the languages taught and used in highereducationsothatcollegescanmeettheneedsoftheirstudentsandcommunities.Languagesaretoolsforcommunication,employment,andmanyotheraspectsofourlives.Thedecisionto use what language and how should be based on context, such as the local economy,availability of instructional materials, the capacities of instructors, the skills that studentsseek,andthevision,mission,andresearchprioritiesoftheinstitution.

7. Continuity of employment is a major concern. However, the claim that thousands ofinstructorswould lose their jobs isalso inaccurate.Firstofall,DepEd isveryopen tohiringFilipino instructors for their growing SeniorHigh School program. Second, higher educationinstitutions are allowed to continue offering Filipino subjects. Third, the existing Filipinoinstructors can apply internal pressure for the continuation of the Filipino subjects theyhandle.Fourth,theycanteachanyofthe36generaleducationunits,whethersomeoftheseunitsareallocatedforFilipino,othersubjects,orelectives.Thetotalnumberofgenedunitsshall not change, therefore there is no need to fire anyone. Fifth, the majority of Filipinolanguage instructors nationwide are not ethnically Tagalog—therefore, they know how tospeak othermother tongues too. Thus, if any language can be taught in higher education,these instructors will actually have more options to teach. Sixth, English is no longer arequired subject too, and yet this did not result in the loss of thousands of jobs aspessimisticallypredicted.Themediashouldnotsoreadilyquotestatisticsthatdonotstanduptoscrutiny.

8. People continue to lambast CHED and the Supreme Court for not respecting “ang atingsarilingwikaatkultura”. In fact,wehavemany “sarilingwikaatkultura”.Letusbehonest.Ourother languageshaveneverhadtheprivilegetoberequiredcourses incollege,even intheirnativeregions.AndexpertsintheselanguageshavenothadtheprivilegeofemploymentlikethethousandsofFilipino/Tagaloginstructors.Isthisfair?Isit“colonialmentality”toaskformore representationandequality amongournative languages?Request for inclusion isnotcolonialnorregionalistic,itisjudiciousandequitable.

9. If any Philippine language could be used/taught in the new General Education curriculum,thennotonlyinstructorswhoareproficientinEnglishorFilipino/Tagalogwillbeabletoteachsaidsubjects,butalsothosewhoareproficientinotherPhilippinelanguagesaswell.Thiswillcreatemoredynamic,diverse,and inclusive languagedepartments.Writers,poets, linguists,researchersandteachersofvariouslanguagescouldbetappedtosharetheirexpertise.

10. The Indigenous Peoples’ Rights Act of 1997 (R.A. 8371) gives indigenous peoples (IP) andindigenous cultural communities (IPPs) the right to “education in their own language, in a

mannerappropriatetotheirculturalmethodsofteachingandlearning”(Chp.VI,Sec.30).TheActfurtherstates,“theStateshallendeavortohavethedignityanddiversityofthecultures,traditions, histories and aspirations of the ICCs/IPs appropriately reflected in all forms ofeducation”(Chp.VI,Sec.31).IfonlyonelanguageistobemandatedintheGenEdcurriculum,andallstudentsaremandatedtotake it, thenthispolicycouldviolate indigenousstudents’rights. By contrast, if CHED will permit any local language to be used in the mandatedsubjects, including IP languages, then CHED will ensure that General Education is moreappropriate to IP communities and will safeguard their right to education in their ownlanguage.

11. Fortoo long,Filipinoshavebeenunnecessarilyrestricted intheir languageoptions inhighereducation.Non-Tagalogpeoplehavehadto learnthenational language (basedprimarilyonTagalog), but Tagalog people have not had the chance to learn other Philippine tongues.HavingaflexiblelanguagepolicyinhighereducationwillopenupopportunitiesforFilipinostolearneachother’s languages,providemorecommunicationoptions,preparethemfor inter-island travel and work, build mutual respect and appreciation, and strive for “unity indiversity” (Constitution,ArticleXIV,Section14).Flexible languagepolicieswillalsoopenthedoortolearnforeignlanguagesforeconomicandsocialopportunities.

12. The Philippine Constitution declares that Filipino “shall be further enriched on the basis ofexistingPhilippineandotherlanguages”(ArticleXIV,Section6).IfnationallanguageadvocatesinsistthatFilipinoisnotthesameasTagalog,thentheyshouldbewillingandevendemandingthatotherPhilippine languagesbe taughtalongsideFilipino inhighereducation.Thiswouldprovideasolidmechanismforcross-pollinationofgrammaticalandlexicalelementsbetweenPhilippine languages, thereby facilitating the enrichment of the national language asenvisionedbytheConstitution.

13. TheLivingTonguesInstituteofEndangeredLanguagesclassifiesthePhilippinesasoneoftheTop10“languagehotspots”oftheworld,whichmeansthatithasarichyetfragilelinguisticheritage.TheKWFmeanwhilehasreportedthatmorethan40Philippinelanguagesaredying(2018).Theseareminority languagesspokeninjustafewplaces.While it isunderstandablethatmanypeoplecareaboutthenationallanguage,it isnotthreatenedtothesamedegreethatourtrulyendangeredlanguagesare.Therefore,itisimportanttogivethemachancetobe taught and learned as well. Hence, if a language requirement is retained in the highereducation curriculum, we again support the eligibility of all Philippine languages, whethernational,regional,orlocal,tobetakenupinfulfillmentofsucharequirement.

Nationalismisnotthesameaspatriotism.Homogeneityisnotthesameasequality.Imposingorprioritizingonelanguageisnotthebestwaytocombatcolonialism.Infact,itistheopposite.LetuspromotePhilippinelanguages(orassomewouldmistakenlysay,“dialects”)inaninclusiveway,andallowanyofthemtobetaughtinhighereducation.Ourformercolonizersfailedtodothis—but we can do better. Let us also give universities and students the chance to learn foreignlanguages according to their genuine interests, needs, and aspirations. Inclusive, flexible, andpluralisticlanguagepoliciescontributetosustainabledevelopmentandpeace(UNESCO,2012).1

1WhyLanguageMattersfortheMillenniumDevelopmentGoals.(2012).UNESCOBangkok