Phillipines: "the key to English is better implementation"

[Harold F. Schiffman]

February 1, 2007 at 1:00 am

English First policy will hurt learning
By Juan Miguel Luz

(This appeared in the Philippine Daily Inquirer, Jan. 22, 2007)

There is much to be said about the decline in English proficiency in this
country. But legislating English as the medium of instruction--as proposed
by the Gullas Bill--is not the solution. In fact not just English, but
also Science and Math proficiency will decline should this law pass.
Rather than propose that English be the sole medium of learning, we should
in fact promote multi-lingualism: English, Filipino and the local language
or dialect. The Japanese will never forego Nihonggo for English, nor will
the Chinese abandon Mandarin or Cantonese for the so-called global
language. Neither would the Scandinavians, Germans or (mon Dieu!) the
French. Why then are we so quick to ditch Filipino for English?

The overall concern about the decline in English proficiency is both
correct and misplaced. Many employers speak of job applicants with
appalling spoken and written English skills. They argue that this
deficiency is a lost comparative advantage as shown by the dismal hiring
rates of the growing call center industry. But is poor English proficiency
really the cause of our global uncompetitiveness? Or is it our low
productivity and the inability to deliver consistent quality that hurt us?
The problem is not poor English. It is poor English, Science and Math
skills. Weak English proficiency is not the sole determinant of poor
overall achievement; it is merely a factor.

Unesco findings show that young children learn how to read and acquire
numeracy faster and better when taught in their mother tongue. Their
achievement rates in higher-grade levels are better than those who are
taught in a language other than what they speak at home. These findings
have been replicated by the Summer Institute of Linguistics (SIL), which
uses the mother tongue for teaching young children in Bukidnon and in
other areas with indigenous people. These pupils have had relatively high
literacy and numeracy scores in DepEd (Department of Education) tests. The
TIMSS (Trends in Math and Science Survey) test is administered here in
English, making us one of the very few countries that take the test in a
language that is not generally spoken at home. We do poorly in TIMSS. (The
Japanese take TIMSS in Japanese; the Finns in Finnish.) But would taking
the test in Filipino make for better scores?

The Department of Science and Technology did conduct such a test in
Filipino and the results were equally dismal. Therefore, its not so much
language; it is simply that children arent learning Science and Math well
enough to solve problems. On the other hand, Sineskwela, the Science
program on television, is broadcast in Filipino. Dr. Milagros Ibe, then
head of the National Institute of Science and Math Education (Nismed) at
the University of the Philippines wrote: Testing in English does not
significantly disadvantage pupils who are taught in Sineskwela using
Filipino as a medium. Understanding of the concepts in Filipino appears to
facilitate transfer of learning to English.

These children however are not fluent in English. In fact, [they] find it
hard to communicate and express themselves in English during recitations
and discussions. But clearly, these children learn Science and Math:
Pupils in Grades 2 and 3 who watch Sineskwela attain master-level in 50-67
percent of the concepts learned, while those not exposed to the program
master only 20-33 percent of the same . Pupils in the lower grades are
capable of responding to 4-option multiple choice questions . Longer tests
(i.e., more than 30 items) can also be used for them. In East Asia, the
national or local language is used as the medium of learning for young
children. English is taught as a subjectnot as the medium of learningand
proficiency is seen as a key to connecting to the world, not as the key to
learning.

We, however, seem to want to shortcut learning. We want to connect to the
world to be competitive before we learn the fundamentals. The current
DepEd policy on the medium of learning set by former Education Secretary
Andrew Gonzalez is sound. Brother Andrew was after all a linguist. The
policy says that the childs mother tongue shall be the medium of learning
in Grades 1 to 3 because the 3 Rs and fundamental Math and Science
concepts are introduced at these grade levels. Makabayan (Social Studies)
shall be taught in the mother tongue as well.

English and Filipino are to be taught as subjects.

If Mandarin someday became the global language for business, would youan
English speakerlearn your Science and Math concepts if it were taught to
you in Mandarin? Probably not. The same would hold true for the young
learner anywhere in this archipelago who does not speak Englishor
Mandarinat home. For Grades 4 to 6, there is a progressive shift to
English as the medium of learning for English, Science and Math subjects.
By this time, the concepts have taken root, and problem-solving and
application are the learning objectives. Filipino will still be used to
teach Filipino and Makabayan subjects.

For high school, the mid-grade policy on language is expanded. The Gullas
Bill is now in Congress, having been passed at the House of
Representatives. Ironically, it does not deviate from the current DepEd
policy. It is a dangerous bill, however, because it places a misleading
emphasis on English as the medium of learning. As such, the young learners
and their teachers will concentrate on the language, not on Science and
Math and literacy (that is more fundamental to learning). The key to
better English is better implementation; more teacher training in grammar,
composition, vocabulary; more mechanisms to expand English usage in
schools such as campus journalism, campus radio, assigned days for English
and Filipino communication and the like, more bilingual reading books and
elocution contests and spelling bees (both in English and Filipino).

English is essential for communication, but Science and Math are crucial
for competitiveness. We need to be more creative and committed to better
English teaching, but not at the expense of Science and Math. Legislation
is not necessarily creative. The Gullas Bill in fact ignores world
experience on learning by prescribing a solution that misses the problem
completely: Why are Philippine schoolchildren not learning? Juan Miguel
Luz is president of the International Institute of Rural Reconstruction
and a former education undersecretary.
http://www.ellentordesillas.com/?p=872

***********************************************************************************

N.b.: Listing on the lgpolicy-list is merely intended as a service to its members
and implies neither approval, confirmation nor agreement by the owner or sponsor of
the list as to the veracity of a message's contents. Members who disagree with a
message are encouraged to post a rebuttal.

***********************************************************************************