Archives

‘Castrated’ MTB-MLE

Dr. Ricardo Nolasco

Dr. Ricardo Nolasco

By Ricardo Ma. Duran Nolasco, PhD
Philippine Daily Inquirer
Friday, September 13th, 2013
(rnolasco_upmin@yahoo.com)
Associate Professor, UP Department of Linguistics

.

.

.

The term “castration” refers to the removal, by surgical or other means, of the reproductive organ of an animal. The intention is to prevent the animal from spreading an “undesired” genetic trait in succeeding generations.

This is precisely what the implementing rules and regulations of Republic Act No. 10533 (otherwise known as the K-to-12 Law) appear to be doing to the Mother Tongue-Based Multilingual Education (MTB-MLE) provisions of the original law.

The IRR provide, albeit illegally, foreign and local lobbyists of the discredited bilingual-education policy with enough escape clauses for them to continue defying the law.

This introductory clause in Rule II, 10.4 circumscribes all the other language provisions: “The curriculum shall develop proficiency in Filipino and English, provided that the learners’ first and dominant language shall serve as the fundamental language of education.”

This provision, absent in the original law, confirms suspicions that the government’s language-in-education policy is MTB-MLE in name but L2 bilingual education in practice.

Continue reading

DepEd Order 31 s. 2013 & DepEd Order 31 s. 2012 Contravene MTB-MLE Provisions of RA 10533

DepEd Sec. Armin Luistro

DepEd Sec. Armin Luistro

Secretary Armin Luistro’s Department of Education, through his directives and the RA 10533 Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR) issued on September 4, 2013, are bent on subverting the intent of the Enhanced Basic Education Act of 2013.

Sec. 4 of RA 10533, otherwise known as “AN ACT ENHANCING THE PHILIPPINE BASIC EDUCATION SYSTEM BY STRENGTHENING ITS CURRICULUM AND INCREASING THE NUMBER OF YEARS FOR BASIC EDUCATION, APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES“, provides that:

“Basic education shall be delivered in languages understood by the learners as the language plays a strategic role in shaping the formative years of learners.

“For kindergarten and the first three (3) years of elementary education, instruction, teaching materials and assessment shall be in the regional or native language of the learners. The Department of Education (DepED) shall formulate a mother language transition program from Grade 4 to Grade 6 so that Filipino and English shall be gradually introduced as languages of instruction until such time when these two (2) languages can become the primary languages of instruction at the secondary level.”

Continue reading

RA 10533 and DepEd’s Misinterpretations thru DO 31 s. 2013 & the IRRs

Subject: Your comment re DepEd and RA 10533 IRRs
From: Joe Padre (joepadre@att.net)
To: rnolasco_upmin@yahoo.com;
Cc: ched.arzadon@gmail.com; aurelioagcaoili@yahoo.com; rvaragon@gmail.com; tawidnews@yahoo.com; erroldiaryo@yahoo.com; jimmyagpaloii@yahoo.com; sherma.e.benosa@gmail.com; nelsondaligcon@gmail.com;
Date: Wednesday, September 4, 2013 5:59 PM
DepEd Sec. Armin Luistro

DepEd Sec. Armin Luistro

Dear Rick,

Your comments re DepEd and the new IRRs for RA 10533 reinforced my suspicion about what DepEd is about to do:

“Ricardo Ma Nolasco: You may want to know what DepEd is really up to, when they approved the IRR yesterday. Focus your attention on Rule II, 10.2, 10.3 and 10.4. (1) The first sentence in Rule II, 10.4 circumscribes all the other provisions. Ibig sabihin, balik na naman tayo sa discredited bilingual policy. This to me is not MTB-MLE:

“The curriculum shall develop proficiency in Filipino and English, provided that, the learners’ first and dominant language shall serve as the fundamental language of education.

Comment:  MTB-MLE under our country’s concrete conditions should promote the development of proficiency in the first language  AND the two official languages, as well as other languages of wider communication.  It appears that the formulation here in the IRR views the first language merely as bridge to learning the two official languages.

For Kindergarten and the first three years of elementary education, instruction, teaching materials, and assessment shall be in the regional or native language of the learners.

Implementing Rules and Regulations of the Enhanced Basic Education Act of 2013

IMPLEMENTING RULES AND REGULATIONS

OF THE ENHANCED BASIC EDUCATION ACT OF 2013

(REPUBLIC ACT NO. 10533)

kto12.jpgPursuant to Section 16 of Republic Act No. 10533, entitled “An Act Enhancing the Philippine Basic Education System by Strengthening Its Curriculum and Increasing the Number of Years for Basic Education, Appropriating Funds Therefor and for Other Purposes,” otherwise known as the “Enhanced Basic Education Act of 2013,” approved on May 15, 2013, and which took effect on June 8, 2013, the Department of Education (DepEd), the Commission on Higher Education (CHED), and the Technical Education and Skills Development Authority (TESDA), hereby issue the following rules and regulations to implement the provisions of the Act.

Continue reading

Pres. Aquino signs Enhanced Basic Education Act

“For kindergarten and the first three (3) years of elementary education, instruction, teaching materials and assessment shall be in the regional or native language of the learners. The Department of Education (DepED) shall formulate a mother language transition program from Grade 4 to Grade 6 so that Filipino and English shall be gradually introduced as languages of instruction until such time when these two (2) languages can become the primary languages of instruction at the secondary level.”

Pres. Aquino signing Enhanced Basic Education Act

Pres. Aquino signing Enhanced Basic Education Act

MANILA, Philippines—President Benigno Aquino on Wednesday morning signed into law the Enhanced Basic Education Act of 2013, mandating kindergarten and adding two years to secondary education to place the country’s curriculum on par with international standards.

The President said Republic Act 10533, widely known as the K to 12 Act, would “lay the foundations for a better future for every Filipino child.”

“Our people’s unwavering support has allowed us to make this vision a reality: to establish a system of education that truly imbues our youth with the skills they need to pursue their dreams,” Aquino told lawmakers, Cabinet officials, diplomats and students in Malacañang.

Continue reading

Enhanced Basic Education Act: Update From Lino Gerona

Lino Gerona/Manny Faelnar

Lino Gerona/Manny Faelnar

Early this morning, April 16, 2013, I received this important email update (dated April 16, 2013)  from Lino Gerona (a.k.a. Atty. Manuel Faelnar), one of our staunchest supporters of MTB-MLE:

Jose Rizal

Jose Rizal

Joe,
 
Nothing to worry about anymore. The clause that would have repealed the mandatory teaching of Rizal courses in  College is not in the bill that was sent to the President for his signature. The Rizal courses wil remain in College.
 
The intention, however, would have been to move the Rizal courses to Grades 11 and 12 under the new K to 12 curriculum, so that only university and professional subjects would have been taught at the College level. But, given the present political and ideological climate, this was not to be.
 
The President will sign the bill into law but he will probably do so after elections in May.

Lino

This morning I also checked the Philippine Senate website’s Legal History of the consolidated version of SBN-3286 and HBN-6643 (ENHANCED BASIC EDUCATION ACT) and found this update:

  • 4/15/2013     Enrolled copies of the consolidated version of SBN-3286 and HBN-6643, received by the Senate already signed by the Speaker and the Secretary General of the House of Representatives
  • 4/16/2013     Enrolled copies of the consolidated version of SBN-3286 and HBN-6643, sent to the Office of the President of the Philippines through PLLO, for the signature and approval of His Excellency President Benigno S. Aquino III;

Continue reading

Aquino Should NOT Let Enhanced Basic Education Act Repeal Rizal Law

Jose Rizal

Jose Rizal

In 1956, Republic Act 1425, otherwise known as the Rizal Law, came into being in spite of stiff opposition from some senators, congressmen, interest groups and the Catholic Church. On December 26, 1994, Fidel V. Ramos, President of the Republic of the Philippines, signed Memorandum 247 directing “the Secretary of Education, Culture and Sports and the Chairman of the Commission on Higher Education to take steps to immediately and fully implement the letter, intent and spirit of Republic Act No. 1425 and to impose, should it be necessary, appropriate disciplinary action against the governing body and/or head of any public or private school, college or university found not complying with said law and the rules, regulations, orders and instructions issued pursuant thereto.”

But, in one fell swoop, the consolidated version of SNB-3286 and HBN-6643 (otherwise known as the Enhance Basic Education Act) passed by both houses of Congress will, if approved by the President or allowed to lapse into law, repeal, among other laws, Republic Act 1425 (the Rizal Law), under its “SEC. 16. Repealing Clause. – Pertinent provisions of Batas Pambansa Bilang 232 or the Education Act of 1982 , Republic Act No. 9155 or the Governance of Basic Education Act of 2011, Republic Act No. 9258, Republic Act No. 7836, Republic Act No. 1425 or the inclusion in the College Curricula, The Life, Works and Writings of Jose Rizal, and all other laws, decrees, executive orders and rules and regulations contrary to or inconsistent with the provisions of this Act are hereby repealed or modified accordingly.”

Continue reading

%d bloggers like this: