Mother Tongue Instruction: A Case Study

Mother Tongue Instruction in Lubuagan: A Case Study Overview

• Modern public education often follows a "one size fits all" model, with private schooling as a small exception.
• The language of instruction was initially considered a minor factor.
• Research indicates that language may be a major component affecting educational success
• The intermediate results of a study in a rural location in a developing country are discussed with the goal of determining how language of instruction affects results

Study Design and Methodology

• Experimental schools teach reading and other core subjects in the local language while English is a subject
• Control schools continue to teach all subjects in English or Filipino, languages not spoken by the children upon entering school.
• Standardized year-end testing in all subjects for grades 1-3 helps compare the two program methodologies

Key Words

• Philippines
• Language Policies
• Lubuagan Mother Tongue-Based Multilingual Education Program
• Lilubuagen
• Filipino
• English
• Evaluation of educational outcomes for primary 1 to 3

Historical Language Policies in the Philippines

• Spanish was the primary language during Spanish colonization, but the public use of local languages was forbidden.
• English became the language of education in 1898, after the Americans colonized the country.
• Philippine languages were prohibited in schools.
• President McKinley advocated for the use of local languages; the influx of American teachers led to a monolingual English-based system.
• Tagalog was declared the foundation of the national language, along with English, by the Commonwealth Act No. 570 of 1940
• Pilipino was designated the new national and official language in the 1973 Constitution along with Spanish and English
• Filipino (spelled with an F) was declared the national language and an official language with English in the 1987 Constitution; Spanish was dropped.
• The Komisyon ng Wikang Filipino was created by the 1987 Constitution to develop and intellectualize Filipino

Current Language-In-Education Policy

• The revised language policy of 1987 prescribes English for teaching math, science, and English, and Filipino for all other subjects
• Teachers often teach the material in the required language while repeating it in the local language to ensure the students understand curriculum
• Some teachers may "code-switch", teaching in more than one language at once.
• Local languages are often used to explain the content instead of being the primary teaching language.
• President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo brought English back as the primary language to improve Filipinos' global job market competitiveness in 2004

Multilingualism

• Multilingualism and education are controversial topics in the Philippines, which has over 160 living languages
• Several studies have recommended using vernacular languages in early education including: PCSPE (1970), World Bank (1988), EDCOM (1991), PESS (1998), PCER (2000) , BESRA (2006)
• Andrew Gonzalez, Secretary of the DECS, started the DECS Memo No. 144 s. 1999 in an attempt to begin a national curriculum based on bridging the learners' primary language to Filipino to English to develop comprehensive literacy skills
• Isagani Cruz expanded the program to include more schools and languages.
• Secretary Raul Roco maintained the focus on language's central role in education through the Basic Education Curriculum
• The DepEd Order No. 74 s. 2009, Institutionalizing Mother Tongue-Based Multilingual Education (MLE) is the strongest and most recent statement.
• The intention of the Department of Education is to fully implement a strong MLE program beginning with each learner's first language, bridging them into Filipino and English

Lubuagan Multilingual Education Program Context

• The Mother Tongue-Based Multilingual Education (MLE) Program responds to the request of the late Secretary Andrew Gonzalez to experiment with ways to educate and develop literacy in native language communities.
• Kalinga, Lubuagan, has a population of around 12,000.
• Lubuagan and its surrounding communities have 13 elementary schools in one school district.
• It has one public and two private high schools.
• Lubuagan is a homogenous, almost monolingual community

Lubuagan Community Languages

• Those who move to Lubuagan learn and use Lilubuagen for business and marriage purposes.
• Ilocano is the primary regional language.
• Children in Lubuagan speak only Lilubuagen when they start school.
• Children speak Lilubuagen until they begin school, learning Filipino and English.
• Lubuagens take pride in their English-speaking skills developed by formal education.
• They believe their children should learn English to find work outside of Lubuagan.
• English is viewed the best way to get a better life, while Filipino is good for communication, but offers less job opportunities
• Ilocano knowledge is expected to do business in the provincial capital

Lubuagan MLE: Rationale

• The Lubuagan MLE program teaches Filipino and English through the mother tongue, not immersion
• Comprehensible input is provided to teach Filipino and English (Krashen 1991, 2000).
• Curriculum remains aligned with standard government competencies
• Uses the first language to teach the curriculum content for it to be comprehended for mastery
• Reading and writing skills are developed first in the learners' native language.
• Oral communication abilities are fostered in FIlipino and English language lessons before reading starts.
• Teachers were taught to read and write in their own language through writers' workshops
• Since its standardization is recent, spelling is difficult, but is expected to change with printed literature being more available.
• Traditional classrooms teach content through Filipino for social studies and language arts and English for math, science, and English
• Young students have to learn a new language while also learning new ideas.

Lubuagan MLE: Curriculum

• Cultural content is incorporated to optimize learning (Dekker and Dumatog, 2004)
• Each lesson starts with content that is familiar to the learner
• Beginner material have familiar stories with an emphasis on reading
• Teachers teach home culture through oral literature, local history, arts, crafts, and music
• Strategy makes a link between what the learner already knows in their first language, culture, and what they haven't yet learned of the curriculum of Filipino and English

Lubuagan Project: National Debate

• Program lies beyond local concerns over culture and educational efficiency, but highlights a wider national problem of educational policy and strategy
• Will country reach its Millennium Development Goals (MDG) in education?
• Are there adequate strategies for the 21st century, and what languages should be taught to reach education goals
• Has the nation regressed according to analysis of date from 2008
• National initiatives show little evidence of having raised key educational indicators in the Philippines.
• National education policy regarding language(s) of instruction constrains effectiveness for many Filipino children

Lubuagan Project: History

• A steering committee was set up to resolve issues of education and language
• Committee suggested the program as a test project
• The Nueva Vizcaya State University (NVSU) and Summer Institute of Linguistics (SIL) gave teacher trainings in 1998 led by Dr. Gloria Baguingan
• Diane Dekker then took program development responsibility
• St Teresita's School started experimental execution in grade one from 1999-2000
• Other public school teachers started implementing it in grade one during 2000
• Summer training helped tailor curriculum to local culture and make materials
• There were many new resources being developed including stories, books and a language primer

Lubuagan: Teaching Methodology

• textbooks for maths and social studies, grade one, which are supported by culture and a multilingual maths calendar alongside other teaching and learning materials.
• All subjects except Filipino and English were taught in the mother tongue at first.
• Filipino and English were then taught through the language of instruction of the mother tongue.
• This strengthens the language acquirement Lubuagan students.
• Nine teachers were teaching using MLE methodology.
• The Lubuagan teachers were complimented by the Division Superintendant for improving achievement within the Lubuagan district in 2006

Lubuagan: Research Questions

• The Lubuagan MLE Program was founded on the belief that mother tongue instruction improves education, but not all stakeholders agreed on the potential outcomes.
• Research design focused on the results that the broadest range of stakeholders considered important
• Parents want their children to do well in "the outside world", and get "good jobs", by being fluent in the "language of jobs"
• Parents mainly want their children to be educated solely in the language of jobs, so that they are not hindered by other languages
• In the Philippines, English and Filipino are the languages of jobs.
• Is program usage of the first language as a language of compromise proficiency in the second language (language of jobs)?
• Educators hope their students score well on tests compared to pupils in other schools
• The traditional belief is that children will better learn if taught completely in English
• Is there a chance that there participation in a program that uses the first language will compromise their curricular content?
• National Policymakers measure countries skilled workers and competitive status
• Measuring the ability in math and science as a starting point is also a research question

Lubuagan: Methodology

• Lubuagan schools agreed to be divided into experimental (local language) and control (English and Filipino) groups
• Tests were given based on curriculum areas, each following the scheme used in instruction
• In both groups the biggest school had one of each grade; students were randomly placed with special parental requests being the exception; 3 "schools" in the control group and 3 in the experimental group resulted

Methodology: Tests

• Research team (authors with 2 teachers), built the tests based on national curriculum learning outcome statements for each grade.
• First they made lists of learning outcomes for content and built test items designed to see if each learning outcome was achieved
• English was used for reading, math, social studies, English as well as Filipino for relevant subjects.
• Entire team reviewed each test questions to assure quality
• The tests were translated into Lilubuagen and checked for the same
• Multiple choice format was used reducing test ambiguity as well as test administrators going around with examples

Methodology: Administration and Scoring

• All children were instructed the same way and had the same training in test-taking regardless of group
• Testers, speakers of English, Filipino, and Liluabugen administered all tests for each group to ensure the same results
• Each child had a written copy and in grades 1 & 2 the testers read aloud all items to account for limited reading levels
• Answer hints were not given nor was the list of possible answers
• Children in grade three took all responsibility for the test and the tester would simply monitor
• Results were scored locally and then spot-checked by a Liluabugen speaker
• Inconsistently marked items were taken off for analysis later.

Findings: Test Scores

• Summaries of test results were found by grade and experimental group and reported as an average in the "mean" column.
• "Percentage" converts the mean score to a percentage based on overall test items.
• Percentage scores were quite related and suggest that test items were properly scaled through them all.
• Test scores in the experiment group were higher consistently and significance was also high.

Comparisons of Major Content Areas

• Tests assessed reading and maths
• Maths had greatest different
• Reading had relatively constant differential
• The data suggest that children in the control schools master approximately 50% of content and the experiment schools 75%

Second Language Acquisition: Concerns

• One of the strongest arguments used against mother-tongue education (MLE) is that it compromises second language skills, Table 3 compares performance between control over experiment groups, Table 4 shows the performance for these second languages for different schools.
• English is common in commercial, higher education (government) & political circles, which accounts for lost time in learning the common tongue
• Table 4 is evidence that indicates children do not have their learning impacted by using their primary tongue but rather are the reverse.

Second Language Acquisition; Tables

• Children who are primarily educated in English do considerably less as compared to experimental kids that are getting most/all of their instructions
• Clear result in English grades 1-3, the data however may be exaggerated due to treatment as a control school for grade 2 because due to having functioned so the year prior due to weakest experimental schools

Additional Influences on Outcome

• Test score findings showed 40% gain/improvement
• 3 experimental and 3 control schools were used.
• A bad or good year for a school skewed data
• Variations in teacher quality skewed data
• Walter and Davis (2006) and the inquiry both established the idea of teachers use of spoken languages

Conclusion

• The testing completed produced an approximate amount of positive gain in educational outcomes.
• Follow up questions of: what of more significance, what would similar programs look like, will the gains have lasting effect, and with additional tweaks?
• Walter and Trammell (2008) study showed similar in Cameroon where gains of grade 1 learners were almost 200%(average) that were taught in native language, 60-125% were gains of second grade after
• Gains in reading and maths in schools where there was a limited amount in controls

Conclusion: Effect Size

• Jacob Cohen's classic work estimates 0.8 for a large effect size
• The current Lubuagan program has 1.31 and 1.61. which indicates an effect size
• Teacher quality affects the experiment greatly
• Students with excellent teachers greatly out scored the lower performing ones by 70%
• Walter and Trammell (2008) saw greater performance by those in Cameroon (100%)
• Greatest size is achieved where quality in the education are weak.
• The results of previous analysis can either broaden or confirm