Unit 3: Bilingual Education Policy PDF

UNIT 3 The Implementation of the Bilingual Education Policy Perhaps the most critical issues in education today are language of instruction and erosion of values. We see the two as inter-related. Language encodes the cultural values of the people. It encodes their shared experiences, shared...

UNIT 3 The Implementation of the Bilingual Education Policy Perhaps the most critical issues in education today are language of instruction and erosion of values. We see the two as inter-related. Language encodes the cultural values of the people. It encodes their shared experiences, shared aspirations, that unite them as one social group. Filipinos have eight major languages and some 170 minor languages; hence the problem of communication ensues. Filipinos love their native languages, and the problem of what language should be used as medium of instruction remains unsolved (Acuna, 1995) The question on what medium of instruction should be used in Philippine schools is answered by our Bilingual Education Policy. However, from its creation in 1974 until this 21st Century, parents, learners, and even teachers still debate on the most effective language to use specially the skill and the content area subjects: Is it English? Should it be Filipino? Why not the regional languages? In the previous unit, you were given the different language policies applied in the Philippines in different periods. In this unit, you will be presented with only the Bilingual Education Policy (BEP)of the Philippines and its implementation in the Philippines. You will then have a closer look and a deeper understanding of this policy. You are then expected to: ✓ Explain the Bilingual Education Policy of the Philippines ✓ Describe how the Bilingual Education Policy has been implemented in Philippine Schools ✓ Cite problems and Issues in the Implementation of the Bilingual Education policy The Bilingual Education Policy (BEP) of the Philippines Learning Competencies: 1. Demonstrate understanding of the Bilingual Education Policy (BEP) of the Philippines 2. Relate experiences on the use of Bilingual Education Policy during their elementary and high school levels 3. Write a reaction paper on some issues that resulted from the Bilingual Education Policy of the  Introduction: Bilingual Education is the use of two languages as media of instruction for a child or a group of children in part or all of the school curriculum (Corhen, 1975.) The Philippines, multi-lingual as it is needs to settle with the language of instruction that promotes understanding of content or subject matter, showcases the culture of the Filipino people and molds the Filipino students to become globally competitive. Right now, we are using the Bilingual Education Policy, which was first implemented in 1974 when the then Department of Education Culture and Sports issued Dept. Order No. 25, s. 1974 titled, “Implementing Guidelines for the Policy on Bilingual Education.” In the previous unit, you were already given an idea of the BEP of our country. In this lesson, you will be given more activities in order to understand and master this policy. Activity 1. Recall as many subjects as you remember when you were in the elementary and high school. What subjects were taught in Filipino? In English? Put your answers in the table: Subjects taught in Filipino Subjects taught in English A. Elementary A. Elementary B. High school B. High school  Activity 2. Looking at your lists of subjects in the table, which subjects were easy to study? Which ones did you find difficult to understand? ____________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________ Activity 3. Do you think the language used as medium of instruction affects your level of understanding in these subjects? Why? ____________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________ Let us take a closer look into our Bilingual Education Policy. LANGUAGE POLICIES IN THE PHILIPPINES Constitutional Basis The Language provision in the 1987 Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines which are embodied in Article XIV, Sec. 6 and 7 provide the legal basis for the various language policies that are being implemented in the country. The ratification of the above-mentioned constitution resolved the issue on what the national language is, since the 1935 and 1973 Philippine Charters were not clear about this. The provision are as follows: 1. Section 6. The national language of the Philippines is Filipino. As it evolves, it shall be further developed and enriched on the basis of existing Philippine and other languages. 2. For purposes of communication and instruction, the official languages of the Philippines are Filipino and, until otherwise provided by law, English. The Philippine Bilingual Education Policy (BEP) Consistent with the 1987 constitutional mandate and a declared policy of the National Board of Education (NBE) on bilingualism in the schools (NBE Resolution No. 73-7, s.1973) the Department of Education, Culture and Sports (DECS) promulgated its language policy. The policy was first implemented in 1974 when DECS issued Dept. Order No. 25, s. 1974 titled, “Implementing Guidelines for the Policy on Bilingual Education.” Bilingual education in the Philippines is defined operationally as the separate use of Filipino and English as the media of instruction in specific subject areas. As embodied in the DECS Order No. 25, Pilipino (changed to Filipino in 1987) shall be used as medium of instruction in social studies/social sciences, music, arts, physical education, home economics, practical arts and character education. English, on the other hand is allocated to science, mathematics and technology subjects. The same subject allocation is provided in the 1987 Policy on Bilingual Education which is disseminated through Department Order No. 52, s. 1987. The policy is as follows: The policy on Bilingual Education aims at the achievement of competence in both Filipino and English at the national level, through the teaching of both languages and their use as media of instruction at all levels. The regional languages shall be used as auxiliary languages in Grades I and II. The aspiration of the Filipino nation is to have its citizens possess skills in Filipino to enable them to perform their functions and duties in order to meet the needs of the country in the community of nations. The goals of the Bilingual Education Policy shall be: 1. enhanced learning through two languages to achieve quality education as called for by the 1987 Constitution; 2. the propagation of Filipino as a language of literacy; 3. the development of Filipino as a linguistic symbol of national unity and identity; 4. the cultivation and elaboration of Filipino as a language of scholarly discourse, that is to say its continuing intellectualization; and 5. the maintenance of English as an international language for the Philippines and as a non-exclusive language of science and technology. Filipino and English shall be used as media of instruction, the use allocated to specific subjects in the curriculum as indicated in the Department Order No. 25, s. 1974. The regional languages shall be used as auxiliary media of instruction and as initial language for literacy, where needed. Filipino and English shall be taught as language subjects in all levels to achieve the goals of bilingual competence. Since competence in the use of both Filipino and English is one of the goals of the Bilingual Education Policy, continuing improvement in the teaching of both languages, their use as media of instruction and the specification of their functions in Philippine schooling shall be the responsibility of the whole educational system. Tertiary level institutions shall lead in the continuing intellectualization of Filipino. The program of intellectualization, however, shall also be pursued in both the elementary and secondary levels. The Department of Education, Culture and Sports shall cooperate with the National Language Commission which according to the 1987 Constitution, shall be tasked with the further development and enrichment of Filipino. The Department of Education Culture and Sports shall provide the means by which the language policy can be implemented with the cooperation of government and non-government organizations. The Department shall program funds for implementing the Policy, in such areas as materials production, in-service training, compensatory and enrichment program for non-Tagalogs, development of a suitable and standardized Filipino for classroom use and the development of appropriate evaluative instruments. Guidelines for the implementation of the 1987 Policy on Bilingual Education are specified in the DECS Order No. 54, s. 1987. Among these are the need to intellectualize Filipino and the concrete steps suggested towards its realization. Activity 1. The Bilingual Education Policy guides our curriculum makers in designing language activities and in maintaining the use of Filipino and English in Philippine schools. These are key points which can sum up the BEP that you just read. How do you understand them? In your own words, tell how did you understand these points. Key points Explanation 1. Bilingual Education is the separate use of English and Filipino 2. Achievement of Bilingual Competence 3. Regional languages are used as auxiliary languages when necessary 4. Maintenance of English as international language and non- exclusive language for Science and Technology 5. Intellectualization of Filipino Now it’s your turn to add your own “key points” from the BEP which you think can help you understand the policy better. 6. 7.  8. 9. 10. Activity 2. What was your major realization on the BEP after reading it? Write this major realization in the bubble wrap below: I used to think that… Now, I realized…. Philippine schools are mandated to implement the BEP in ways that could promote development of the vernacular, the national and the English language. How is BEP being implemented in the Basic Education? Below are some points as embodied in the BEP. How did your school implement the provisions of the BEP and how do you think these provisions were violated? Accomplish the table with the necessary information. Bilingual Education Activities conducted in Activities/Things done Policy your school to as possible violations or implement/support the unsupportive of the provision provision 1. As embodied in the DECS Order No. 25, Pilipino (changed to Filipino in 1987) shall be used as medium of instruction in social studies/social sciences, music, arts, physical education, home economics, practical arts and character education. 2. English, on the other hand is allocated to science, mathematics and technology subjects. 3. The regional languages shall be used as auxiliary languages in Grades I and II. 4. the cultivation and elaboration of Filipino as a language of scholarly discourse, that is to say its continuing intellectualization 5. the development of Filipino as a linguistic symbol of national unity and identity;  Activity 2. The BEP also provides that “Tertiary level institutions shall lead in the continuing intellectualization of Filipino”. Enumerate at least three activities/things your class, or the CSU as whole is doing to support this provision. 1. ____________________________________________________________ 2. ____________________________________________________________ 3. ____________________________________________________________ Below are scenarios in the Philippine schools which may be an impact of the implementation of Bilingual Education. Choose one between these scenarios and write a reaction paper: Activity 1. Commission on Higher Education memorandum Order (CMO) 20,s. 2013 defers the offering of Wika and Panitikan in Tertiary levels and leaves the decision to the institutions on whether to offer these subjects in their programs. What is your stand in this issue. Voice out what you think by writing a five- paragraph reaction paper. Your reaction paper will be graded using the rubric below: Activity 2. Code -switching or the alternate use of two languages (e.g Filipino and English) in one sentence or in a discourse is a popular technique among bilinguals. T Also, this speaking pattern is mostly found in classrooms learning content area subjects (Science, Math, Professional and General education subjects). Others justify that code- switching is part of bilingual education. Now that you already have the idea of what the Bilingual Education is in the Philippines, do you agree that the Bilingual Policy of Education can be used to justify Code-switching in the Classroom? Explain your answer in three to five paragraphs. Your work will be graded using the rubric below. Features 4 3 2 1  Expert Accomplished Capable Beginner Piece was Piece had Piece was written in an Piece had no little style or written in an interesting style or voice voice extraordinary style and Gives no new Quality of Gives some style and voice voice information Writing new very Somewhat and very information informative and informative poorly but poorly well organized and organized organized organized Few So many Virtually no spelling A number of spelling, spelling, and spelling, punctuation Grammar, punctuation punctuatio punctuation and Usage & or ns errors, or grammatical Mechanics grammatical minor grammatical errors that it errors grammatic errors interferes with al errors the meaning Source: ThoughtCo.com The BEP in the Philippines: Models, Benefits, Challenges Learning Competencies: 1. Explain the Bilingual Education models 2. Explain why did the Philippines implemented Bilingual Education 3. Point out the benefits, challenges and issues concerning the implementation of Bilingual Education in the Philippines Introduction: In today’s world, “bilingualism is more the norm than the exception,” (Lessow- Hurley, 2000). Governments around the world are now developing bilingual/multilingual educational policies, not only as a response to their nations’ innate linguistic heterogeneity, but also as a means of coping with a world whose borders are increasingly disappearing. The Philippines is no different from the rest of the world: the average Filipino speaks three to four languages. There are two official languages, English and Filipino. Filipino, the basis of various local languages, is the language of the streets, popular media and the masses. Inhabitants of Metro Manila, the nation’s capital, are all exposed to these two languages the minute they are born. Yet, when they enter school, English is introduced as the “global” language, as well as the language of math, science and technology. The Philippines is in a linguistic situation where English and Filipino are used predominantly for different functions: English is used for formal and business communication needs, as well as for most academic discourse. Thus, it becomes imperative to learn this language, mostly at the expense of the other. Activity 1. Fill-out the first two columns of the table below (Ready and Set). You can go back to the last two columns after reading the texts to be given to you. Topics Ready Set Go Whoa (What Do I (What Do I (What New (What know?) Think I will Information questions Do Learn?) Do I have?) I still have about the topic?) Dual language model Development of BEP of the Philippines (What triggered its formation?) Benefits of implementing BEP Challenges and issues in implementing BEP  Bilingual Approaches to Language Learning Bilingual Approaches to language learning describe the various bilingual models found in different levels. In different parts of the world, the attainment of proficiency in two or more languages is viewed as highly a desirable goal. Sometimes the development of bilingual skills takes place outside the bounds of formal education, impelled by individual factors in socio-cultural context. The emphasis of bilingual education is understanding how two or more languages are used within an educational system to promote the goal of proficiency in both languages. The Bilingual Education Program of the Philippines (BEP), where English is the medium of instruction in Science and Mathematics and Pilipino or Filipino, the national language, in all other subjects, has been recognized as one of the earliest comprehensive bilingual education experiments in the world. The BEP was institutionalized in 1974 and since then, it has been the broad framework of the educational system in the country. Prior to 1974, English had been practically the sole medium of instruction in the Philippines since 1901 when the public education system was put in place by the Americans. From then on, the Dual Language Bilingual Education model, where academic programs are taught in two languages, is being used. Philippine schools specifically use two forms of dual language bilingual education. Through the years, the Filipino and English languages were used, and the Mother Tongue as an auxiliary language for instruction. a. Transitional program- this dual language bilingual education provides students with some level of instruction in their primary or native language for a certain period of time—generally one to three years—before students transition into English-only instructional programs in content areas. They are known as “one-way” programs because they only serve one group— non-native English speakers. Before the emergence of the Mother Tongue Instruction in the Philippines, the native language referred to in this program is the Filipino language-our National Language. However at present, with the implementation of the Mother Tongue-Based Multi Lingual Education (MTB-MLE) some public schools in the Philippines use the children’s vernacular language as the primary medium of instruction in Kinder to grade three levels before using both Filipino and English in grades four to grade six levels. b. Maintenance program. In this program, the students are provided with concurrent instruction in English and their primary language throughout their elementary-school years—typically pre-kindergarten through sixth grade—with the goal of developing English fluency and academic literacy  in both languages. This program is continued during secondary and tertiary levels. Both transitional and maintenance programs include instructional strategies associated with English as a second language In a report, `Tupas and Lorente (2014) summarized the development and implementation of the Bilingual Education Policy (BEP) in the Philippines Development of BEP in the Philippines In the postcolonial era, this ‘American legacy’ of English shaped the landscape in which national language and bilingual education policies were debated on and carried out. Whatever the form and substance of language debates at any given point, the politics of language in the Philippines always featured the tension between English on the one hand and the vernacular languages on the other. English represented colonial oppression and ideological superiority, as well as democracy and modernity. The vernacular languages represented barbarism, tribalism and anti- Americanism, as well as freedom and social justice. The Filipino’s urge for freedom from this “American legacy” led them to choose a single language that will represent them. Among the competing Philippine languages, Tagalog became the basis of the national language for many possible reasons, including the fact that it was the language spoken by most of the national leaders including then Philippine President Manuel Quezon. Also, the seat of political government was (and still is) in Manila in Central Luzon, the region in which the majority of people spoke Tagalog as a mother tongue. But because of this choice as the national language, the politics of language took on an ethnolinguistic dimension (Gonzalez 1991). At the time, Bisaya, the language spoken in Central Visayas and in many parts of Mindanao, was numerically greater than Tagalog (Smolicz & Nical 1997), leading to accusations of Tagalog imperialism or internal colonization. It was precisely because of the political sensitivity about Tagalog as the national language that it was renamed Pilipino in 1959 through a memorandum from the Department of Education. During the debates in the national assembly for the purpose of rewriting the Philippine Constitution in 1973, ethnolinguistic rivalries flared up again when the national language issue was deliberated (Gonzalez 1980). Because of different levels of compromise among political leaders in the national assembly, Pilipino ceased to be the national language of the country. Instead, Section 3.2 of Article XV of the 1973 Philippine constitution stated that: The National Assembly shall take steps towards the development and formal adoption of a common national language to be known as Filipino. Tagalog, Pilipino or Filipino, its inclusion as a medium of instruction is history for the Philippines. This was, in fact, the first time in the history of 20th century Philippine education that the dominance of English in the schools was seriously challenged by another language. Except for vernacular instruction in Grades 1 and 2, between 1957 and 1974, English was the sole medium of instruction in school from the time it was introduced in 1901 until the promulgation of bilingual education in 1974. Two key points, therefore, were instrumental to the emergence of bilingual education in the Philippines: First was the question about the sole dominance of English as a colonial language in Philippine schools. A vernacular language, in the form of a national language, would arguably have better chances than English of eliminating inequalities in Philippine education perpetuated by and through the sole use of English as medium of instruction. The second key point that led to the emergence of bilingual education in the country was the question about Pilipino as the national language itself. Because of ethnolinguistic rivalries, Pilipino ceased to be the national language in the Philippine constitution but it resurfaced as a medium of instruction alongside English. In 1987, the constitution was again rewritten during the administration of President Corazon Aquino after the ousting of Ferdinand E. Marcos during the 1986 People Power revolt. Section 6, Article 16 of the 1987 Philippine Constitution stipulated in definitive terms that ‘The national language of the Philippines is Filipino’. Thus, while Filipino was still a linguistic fiction in 1973 (Gonzalez 1980), it became a sociolinguistic reality in 1987. Filipino, unlike Tagalog or Pilipino, signalled the ‘non-exclusivist and multilingual character’ of the national language (Nolasco 2010, p. 171). This was followed by Department of Education Order No. 52 which spelled out further the political framework of the BEP. This time Filipino, not Pilipino, was to be a medium of instruction alongside English, even if ‘Tagalog’, ‘Pilipino’ and ‘Filipino’ were essentially the same linguistically (Nolasco 2010). The contributions of Bilingual Education to Philippine society Viewed through the lens of a decolonizing agenda, bilingual education in the country undoubtedly ruptured the dominance of English in Philippine education. Although it has not really displaced English as a symbol of power and prestige (Tupas 2008), it has opened up resistance to neocolonial dominance in Philippine education through the use of a local language as a language of learning (Enriquez 1989). ‘Tagalog’ (in 1937), ‘Pilipino’ (in 1973) or ‘Filipino’ (in 1987) would serve as the language of nationalism (or anti-colonialism) which would arrest the mis-education of the Filipino people through English (Constantino 1970; see also Enriquez 1989; Almario 1999). In other words, bilingual education would constitute part of what may be called ‘a pedagogy of liberation’ (Alexander 2009, p. 199). For example, the importance of a national language contributed to what many scholars have called the indigenization of knowledge construction in the country. The indigenous national language has served as a vehicle for the recuperation of local knowledges and ways of thinking and doing which have been marginalized by Western - based research theories and methodologies, for example in the social sciences. Through the national language, an intellectual tradition called Pantayong Pananaw has emerged in the social sciences, roughly a perspective of history and society that takes on a ‘from-us-for-us’ point of view where research and other forms of intellectual scrutiny centred on problems and solutions that are relevant to the lives of Filipinos (Bautista & Pe-Pua 1991). Sociolinguistically, Tagalog-based Filipino through bilingual education increasingly became widespread across the archipelago, and took root in the lives of many Filipinos especially through the media and popular culture. The same national language has served as lingua franca among Filipino workers scattered all over the world. Although still resisted along ethnolinguistic lines, research has shown that majority of Filipinos have come to accept the Filipino language as the country’s national language (Nical, Smolicz & Secombe 2003). Bilingual education, thus, has cemented the role of Filipino as the country’s main interethnic lingua franca elevating it to a national symbol of unity through which the Filipino people’s national identity and aspirations could allegedly be expressed (Sibayan,1991). Problems and Criticisms of Bilingual Education In its simplest form bilingual education is the use of two languages. In a more sophisticated context, bilingual education is the use of the native language for instructional purposes while English is being learned as a second language. While the implementation of the Bilingual education is a big step, unfortunately, as a program commonly externally imposed, it has not received general acceptance by the education community. Bilingual programs are often reluctantly implemented, inadequately staffed, limited in resources and poorly administered. The program has been implemented decades ago, but its status is still unresolved. It is a fact that global and local socioeconomic and political formations continued to perpetuate the symbolic dominance of English in the country. In the 1970s and the 1980s during which bilingual education was institutionalized and took root, the whole Philippine society under the Marcos dictatorship was increasingly being reconfigured toward an export-driven liberalized economy under the aegis of the World Bank and other global institutions (Tupas 2008a). Among many things, this meant deploying the infrastructures of bilingual education to train young Filipino bodies to become export-ready labor commodities to help keep the fledging economy adrift. A key feature of the politics of development aid during this period was the well-documented collusion between the dictatorship and the US-led global economic institutions (Bello et al. 1982). One example of this was the infusion of funds into the Philippines in exchange for control over the content and management of education through which the so-called benefits of labor export, the gains of dictatorship, and the triumph of globalization could be heralded as “truths” (Constantino 1999). During this period, school texts were “supervised and financed by the World Bank” (Mulder 1990, p. 85), thus the content of bilingual education was essentially ideologically suspect, if not flawed. In serving the economy, bilingual education contributed hugely to the tiering of English linguistic proficiencies which would then correlate with the kinds of jobs and economic opportunities available to different socioeconomic classes in Philippine society (Tupas 2008a; Sibayan and Gonzalez 1996). The 1970s saw the emergence of the discourse of English as a necessary social and economic good in the making of what Lorente (2012) now calls the “workers of the world.” On the contrary, Constantino (1982) claims that English is a social wedge between the small Filipino elite and the great majority of Filipinos masses True, as Hau and Tinio (2003) contend, that “Filipino appears to stand a better chance” (p. 347) to address the “compelling need in the Philippines to create linguistic public spaces where different classes and groups can meet on a common linguistic ground” (ibid.). Nevertheless, it was hijacked by the collusive agenda of the State and global economic institutions and their guardians. Until today, there still exist a debate on the practicality of using the Filipino and the vernacular in some subjects or as separate subjects in the curriculum, considering that they may not be useful in technical courses, and that, they may be learned in our own homes. The first and most comprehensive evaluation of the accomplishments of bilingual education in the country (Gonzalez and Sibayan 1988) found that more than Medium of Instruction (MOI), the most significant contributor to success in learning in school in the country is the socioeconomic composition of the student population which correlates with quality of teachers, salary, and proximity to an urban environment. In other words, bilingual education failed to overturn “opportunities for advancement which seem to be largely restricted to those who already enjoy social and economic advantages in Philippine society” (Bernardo 2004, p. 26). Another criticism on the BEP is the seemingly impossible separation of English and Filipino in one course or subject. One very common phenomenon in a bilingual class is the use of code-switching specially when teaching a content-area subject. Code-switching is the practice of alternating between two or more languages or varieties of language in conversation. Traditional grammarians call this “poor English”. For them, not being able to speak eloquent English is an evidence of incompetency and lack of language facility. On the other hand, research like that of Martin (2006) proved that code-switching does not hinder students to achieve fluency in English nor did it hinder the learning experience of Science. She claimed from her data that code –switching is not only useful in the learning experience of the students, but also in teaching. Bernardo (2005) stresses that multilingualism is not a problem in teaching and learning. He emphasizes that it must actually be used as a resource to help increase students’ achievement. Unacceptable though, it is very evident that code - switching has penetrated the premises of the schools, and even inside the classrooms. Students and teachers alike are heard code -switching in meetings and other gatherings, and even in classroom discussions. Whether we like it or not, we find comfort in code - switching as we use it in expressing our ideas. In our curriculum where most of the subjects are taught in English, sometimes we cannot help but to code - switch to facilitate understanding and allow more rooms for exchanging of ideas (Dela Cruz, 2018) Code-switching, though typical in our society, does not seem to be aligned with the BEP of the Philippines, thus, remains a controversy. Activity 1. After reading the texts given to you, you are now to fill-out the last two columns of the table below (Go and Whoa). Topics Ready Set Go Whoa  (What Do I (What Do I (What New (What know?) Think I will Information questions Do Learn?) Do I have?) I still have about the topic?) Dual language model Development of BEP of the Philippines Benefits of implementing BEP Challenges in implementing BEP Activity 1. Below are some key points, scenarios, and issues which are presented in the reading materials on the implementation of the BEP in the Philippines. React and reflect on them by indicating how do you feel and what do you think about them. You can use real-life experiences, your readings, and results of researches to backup how you feel and what you think. Choose just three of the issues presented for your reaction. Issues How do you feel What do you think about the Issue? about the Issue? 1. English represented colonial oppression and ideological superiority as well as democracy and modernity 2. Vernacular languages represented barbarism, tribalism and anti- Americanism 3. Tagalog became the basis of national language for many possible reasons  including the fact that it was the language spoken by most of the national leaders including the then Pre. Manuel L. Quezon 4. Tagalog, Filipino or Pilipino, it was the first time in the history of 20th Century Philippine Education that dominance of English s seriously challenged by another language 5. Although bilingual education has not displaced English as a symbol of power and prestige, It has opened -up resistance to neo-colonial dominance in Philippine Education through the use of the local language as a language of learning. 6. The indigenous national language has served as vehicle for the recuperation of local knowledge and ways of and thinking and doing which have been marginalized by western research theories 7. Bilingual Education has cemented the role of Filipino as country’s main lingua franca elevating it to a national symbol of unity and national identity 8. Because English is continuously perpetuated as a symbol of dominance, bilingual education is a hindrance to learning English 9. The content of bilingual education is flawed as the  idea of globalization triumphs and as our educational system trains young Filipinos to become export- ready labor commodity. 10. Bilingual Education failed to overturn opportunities for advancement and it seems that it is restricted to those students with social and economic advantage. Activity 1. Go back to the provisions, policies and goals of the Bilingual Education of the Philippines. As a Filipino learner, which one of these provisions, goals and policies do you agree the most? Which one don’t you agree the most too? Use the table for your answers. Provision, goal, policy which I… Agree Do not Agree Reasons Activity 2. One of the perceived reasons why Bilingual Education has not received general acceptance in education community is because of lack of training and orientation of teachers on the policies and on the implementation of the program. If you were a curriculum designer, would you like to include Bilingual Education in the Philippines as a separate Professional Education subject to all students taking up education course, instead of only English majors studying it? Why or why not? Put your answers on the table below:  Bilingual Education in the Philippines Bilingual Education in the Philippines must be a separate professional must be not be a separate professional Education subject among all education Education subject among all education students students. Only English majors should study it. 1. 1. 2. 2. 3. 3. Congratulations! You have tackled the third module in this subject. Give yourself a thumbs-up for a job-well done! This time, reflect on your learnings in this module. Put your reflections on the boxes following the guide statements: I am certain that I I think there is still a I could apply what I learned about… need to learn more learned by… about… References: 1. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/307551787_Bilingual_and_Mot her_Tongue- Based_Multilingual_Education_in_the_Philippines/link/5c3715d0a6fdccd 6b5a0a216/ 2. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/305002463_A_'New'_Politics_o f_Language_in_the_Philippines_Bilingual_Education_and_the_New_Chal lenge_of_the_Mother_Tongues 3. https://www.u-keiai.ac.jp/issn/menu/ronbun/no19/19-175_yanagi.pdf 4. https://www.seameo.org/_ld2008/doucments/Presentation_document/Alm ario_Villenueva_DualLanguage.pdf 5. https://www.seameo.org/_ld2008/doucments/Presentation_document/Alm ario_Villenueva_DualLanguage.pdf 6. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/studies-in-second-language- acquisition/article/evaluating-bilingual-education-in-the-philippines- 19741985-andrew-gonzalez-and-bonifacio-p-sibayan-eds-manila- linguistics-society-of-the-philippines-1988-pp- iv175/07BD2806280C66AD90D041E54A3972D2