Scribd
Upload
151 views3 pages

Position Paper

This document is a position paper submitted by Pia P. Sumalinog to their instructor Marlon C. Rañises at Ramon Magsaysay Memorial Colleges arguing that the implementation of Mother Tongue Based- Multilingual Education (MTB-MLE) in the Philippines should be suspended rather than retained. The paper provides several arguments against MTB-MLE, including that it may adversely affect students' English literacy development, marginalizes minor languages, fails to consider concerns of migration, uses complicated language that is difficult for students to comprehend, and poses challenges with insufficient teacher training and resources. The paper concludes that MTB-MLE has issues that need to be addressed, and recommends returning to using Filipino and

Uploaded by

Charisse Sumalinog
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
151 views3 pages

Position Paper

This document is a position paper submitted by Pia P. Sumalinog to their instructor Marlon C. Rañises at Ramon Magsaysay Memorial Colleges arguing that the implementation of Mother Tongue Based- Multilingual Education (MTB-MLE) in the Philippines should be suspended rather than retained. The paper provides several arguments against MTB-MLE, including that it may adversely affect students' English literacy development, marginalizes minor languages, fails to consider concerns of migration, uses complicated language that is difficult for students to comprehend, and poses challenges with insufficient teacher training and resources. The paper concludes that MTB-MLE has issues that need to be addressed, and recommends returning to using Filipino and

Uploaded by

Charisse Sumalinog
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 3

RAMON MAGSAYSAY MEMORIAL COLLEGES

College of Arts & Sciences


General Santos City

Bachelor of Arts in English Language

Linguistic Society of the Philippines (LSP) against House Bill No. 2188
“An Act Suspending the Implementation of the use of Mother Tongue
as the Medium of Instruction for Kindergarten to Grade 3”:
A Position Paper

September 14, 2022

In partial fulfillment
of the requirements in ESLM 4
Issues and Perspective in English Language Studies

Presented by:

Pia P. Sumalinog
1910210003

Presented to:

MARLON C. RAÑISES, LPT, MAEd


Instructor
The Philippines is a linguistically diverse country. Specifically, the medium of instruction has

been one of the key areas in our education curriculum which undergone drastic transition from the

previous years. The implementation of Mother Tongue Based- Multilingual Education (MTB-MLE)

under the Enhanced Basic Education Acts of 2013 (RA 10533) had not only created changes in our

country's educational system but also brought forth controversies and mixed opinions from different

educational and linguistic sectors with regards to its realization. Hence, given the various issues it

had faced since its inception, the House Bill No. 6125 was proposed on February 25, 2020, which

calls for the suspension of the implementation of mother tongue or first language as a medium of

instruction from Kindergarten to Grade 3. This has been received with a frown by the Linguistic

Society of the Philippines (LSP) which asserts their stand that the MTB-MLE should not be

suspended but rather be strengthened and maintained.

Contrariwise, it is argued in this paper that MTB-MLE should be suspended rather than

retained in our current educational system. First, the global competitiveness of Filipinos in terms of

our English proficiency is slowly depleting. In a study conducted by Namanya (2017), the paper

concluded that children taught in the mother tongue demonstrated a decline in English literacy level.

This has been affirmed by scholars who had already concluded that MTB-MLE may adversely affect

children’s English literacy development (Alberto, Gabinete, & Ranola, 2010; Krashen, 1982; Li &

Majhanovich, 2010; Saville-Troike, 2006). Secondly, MTB-MLE only considers the major and the

dominant language in a specific region to be used as a medium of instruction. This is a direct irony to

idea of inclusivity as minor languages would be marginalized in the process. For example, a student

whose mother tongue is “Samal” resides in the Mindanao area whose assigned medium of instruction

is Tausug. What language would the teacher use in the class? Isn’t this “boxing” the other student’s

mother tongue in the name of the dominant or general language spoken in the region? In connection,

the MTB-MLE fails to consider migration-related concerns. For instance, a family transferred from
Visayas to Mindanao (specifically, in a different language-speaking community) due to parents’

employment reasons. How would the learners adapt his/her mother tongue to this new environment?

Third, MTB-MLE claims that mother tongue is the best language of learning for students to

participate more if they use the language that they already know. However, ironically, the terms used

in as a medium of instruction is far from the “everyday” language that the student are using within

their homes as words are far complicated and a lot of times, “archaic”. Rather than making this easy

to the child and the teacher as well, difficulties in comprehending these words arises more often.

There are also highly technical words in science or math that may not have direct translation to other

indigenous language which makes it challenging to teach these subjects in the child’s formative

years. Lastly, MTB-MLE claims that learning the L1 (mother tongue) may help students to build on

the essential skills and concepts necessary to learn L2 (Filipino) and L3 (English). However, L1 is

naturally acquired (not learned) at our respective homes. Isn’t learning the language better means

being exposed to that language as early as possible? Hence, it is undeniable that since learners under

MTB-MLE were only introduced formally to English in their 4 th grade, their English competency

cannot be compared with that of pre-MTB-MLE learners since the latter started learning English in

Kindergarten. In top of these are the other issues that include insufficient teacher training and

inadequate books/references written in mother tongue and lack or deficiency in vocabulary.

In conclusion, MTB-MLE has its fair share of issues that needs to be addressed. Though

teaching students their first language may be beneficial to their character formation and nationalistic

developments, MTB-MLE still has its own challenges with regards to its implementation that

requires careful attention and immediate solution. It is recommended that we go back to Filipino and

English as mediums of instruction and have mother-tongue based education as a separate learning

area or subject instead. DepEd administrators should also revisit the curriculum and realistically

address these issues concerning MTB-MLE than just focusing on the “ideals” of the program.

You might also like