TOPIC: MOTHER TONGUE-BASED-MULTILINGUAL EDUCATION (MTB-MLE)

DEFINITION A formal or nonformal education, in which childrens mother tongue is used in the classroom as a bridge in learning Filipino and English. Children begin their education in a language they understand, and developed a strong foundation in their mother language. The use of more than two (2) languages for literacy and instruction. It starts from where the learners are and from what they already know. This means learning to speak, read, write, and think using their 1st language teaching mathematics, science, health and social studies in their first language.

THE PROCESS As students develop a strong foundation in their first language, they are gradually introduced to their second language (English, Filipino), first orally, then the written form. With adequate 2nd language instruction, cognitive skills and subject content acquired in the 1st language can now transfer to the 2nd language.

PURPOSE: To develop appropriate cognitive and reasoning skills To enable children to operate equally in different languages- starting in the mother tongue with transition to Filipino and then English. To provides learners with a strong educational foundation in the first language.

BENEFITS: Reduced drop-out, reduced repetition, children are attending school, children are learning, parents and community are involvement Implementation is more cost-effective

MOTHER TONGUE-BASED-MULTILINGUAL EDUCATION (MTB-MLE) Dep-Ed Order No. 16, s. 2012 Starting SY 2012-2013, MTB-MLE shall be implemented in all public school, in Kindergarten, Grade 1, 2, and 3 as part of the K to 12 Basic Education Program GOAL: Every Child A Reader and A Writer by Grade 1 Eight (8) major languages or Lingua Franca shall be offered and utilized as language of instruction Tagalog, Kapampangan, Pangasinense, Ilokano, Bikol, Cebuano, Hiligaynon, Waray, Tausug, Maguindanaoan, Maranao, Chabacano OBJECTIVES OF MTB-MLE Develop language development which establishes a strong education success in school and for life long learning Develop cognitive development which focuses on Higher Order thinking Skills (HOTS) Develop Academic development which prepares the learner to acquire mastery of competencies in each of the learning areas Develop socio-cultural awareness which enhances the pride of the learners heritage, language and culture

 AREAS OF FOCUS OF MTB-MLE MT as subject will focus on the development of beginning reading and fluency from Grade 1 to 3 MT shall be used as the medium of instruction in all domains/learning areas from Kindergarten through Grade 3 except Filipino and English Filipino language will be introduced in 1st Semester Grade 1 for oral fluency; reading and writing will be introduced in the 2nd Semester Grade 1. Oral fluency in English will be introduced in the 2nd semester of Grade 1, while reading and writing in English will start in the 1st Semester of Grade 2. The four (4) macro skills, namely: listening, speaking, reading, and writing will continuously be developed from Grade 2-6 TEACHING AND LEARNING PROCESS MT shall be used as MOI in the Kindergarten or Grade 1 class. In school where there are three (3) or more MTs or variations without an approved orthography spoken by the pupils, the LINGUA FRANCA in that area shall be used as the MOI. Special classes offering the childrens MT may be held twice a week if a teacher is available for the development of oral fluency. The oral fluency skills shall be bridged to any of the languages. When an approved orthography of the MT is available and learning resources have been developed with trained teachers, the schools are encouraged to use the MT. School heads shall inform the Division Office so that technical assistance could be provided and learning resources could be evaluated to meet the national standard for learning resources. TEACHERS TRAINING AND DEVELOPMENT MTB-MLE regional training team shall be responsible for the division and school-based training teachers on the MTB-MLE for the K to 12 Basic Education Program.

 PREPARATION OF LEARNING PROCESS Regions, divisions and schools MTB-MLE trained writer shall continuously update their knowledge and skills in the development of indigenized materials thus, providing students with variety of learning resources.

Reference/s: Dep-Ed Order No. 16, s. 2012

ANALYSIS: The desire to make classrooms enjoyable for children can work against education if the fact that learning requires work is ignored. Cognitive development is a process, and like other processes, requires both time and energy. Learning is rewarding and with children, the effort alone is integral to developing the brain. Without challenges, the brain will not master thinking processes. Making classrooms enjoyable means equipping the schools with the necessary materials and inputs for education, supporting adequately the teachers. It means creating an environment that is physically conducive to learning. It does not mean lowering the standards and expectations. Having the mother tongue in school is important as it provides children a sense of familiarity, easing their transition from home to school. Learning to read and write in the mother tongue as a formal subject in the early years is, without doubt, important. Using the mother tongue as a medium of instruction is the questionable part. Claims have been made that children learn faster and more effectively when instruction is done in the mother tongue. Indeed, browsing through the internet, one will arrive at numerous articles that either support or dismiss this notion. For this reason, it is important to examine the evidence behind these claims. The lack of learning materials on science and math in the mother tongue requires a serious inspection of how the medium of instruction affects children in their cognitive development. Adopting mother tongue based - multilingual education requires substantial investments in money, time and energy. The MTB-MLE is allegedly based on studies that showed that children who were taught in their dialect learned better than those who were taught in their second language, which is either Filipino or English. I really do not know in which particular region the said study was conducted. For its result to be fair and conclusive, was there also a parallel study conducted in schools in the Tagalog region? I mean, one is made to understand that, according to the study, Bicolandia children who were taught via the Bicol dialect, for example, had learned better than when they were taught in English or Pilipino. But how conclusive is the study and its findings? Does it also apply in the Tagalog region, for example. That is to say, the mother tongue is Filipino in this region,

where the medium of instruction has always been Filipino in the lower grades. Has there also been a study showing that children in Bulacan, Laguna, Quezon and Batangas have generally been fast and better learners than their counterparts in the Bicol or Ilocos region? I don't think and I refuse to believe so. I think that people from the DEPED themselves will in good conscience admit the plain truth that, taking all other variables equal, our public school children in the Tagalog provinces are just generally in the same degree of learning capabilities and aptitudes as their counterparts in the nonTagalog regions. More clearly put, Kinder-to-Grade III children in the Tagalog regions are definitely not as better prepared for Grade IV and onwards than those from any other region. To contradict this plain truth is not unlike contradicting human nature itself. If there is ever a difference, I believe it is not because of the medium of instruction per se -- maybe the quality of teachers and the like.... The positive effect of using the first language as a medium of instruction has been consistently backed by linguistic studies, so there is little dispute with regards to this reforms benefit. Using the first language will invariably make access to the body of knowledge in a particular science much easier for an individual. But it must be pointed out that the Philippines has a rather complicated linguistic situation. While the Tagalog language serves as backbone to a national language in the making (called Filipino), there is a multitude of languages being spoken as mother tongues in the Archipelago. There are areas with a dominant L1 (mainly homelands of the language, the Tagalog area for Tagalog, Cebu and Negros Oriental for Cebuano, Iloilo and Bacolod for Hiligaynon, etc.), but there are areas with a great degree of linguistic diversity (Davao, Iligan, etc.), and application of the program on the latter will prove to be difficult. While the Mode 2 of the DepEd order provides for the use of the Lingua Franca of the area (which is among eight major languages identified by the order), the Mode is only in the event that the L1s being used do not have an orthography (or simply when the L1s used are not among the eight identified major languages). There will be a theoretical complication when the situation is to be applied on an area with such linguistic diversity that there are more than one of the eight major languages being used (i.e. in Davao, Cebuano only outnumbers Tagalog by a small margin; in Mlang, North Cotabato, Hiligaynon barely outnumbers Cebuano). In practice of course, this doesnt cause much of a problem. The emphasis on multilingual education will entail that the teacher will end up using a combination of the languages. In Waray for instance, the teacher will end up using both Tagalog and Waray. But this, however, opens up another complication. Though this is still in the early stages of education, we would be prudent to assume that the model will be applied to all levels of education in the future. As such, we must express concern over the development of the languages being used. Take note that in linguistically diverse areas, a combination of the languages will inevitably be used. And this, of course, is code

switching. Code switching, any student of language knows, will end up diluting the languages, reducing them to only a fraction of their original form. In the worst case scenario, the students will be proficient in only the code switched form of the language, and they will be barely capable of uttering a sentence purely in one language. The above scenario is a double edged sword, and we must do justice by pointing out the pros and cons thereto. Perhaps the best thing about the situation would be a contribution to the development of the National language in the making. If we are to conceive the Filipino language as a creole of the different languages in the country, then the MTB-MLE will add the colloquial arena of the development of the National Language to the academe. But conversely, the program will end up incorporating English, and any attempt to keep our would be National language pure of western influence impossible. Similarly, the same program will end up limiting the intellectual pool of each language, as ideas will still remain represented by specific words. To maximize the benefits of the program without suffering its drawbacks, it is suggested that efforts for the intellectualization of the local languages be continued. In line with the orders mode 2, the same efforts for intellectual development of the languages should also be applied to other mother tongues, so that the small group of languages identified as linguae franca will be expanded. I will write a post on the possible development of a National Language later on. There is also a big problem with the register of the language to be used. While it is easy to say that using the mother tongue will make comprehension of the subjec t matter easier, we must consider the fact that the mother tongue with which the student is comfortable is in its colloquial form, and the colloquial form will invariably be inadequate as an instructional medium. The terminological precision inherent in an academic form of language remains foreign even to the native speaker of the same language who only comprehends it in its colloquial form. That, of course, is the case in the Philippines, and we thus get jokes about the apparent difficulty of comprehending math lessons if they are to be taught in Tagalog. Even if we are successful in trying to intellectualize our local languages in order to exorcise the colonial demons that compel us to borrow lexically, we still end up forming a language difficult for the student to comprehend. This matter, of course, is not unsolvable, but the solution will be difficult. There must be, once and for all, an institutionalized mass effort to increase the competence of our people in academic register. To put it simply, we must begin undoing our natural aversion to smart talk. This will involve a great amount of effort on the mass media to make their language more terminologically precise, and on the meta-level, they must contribute to the positive portrayal of such terminologically precise language. If we can somehow bridge the gap between colloquial language and academic

language, comprehension in class, no matter how difficult the subject is, will definitely be higher than otherwise. The government is taking small steps to what could be a reform with tremendous impact, and to rush would merely be detrimental. It is nevertheless hoped that all implications, no matter how small they may seem will be taken into consideration. MTBMLE in the Philippines could work wonders, or it could destroy our linguistic identities irreversibly.