Legal Basis of Language Instruction

Introduction
The Language provision in the 1987 Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines
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 1987 constitution resolved the issue
on what the national language is, since the 1935 and 1973 Philippine Charters were not clear
about this.
The national language of the Philippines is Filipino, according to Section 6, Article XIV of
the 1987 Constitution. Prior to the current constitution, the country has had 4 constitutions since
the declaration of independence in 1896. To understand how the national language was finally
settled in the current constitution, it is relevant to study what the previous constitutions had to
say regarding the national language.
The Constitution recognizes the necessity for uniting the various regional and ethnic
groups despite the geographic divide into a national whole on the basis of a common national
language. President Manuel L. Quezon of the Commonwealth of the Philippines made this
possible through the inclusion of an article in the 1935 Constitution of the Philippines regarding
the development of a national language.
I. Constitutional Basis
A. 1899 Malolos Constitution
Under the Constitucion Politica de Malolos, the constitution of the short-lived first
independent Philippine Republic, no single language was made compulsory in the Philippines
except for Spanish but only "in public and judicial affairs."
The full text of Title IX, Article 93 of the 1899 Constitution goes: The use of the languages
spoken in the Philippines shall not be compulsory. It cannot be regulated except by virtue of law
and only for acts of public authority and judicial affairs. On such occasions, the Spanish language
shall temporarily be used.
The use of the Spanish language in the Philippines declined with the United States'
annexation of the Philippines in 1901 and the introduction of the American public education
system.

B. 1935 Constitution
Under the Americans, the Philippine Assembly launched numerous attempts to lobby for
Philippine independence. Their efforts culminated in 1934 with the Tydings-McDuffie Act, which
led to the foundation of the Philippine Commonwealth in 1935.
 When the constitution of the Commonwealth was being drafted, Camarines Norte
Representative Wenceslao Vinzons proposed the inclusion of an article on adopting a national
language.
His proposal bore fruit in Article XIV, Section 3 of the 1935 Constitution, which directed
the National Assembly to take steps toward the development and adoption of a common
national language based on one of the existing native languages. The mono-based language
school of thought prevailed over those advocating a multi-based national language. It also states
that until otherwise provided by law, English and Spanish shall remain as the official languages
of the Philippines.
After the ratification of the 1935 Constitution, the initial step made by the national
Assembly was the passing of Commonwealth Act No. 184 (1936) that created a national
committee, called the Institute of National Language to study existing Philippine native languages
and dialects and select one of them to be the basis of the development of a Filipino national
language .
Of the more than a hundred languages being spoken by the different ethnolinguistic
groups of dwellers in the more than seven thousand and one hundred islands comprising the
Philippines, eight of them are considered major languages. These major languages are Ilocano,
Pangasinan, Pampango, Tagalog, Bicol, Cebuano, Hiligaynon and Waray-Samarnon.
In November 30, 1937, after a thorough and earnest effort in studying the case, and
following studies and numerous debates among experts and proponents of various regional
languages, the Institute of National Language recommended Tagalog to be the basis for the
national language of the country. The Institute selected Tagalog in view of its being widely spoken
and the most understood language in all the regions of the country. Three years after the
proclamation of Tagalog as the basis of the national language it was decided as one of the official
languages of the Philippines. It was taught as a subject in the teacher education courses and in
the elementary and secondary schools throughout the country. Lope K. Santos who was then
appointed director of the Institute of National Language (1939), undertook the preparation of
grammar book (Balarila ng Wikang Pambansa) which constitute the bulk of what was taught in
school.
In 1961, the government introduced the use of the term Pilipino when referring to the
national language , so as to differentiate the national language from the ethnic group also called
Tagalog. The word gained support, resulting in the renaming of the Tagalog-based national
language as Pilipino.
Due to the fact that a large majority of the Filipino population spoke other native
Philippine languages, the choice of a Tagalog-based national language sparked a still ongoing
debate on the basis of the national language of the country.
 C. 1943 Constitution
During the Second World War, the Japanese occupied the Philippines and established the
Second Philippine Republic.
Part of Japans plan for dominance in Asia was to remove western Influence from its
occupied Asian countries and to encourage local culture. The Japanese encouraged the use of
the National Language rather than English in the schools. The Tagalog-based national language
was, therefore, propagated not only in education but also in mass media and in official
communication. This is reflected in Article IX, Section 2 of the 1943 Constitution, which removed
English and Spanish as official languages and stated: The government shall take steps toward
the development and propagation of Tagalog as the national language."
Like the Malolos Constitution, the 1943 Constitution was short lived. When Allied Forces
liberated the Philippines in 1945, the 1935 Constitution was reinstated. However, with the
constitutions explicit mention of Tagalog, the 1943 Constitution furthered the idea of Tagalog as
the basis of the countrys national language.

D. 1973 Constitution
In 1971, a year before President Ferdinand Marcos declared Martial Law, a Constitutional
Convention began crafting a new constitution, and once again, the National Language issue
sparked heated discussion during the 1973 Constitutional Convention. A committee on National
Language (CNL) was created by the convention delegates to look into the language question and
to make recommendations on the policy that should be adapted on the matter. The CNL, after
hearing conflicting testimonies from various language experts in the country, recommended to
eliminate Pilipino and replace it with a new common national language to be known as Filipino,
based on existing native languages The 1973 Constitution ended up with a carefully-worded
Article XV, Section 3, which states: (2) The Batasang Pambansa shall take steps towards the
development and formal adoption of a common national language to be known as Filipino. (3)
Until otherwise provided by law, English and Pilipino shall be the official languages.
While the common national language contemplated in the 1935 Constitution was based
on one of the existing languages, the Filipino to be developed pursuant to the 1973 constitution
could be a fusion of the different native languages. The multi-based school of thought prevailed.
It means that it need not be based on one of the existing languages but on all of our many regional
languages and dialects. It was a compromise as it did not explicitly mention that Filipino was not
to be based on Tagalog, nor did it state that a Tagalog-based national language was to be
abandoned. Instead, it proposes the development of a language that shall be called Filipino.
The compromise however was met with criticism, as detractors of Filipino stated that such an
artificial language was not feasible, since it lacked both native speakers and a literary tradition to
help propagate it.
 Since the 1950s, Pilipino referred to the national language based on Tagalog alone. By
ordering the Batasang Pambansa (National Assembly) to take steps to develop a national
language to be known as Filipino, the 1973 Constitution introduced the idea that the Filipino
national language, though still with Tagalog as its nucleus, is a work in progress subject to
further development.
This CNL recommendation met a great deal of oppositions from various sectors of the
community. They pointed out that Tagalog advocates remained firm on a Tagalog-based national
language, while a great majority of delegates voted in favor of scrapping the notion of having a
national language altogether.
E. 1987 Constitution
Filipino as the national language of the Philippines was finally settled in the 1987
Constitution. The current working definition of the Philippines national language is found
in Sections 6 and 7 of Article XIV of the 1987 Constitution.
Article XIV section 6 states that,
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. It makes it clear
that said language is already existing and evolving and as Filipino evolves, it shall be further
developed and enriched on the basis of the existing Philippine and other languages, not of just
one existing language. Filipino principally based on Tagalog will eventually include selected words
taken from various existing native languages as well as most familiar or commonly used words
from foreign languages, making it responsive to the times while preserving what makes it
distinctly Filipino.
The constitutional provision further states that subject to provisions of law and as the
Congress may deem appropriate, the Government shall take steps to initiate and sustain the use
of Filipino as a medium of official communication and as language instruction in the educational
system.
Article XIV section 7 states that,
For purposes of communication and instruction, the official languages of the Philippines
are Filipino and, until otherwise provided by law, English. The regional languages are the auxiliary
official languages in the region and shall serve as auxiliary media of instruction therein
In addition, Section 9 orders the establishment of a national language commission, which
will enhance the language-formation role of regional languages through the representation of
various regions and disciplines in the body. The task of this commission is to undertake, promote,
and coordinate researches for the development, propagation, and preservation of Filipino and
other languages.
 The commission came to be known as the Komisyon sa Wikang Filipino (Commission on
the Filipino Language), which was established in August 14,1991.

II. Other Legal Basis

a. DepEd Order No. 25, s. 1974; DepEd Order No. 52, s. 1987
Consistent with the 1987 constitutional mandate the Department of Education
promulgated its language policy. The policy was first implemented in 1974 when it 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 Dept. Order No.
25, Filipino 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 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.
However, following findings of language experts that the superiority in learning when
taught in the national language and that learning is enhanced when the subject is taught in the
home language, the Congressional Commission on Education (EDCOM) recommended a revision
of the policy of bilingual education adopted in 1974 by promoting the use of the dominant
regional and Filipino medium of instruction such that by the year 2000, all subjects except English
and other languages shall be taught in Filipino. It will be impractical to impose Filipino as the sole
medium of instructions in schools. The national language should be allowed to develop by itself.
b. CHED Memorandum Order (CMO) No. 59, s. 1996.
Under CHED Memorandum Order (CMO) No. 59, s. 1996 is its language policy which is as
follows:
In consonance with the Bilingual Education Policy in DepEd Order No. 52, Series of 1987,
the following among others are the guidelines vis-a-vis medium of instruction, to wit:

1. Language courses, whether Filipino or English, should be taught in that language.

2. At the discretion of the HEI, Literature subjects may be taught in Filipino, English or any other
language as long as there are enough instructional materials for the same and both students and
instructors/professors are competent in the language. Courses in the Humanities and Social
Sciences should preferably be taught in Filipino.
c. Executive Order No. 210 (March 7, 2003)
Executive Order No. 210 (March 7, 2003) establishes the policy to strengthen the
use of English language as a medium of instruction in the educational system. In
its Declaration of Policies under Section 1, it states that English shall be taught as
a second language, starting with the First Grade; that English shall be used as the
medium of instruction for English, Mathematics and Science from at least the
Third Grade level; and that the English language shall be used as the primary
medium of instruction in all public and private institutions of learning in the
secondary level. The Filipino Language shall continue to be the medium of
instruction in the learning areas of Filipino and Araling Panlipunan.
Furthermore, Section 2 of the said Executive Order states that, Institutions
of higher education, including State Colleges and Universities [SUCs], are
encouraged to adopt the use of the English language as the primary medium of
instruction in the tertiary level. The CHED shall adopt measures to promote and
encourage the use of the English language as the primary medium of instruction
in the tertiary or higher education level.

d. DepEd Order No. 74, s. 2009

DepEd Order No. 74, s. 2009 prescribes the use of the Mother Tongue as primary
medium of instruction from pre-school up to Grade 3. The use of mother tongue
as a language of instruction as recognized as the most effective way to improve
student learning. It nullifies DepEd Order No. 25, s of 1974. This new policy known
as Mother Tongue- based Multilingual Education ( MTBMLE) aims to promote
learning outcomes and promote education for all (EFA).

III. CONCLUSION
Despite a number of studies confirming that learning is faster using the native language,
government officials are still pushing for the adoption of English as a medium on instruction
(MOI) in Philippine schools.
A check on the bills filed in the 14th Congress shows that there are three billsHouse
Bills 230, 305, 406seeking for either the re-instatement or enhancement of the use of English
as a medium of instruction.
The three bills propose the use of English, Filipino or the regional languages as MOI in all
subjects from pre-school to Grade II. They prescribe the use of English for all academic subjects
from Grade III up to the secondary level.
Proponents of these bills claim that the decline in the English proficiency of the Filipinos and the
deterioration of the quality of the education have eroded the competitiveness of the Filipinos.
Rep. Eduardo Gullas, author of HB 305, said in the bills explanatory note that the
proposed legislation aims to correct the defects of the current Bilingual Education Program (BEP)
of the Department of the Education, which was introduced in 1974.
The BEP mandated the teaching not only of Filipino as a subject in all levels but also the use of
Filipino as MOI in Social Studies, Character Education, Values Education, Physical Education,
Industrial Arts and Home Economics.
Gullas said learning of the English language suffered a setback when the BEP was
introduced in 1974. "The use of Filipino as a medium of instruction in the subjects mentioned
earlier has limited the exposure of the learner to English, and since exposure is basic to language
learning, mastery of the language is not attained."
The policy, Gullas said, results in language interference since targeting the learning of
English and Filipino is difficult especially in the lower grades.

Competitiveness
Reps. Raul del Mar and Luis Villafuerteauthors of HB 446 and 230, respectivelybelieve
that their proposed legislation will raise the level of English language proficiency and will help the
Filipinos remain competitive.
Del Mar, whose bill also proposes the use of English as the language of assessment in the
government examinations and entrance tests in public schools, colleges and universities, said
"The accepted view is that without English language proficiency, it is difficult for a Filipino to get
jobs anywhere in this country and anywhere in the world. The key to better jobs here or overseas
is English"

Here comes EO 210

This growth in the information and technology sector is one of the reasons cited by
government in justifying the need to improve English proficiency. In 2003,
President Arroyo signed Executive Order No. 210, which strengthens use of the English
language as a second language in the educational system.
"There is a need to develop the aptitude, competence and proficiency of our students in
the English language to maintain and improve their competitive edge in emerging and fast-
growing local and international industries, particularly in the area of information and
communications technology," the order reads.
According to the order, English should be taught as a second language starting with Grade
1 and should be taught as the medium of instruction for English, Mathematics and Science from
at least Grade 3. Filipino language will be used as MOI for Filipino and Araling Panlipunan.
It also mandates the use of English as the primary medium of instruction in all public and
private secondary schools. The percentage of time allotment for learning areas conducted in
English language, the law said, should not be less than 70 percent of the total time allotment for
all learning areas in the secondary level.
However, EO 210 and its implementing rules and regulation were questioned last year by
a group of professors and language experts. The professors and language experts filed a petition
with the Supreme Court challenging the orders.
"While the title of the EO purports to strengthen the use of English as a second language,
analyses of the contents show that the EO actually strengthens English as the medium of
instruction," the petition said.
Petitioners argued that the (1) EO subverts the present status of Filipino in non-Tagalog
areas, and violates the constitutional injunction that the regional language shall serve as auxiliary
media of instruction, (2) violates the constitutional duty to initiate and sustain the use of Filipino
language in the educational system and (3) "undermines the letter and spirit of the Constitution
on the national language."

Mother tongue is best

Language experts also criticized the EO 210 and the pending bills because they go against
the findings of previous studies that learning is faster when the mother tongue is used as medium
of instruction, particularly during the childs early years in school.
A World Bank-funded study in 1994 by Nadine Dutcher and G. Richard Tucker concludes
that individuals easily develop cognitive skills and master content material when they are taught
in a familiar language. The study also found out developing the childs cognitive skills through the
first language is more effective than exposure to the second language.
Similarly, the 1991 Congressional Report of the Congressional Commission on Education
recommended the use of the vernacular and Filipino as the medium of instruction for basic
education.
In a CEO forum on English last year, Patricia B. Licuanan, president of Miriam College, said
empirical evidence has shown the damaging effects of English on Filipino student learning since
the 1925, when the Monroe Survey Commission found out that foreign language handicap was
the greatest problem of the Philippine educational system. Back then, the American colonial
government prescribed the use of English as medium of instruction.
"When English is used, students do not learn well, and at times do not learn at all,"
Licuanan said. "Using English as medium of instruction in some subject areas [Math and Science]
prevents students from learning as much as they could in their mother tongue."
Ricardo Ma. Nolasco, chair of the Komisyon sa Wikang Filipino, said the basic weakness in
Philippine education is the fact that many students do not understand their teacher and cannot
follow the lesson because "the language in school is one they can hardly speak or understand."
Nolasco told us that what the country need is a law mandating the use of the childrens
first language from pre-school to Grade 6 and adopt the bilingual system in high school. He added
that this would allow learners to develop cognitive and linguistic skills in their mother tongue,
build solid foundation for learning other subjects and eventually transfer skills and knowledge to
the prescribed languages.
National Artist for Literature and UP College of Arts and Letters Dean Virgilio Almario said
in an interview that the use of Filipino language is not tantamount to the decline in English
proficiency.
"Even if all classes will be conducted in Filipino, English will not die because it will remain
to be a necessity," said Almario, who is among those who filed the petition challenging EO 210.

Train the teachers

Almario added that in order to improve the English proficiency of students, there is a need
to re-train the teachers because most of them are also not proficient in English.
Results of self-assessment test conducted by the DEPED in 2004 showed that one out of
five public high school teachers is proficient in the English language. Even Deped Secretary Jesli
Lapuz himself told us that he hears stories of students complaining that their teacher is not good
in English.
Carleen Sedilla, a former public high school English teacher in Caloocan and now the
principal of Caloocan City Science High School, said the situation is aggravated by students
limited exposure to the language. "Before, they can learn English by watching cartoons and TV
shows. Now, everything is in Filipino."
 "Do you expect them to learn if they have limited exposure to the English language and if
their teachers do not speak good English?" she said. http://news.abs-cbn.com/special-
report/06/09/08/legislators-push-english-medium-instruction By Jesus F. Llanto

Sources: Malolos Constitution 1899, 1935 Constitution, Commonwealth Act No. 184 1936,
National Commission For Culture and the Arts:Filipino Language in the Curriculum, NCCA:
Balanghay: The Filipino Language, Executive Order No. 263, S. 1940, 1943 Constitution, 1973
Constitution, Santiago & Otanes: The Elaboration of a Technical Lexicon of Pilipino, Republic Act
7104

Sources:
De Leon, Hector S. Textbook on the Philippine Constitution. 2011.
CLEMENCIA ESPIRITU, PH.D. http://ncca.gov.ph/subcommissions/subcommission-on-cultural-
disseminationscd/language- and-translation/development-of-filipino-the-national-language-of-
the-philippines/
http://www.rappler.com/newsbreak/iq/65477-national-language-philippine-constitutions