Abstract
This paper sought to discuss how the Philippine
educational system evolves. It offers its readers a view of how Filipinos were
educated on the following timelines namely Pre-colonial period, Spanish
Occupation, American Occupation, Japanese Occupation and Post-War to Present. The
paper also discussed why it is important for teachers to learn about the
evolution of Philippine Education System and how teachers` teaching
methodologies will be informed through knowledge of the topic.
Introduction
The Development of Education in the Philippines is not
that complex. We can trace its evolution from the Pre-Spanish archaeological
artifacts, biographies, educational institutions and systems established by the
western colonizers and the Japanese`. After the colonialization period, all the
evidences that will speak of how Filipinos were educated were kept intact.
Studying the timeline of the development of the Educational System of the Philippines
open avenues to vast issues where the Filipino teachers of modern time can
learn something of significance from and apply those knowledge on educating the
Filipino learners of today.
Pre-colonial
Education System
It is said that the education system before the
Spaniards came to the Philippines were informal. This may be due to lack of
evidences that support that educational institutions were established back then.
It is because the Spaniards completely destroyed earlier records and all the records
in their attempt to press Christianity to the natives (Porter, 1945). Also materials
where pre-hispanic Filipinos write on such as bamboo tablets, bark and loose leaves
easily deteriorate (Kawahara, N.D.). The only theory that can stand out is that
Filipinos were educated at home with their parents or village elders known as
Babaylans as teachers.
When the Spaniards
arrived to the Philippine Islands on 1521, they noticed that the pre-colonial
Filipinos are highly literate. They already knew how to read and write using
the Baybayin script (Dacumos, 2015). The effectiveness of education system
before the Spaniards came to this archipelago is also evident on archaeological
artifacts discovered. The Laguna copper plate did not just support that Filipinos
were able to read and write but were also translingual (Martinez, 2020). As to
numeracy, Spanish accounts suggested Filipinos` lack of capacity for
Mathematics, stating that “Tagalogs in counting are unreliable”. In contrary to this, Pre-Colonial Filipinos` ability to weave and
design textiles and Shipbuilding suggest that they have the grasps of geometry
and algebra (Manapat, 2011).
Going back to the note that pre-colonial
Filipinos were informally educated it can be concluded that the education
system was need based. Males were trained by their fathers to hunt and maintain
livelihood while females were taught by their mothers how to perform household
chores in order to prepare them to be good husbands and wives in the future. In
the Muslim communities, Imams taught children how to read, write and comprehend
the Koran (Muza and Ziatdinov, 2012).
Education
System During the Spanish Occupation
When the Spaniards came, the Philippine Educational
System began to take a better shape. It all began when the Spaniards notice
that Baybayin, a local alphabet, exists. They came to a fact with the native
Filipinos to learn Baybayin and then later on used Baybayin to teach the
natives the Christian Doctrine. Thus the Doctrina Cristiana, the first book
published in the Philippines came to existence. The said book Authored by a
Spanish Friar was written in Tagalog using both Baybayin and Roman Alphabet
(Rafael, 1993). The religion oriented education during the early Spanish
period, controlled by the Roman Catholic Church, was also successful and
enables them to press Christianity to the core of almost every Filipino.
When the Spaniards came, they established Christian
villages and pueblos with a church and a school in each. With the establishment
of schools as early as 1565, Religious Orders began to teach Filipinos how to
read and write. They also taught them industrial and agricultural techniques.
Although schools exist during the early Spanish period, education, specifically
secondary and tertiary, were only for the privileged (Mack and Vogeli, 2019)
Spaniards made the education system in the
Philippines the best in Asia. They established Universities where Philosophy,
Theology and Jurisprudence were taught. Friars also opened Pharmaceutical and
Medical Schools. With such initiative, the Spaniards were, later on, able to
establish Hospitals and Pharmacies, counter infectious diseases, embarked in
pharmaceutical and medical researches and provide other public services
(Alcala, 1999)
Education in the Philippines under the Spaniards was
later on liberalized through the Educational Decree of 1863. From the then segmental educational
opportunities with a curriculum that is more on catechism under the control of
religious orders namely the Franciscan, Augustinians, Jesuits and Dominicans, educational
system became systematized and available to the public. The decree required for
the the establishment of two schools in each municipality, one for boys and one
for girls and the establishment of Normal Schools where men were trained to be
teachers (Bulder, 2007)
The system offered complete education from primary to
tertiary. Curriculum were standardized with range of advanced subjects such as
Reading, Arithmetic, History, Languages (English, French and Latin) Algebra,
Geometry, Geography, Chemistry, Commerce, Agriculture, Physics, Mechanics,
Painting, Music, Natural History among others (Alcala, 199). As a result, the
number of literate Filipinos increased and they were able to function outside
the Spanish Regime and that is during the American rule.
Education
System During the American Occupation
The already existing schools and system established by
the Spaniards was an advantage for the American`s campaign for extensive
education in the Philippines. The first action by the Americans with regards to
education is requiring every children from age 7 to register in schools and
provided them with free school materials (Musa & Ziatdinov, 2012)
If there is something noticeable in terms of
education during the American rule, that is the coming of the Thomasites and
the establishment of Gabaldon buildings. The Thomasites were American teachers
who arrived in the Philippines aboard United States Army Transport Thomas on
August 21, 1901. They modernized the Public Schools System and trained Filipino
teachers with English as medium of instructions. The curriculum under the
Thomasites includes English, Grammar, Agriculture, Mathematics, Sciences,
Geography, Trade Courses, Trading, Mechanical Drawing, Freehand Drawing and
Athletics (Sianturi, 2009)
Aside from utilizing the already existing school buildings
and reopening defunct schools, the Americans constructed school buildings known
as Gabaldons. It was provided through Act
No. 1801 or Gabaldon Law of 1907 as named to its author Isauro Gabaldon
of Nueva Ecija. The law appropriated a total amount of One Million Pesos for
the construction of modern public schools of strong materials in Barrios,
across the country, which can accommodate daily attendance of not less than
sixty pupils per school. The law allowed for the completion of 456 School
buildings in 1916 bringing the total number of classrooms to 1852 (Henares,
2006).
The American`s campaign for education is also
praiseworthy for its inclusiveness. They made sure that education will reach
even the far flung areas of the country. They also taught ethnic groups and
established schools in Muslim Areas, something that the Spaniards did not do.
With much effort made, it was reported that, after 24 years since the
establishment of US Education System in the Philippines, 530,000 Filipinos had
completed Elementary, 160,000 completed intermediate and 15,500 completed High
School (Monroe Survey of 1925 as cited
in Thompson, 2003).
Assessment on the effectiveness of Education
System established by the United States also revealed its weaknesses. The
report of Monroe Commission on Philppine Education asserted that although
Filipinos were at par with Americans when it comes to Mathematics and Science they are lagging behind in English-language related
subjects. It is also emphasized in the report that secondary education did not
prepare students for life and recommends training in agriculture, commerce and
industry. The report also found that English as the medium of instruction is
the best but the use of local dialect in teaching character education was
suggested. It is not just the curriculum that is problematic according to the
Monroe Survey. It also asserts that the majority of the teachers were not
professionally trained, Learning Materials did not fit the Philippine life, the
University of the Philippines is not free of politics, Higher Education is
concentrated in Manila and that the Public Schools System is highly centralized
in administration and needs to be humanized and made less mechanical (Monro Survey of 1925 as cited. in Magno, 2010).
Education System During the Japanese Occupation
It is said that the Japanese occupation that started
in 1941 causes a standstill in the progress of Philippine Education System.
Schools reopened in June 1942 and in 1943, the Japanese Sponsored Republic
Created the Ministry of Education. Although the occupation did not last long,
the heavy changes in the curriculum through Military Order No. 2 of 1942 was
observed. The education system sought to halt Filipinos from patronizing
western countries, instead recognize Philippines as part of Greater East Asia
Co-prosperity Sphere, stop English language learning and to boost morality of
Filipinos among others (Musa & Ziatdinov, 2012)e
Survey of 1925 as cited. in Magno, 2010).
The education system became a vessel to Japanese
propaganda which is to denounce the purpose of the American colonial objectives
in the country. They asserted that the American initiatives of establishing
Political, Social and Economic institutions is only a step towards the
Americanization of the natives. The Japanese maintained their position that the
Education System under the Americans purports to promote American ideals,
language, history, government and outlooks for their own interest (Javier,
1975).
Post-war to Current Education System.
The period after World War – II caught the Philippine
Education System in Transition. It is not just the school buildings that needs
restoration and rehabilitation but also the Filipino values. Rapid increase in
population followed concurrently with urbanization and higher demand for Social
Services. As a result the Joint Committee on Educational Reform declared that the
Public Education System was in crisis. The proposed solution to this crisis is
the full day session and the offering of Grade Seven for the Primary level but
it was not enacted into law. The inability of the government to address
educational issues leads to the further erosion of Educational System on the
succeeding decades. As a result, Filipinos find less significance on being
educated because it did not guarantee them of a stable job that can provide
better income (Durban & Catalan, 2012).
Up to 1957, textbooks were in English except
those for classes in the Filipino and Spanish language. The curriculum offers
subjects such as Grammar and Composition, Reading, General Science, History and
Current Events, Exploratory Vocational
Course for Boys, General Home Economics
for Girls, Physical Education and Health, General Mathematics, Biology,
Economics Spanish I-IV, Filipino Language, Literature and Composition and
History. The Convention of School Superintendents asserted that the curriculum
was overloaded with Language requirements and deficient in Science and
Mathematics. The vocational courses were not contextualized to the
community needs or the interest of the learners. This leads to the creation of
the 2-2 Plan curriculum which considers learners` interest whether to pursue
General Academics as preparation for Higher Education or take more vocational
subjects for practical works and early employment (Carson, 1961).
The succeeding Educational
System and Curriculum, up to date, is heavily politicized. It is due to the
fact that the Heads of the highest office in the Education Department are
Political Appointees. This leads to issues such as constant implementation of
programs which are not properly monitored.
Every political administration wanted to leave a said “legacy” leading
to the discontinuation of the Projects and Programs of the previous
administration (Durban & Catalan, 2012).
In 2012, the K-12 curriculum
was launched. It is the answer of the Department of Education tothe observation
that the existing curriculum back then was congested and that High School
graduates lack maturity and competencies in various subject areas. The K-12
curriculum does not just aim to prepare learners for higher education or
employment and to narrow development gaps but also to transform them to
socially critical and productive citizens able to repel the exploitative
features of Globalization. With its positive agenda of K-12, issues persist and
problems from previous curriculum recur such as its alignment to 21st
century learning and roles of teachers (Barrot, 2018).
Conclusion
Filipino teachers of today can gain significant
learning from the History of Education System of the Philippines. That
knowledge can help them decide on deploying effective teaching methodologies.
Among those significant knowledge is the effectiveness of contextualization.
Contextualized approach to teaching and learning is a
theme throughout this paper. It shows that need-based teaching during the
pre-colonial period leads to the ability of the Filipinos to thrive even
without the guidance from the western colonizers. When the Spaniards recognized
the needs for health and public service, they devised Higher Education Courses
such as Medical, Pharmaceutical and Jurisprudence courses as a response and
succeeded on countering illnesses and on their pharmaceutical researches during
that time. The Americans recognized the needs to contextualize Learning
Materials and outcomes to the Philippine setting. Therefore we can conclude
that contextualization of teaching and learning is a methodology that does not
wear out and still be effectively use by our teachers today.
It can also be
concluded that in teaching and learning, less is more. Decongesting the
curriculum is one of the calls from the American occupation up to the 1960`s.
Teachers have all the power to decongest what to teach to learners through
simplification. They can apply methods such as the integrative approach to
decongest the curriculum today which is made up of interconnected subjects and duplicate competencies. That is why teachers
today should show mastery of content knowledge and apply it within and across
learning areas. In that case, learners will never be overwhelmed with learning
activities in order to show that they met vast competencies indicated in the
curriculum.
Moreover, it can be concluded that the language of instruction
matters. In the report of the Monroe Commission during the American Occupation,
it is stated that the best language of instruction is English but also
encouraged the use of local dialects. This means that we cannot ignore the
truth that local dialect can be tapped in order to transfer knowledge to the
learners specifically when we saw no significant progress among the learners
when foreign language was being used as medium of instruction.
Furthermore, in the immanent changes of the curriculum
which is always politicized, it is always up to the teacher to retain what is
effective. Changes in the education program or curriculum and the introduction
of new projects always require the teachers to adjust or change their teaching
methodologies. Those changes affect not just the way teachers approach teaching
but also the way learners approach learning. Changes, especially when politicized, do not
engender good results in the teaching-learning process and outcomes. Teachers
have all the powers to rollback to or retain previous methods that are more effective
for the interest and benefits of the learners.
References:
Alcala, A. (1999). Higher Education in the Philippines. Philippine
Studies, First Quarter 1999, Vol 47 (1) 114-128. https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/42634303.pdf
Barrot, J. (2018). English
Curriculum Reform in the Philippines: Issues and Challenges from a 21st Century
Learning Perspective, Journal of Language, Identity & Education, DOI:
10.1080/15348458.2018.1528547
Bulder, J. (2007). Country Analysis: Education – Philippines. Woord en
Daad 2007. https://bibalex.org/baifa/Attachment/Documents/210021.pdf
Carson, A. (1961). Higher
Education in the Philippines. United States Department of Health, Education and
Welfare: Office of Education. Bulletin 1961, No. 29.
https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED544129.pdf
Dacumos, R. (2015). Philippine Colonial Education System. DOI:
10.13140/RG.2.1.2507.7600
Durban, J. & Catalan, R. (2012). Issues and Concerns of the Philippine Education
Through the Years. Asian Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities. Vol. 1 (2)
2012. http://www.ajssh.leena-luna.co.jp/AJSSHPDFs/Vol.1%282%29/AJSSH2012%281.2-08%29.pdf
Henares, I. (2006). The Gabaldon Legacy. https://gabaldon.ivanhenares.com
Javier, M. (1975). Japanese Cultural Propaganda in the
Philippines.https://www.asj.upd.edu.ph/mediabox/archive/ASJ-13-03-1975/javier-japanese-cultural-propaganda-philippines.pdf
Kawahara, T. (N.D.). A Study of Literacy in Pre-Hispanic Philippines.
Kyoto, Koka, Women`s University. https://izumi-syuppan.co.jp/LLO_PDF/vol_08/16-02Kawahara.pdf
Mack, J. & Vogeli, B. (2019). Mathematics
and its Teaching in the Asia-Pacific Region. World Scientific Publishing Co.
Pte. Ltd. Series on Mathematics Education - Vol .15.
books.google.com.ph/books?id=iPZtDwAAQBAJ
Manapat, R. (2011). Mathematical Ideas in Early Philippine Society.
Ateneo de Manila University Philippine
Studies: Vol. 59 No. 3 (2011) 291-336.
Martinez, J. (2020). Recovering Transligulism in Precolonial Philippines. https://doi.org/10.1080/14790718.2021.1932909
Muza, S. & Ziatdinov, R. (2012). Features and Historical Aspects of the Philippines
Educational System.European Journal of Contemporary Education, 2012, Vol.(2),
No. 2. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1057820.pdf
Porter, C. (1945). What Lies Ahead for the Philippines? Office of War
Information, formerly with Institute for Pacific Relations. Published April
1945. https://www.historians.org/about-aha-and-membership/aha-history-and-archives/gi-roundtable-series/pamphlets/em-24-what-lies-ahead-for-the-philippines-(1945)
Rafael, V. (1993). Contracting Colonialism: Translation and Christian
Conversion in Tagalog Society Under Early Spanish Rule. Duke University Press,
Durham and London.
https://books.google.com.ph/books?hl=en&lr=&id=UUNvKITIk3YC
Sianturi, D. R. (2009). Pedagogic Invasion: The Thomasites in the Occupied
Philippines. Ateneo de Manila University: Kritika Kultura Vol. 12 (2009):
005-026.
Thompson,R. (2003). Filipino English and Taglish: Language switching from
multiple perspectives.
https://books.google.com.ph/books?id=1VI9AAAAQBAJ
AUTHOR INFORMATION
Lawrence Avillano
Licensed Professional Teacher
Public School Teacher/Researcher
How to Cite This Article:
Avillano, L. (2022). Development of Education System in the Philippines and its Significance to Current Teaching Methodologies. Kulturang Pinoy. https://kulturang-noypi.blogspot.com/2022/09/Development of Education System in the Philippines and its Significance to Current Teaching Methodologies.html
.jpg "Globalisasyon ng Pilipinas")
