Latest Shouts In The Shoutbox -- View The Shoutbox

[king_manticore]

What’s wrong with the study
and teaching of Philippine history?
Dr. Serafin D. Quiason and Prof. Fe B. Mangahas

AS in all former colonies in Asia, the history about the Filipino was written by the Spaniards and then by the Americans, resulting in the tragic alteration of the Filipino character and soul. To paraphrase Dr. Jose Rizal, the Filipino was reduced to a groveling, clinging and fawning creature without a sense of community.

For centuries our people have grievously suffered from racial slurs that our students must know about. The Spaniards called our people “Indios” and the friars often referred to them as chongos, or monkeys. Only through the correct teaching of Philippine history can we rectify these demeaning racial stereotypes.

With the advent of the Norte Americanos, the English writer Rudyard Kipling in his “White Man’s Burden” warned the new masters to be cautious in dealing with their new wards because “they are half-devil and half-child.” Up to the 1980s, James Fallows wrote that the Filipino people were victims of a “damaged culture.” What have our educators and historians done to redress these indictments of contemporary Filipinos?

In the postwar period, Philippine history at the university level was taught as a solid subject, but the textbooks remained written from the colonizers’ point of view. Only Teodoro Agoncillo became a staunch proponent of rewriting Philippine history from the Filipino viewpoint. He came out with a nationalist-oriented textbook entitled The History of the Filipino People. Renato Constantino followed with The Past Revisited. On the high-school level, commercialized Philippine history books were prescribed by the Bureau of Education.

The sad plight of the study and teaching of history continued up to the seventies and eighties when teachers recruited to teach history in high schools included physical education and home economics teachers. In today’s world, our educational planners have come out with a strange concoction in the form of a collected set of subjects called Makabayan, which is a misnorner.

Lamentably, Makabayan is the antithesis of patriotism, nationalism and one’s sense of national identity. Although the package is well intentioned, Makabayan presents Filipino culture and history in a hodgepodge fashion, void of the vital element of continuity in the study of our past.

ln the more highly industrialized countries in the West, such as Great Britain and the United States, the teaching of English history covers four years of the student’s life in college while in the US, irrespective of the student’s major or field, he or she is required to take four semesters of American history.

In the Philippines history merits one semester’s work. Just recently the University of the Philippines reduced Philippine history to an optional subject, among other social-science subjects. What a disservice to the young generation and to our students!

Philippine history is a potential tool to instill the spirit of nationalism and patriotism, especially at a time of political disunity and sluggish economic growth. What we need, to quote the economist Emmanuel Q. Yap, is “know the historical truth about what really happened to our country in how we have been exploited, divided and ruled and turned one against each other to the point of hating and killing each other for many generations.”

This echoes Rizal’s earlier observation: “In order to read the destiny of the people, it is necessary to open the book of their past.” But what sort of books shall our students open in the Makabayan class if these are bristling with half-truths and downright lies?

As a people we cannot develop or advance unless we have a clear image of ourselves, an honest understanding of our past and a collective will to resist foreign dictation and to rely on our capacity and resources to bring about social justice, peace and prosperity in our land.



Dr. Quiason is a member of the NHI Board and its former chairman.
Prof. Mangahas chairs the Department of History, St. Scholastica College.

[king_manticore]

SPECIAL REPORT: Philippine History

History is not teacher’s pet

By Jonathan M. Hicap, Reporter

IN THE 1990s the Philippine government had to retailor most of its policies in order to adapt to the concept of globalization.

The overhaul was not limited to the economic field. Education authorities, noticing the steady decline in the level of competencies of Filipino students and extrapolating their prospects, concluded that the root of the problem lay in the curriculum—from the elementary to the high-school level. Retool the curriculum they did.

A casualty of these efforts was the subject of history.

So what if a student can rattle off the dates of the rediscovery of the islands and give a background on what happened during the revolution against Spain? If he can’t do algebraic exercises and write in grammatically correct English, his chances of future employment in the face of stiff competition against his peers were practically zilch.

The education authorities concluded that algebra, chemistry and English were more relevant to the country’s global competitiveness.

Up until 2002, the subject Araling Panlipunan (Social Studies), which included history, used to enjoy top priority in the Philippine education curriculum. The subject was allotted equal time along with math, science and English subjects.

But with the worsening level of competencies of Filipino students, the Department of Education made a drastic move by overhauling the curriculum for elementary and high-school levels.

16-year study

A product of 16 years of studies and seven years of consultations, the Basic Education Curriculum (BEC) was carried out in all public elementary and high schools starting school year 2002.

“We were concerned about the low performance of students in subjects that were needed for us to compete globally,” explains Dr. Eugenia Moraleda, chief of the Curriculum Development Division of the department’s Bureau of Secondary Education.

The 2002 BEC, implemented during the time of Education Secretary Raul Roco, aimed to improve the quality of education in public schools. A report by the Presidential Commission on Educational Reform said the elementary curriculum was overcrowded with too many subjects. This was also said of the high-school curriculum. “It should be streamlined to provide for greater concept understanding, mastery of skills, i.e. critical thinking and other scientific skills, and appreciation of science and technology as applied to daily life.”

“An overcrowded curriculum can hinder or delay the development of lifelong learning skills as coverage of the subject matter tends to take priority over in-depth learning,” said Education Undersecretary Fe Hidalgo in a paper presented in 2002 during a training of teachers for the new curriculum.

In the 1999 Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study, the Philippines ranked 36th out of 38 countries in math and science, an indication that the quality of education in the country was on a steady downward spiral.

Hidalgo said studies recommended the revision of the curriculum by reclustering components into fewer subjects and giving more time to essential learning competencies.

“In short, a restructured, upgraded and more integrated curriculum,” she said in her paper.

Moraleda explains that the 2002 curriculum was created under an order issued by Education Secretary Roco.

Eight to five subjects

The 2002 revised curriculum drastically reduced the number of subjects from eight to five—English, Math, Science, Filipino and the controversial Makabayan.

According to the department’s Order 43, issued in 2002, the elementary curriculum “focuses on the tool learning areas for an adequate development of competencies for learning how-to-learn.”

“The 2002 curriculum for formal basic education aims at raising the quality of the Filipino learners and graduates and empowering them for lifelong learning, which requires the attainment of functional literacy,” the department said in an executive summary in 2002.

In the elementary and high-school levels, Araling Panlipunan was lumped together with other subjects under Makabayan.

In the elementary grades, Makabayan, which the department called the “laboratory of life,” consists of Sibika at Kultura/Heograpiya, Kasaysayan at Sibika; Edukasyong Pantahanan at Pangkabuhayan; Musika, Sining at Edukasyon sa Pagpapalakas ng Katawan.

(Loosely translated, the subjects are civics, culture/geography, history and civics; home economics; music, the arts and physical education.)

“The Makabayan learning area provides the balance as it addresses primarily societal needs. Thus, it emphasizes the development of self-reliant and patriotic citizens as well as the development of critical and creative thinking,” the department’s memo said.

The department said this needs understanding of Philippine history, culture, arts, music and games.

“Makabayan entails the use of integrated units of learning tasks which will enable the learner to personally process, assimilate and systematically practice a wide range of values and life skills including work skills and a work ethic,” the department said.

From Grades 1 to 3, only Sibika at Kultura is taught and from Grades 4 to 6, Kultura/Heograpiya, Kasaysayn at Sibika is taught 40 minutes daily.

High school

In high school, Makabayan, which “serves as a practice environment for holistic learning to develop a healthy personal and national self-identity,” has four component subjects: Araling Panlipunan; Teknolohiya at Edukasyong Pantahanan at Pangkabuhayan; Musika, Sining, Edukasyong Pangkatawan at Pangkalusugan; and Edukasyon sa Pagpapahalaga.

Araling Panlipunan covers Philippine History and Government in the first year, Asian Studies in the second year, World History in the third year, and Economics in the fourth year. Araling Panlipunan is taught in the classroom for 240 minutes a week or 48 minutes a day.

One criticism about the 2002 curriculum concerned the grading method for Makabayan. According to the department’s guidelines, there shall be only one grade for the Makabayan subject. This is done by adding all the grades of a student in the component subjects and dividing them by the number of subjects.

“If the average grade in Makabayan is passing, the student shall be considered “passed” in the learning area, regardless of whether the student has a failing grade in any of the component subjects,” the 2002 department memo said on computing the Makabayan grade in high school.

This means that even if a student fails in Araling Panlipunan, he can still pass the Makabayan subject if he gets grades in the other component subjects high enough to pull his average.

In May 2003, however, then-Secretary Edilberto de Jesus changed the guidelines to say that “if the student incurs any failure, the grade for Makabayan shall be “incomplete.” Failure in any of the component subjects shall mean repeating the subject which the student failed.”

In the 2002 curriculum, clearly the government wanted to upgrade students’ knowledge in English, Math and Science, considered marketable skills. But did the government do it at the expense of other subjects?

Time reduction

Another criticism hurled against the new curriculum is the reduction of time allotted for Araling Panlipunan from one hour in the old curriculum to 40 to 48 minutes under the new setup.

In Grades 4 to 6, for example, English is allotted 80 minutes a day; Filipino, 60 minutes; Math, 60 minutes; Science and Health, 60 minutes; and HKS, 40 minutes.

In high school, Filipino is allotted 240 minutes a week, or 48 minutes a day; English and Math, 300 minutes a week, or an hour daily; Science, 400 minutes a week, or 80 minutes a day; and Araling Panlipunan, 200 minutes a week, or 40 minutes a day, which was later increased to 240 minutes a week.

Dr. Ronaldo Mactal, chairman of the History Department of the De La Salle University, said the 2002 curriculum had an adverse effect on how students and teachers perceived Araling Panlipunan as a subject.

(Continued tomorrow)


this two articles are from the Manila Times

[king_manticore]

History has always been my favorite subject since my high schools days.... it has always fascinated me.... i almost did not pass my interview in Mapua because when i was asked what my favorite subject was i answered history.........

this two articles could shed light why our present society is in shambles...... nationalism and patriotism is almost non existent...... up to now Filipinos as a whole still don't have a national identity....

[king_manticore]

History loses its stature
By Jonathan Hicap, Reporter

Conclusion

“Students and teachers looked down on the subject,” Dr. Ronaldo Mactal said.

He said the 2002 curriculum has made Araling Panlipunan a second-class subject and its teachers, second-class citizens. He said some of the teachers he talked to lost interest in teaching the subject because of the way the 2002 curriculum classified Araling Panlipunan.

But Dr. Eugenia Moraleda said it is not the time allotted for Araling Panlipunan that matters but the quality of teaching.

Antonio Tinio, chairman of the Alliance for Concerned Teachers, said they opposed the implementation of the new curriculum in 2002, because teachers were not consulted extensively in the revision of the curriculum.

“It was implemented in haste,” he said.

Results of achievement tests of public elementary and high school students in Hekasi subject (Heograpiya, Kasaysayan at Sibika) and Araling Panlipunan before and after the implementation of the new curriculum varied.

In the achievement test, students in public-elementary schools got mean percentage scores of 55.21 in Hekasi for school year 1999-2000; 53.93 for SY 2000-2001 and 59.55 for SY 2004-2005.

In public high schools, students posted mean percentage scores in Araling Panlipunan of 58.84 for school year 1999-2000; 57.19 for SY 2000-2001; and 50.01 for SY 2004-2005.

Tinio said even in Filipino subject, students’ achievement levels dipped. From a high of 66.14 mean percentage score from 1999 to 2001, students scored only 42.48 for SY 2004-2005.

In 2005, after assessing the implementation of the 2002 education curriculum in the secondary level, then-Education Secretary Florencio Abad observed that “there are gross inconsistencies between means and ends.”

Except in some Science high schools, “there are gross inconsistencies between the kind of learner/graduate that the schools desire to produce and the strategies they employ,” Abad said. “Instruction is still predominantly authoritative and textbook-based; learning is usually recipient and reproductive; supervision is commonly prescriptive and directive; and assessment is focused more on judging rather than improving performance.”

‘Laboratory of life’

In Makabayan, the Department of Education assessed that teachers need more knowledge and skills to operationalize the subject as a “laboratory of life.” It said “teachers . . . find the integration of the four Makabayan learning areas difficult to plan, implement, monitor and evaluate.

Teaching history in the public-elementary and high-school levels has remained the same: memorizing names, events and dates.

“It has become a habit,” Dr. Moraleda said.

She said to change the traditional way of teaching history will be like “climbing Mount Everest.”

Dr. Mactal said memorization to learn History is the “lowest level” since it lacks critical thinking.

Textbooks used in Araling Panlipunan vary depending on the grade or year level. In first year, students use the book Daloy ng Kasaysayan at Pamahalaang Pilipino, which was first published in 1997. The book tackles subjects ranging from geography and Philippine history, up to the presidency of Joseph Estrada.

As to teachers, Dr. Moraleda said, graduates of AB History, Economics or Political Science can teach Social Studies. Most teachers in public schools are history majors, although Social Studies is not entirely about history, she said.

Dr. Moraleda said public schools need to have more Economics majors to teach the subject.

“We’re so poor because of the lack of economic orientation,” she said.

While there seems to be perception that the youth today somewhat cool to the subject of Philippine history, enrollment in leading universities in the country proves otherwise.

At the University of the Philippines in Diliman, the number of students enrolling in BA History remains stable, according to Dr. Ferdinand Llanes, chairman of the UP Diliman Department of History.

For this school year, Llanes said, 136 students are taking up BA History as their undergraduate course and 78 are taking up master’s degree in History.

No enrolment decline

“Walang pagbaba sa enrolment [No decline in enrolment],” he said.

Llanes considers getting 136 students a “feat” considering that UP Manila admits only 70 students a year in its nursing program, considered one of the most popular courses today. He added that for this semester, they received applications to the history department from 70 transferees.

When the Revitalized General Education Program was implemented starting in 2002, Llanes said they feared that enrolment in Philippine History subject would go down since, under the new rules, Philippine History was no longer a mandatory subject for all students.

In effect, Philippine History became sort of an elective subject for UP students. Although all students are required to take six units of Philippine Studies, he may or may not choose Philippine History to complete the requirement.

Llanes said when the plan was presented, they objected for fear of a “slide in enrolment.”

But they were wrong, and happy to be wrong. In fact, Llanes said, the department even received an award from UP for registering the highest number of enrollees in history subject.

Llanes sees the steady enrolment in BA History as an indication that Philippine history is still relevant.

More training

He said the enrolment in the department’s graduate course indicates that “many of our teachers want more training.”

While teaching Philippine History in UP is done through lectures, Llanes said this is enhanced by the use of multimedia technology including use of Power Point presentations to spike interest. Field trips are also done to assimilate students.

At De La Salle University, teaching History has taken a new level. Mactal said they have developed what they call as “transformative learning framework” where the students become active participants in learning history.

Gone are the days of memorization. Instead, students make plan of inquiry and critical analysis of events.

“They apply knowledge to real-life situations,” Mactal said.

Tackling history can be achieved through several methods. DLSU students use posters, dramatization and present position papers and manifesto.

Mactal said the university has even distributed CDs of the readings for the History course for the convenience of students.

Growing enrolment

He said enrolment in DLSU’s AB History course is “growing.” This growth, he said, can be attributed to the reforms implemented by the university in the teaching of history.

Mactal said the perception is that the subject of history “is all about dead people.” He said they emphasized the importance of relevant past to what is going on in the country today. In fact, they even discuss the impeachment of President Arroyo in their history classes.

“History can’t predict but a historian can prescribe,” he said.

Mactal explained that schools and teachers cannot be faulted if today’s youth seem out of loop when it comes to the issue of nationalism.

He said environmental factors including the media and value orientation of parents play the bigger role in shaping the youth’s mindset.

The youth of today focus on personal aims and not the nation, he said. The focus maybe on family or personal interest and schools cannot change that in such a short time.

“Do you think we can change that in three months?” Mactal asked.

Centennial celebration

Moraleda said there were efforts to shore up interest in Araling Panlipunan starting in the Philippine Centennial celebration in 1998. School museums were built and projects were implemented. But she said these were not sustained after a few years.

She said Araling Panlipunan is very relevant especially in the age of globalization.

“Globalization is a major force,” Moraleda said.


Manila Times

[Percival O. Flores]

Here we go again with Mr. Jonathan Hicap. I have not met the fellow but right now he is a co-respondent in a libel case I am handling in Pangasinan. Talaga palang education ang articles na sinusulat niya. Sana naman walang magkaso ng libel sa kanya unlike doon sa case na hinahawakan ko in behalf of his co-respondents.

[KobeWanKenobi]

I have never been a fan of history when I was in Elementary and High School. Some of my lowest grades came from history/araling panlipunan.

It turns out that its not really the subject but the teachers who were the problem. I've met in my work a former history teacher turned programmer and he was an excellent source of historical information. Same with some people I've met who know a lot about history.

Fact is, history is a very interesting subject. We just need teachers who are willing and have the capability to teach the subject.

[JonarSabilano]

I have never been a fan of history when I was in Elementary and High School. Some of my lowest grades came from history/araling panlipunan.

It turns out that its not really the subject but the teachers who were the problem. I've met in my work a former history teacher turned programmer and he was an excellent source of historical information. Same with some people I've met who know a lot about history.

Fact is, history is a very interesting subject. We just need teachers who are willing and have the capability to teach the subject.

Not to mention a fresh perspective on the subject. We've been fed the same Western-centered pap over and over again that we know more about the conquistadores than, say, Dionisio Magbuelas, who was introduced to me in college.

Also, teachers need to present history not as a brute fact, but as a continuing process. As with everything human, nothing in history remains static.

[bnx613]

nakakainis lang, kasi dapat may gana ang mga teacher dito. it's one of the foundations of our "nationalism".. pano maiinstill sa mga estudyante ang pagmamahal sa bansa kung ang titser mismo eh walang galang sa kasaysayan?!

[nastrans]

Isa din sa mga problema ng mga social studies teachers even sa college level ay parang gusto pa nilang pahirapan ang estudyante imbis na gawing makulay ang pagtuturo nito. Yun parang basic style ay napakaautocratic na rin papano matututo ang mga estudyante niyan or seryosohin ang subjects na yan?

[bnx613]

i'm so glad i was able to become sir antonio hila's student. he's not the typical history teacher. he relates architecture, music, paintings, and all the other artworks to history.. hindi lang kami puro basa nun, actually puro kami field trip sa kung saan-saan.

it is because of him that i was able to appreciate art... and appreciating history through art isn't really famous, so.. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)