A Qualitative Assessment of the Implementation of Mother Tongue Based-Multilingual

Education (MTB-MLE): The Case of Guelew Integrated School

Elli, Marly Vea Clarisse Lazatin

Go, Meryl Erikka Sy

Isidro, Abigail Loren Javier

Monghit, John Oliver Battle

Pama, Eunice Nillasca

Roque, Bea Jianne Cuison

San Pedro, Maricar Nebrida

Yuson, Myla Kim Dy

Lingg 125

ABSTRACT

Barangay Guelew poses as a special case in dealing with the nationwide Mother Tongue Based-

Multilingual Education (MTB-MLE) curriculum. In addition to the country’s two main media of

instruction, Filipino and English, it is the only community in San Carlos City, Pangasinan that

speaks two mother tongues: Pangasinan and Ilokano, This research assesses how MTB-MLE is

being implemented in the Grades 1-4 of Guelew Integrated School; from the preparation to the

transition period, including the current situation. Based on the personal viewpoints explained

by the people involved, both negative and positive sides of the program are found. Possible

solutions are also considered for the improvement of MTB-MLE in the near future.

Keywords: Guelew, Ilokano, MTB-MLE, Pangasinan

 2

1.0 Introduction

In the Philippines, being multilingual is common as it is home to 175 or more languages.

Like many local communities, Barangay Guelew accommodates multilinguals, specifically

speakers of Ilokano, Pangasinan, and Filipino.

Figure 1. Barangay Guelew (retrieved from Guelew Health Center)

This scenario is also depicted in Guelew Integrated School (GIS), a public school situated

within the barangay. As one of the pilot schools, GIS adopted the Mother Tongue Based-

Multilingual Education or the MTB-MLE policy in 2011. This policy aims to improve learning by

using the mother tongue (L1) of the students. However, it has some downsides evident from the

preparation to the transition periods of the program. This research aims to assess its

implementation, particularly in GIS, and to examine the current situation as well as the

problems encountered throughout the policy.

 3

Figure 2. Guelew Integrated School (taken in June 2016)

1.1 Barangay Guelew

The field research was set in Barangay Guelew, San Carlos City, Pangasinan. Barangay

Guelew is located southwest from the town proper, bounded by Tamayo on the west, Anando on

the north, Caoayan Kiling on the east, and Malibong (in Urbiztondo) & Supo on the south. It has a

land area of 2.88 km2, and an estimated population of 3686 as of 2015. It consists of 808

households with 926 families distributed among its seven (7) puroks (State of the Barangay

Governance Report, 2015).

 4

Figure 3. Guelew within San Carlos City, Pangasinan (SCCP) map (Philippine Statistics

Authority, 2011)

San Carlos City, being situated at Central Pangasinan, is said to be where the purest

Pangasinan is spoken. Despite the remarkable increase in Ilokano speakers throughout

Pangasinan (Anderson & Anderson, 2007), San Carlos City remains to be the least influenced.

Barangay Guelew is said to be an Ilokano-speaking community within the city. Situated along

the borders, Guelew residents naturally have contact with neighboring towns and other

Ilokano-speaking communities such as Aguilar, thus instigating their use of the Ilokano language

alongside Pangasinan.

1.2 Background of the Study

On February 17, 2012, the Department of Education (DepEd) issued Order 16, s. 2012,

entitled “Guidelines on the Implementation of the Mother Tongue Based-Multilingual Education

(MTB-MLE).” This order was followed by DepEd Order 31, s. 2012, which provided additional

guidelines about the goals of the policy and possible innovative ways of implementing it. On May

15 2013, Republic Act No. 10533, better known as the “Enhanced Basic Education Act of 2013”
 5

was formally approved by the former President Aquino (The Official Gazette, 2013). MTB-MLE

was implemented alongside the K-12 Basic Education program for the school year 2012-2013.

With the goals of establishing a strong academic foundation, and instilling excellent academic

performance and socio-cultural awareness to the Filipino youth, the DepEd mandates: a) the use

of mother tongue (MT) as the medium of instruction (MOI); and b) the institution of MT as a

learning area in Kindergarten and Grades 1 to 3. MT as a learning area means that it will be

added to the list of subjects that the primary grade students need to learn. Children will be first

taught in their mother tongue, enabling them to fully understand the concept of the lessons in

school. This learning process is expected to eventually result in the enhancement of the

children’s cognitive skills. Their MT will serve as the foundation of learning other academic

subjects and theoretical concepts which will be introduced in the intermediate grades. This is

further illustrated by a chart provided by the Department of Education (2013, p. 4).

Figure 4. MTB-MLE Curriculum Framework

 6

Within its first year, the following languages— Tagalog, Kapampangan, Pangasinan,

Ilokano, Bikol, Cebuano, Hiligaynon, Waray, Tausug, Maguindanaoan, Maranao, and

Chabacano— were used as MOI and were taught as a learning area in the early grades in public

schools (DepEd Order 16, s. 2012). A year after implementation, the following languages were

added to the list— Ybanag, Ivatan, Sambal, Akianon, Kinaray-a, Yakan, and Surigaonon (DepEd

Order 28, s. 2013).

Five (5) years have passed since its pilot implementation, but there is still a lack of an

evaluation mechanism capable of accounting for the multifaceted components of MTB-MLE

(Metila, 2014). The researchers deem it necessary to conduct a comprehensive and critical

evaluation of it to determine whether MTB-MLE has been successful or not. This research thus

aims to assess the implementation of MTB-MLE using various research methods.

1.3 Objectives

As part of the evaluation, the researchers aim to determine the effectiveness of the

implementation of MTB-MLE in Guelew Integrated School through a qualitative analysis. They

aim to examine several factors affecting the preparation, execution, and outcome of this

implementation. These factors include:

a) linguistic performance and linguistic competence of the students in their mother

tongue and in other languages spoken in the community;

b) exposure of the students in their first and other languages;

c) preparation of the teachers;

d) quality of the materials the teachers use;

e) language attitude, beliefs, and situation of the barangay; and

f) other problems encountered.

Alongside these factors, the researchers intend to look into the perspectives and

attitudes of the students, parents, school authorities, and the community in general regarding

MTB-MLE and its implementation, and offer possible solutions and enhancements of the policy.
 7

1.4 Significance of the Study

Since 2012, various public and private schools in the country have adopted the MTB-

MLE program into their curriculum; Guelew Integrated School, as one of the pilot schools

(DepEd Order No. 90, s., 2011), adopted the program in 2011. For the realization of long-term

future-oriented plans like MTB-MLE, constant evaluation is critical. As stated by Daoust (1997),

objectives must be periodically re-assessed, as well as the implementation procedures.

This study is helpful as it evaluates the implementation of MTB-MLE by recognizing the

benefits earned and identifying the problems encountered before and during the program. The

results yielded in this research will be useful information for the teachers when assessing their

approach on MTB-MLE, especially in a multilingual setting. Not only will it be helpful to GIS, but

also to other schools going through similar dilemmas.

1.5 Review of Related Literature

This section presents some accounts on the etymology of the barangay’s name Guelew

and some previous studies conducted about MTB-MLE.

1.5.1 On Barangay Guelew

The official history of the barangay states that it was called guelew, a Pangasinan term

for mixture, in reference to the people who first resided in the area. These include immigrants

from various places including the Ilocos, Cagayan, and the Visayas (State of the Barangay

Governance Report, 2015).

However, there are other beliefs regarding the origin of the name of the barangay.

Through personal communication with Barangay Guelew residents, it was found that guelew is

also said to be derived from the morphemes gue ‘taong nanginginig’ or ‘a trembling person’ and

lew ‘sa takot’ or ‘in fear’. According to them, in the past, the area was occupied by mostly

Ilokanos until a group of Pangasinan-speaking people came and resided in the community.

Theft and robbery (i.e., of rice fields) within the area followed, causing many citizens to be
 8

worried and scared. Thus, the name guelew is used to refer to those people who were, in such a

time, in fear of the bandits.

On a different account coming from Purok 1, the name guelew is reckoned to be derived

from the Pangasinan word naelew which means ‘got dizzy’. It is said that a person ate something

which resulted in him becoming dizzy. Another story comes from a group of mothers residing at

Purok 2. According to them, the word guelew originated from the name of a fruit that belongs to

the family of lime called dayap, which grows abundantly in the area. The said term translates to

kabelew in Pangasinan. In another story told by an informant from Purok 6, the name guelew is

said to be after a person called Guillo who had lived during the time of the Japanese war in the

Philippines. No further information about Guillo was given, but perhaps he was a prominent

figure or someone who was of great influence in the area during those times. Through time, it is

believed that these words have evolved into guelew that is used today.

With these varying stories, it is difficult to determine which is the most reliable

etymology of the name Guelew. However, these stories only prove that the barangay has a

colorful history.

1.5.2 On MTB-MLE

There were studies already conducted about Bilingual Education Policy (BEP), the policy

prior to MTB-MLE (cf. Yanagihara, 2007; Kosonen & Young, 2009). They showed that the use of

mother tongue is effective in helping the students understand their classes. However, apart

from the language used, teaching techniques and instructional models are also considered

important factors for effective teaching.

Nolasco’s (2009) introduction to this curriculum entitled “21 reasons why Filipino

children learn better while using their mother tongue: A primer on Mother Tongue--based

Multilingual Education (MLE) & other issues on language and learning in the Philippines”

relatively explained how Filipino students may benefit from adopting a mother tongue--based

multilingual education or MLE. MLE involves the use of more than two languages as media for
 9

literacy and instruction in the aim of addressing the high illiteracy of Filipino children and

producing multi literate, multilingual, and multicultural learners. The first language or L1 is

used in reading and writing as well as in teaching different subjects such as Mathematics,

Science, Social Studies, and the like. Using the L1 ensures the comprehension of concepts, which

emboldens students to participate actively in class. However, MLE is not simply modifying the

medium of instruction and translating material to the local languages, rather it involves

developing good curricula, training teachers, producing good teaching materials, and

empowering the community through school-based management.

As students acquire a strong foundation of their L1, they are gradually introduced to

Filipino and English as separate subjects, both orally and in writing. In fact, it was found that a

good foundation of the L1 increases the potential of students to learn any second language or

L2. The use of the national language, Filipino, alongside the local and regional languages,

encourages national unity, while the use of English allows for access to world knowledge and

information. However, attaining proficiency in a language of wider communication like English

does not merely consist of increasing the time in which it is used in the classroom. Adopting the

English-only Bill is thus detrimental to Filipino students, as it impedes the understanding of

lessons and concepts, decreasing their chances for future employment. All in all, it was found

that MLE not only improves the quality of education of students, but is also feasible and cost--

effective in the Philippines.

Dekker and Walter (2011) did a research called “Mother tongue instruction in

Lubuagan: A case study from the Philippines,” wherein the effects of teaching in mother tongue

to the students’ performance were studied. Students were grouped into two— the control group

which were taught in English, and the experimental group which were taught in Lilubuagen, the

children’s mother tongue. The results showed that the group that was taught in Lilubuagen, the

experiment group, scored higher even in English and Filipino. This shows that children can

perform better if they are taught in their mother tongue, yielding the same conclusion as

Nolasco (2009). Also, in agreement with the BEP studies mentioned earlier, it was understood
 10

that effective instructional models are needed for the students to perform their best in different

subjects.

Meanwhile, Gallego and Zubiri’s (2011) research paper about the MTB-MLE curriculum

provided an overview of the various perceptions on how the Filipinos took this change in the

country’s educational system. Being multilingual speakers, the vernacular language used at

home suffers if only English, the global language, and Filipino, the national language, are taught

in school. This previous ideology gave the impression of the vernacular as “unfit for official and

formal use.” To present preferences and viewpoints of parents and students gathered from

different places in Luzon, they conflated recent surveys done by other researchers. With these,

they found that most students and teachers still preferred English and Filipino to be the MOI as

they are helpful in communication on an international scale in comparison with the mother

tongue. There is prestige in being able to speak English, yet when it comes to other Philippine

languages, the sentiments are more of having the “sense of identity and belongingness.” In

addition, parents think that there is no need to study a language used by their children at home,

as they believe English and Filipino are more essential.

In a study by Lartec, et al. (2014), the researchers analyzed the teachers’ experiences

from pilot schools implementing MTB-MLE in Baguio City, where the setting is multilingual. This

paper analyzed the strategies of teachers and identified some problems that teachers encounter

in implementing them. A qualitative analysis using interview as the main data gathering tool

was conducted. The strategies used by teachers include the translation of the target language to

the mother tongue, multilingual teaching, remedial classes, the improvisation of instructional

materials written in the mother tongue, and the use of literary pieces written in the mother

tongue as motivation. Some problems were also encountered such as the absence of books

written in the mother tongue, lack of vocabulary, and lack of teacher-training.

Another study on the MTB-MLE policy is Cruz’s (2015) “The implementation of the

Mother tongue--based Multilingual Education in Grade I in the public elementary schools in

Pangasinan I.” This study mainly described the status of the implementation of the mother
 11

tongue as a learning subject and medium of instruction in Grade 1 in the public elementary

schools in Pangasinan. With the use of a survey questionnaire as well as documentary analysis,

the study assessed how the Grade 1 pupils were coping with the language policy. It also looked

into the Grade 1 teachers’ proficiency in the mother tongue (Pangasinan) as well as the

problems they encountered with the implementation of MTB-MLE. Results showed that the

majority of the instructional objectives in the MT subject are not being met as indicated by the

areas where they are found weak, particularly in grammar awareness, vocabulary development,

and reading comprehension. Moreover, the Grade 1 teachers used another language as

accessory to the mother tongue. They, too, encountered serious problems with the

implementation of MTB-MLE such as attendance to relevant trainings and the provision of

evaluation instruments.

It is undeniable from these researches that although MTB-MLE promises a positive

effect on the educational system in the Philippines, it still has its drawbacks. In Igcalinos’ (n.d.)

study entitled “Gaps and Challenges in the Mother Tongue Based Multilingual Education (MTB-

MLE) Implementation in Philippines Basic Education: A Policy Issue Paper on Language-in-

Education Policy,” he stated that there are gaps and flaws in the MTB-MLE program. For one,

funding was previously available for MTB-MLE trainings. For another, materials development

are difficult to source. However, it was later found that teachers have been spending their own

money to cover the expenses for these materials. This happened in North and South Cotabato,

Sarangani, Sultan Kudarat, and Bukidnon. The five (5)-day trainings for teachers conducted

between 2013 up to the recent batch in the summer of 2015 only had two hours devoted to

MTB-MLE. The insufficient learning materials in the language also pose a problem— resource

materials from Luzon written in Tagalog and Ilokano are translated for use in Visayas and

Mindanao. Orthography is also problematic. Differences in spelling usage could not be brought

to an agreement, as noticed by the Komisyon sa Wikang Filipino (KWF) whose prescription is to

standardize all Philippine orthographies called Ortograpiyang Pambansa for the sake of unity

and uniformity. However, community-based terms are still preferred, thus making way to
 12

various terms. The KWF’s prescription of standardizing orthographies did not go well with the

native speakers. A possible solution is to find some common ground on which the policy and

implementation are rested. All individuals involved in the program must partake in continuous

examination and self-reflection. More evidence-based research should be undertaken; the

academe should play an active role in the study; and sustainable policy-making is the key to

solving some of the problems.

There are also studies like those of Araña (n.d.) and Eslit (2014) that show teachers in

strong agreement on the MTB-MLE objectives and are supportive of the program but were

nonetheless skeptical of it. Their skepticism is due to the challenges affecting the

implementation of MTB-MLE. Among these are the lack of MT learning materials, the need to

cope with the National Achievement Test since these are given in English and Filipino, and the

insufficient teacher trainings.

2.0 Methodology

The researchers worked on the field for a total of seven (7) days, spending the first three

(3) days on classroom observation and the remaining four (4) days on house-to-house linguistic

survey. The researchers utilized various methods which include: a) participant observation; b)

interviews with parents and school authorities; c) focus group discussions among teachers and

parents; and d) linguistic survey throughout the barangay.

For the participant observation, the researchers split into 4 pairs, assigning 1 pair for

each grade level. The researchers sat in between classes and observed the general classroom

setting, especially the language use of the students and the teachers. During breaks, informal

interviews with teachers and some parents were conducted. These parents are mostly mothers

tending to their children in Kindergarten and Grade 1.

For the focus group discussions, the researchers followed a structured questionnaire as

a guide. The discussion with teachers was held during their idle time, usually in the afternoon,

while that with the parents was held after the PTA meeting. Also, the researchers took the
 13

opportunity to commence the linguistic survey after the said meeting which was held on the

fourth day of field work. The researchers based their survey questionnaire on Rosario (2010).

The questionnaire was divided into three (3) parts: the first part focusing on linguistic profiling;

the second on language preference for their children; and the third on MTB-MLE and its

probable effects.

2.1 Definition of terms

In this research, the following terms are used according to these definitions:

Mother tongue or MT refers to the language first learned by a person. It is the same as the first

language or L1. Other languages learned after L1 are referred to accordingly as L2, L3, and so

forth. In this research, L1 is used to refer to either Pangasinan or Ilokano (unless otherwise

indicated), L2 refers to Filipino, while L3 refers to English.

Home language refers to the language(s) used at home. This language is not automatically the

same as L1; other languages can also serve as the home language.

Multilingual refers to the use of three (3) or more languages. A person is said to be a

multilingual if he has developed speaking and listening skills in three (3) or more languages.

Consequently, bilingual refers to using two languages and monolingual to only one language.

Linguistic competence pertains to an individual’s knowledge about a certain language.

Meanwhile, linguistic performance refers to how an individual uses a language, especially for

communication. It encompasses the ability to read, write, speak, and understand a language.

Competence and performance are not always in parallel correlation; a student might have

difficulties in speaking a certain language but this does not mean that he does not know any

lexicon or grammar forms of that language. In this research, assessment of the students’

performance is based on the researchers’ observations and the teachers’ remarks on their

reading, writing, speaking, and listening skills in Pangasinan, Ilokano, Filipino, and English.
 14

Code-switching refers to the act of mixing or alternating between two or more languages (or

varieties of languages) in a conversation. In this research, it pertains to code-switching among

the four (4) languages: Pangasinan, Ilokano, Filipino, and English.

Straight Teaching refers to a teaching style where only one teacher is assigned to handle and

instruct all the subjects in one section. This is practiced in classes from Grades 1 to 3.

The evaluations undergone for this study are qualitative, gathered with the help of

teachers, including school officials, parents, and the students. This is to gauge their perspectives

on the MTB-MLE curriculum in a natural setup.

2.2 Scope and (de)limitations

The classroom environments of Grades 1 to 4 in Guelew Integrated School were

assessed. The initial goal was to observe all the subjects being taught in these grades, but due to

time constraints, the researchers were not able to observe some classes such as English,

Edukasyon sa Pagpapakatao (ESP), and Music, Arts, Physical Education, Health (MAPEH).

Likewise, some teachers were not available for interview and focus group discussion because of

a school seminar and their hectic personal schedules.

In order to assess whether MTB-MLE has been successful by far, the researchers wanted

to find about the students’ academic competence. Specifically, the National Achievement Test

(NAT) and the Languages Assessment for Primary Grades (LAPG) results were considered to

serve as the basis for the evaluation. However, these results were either unavailable at the

moment or confidential and, thus, not possible to be disclosed. In lieu of this delimitation, the

researchers resorted to the descriptive assessment of the students’ academic performance

based on classroom observations, last year’s exam samples provided by the teachers, and

remarks of the teachers interviewed.

Meanwhile, only around 5% of the total household population in Barangay Guelew,

comprising about 8 to 12 households per purok, were surveyed. Nonetheless, the researchers

have ensured that an even distribution of respondents was covered in all the puroks.
 15

3.0 Results and Discussions

Before the discussion on MTB-MLE implementation, a short background on Guelew is

provided in Section 3.1. Demographics of language use and preference are presented to inform

the readers of the current linguistic situation in the barangay. The succeeding sections then

describe the situation in GIS before and after the implementation of MTB-MLE. Problematic

issues tied to the program are identified and discussed, and after a thorough analysis, possible

solutions are offered.

3.1. Background of Guelew and Linguistic Survey

The researchers conducted a linguistic survey of the seven (7) puroks in the barangay. A

total of eighty-five (85) residents were interviewed whose ages range from 20 to 80 years old.

Seventy-nine (79) among these are female, while six (6) are male. Since in this community,

women usually stay at home and take care of the family while men are at work, it is not

surprising that the majority of those who participated in the survey are women. The age

distribution of these respondents is shown in Figure 5.

Figure 5. Distribution of age among respondents

 16

From Figure 5, it is observed that the 30-39 age group comprises 37% of the total

respondents, followed by the 40-49 age group (22%), 50-59 (15%), 20-29 (14%), and 60 years

and above (10%). There were 2 respondents (2%) who did not disclose their age.

Based on the data collected on language use, the researchers understand that Guelew

multilinguals can speak Pangasinan, Ilokano, and Filipino, among other languages. Out of those

surveyed, only two (2) respondents were noted to be monolingual in Pangasinan but can

understand some Ilokano and Filipino words and phrases.

Figure 6. Number of speakers per language, and comparison of usage as L1, as L2 or L3,

and as home language

As for Figure 6, the number of speakers of a language is illustrated according to the

following: a) as L1; b) as L2 and L3; and c) as a home language. It shows that most, if not all

respondents, first acquired Pangasinan as their L1 instead of Ilokano or Filipino. However, it

may be noticed that the number of respondents who have Ilokano as their L1 are not too far off.

It can also be seen that the number of respondents who use Filipino as their L2 and L3 almost

double those who use Ilokano or Pangasinan. Meanwhile, there are some who have learned

English as their L2 and L3 but not as their L1. Languages such as Bisaya and Kapampangan are
 17

also used as L1 and L2, but speakers of these languages are only few; in many cases, they had

only immigrated to Guelew.

Figure 7. Comparison of Parent and Child

In Figure 7, the languages used by the respondents and their children are compared. It

should be noted that the children of each respondent are treated collectively, i.e all children

belonging to the same family are interpreted as one (1) child, and that all languages used are

accounted for, regardless of whichever their L1 or L2 is. Similar to the case of the respondents,

the number of children who can use Filipino scored the highest, closely followed by Pangasinan

and Ilokano, respectively.

Survey results ascertain that Barangay Guelew is a multilingual community. Residents

have learned to live among their differences (e.g., language). A person might come from a

Pangasinan household (i.e., He grew up using Pangasinan as his home language, but his

neighbor an Ilokano.) Eventually he learns Ilokano as a means of adapting to his environment.

Likewise, his Ilokano neighbor also acquires Pangasinan. This scenario depicts Guelew as a

community where Pangasinan and Ilokano speakers coexist in harmony.

 18

3.2 MTB-MLE in GIS

Having stated the facts that show Guelew as a community where different languages are

used simultaneously as L1, it can be assumed that the school within the area may face problems

regarding a policy that mainly deals with the L1 of students (i.e., MTB-MLE). The situation of

Guelew Integrated School will be thoroughly discussed in this section.

3.2.1 Before MTB-MLE implementation

Before MTB-MLE was implemented, almost all of the teachers interviewed had minimal

to zero knowledge about the policy. After being oriented, many of them had doubts on the

program. Some teachers were not convinced about the significance of implementing the new

policy. According to them, the former policy, Bilingual Education Policy (BEP), was already

satisfactory. Moreover, they did not understand the sense of urgency associated with the new

policy. After their trainings, the teachers were expected to immediately adopt the policy into

their classes, leaving them very little time to reevaluate their teaching strategies. Furthermore,

they viewed MTB-MLE, along with the K-12 Basic Education Program, as an additional burden

to the parents. In the end, they had no choice but to comply.

Likewise, the parents interviewed shared these sentiments. Many parents were against

the idea of MTB-MLE because it is troublesome to both their children and themselves. According

to them, learning MT is counterproductive as the children will not likely use it in the future,

especially in terms of employment. Some even commented on the seemingly backward

progression of the educational system (i.e., bringing back previous curriculums like MT).

On an interesting note, almost all of the parents interviewed were not aware that

besides being taught as a subject, MT is also used in teaching the other subjects. This is why

many parents were surprised upon learning that subjects such as Math and Science are being

taught in the children’s L1.

 19

3.2.2 Current Situation

The current situation in GIS is presented in this subsection, which is further divided into

two: 3.2.2.1 is about the observations in different classrooms; and 3.2.2.2 is about the different

preparations and teaching strategies utilized by the teachers.

3.2.2.1 Classroom Observation

In this section, classroom observations are presented by grade level. Summaries of the

observations in various classes as well as the analyses of the researchers are stated.

3.2.2.1.1 Grade 1

To account for both Pangasinan and Ilokano speaking students, Grade 1 for this school

year has been divided into three (3) classes— two of which are in Pangasinan and one in

Ilokano. These classes are conducted through straight teaching. They include the following

subjects: Edukasyon sa Pagpapakatao (ESP), MTB-MLE, Mathematics, Araling Panlipunan,

Filipino, English, and MAPEH. Remedial teaching is also part of the afternoon session, but so far,

it is not being applied to practice. In fact, it was observed that Grade 1 does not strictly follow

their schedule. When a lesson in a certain subject is not finished in the given time, the discussion

may be extended, thus using up the time for another subject. Moreover, when the students are

not as participative anymore especially when nearing lunchtime or dismissal time, the teachers

allow them to leave early, and the lesson currently being discussed will be continued in a later

time.

It should be noted that Filipino and English are not yet included as part of the

curriculum of Grade 1 students in the first grading, although they are sporadically taught and

sometimes used by teachers in classrooms as languages of instruction. For example, students

are taught to count from one (1) to one hundred (100) in English as early as Grade 1. There are

also times when teachers choose to shift to Filipino as additional support when it appears as if

students do not completely comprehend a particular topic taught in the mother tongue.
 20

Accordingly, Filipino is taught as a subject in the second grading, while English is taught as a

subject in the third grading.

In general, the students in Grade 1 are lively and participative during class lectures and

recitation. As students are able to express themselves more freely in their own tongue, the more

that they become active and engaged in class. The downside is that they become noisier, rowdier,

and harder to control for teachers. Some randomly stand up, go out of the classroom, and spurt

out comments like “Madam, ako naman” ‘Madam, me too’ when not picked to recite in class, or

“Madam, o, makulit si X” ‘Madam, o, X is annoying,’ when a classmate is causing a disturbance.

These students do rote memorization, recitation, and repetition of lessons several times

in a week. For instance, the teachers make them repetitively practice counting in their mother

tongue as well as in English. It is worth noting that these students count well in English but

struggle quite a bit doing so in Pangasinan or Ilokano, especially when the numbers reach higher

values. One student was in fact seen counting using his fingers and, at the same time, was

mouthing these numbers to himself in English. It may be said that students find it easier or is

more comfortable counting in English.

When talking to fellow classmates, the students in the Pangasinan classes mostly speak

Pangasinan and sometimes Filipino. Similarly, those who belong to the Ilokano class mostly speak

Ilokano and some Filipino. It appears that there is no significant difference between the learning

attitude or participation of students and whichever language the teacher uses to speak with them.

Usually, when the teacher speaks in a certain language, students reply in the same language.

However, there are instances in which students randomly speak or recite in Filipino or English

even when the teacher previously spoke in their mother tongue. It may be noted that the teachers

use multiple languages in class and sometimes do code-switching. Sometimes, they also borrow

English words such as magdodrowing ‘will draw’ and magririses ‘will go on recess’.
 21

3.2.2.1.2 Grade 2

In the Grade 2 level, there are three (3) sections— one in Pangasinan and two in Ilokano.

Unlike in Grade 1, Filipino and English are part of the curriculum of the Grade 2 students from

the very start of the academic year. They also have remedial teaching in the afternoon and are

also taught by only one teacher, their class advisor, in all of their classes.

During the MTB-MLE class, the students actively participate in class. They often throw

jokes at each other and laugh cheerfully, a sign that tells that the students do not only

understand the lesson but are also enjoying the class. In the Pangasinan section, Pangasinan is

the primary language but Filipino is used when the teacher gives instructions to the students.

English is occasionally used to provide the definition of a certain concept and it is later

explained in Filipino and Pangasinan by the teacher. The teacher also asks the students to read

the definitions in English and the students are able to do so. When conversing among

themselves, the students usually use Filipino but they sometimes also use Pangasinan. When the

teacher asks something in Pangasinan, the students commonly reply in Filipino. Consequently,

the teacher would speak in Pangasinan or Filipino. Ilokano, however, was not observed to be

used in the class.

Those who do not speak Pangasinan as a first language find it more difficult to

understand the lessons in comparison to native Pangasinan speakers, but since the teacher also

explains the subject content in Filipino, they are also able to understand what the teacher is

talking about. After being exposed to the language for some time in the classroom and being in

the midst of their Pangasinan-speaking peers, the students who could not initially speak

Pangasinan eventually acquired the language and became comfortable with it. On the other

hand, classes in one of the Ilokano sections are being conducted solely in the Ilokano language.

The teacher asks and gives directions in Ilokano and tries avoiding speaking in Filipino. When

the students answer a teacher’s question, they try to answer in Ilokano. However, it was

observed that there are terms that they do not know how to say in Ilokano but they do know in
 22

Pangasinan and Filipino. The teacher then asks them to translate the answer in Ilokano. Most of

the students speak in both Filipino and Ilokano when conversing with other students.

During Mathematics class, the same atmosphere in the Pangasinan and Ilokano classes

was observed. The students showed positive response during the whole period. According to

the teachers, the Mathematics subject is the easiest subject to teach because it involves

numbers, which means that there is not much need for them to switch among languages.

Compared to the MTB-MLE class, more English terms were used in this class because the

technical terms taught by the teacher to the students and the instructional materials used are in

English. However, the teachers also use and teach the MT counterpart of each technical term, if

available. When the teacher asks the students to recite the numbers in the flashcards, the

students read them in English, making them more accustomed to reading large numbers in

English. The teacher remarked that MT number words are very long unlike English number

words which are shorter and could be uttered faster, thus are very convenient for the students.

Nevertheless, the students are also able to express large numbers in MT. When it comes to word

problems, these are expressed in the mother tongue. Since the students are not that familiar

with using MT in performing mathematical operations, the teacher had to include the

mathematical operation symbols in brackets in these word problems to facilitate better

understanding among the students.

Pangasinan materials are supplied sufficiently in this school. Because of that, all of the

students in the Pangasinan section possess instructional materials for all of their subjects.

However, during the class, the students are not using any textbook at all. The teacher said that

he often does not require the students to bring their books because, in reality, all the books

except in English and Filipino subjects are exercise books. Usually, it is he who has to prepare

what would be used for the class, from the visual aids, to the exercises of the students, up to

their examinations. The same situation is observed in the Ilokano sections. Currently, as

mentioned by the Principal, only the Grade 2 level has the complete Ilokano materials, but the
 23

teachers still prepare their own materials since the Ilokano words found in the books are too

hard for the students to understand.

3.2.2.1.3 Grade 3

This school year, the Grade 3 level has been divided into three (3) classes— two of

which are conducted in Ilokano and one in Pangasinan. However, the researchers were only

able to observe two sections since one Ilokano section had no classes as the teacher was away

attending a seminar outside of school. These classes also utilize straight teaching, and the

subjects are similar to those of Grade 2 except for the addition of Science class. Aside from these,

there is a religion class that is held in the classroom by church members twice a week. This class

is said to be conducted in Pangasinan and Ilokano, although Filipino is often being used as well.

Moreover, there are remedial classes before lunch break and before dismissal for those who get

scores below the average in a quiz.

It should be noted that not all students in each class, particularly in the Pangasinan

section, are native speakers of their corresponding language group. There is a transferee

student in the Pangasinan section whose mother tongue is Tagalog yet uses Pangasinan at

home. The student grew up in a non-Pangasinan speaking community in Valenzuela and is

accustomed to using Filipino, however when she transferred to Pangasinan, her parents and

neighbors use Pangasinan a lot. For this reason, the teacher sometimes explains and states a

command or an instruction in Filipino when she thinks that the student, as well as the others,

cannot understand her Pangasinan. There are students, likewise, who ask the teacher in Filipino

even in Math and MTB-MLE classes. In this case, the teacher answers in Filipino and then

encourages the student to speak in Pangasinan. In the same manner, students in the Ilokano

section were observed to be speaking Filipino, although less frequently as compared to the

Pangasinan section. However, this section frequently speaks in English, for example “Madam,

finish,” “Pwede po mag-English?” ’May I speak English?’ since their adviser is also their English

teacher. The students use Filipino mostly when talking to fellow students. There are also a
 24

number of times when the teacher discusses, explains, and gives instructions in Filipino. As

stated by one teacher, the teachers do not only teach in the classroom, but they also translate or

interpret for the students since they can comprehend Filipino, English, and Pangasinan and/or

Ilokano.

The students’ exposure to their mother tongue is mostly because the teacher is naturally

using it too. Songs and prayers are also in their mother tongue, and the students are chanting

them in a very lively manner. There are also claps but these are spoken in Tagalog and English

such as “ang galing galing mo,” ’very good, very good’. Clapping is used as motivation when

reciting in class to show appreciation or praise for correctly answering a question, while songs

and prayers are uttered before beginning the next subject and before dismissal. These songs and

prayers are taught as early as Grade 1, and the Grade 3 teachers supposedly teach the students

the translated English version, but sometimes, they still use the MT version.

3.2.2.1.4 Grade 4

Until the third grade, all subjects excluding Filipino (L2) and English (L3), are taught in

the child’s MT (L1). L1 is continuously used as MOI in a transition process through Grade 3.

Upon entering the fourth grade, the child’s skills in L2 and L3 are honed by increased exposure

to these languages (i.e., MOI shifts from L1 to L2 and L3). In GIS, L2 is used as MOI in Filipino,

Araling Panlipunan, and Edukasyon sa Pagpapakatao (ESP), while L3 is used in English,

Mathematics, Science, MAPEH. However, in practice, L2 and L3 are not exclusively used as MOI.

In all the three (3) sections, the researchers observed mixed usage of Ilokano, Pangasinan,

Filipino, and English among the teachers and the students, inside and outside the classroom.

Detailed observations regarding classroom observations are discussed below.

In GIS, there are three (3) Grade 4 sections— two (IV-EC and IV-AL) of which are

comprised of students from the Ilokano sections of the previous grade level, while the other one

(IV-MM) is from the Pangasinan section. Although Filipino and English are used as MOI, they are

not used exclusively. To further illustrate, look at Table 1.

 25

Subject MOI IM

Science Filipino (overall discussion) English

with occasional English (terms)
and Pangasinan (interjections)

Mathematics Filipino (overall discussion) English

with occasional Ilokano and
Pangasinan (when scolding
students or when the students
do not understand)

Araling Panlipunan Filipino (overall discussion) Filipino

with translated terms in
English

Filipino Filipino Filipino

Table 1. Language of IMs and the MOI in each class in Grade 4

Science, which is supposed to be taught in English, was observed to be taught mainly in

Filipino. Although the instructional materials are in English, the discussion was mainly in

Filipino, with a few terms in English. In IV-MM’s lesson on biodegradable and non-

biodegradable materials, when the teacher asked for examples of biodegradable materials

"Magbigay nga ng halimbawa ng biodegradable materials." ‘Give an example of biodegradable

materials’, some students answered in Filipino (e.g., balat ng saging ‘banana peel’), while some

in Pangasinan (e.g., ubak ya mansanas ‘apple peelings’).

It is noticeable from Table 1 that the language of IMs is not automatically the language

used as MOI. The teachers use MTs Pangasinan or Ilokano, Filipino, and English in teaching;

Filipino being the most frequently used. Although the materials provided by the government are

in Filipino or English, the teachers were observed to teach these materials in a language where

the students feel most comfortable. Likewise, apart from the MOI, other languages are used as

supplements. For instance, if the teachers notice that the students are not able to understand

what was said, they will then translate it to Filipino. If this still is not enough, they will translate

it to the children’s L1. Through this method, the students are able to grasp the lessons but the

flow of discussion gets slowed down by a series of translations. Furthermore, the class schedule

gets disrupted as some classes extend beyond their time allotment.

 26

In all classes, the students were observed to use Filipino during lessons and

conversations with other students. There were instances when the L1 was utilized, but only

within a certain group of people, most likely as a sign of exclusivity. Even in classes where it

ought to be the MOI, English was rarely used, if not at all. These rare instances are usually

observed when the students read out instructions on the blackboard or texts from the books.

In summary, the researchers observed that code-switching is an inevitable practice

since the setting is multilingual. Teachers and students code-switch when talking to each other.

Some problems posed are usually seen when answering a question in L2 or L3. Some of the

students are still accustomed and well-versed in using their L1 that they answer some questions

in their mother tongue. The answer is not wrong, however the question seeks the right

language.

3.2.2.2 Preparation and Teaching Strategies of the Teachers

This section describes the trainings and seminars the teachers had undergone for the

new policy. Instructional materials as well as teaching strategies are covered.

3.2.2.2.1 Trainings and Seminars

As a pilot school of MTB-MLE, GIS was invited to attend a 10-day seminar in La Union,

administered by the Department of Education Region I in the year 2011. The Grade 1 teachers

who participated in the said seminar were introduced to the philosophy behind the policy and

the methodologies to use in order to effectively teach the students using their mother tongue.

A similar seminar was held in the following year, but it was intended for the Grade 2

teachers. The content of the seminar was relatively similar to that conducted for the Grade 1

teachers in the previous year, only now it was conducted with the Grade 2 students in mind.

However, unlike the prior one, the Grade 2 teachers had to attend a series of seminars. The 10-

day seminar was followed by a five (5)-day training in Dagupan City, Pangasinan headed by the

Department of Education Schools Division Office of Pangasinan. After this, a three (3)-day

follow-up writeshop about the production of instructional materials on MTB-MLE was held in
 27

La Union. During this training, the teachers were taught how to prepare materials like visual

aids, storybooks, and workbooks, in the mother tongue for different subjects. According to them,

preparing the necessary materials was the most arduous task they had to do because there were

no materials available initially, and they had to do research themselves on what they should

write and teach to their students.

In the same manner, Grade 3 teachers attended the seminar in 2013, acquiring the

necessary knowledge and skills that the teachers in the lower grade levels had also previously

learned. It should be noted that an Ilokano teacher was told to join the Pangasinan group

instead of the Ilokano group because the supervisor of the training told them that GIS is

assigned under the Pangasinan MT. This seminar was followed by a five (5)-day seminar held in

Dagupan in the following year 2014. It was to inform the Grade 3 teachers about the K-12 Basic

Education curriculum.

Apart from the trainings the teachers underwent in the previous years, follow-up

seminars are very rare. Although there are seminars and trainings held each year, these are

targeted at a different set of teachers and not those who have already attended such seminars.

The most recent update would be the Grade 4 teachers having their first training this year,

lasting for only five (5) days. According to them, it was informative but still not enough to

address all the problems arising in the transition period.

After the seminar in 2011, MTB-MLE was implemented in the school without delay. In

addition, parents were convened and informed by the school administration about MTB-MLE.

3.2.2.2.2 Instructional Materials and Teaching Strategies

The government provided instructional materials corresponding to the MTB-MLE

curriculum such as, teachers’ manuals, and learning materials for the students. There is a

sufficient supply of Pangasinan materials yet a lack of Ilokano materials. Despite having several

Ilokano sections, GIS receives very few materials for such classes. Instead, the teachers resort to
 28

borrowing and translating materials from Pangasinan to Ilokano. Translation also occurs in

class discussions. For instance, since there are students whose skills in Filipino and English are

not enough to understand the lessons, especially in Grade 4, the teachers resort to translating.

This issue is to be pondered on in Section 3.4.3.

There are other instances where teachers utilize supplementary materials such as visual

aids for more efficient teaching even though instructional materials from DepEd were provided.

This is done so that the students would be able to understand the lessons better. Likewise, there

are teachers who refer to other books for class activities.

IMs are in need of attention and action, as stated by the teachers. Standardized

textbooks and exercise books would be of great help to establish a motivational learning

atmosphere in the classroom. Both the students and the teachers heavily rely on these

materials, and the lack of them could cause inconsistencies in teaching that may affect everyone

involved.

Aside from these materials, the teachers also utilize other strategies such as singing

songs or praying at the beginning of the class. These are held in MT. However, it was observed

that in Kindergarten class, the songs performed are in Pangasinan even though the parents

waiting outside for their children assured that it is an Ilokano class. Most of the songs have a

Filipino counterpart; some were merely translated, while some had different lyrics but in the

same melody. There was one song that cannot be associated with any Filipino song (i.e. Si

Anna). Clapping was also observed to motivate the children to participate, and the claps along

with chants are spoken in either Filipino or English.

3.3 Language Attitudes and Beliefs

There are various opinions and attitudes toward MTB-MLE and languages in general. In

this section, the attitudes of the teachers, parents, and students are presented. These are

collected from the linguistic surveys, interviews, and focus group discussions conducted with
 29

the teachers and the parents from Barangay Guelew. The analysis of the students’ attitude is

based on researchers’ observation of their behavior during classes and breaks.

3.3.1. Teachers

Many teachers are in favor of the policy since they see improvement in the students’

class performance. That is to say, the children have become more active in answering the

teachers‘ questions as compared to before. They have also become more enthusiastic and lively

as they participate, speak up, and contribute to class discussions. According to the teachers, it

cannot be denied that the students have become more insightful and receptive to the class

lessons, resulting in higher grades.

On the other hand, there are a lot of students who struggle with language when they

reach a higher grade level. This is due to their L2 which now tends to become the language more

often used than their L1. In addition, the problems regarding the instructional materials, which

will be discussed in the succeeding section, are a burden to some teachers. Due to lacking

materials, aside from making and producing their own, the teachers spend money from their

personal finances. They also need to translate some lessons, thus spending more time doing

these instead of other groupworks or activities. For these reasons, a number of teachers

propose to make MTB-MLE merely a separate subject in school, rather than applying it to all the

subjects.

There is also speculation that GIS will remove its Ilokano sections. Since the students are

in Pangasinan, it is said that it is a good thing to learn the Pangasinan language. This may be the

reason why the songs in the Kindergarten classes are all in Pangasinan for both Pangasinan and

Ilokano classes. On the one hand, this resolution seems favorable as it would easily eliminate the

problems related to Ilokano, e.g. lack of materials and teachers. However, this is not a viable

option at all as it will lead to the imposition of Pangasinan as the only MT to be taught in GIS.

Doing so will cast aside the linguistic reality of Guelew as a community that speaks not only

Pangasinan but also Ilokano.

 30

3.3.2 Parents

As mentioned, the researchers interviewed eighty-five (85) residents of Barangay

Guelew. Eighty-four (84) of these are parents, and seventy-three (73) have children or relatives

who have been affected by the MTB-MLE program. A total of forty-seven (47) respondents was

recorded to be in agreement with the MTB-MLE policy, while thirty-four (34) was found to

disagree with it. Some respondents who agreed said that they have no choice but to comply with

the policy since it has already been implemented.

There are a number of parents who actually approve of MTB-MLE since, according to

them, it is good that the children get to learn more about their own language. The parents also

note that their children can comprehend the lessons being taught to them more easily and can

express themselves better using their mother tongue. Some parents want their children to learn

as many languages as they can, and they view MTB-MLE as a great chance to do so.

On the contrary, there are parents who believe that the former BEP policy is more

practical. Especially because of the influences of media, for instance, since television shows in

the area are mainly broadcasted in Filipino, many children nowadays are used to speaking

Filipino more than their MT. Also, in their opinion, Filipino is more essential since majority of

Filipinos can speak it. They also deem it more useful, particularly when going to other places,

when communicating with other people, and when applying for work. Moreover, when some

parents were asked about the school textbooks their children use, which are written in either

published in Pangasinan or in Ilokano, they assert that there are deep words being used in the

books that even they cannot understand. They find it difficult, likewise, to help their children

with their homeworks.

3.3.3 Students

As stated in the previous sections, students appear to be flexible in terms of language

use. Because most of them are bilingual or multilingual, they were observed to be tolerant of

whichever language is being utilized. Usually, they use whichever language their teacher or their
 31

classmates use to speak with them. Also, there was no noticeable difference in their attitude

when using various languages. Generally speaking, Pangasinan and Ilokano speakers interact

freely and without reservations. During recess and lunch break, students from either sections

play and catch up with each other. When asked how they communicate, the students responded

that they know Pangasinan, Ilokano, or Filipino so it does not matter to them if their friends

speak a language different from their MT because they can understand it. Likewise, they do not

mind which language they use because, in any case, they are confident that they will be

understood by their peers. Despite being separated in classes according to their L1, the students

were observed to mingle and not practice isolation towards other students.

3.4 Overall Problems of MTB-MLE

This section provides thorough analyses of some problems encountered with MTB-MLE.

The problems listed below are those that stood out the most but are not strictly the only

problems that may be encountered.

3.4.1 Sorting of students (Pangasinan and Ilokano sections)

The class assignments of students, whether in Pangasinan or Ilokano sections, appear to

be arbitrary. There are instances wherein there is a mismatch between the mother tongue used

in class and the language spoken by a student. This may be because of the faulty method that the

school utilizes in student placement. For one, some teachers revealed that they simply base the

class assignments on the child's comprehension ability. During enrollment, they ask the student

a question in Pangasinan and place that student in the Pangasinan section if he understands the

question and responds accordingly. Otherwise, he will be placed in the Ilokano section.

However, this is problematic especially if the child is bilingual or multilingual. Also, there is no

clear method to assess the placement of students who speak neither Pangasinan nor Ilokano.

Tagalog students, for example, are present in both Pangasinan and Ilokano classes in Grade 1.
 32

An interesting case involves a Grade 1 Ilokano student who was transferred to a

Pangasinan class after only a week since the resumption of classes. This student was previously

part of the Ilokano class, but as per request was permitted to change classes because of her

preference for a certain teacher. Because of language mismatch in the classroom, the new

teacher has to give her more attention and speak to her in Ilokano or Filipino when she appears

to not understand a topic or instruction. As more time is spent explaining the lessons to

students who do not understand a certain language, the time for learning new concepts or for

practicing is compromised. This makes the application of MTB-MLE in the classrooms also

arbitrary since several languages are often spoken in class and used as MOI, not just the MT. A

Pangasinan teacher herself revealed that in reality, four (4) languages, namely: Pangasinan,

Filipino, English, and Ilokano, are used in her class.

3.4.2 Learning and teaching materials

The greatest problem regarding materials is the lack thereof. Despite the provisions

from the government, there are still insufficiencies for both Ilokano and Pangasinan. There are

instances in which the teachers themselves have to look for their own instructional resources;

they borrow and utilize other books and the internet, and shell out their own money in order to

provide the students enough material. They do not even receive incentives in making their own

materials. Ilokano teachers have it worse, improvising materials by manually translating from

Pangasinan.

Supplementary instructional materials are also very limited. For example, in a Grade 4

Araling Panlipunan class, there was only one globe and one map for the whole class. During an

activity where the students were asked to find the Philippines in the globe and map, the children

were not able to find it immediately. Some students did not even participate because they had

no map and were seated too far from the provided globe and map.

There are problematic cases where the ones that are written in the teachers’ manual and

the students’ books are different. For example, a teacher noted that in their Filipino class, the
 33

contents of her teaching manual differ from those written in the students’ books. According to

her, this incoherence makes it difficult for her to smoothly discuss the lesson. Moreover, the

learning materials themselves prove to be problematic and in need of updating. There are

lessons included in the materials that are difficult to process and comprehend without the

proper background. An example for this would be the parts of the globe. The books provided

discussed the circles of latitude, (e.g., Tropic of Cancer), straightaway without discussing

concepts such as latitude, longitude, and the equator. The teacher then had no choice but to

refer to other books which stated these things. This excerpt only shows that the materials need

to be updated.

Figure 8. Examples of deep Pangasinan words

Some of the learning materials in MTB-MLE, ESP, and AP also have deep Pangasinan and

Ilokano words which may be decontextualized in a sense that perhaps these books are from the

Ilokano-Ilocos variety. The teachers have a hard time decoding the words and often ask help

from their co-teachers. Some of the English meanings of the words are found in the books

themselves, however the teachers said it was their first time seeing those words. Examples of

Pangasinan words are “talagnaw" ‘excitement,’ “seseg" ‘enthusiasm’, and “kabunlalakaw"

‘rainbow’. Some of the Ilokano words are “agkikinammayet" ‘teamwork,’ “maladaga" ‘infant,

baby’, and “balligi" ‘success.’

 34

In relation to the lack of materials, teachers likewise encounter problems with the

orthography in the mother tongue. For instance, the Pangasinan word for the number ‘two’ is

often spelled in books and instructional materials provided by DepEd as duwara. However, one

teacher chooses to teach her students the spelling duara instead. She based her written

Pangasinan from the translated version of the Bible despite the provided orthography from

DepEd, saying that the Bible is older and can be a more reliable source than the recently

provided version.

Also, at a very young age, students are observed to be multilinguals. This can be viewed

as a byproduct of the children’s environment. Outside school, children are exposed to the

languages of their parents and their neighbors. Usually, they use their MT in their homes.

However, they are inarguably susceptible to other languages. Parents noted that their children

become familiar with Ilokano and Pangasinan as they interact with their neighbors. Also,

frequent subscription to media such as television accounts for their exposure to Filipino.

3.4.3 Transition from MT to Filipino-English

The effects of MTB-MLE were seen firsthand in Grade 4. Through Grades 1 to 3, the

students have achieved linguistic competence in their L1. The researchers even asked the

students’ teachers to rate their competence in their L1. Remarkably, the highest grade has been

given. Likewise, their academic performance is highly satisfactory. But upon entering the fourth

grade level, the students’ performance seems to be static, if not declining. Being used to MT, the

students are overwhelmed by the sudden increase of subjects taught in Filipino and English.

Their lessons are full of unfamiliar terms. As a result, they face difficulties grasping the essence

of the lectures. Although they have been studying Filipino and English since Grade 1, the skills

they have acquired are observed to be inadequate. For instance, in an activity where they were

asked to write about their dream using the Filipino language, many students were unable to

write their essays. Furthermore, those who did so either wrote it in their MT or in Filipino, but

these were irrelevant to the topic. Also, when posed with questions in English, the students
 35

failed to respond, and if they did, their answers were incoherent. As the Grade 4 teachers

remarked, it looks as though the students undergo a mind reset when they enter the fourth

grade. As an immediate solution, the teachers would simply translate L3 to L2 and L2 to L1 until

the students are able to understand the lessons. However, the progress of the lessons gets

compromised and slowed down.

3.4.4 Faculty

An effective and efficient teacher is one of the key components in improved learning.

However, GIS is noted to be inadequately staffed, especially when it comes to subjects offered in

Ilokano. There are only a few Ilokano teachers, and sometimes they are forced to teach in

elementary (Grades 1-3) even if they are intermediate teachers (Grades 4-6). One Pangasinan

teacher who is a Tagalog native has a hard time teaching deep Pangasinan words and even

needed a dictionary for consultation. As a temporary solution, teachers with tolerable

knowledge of Ilokano and even Pangasinan are assigned to these classes as well. Nonetheless,

they still lack the skills required to teach a multilingual classroom.

3.4.5 Other Problems

Misinformation and lack of information dissemination are among other problems that

should be addressed. Teachers and residents were both observed to use the term dialect when

referring to Pangasinan and Ilokano, and the term language for Filipino. Some parents lack

awareness of MTB-MLE, its agenda, its policies, and even its name; some residents mistook it for

MTV, a television channel. Forty-one (41) out of the eighty-five (85) residents stated that they

were not aware of the MTB-MLE program. However, some of these respondents recognized the

program when the researchers explained it in detail.

Moreover, there are limited learning opportunities for Ilokano students. Aside from the

insufficient materials, students from Ilokano sections are seldom picked to participate in quiz

bee competitions since the MT being used is Pangasinan. Usually, students from the Pangasinan

section are the ones chosen.

 36

3.5 Possible Solutions

With all the problems out in the open, the researchers then propose probable solutions

to alleviate the ongoing worries of the school and the Guelew community regarding the

curriculum. The first problem in need of immediate attention would be the lack of instructional

materials. In order to facilitate better education, every student should be given adequate

learning materials. As much as possible, they should already be delivered to the school before

the first day of classes. All teachers should also be given sufficient teaching manuals before the

first day of classes to help them prepare for their classes. Also, it would be better if a variety of

instructional materials for the teachers and the students are available. These may include audio-

visual materials, story books, short stories, and other references like dictionaries and grammar

sketches in the MT. If there are none available, it could be addressed by creating a committee

among the teachers which will concentrate specifically on collecting and creating the learning

materials. For the sake of uniformity, the said committee’s works would become the standard

IMs for the whole school. The students could also be active participants in this endeavor by

asking them to do their quarterly projects in their MT, holding competitions and school

programs that could showcase their prowess with their mother tongue. In addition to the

materials, the development of a standard orthography of the language is also important. Before

expanding into implementing MT classes of another language, the regional lingua franca and

some of the already implemented languages should be further analyzed and researched.

Conducting language surveys is essential to the program.

Second, the seminar and trainings of the Department of Education are in need of better

scheduling and preparation. Since the teachers are actually the ones who are in the classrooms

teaching their students under the MTB-MLE curriculum, they should be equipped and

knowledgeable about the teaching techniques prescribed in the program. The government must

ensure that the educators fully understand and believe in the policy. This could be done by

holding various seminars, training programs, and conventions wherein they could learn about

the rationale behind MTB-MLE, discuss the experiences and difficulties they have faced, and
 37

share with each other the possible solutions to the shortcomings of MTB-MLE. All these must be

given ample time before regular classes start every year so as to condition the teachers and the

school administrators. These meetings are great platforms to present alternative ways for the

improvement of the policy which will be useful to everyone involved if they regularly join the

yearly events of the school and the DepEd.

Third, in relation to the second solution, would be the consistent evaluation and

documentation of the policy conducted individually and collectively. The school community

should start planning among themselves first, in accordance with the DepEd memoranda, and

discuss what they could possibly do at the moment just in case unexpected problems would

arise. This is a way of formulating contingency plans, at least until their concerns are addressed

in the Division Office.

Fourth would be the class assignments wherein some classes have multilingual students.

A standardized procedure to determine a student’s mother tongue should be created.

Multilingual students shall be assessed on what language they use the most, and this rule shall

be strictly implemented, although it does not stop the personal preferences of the students and

parents.

Fifth would be a better transition curriculum which would include language

progression. In concept, Grade 3 shall be the time for transition. Instead, as what has been

observed, the transition phase is happening in Grade 4. A curriculum for transition which can be

incorporated into the MTB-MLE is needed to address the abrupt shift currently happening in

Grade 4. Also, the teachers should be reminded of the objectives of the policy itself and the fact

that the transition is an integral part of it. This eases the students to English and Filipino as they

need to learn these to be able to talk to other people beyond their barangay and province.

Last would be a supportive environment coming from the Barangay and the City

officials. Parents should also be involved in some of the seminars or meetings for them to be

informed on the education of their children. Raising the awareness of the community is a big
 38

step in achieving an efficient program. Coordination and supervision not only from teachers but

also from parents are needed. With these, funding for the program is necessary.

3.6 Impact of MTB-MLE in the community

As mentioned in the previous section, a supportive environment is vital as it stimulates

positive reception of the policy. For five (5) years, MTB-MLE has been implemented in GIS and

it has played its part in the community as well. In the linguistic survey conducted by the

researchers, parents had stated their opinions about the policy. From these, numerous benefits

and drawbacks are already identified and discussed. Some parents agreed that MTB-MLE

yielded better performance of their children in school, while others wondered why it should be

implemented in the first place when it seemed dispensable to study MT. Overall, the policy

garnered mixed sentiments from the community.

Nonetheless, GIS and the community have developed an appreciation for Pangasinan

and Ilokano because of MTB-MLE. Before, these languages were taken for granted and were only

viewed as the typical tongues at home. Nowadays, even young children pay attention to these

languages through formal education. Ideally, the parents become more involved in their

children’s education, especially when aiding in their homeworks. In the same manner, it has

fostered openness among the residents. An example would be the case of the child who was

placed in the Pangasinan class despite being a Tagalog speaker. His family recently migrated to

Guelew where his father’s house is, but his father stayed in Manila. His mother, who knows very

little Pangasinan, seeks the help of her in-laws and neighbors. They, in turn, help the new

residents not just with the local language, but also with the barangay’s way of life. This shows

how Guelew, as a multilingual locality, can adapt to the changing dynamics of the province by

utilizing the languages they know, including Filipino, to deal with immigrants without forgetting

their mother tongues.

Furthermore, even though there is a division of classes based on the MT or even the

language preference of the involved (students themselves, parents), there is no reported

 39

language discrimination among the students. Students from Pangasinan section often visit their

friends in Ilokano sections, and vice versa. Guelew is indeed an amiable community.

4.0 Conclusions

Barangay Guelew, San Carlos City, Pangasinan is a multilingual community where both

Ilokano and Pangasinan are regarded as mother tongues. This poses a problem for the MTB-

MLE implementation in Guelew Integrated School.

Through this research, it was found that GIS separated Grades 1, 2, and 3 students into

Ilokano and Pangasinan sections. Generally speaking, straight teaching is practiced, with the MT

as the primary focus of discussion as well as the MOI used. This setup resulted in active

participation of the pupils, possibly due to the fact that they are more comfortable using a

familiar language. English and Filipino are incorporated in some terminologies and technical

concepts, but further discussion of these languages as learning areas exclusively starts from the

second and third grading periods in Grade 1. In Grade 4, the MOI supposedly shifts to Filipino

and English, but it was observed to still be the L1 of the students since the children’s skills

regarding the two languages are not enough for them to understand the lessons. Hence, some of

the students’ answers are in Pangasinan or in Ilokano. Likewise, the teachers heavily rely on L1

in conducting their lessons.

The language attitudes and beliefs of the people in the area were also assessed. It seems

that there are mixed emotions regarding the policy. The teachers are divided; some preferred

the old policy wherein the MOI is only Filipino and English because they noticed that the

children cannot converse well in the languages, while others preferred MTB-MLE since they say

the children are performing actively in their own tongue. This is also reflected in the linguistic

survey conducted, where it was shown that there are more families using Filipino as the home

language compared to Pangasinan and Ilokano. Meanwhile, it appears that there is no significant

difference in the learning attitude or participation of students regardless of whichever language

is utilized.
 40

Problems in the implementation were observed. The main problems indicated in the

study were the sorting of students, learning and teaching materials, transition from MT to

Filipino and English, and the faculty and their skills regarding the subjects. The solutions offered

by the researchers are the following:

1. To prepare materials before the school year starts; if possible, a committee can

be formed to make standard teaching materials;

2. To provide tactfully scheduled trainings and seminars for teachers;

3. To conduct consistent evaluation of the policy, both individually and collectively;

4. To devise a standardized procedure for class assignments;

5. To formulate a more viable transition curriculum;

6. To foster a supportive community and to have sufficient funding from the

government.

From these data, we can conclude that MTB-MLE is far from perfect as it faces a lot of

problems especially in multilingual communities such as Guelew. Although there are cases

where the students actively participate as the classes are conducted in their L1, the objective of

the policy (i.e., to bridge the students’ skills learned in the primary grades through L1), became

a major problem as the transition phase from MT to L2 and L3 is not smoothly executed. The

students are having difficulties shifting from their L1 to Filipino and English. The teachers are

also struggling since the trainings that they underwent only lasted for a week or so and they felt

that these were not enough. Other minor problems observed, mostly in relation to the

barangay’s way of living, also serve as barriers for the curriculum to work.

Despite all these things, MTB-MLE is still considered to be a policy with a promising

future, as long as the problems are to be addressed immediately. In fact, Guelew residents and

GIS, especially the students, were observed to have developed an appreciation for Pangasinan

and Ilokano because of MTB-MLE. Guelew Integrated School is more than willing to cooperate

with the government. As long as everyone is open to make improvements and adjustments for

the policy to serve its purpose, an effective MTB-MLE can be expected.

 41

5.0 Recommendations

In a mere five (5) years since its implementation, the researchers do not expect instant

results from MTB-MLE. Through this research, initial effects were observed, but it is still too

early to see its long-term effects. Hence, quantitative assessments are recommended to be

conducted on the pilot sections (i.e., current Grade 6 students) when they graduate from

elementary and a follow-up when they graduate from high school. The researchers believe that

the efficiency or inefficiency of the program can only be tested when the students start learning

more complex concepts and ideas. These assessments will gauge the children’s academic

performance as influenced by the program.

Further studies and reviews on MTB-MLE implementation, especially in other provinces,

are also called for. When compounded, these endeavors can elicit attention from the authorities

and hopefully, immediate action. Since the lack of materials and skilled and competent teachers

are almost always the problem, sufficient funding is eminently necessary.

 42

6.0 References

Anderson, V. & Anderson, J. (2007). Pangasinan --- An endangered language? Retrospect and

prospect. Philippine Studies, 55 (1), 116-144. Ateneo de Manila Press. Retrieved July 10,

2016 from http://www2.hawaii.edu/~vanderso/Pangasinan.pdf

Araña, R. (n.d.). Assessment of mother tongue-based education in Iligan City. Retrieved July 10,

2016 from

https://www.academia.edu/25013712/ASSESSMENT_OF_MOTHER_TONGUE-

BASED_EDUCATION_IN_ILIGAN_CITY

Barangay Guelew Governance. (2015). State of the Barangay Governance Report. Philippines:

San Carlos City, Pangasinan.

Cruz, N. (2015). The implementation of the Mother tongue--based Multilingual Education in

Grade I in the public elementary schools in Pangasinan I. Presented at the DLSU

Research Congress 2015. De La Salle University. Manila: Philippines. Retrieved July 18,

2016 from

http://www.dlsu.edu.ph/conferences/dlsu_research_congress/2015/proceedings/LLI/

014LLI_Cruz_NT.pdf

Daoust, D. (1997). Language planning and language reform. In F. Coulmas (Ed.), The handbook of

sociolinguistics (pp. 436-452). Oxford, UK: Blackwell. Retrieved July 5, 2016 from

http://www.blackwellreference.com/subscriber/tocnode?id=g9780631211938_chunk_

g97806312119381

Dekker, D. & Walter, S. (2011). Mother tongue instruction in Lubuagan: A case study from the

Philippines. International Review of Education / Internationale Zeitschrift für

Erziehungswissenschaft / Revue Internationale de l'Education, 57(5-6), 667-683.

Retrieved March 11, 2016 from http://www.jstor.org/stable/41480150

Department of Education. (2012). DO 16, s. 2012 - Guidelines on the Implementation of the

Mother Tongue-Based- Multilingual Education (MTB-MLE). Retrieved July 11, 2016 from

http://www.deped.gov.ph/orders/do-16-s-2012
 43

_____________________________. (2012). DO 31, s. 2012 - Policy Guidelines on the Implementation of

Grades 1 to 10 of the K to 12 Basic Education Curriculum (BEC) Effective School Year

2012-2013. Department of Education website. Retrieved July 19, 2016 from

http://www.deped.gov.ph/orders/do-31-s-2012

_____________________________. (2013). K to 12 curriculum guide: mother tongue. Retrieved June 14,

2016 from

http://www.deped.gov.ph/sites/default/files/Final%20Mother%20Tongue%20Grades

%201-3%2001.21.2014_.pdf

_____________________________. (2013). DO 28, s. 2013 - Additional Guidelines to DepEd Order No. 16,

s. 2012 (Guidelines on the Implementation of the Mother Tongue Based-Multilingual

Education (MTB-MLE). Retrieved July 11, 2016 from

http://www.deped.gov.ph/orders/do-28-s-2013

Eslit, E. (2014). “Binisaya” instruction: Facing the MTB-MLE challenges head-on. Iligan City,

Philippines: SMC-Iligan. Retrieved July 10, 2016 from

https://www.academia.edu/11535888/_Binisaya_Instruction_Facing_the_MTB-

MLE_Challenges_Head-on

Gallego, M. & Zubiri, L. (2011). MTBMLE in the Philippines: Perceptions, attitudes, and outlook.

Frontiers of Language and Teaching, 2, 405-414. Retrieved June 14, 2016 from

https://mlephil.files.wordpress.com/2013/08/mtbmle-in-the-philippines-perceptions-

attitudes-and-outlook.pdf

Igcalinos, (n.d.). Gaps and challenges in the Mother Tongue Based Multilingual Education

(MTBMLE) implementation in Philippines basic education: A policy issue paper on

language-in-education policy. Retrieved July 10, 2016 from

https://www.academia.edu/23350185/Gaps_and_Challenges_in_the_Mother_Tongue_B

ased_Multilingual_Education_MTBMLE_Implementation_in_Philippines_Basic_Education

_A_Policy_Issue_Paper_on_Language-in-Education_Policy
 44

Kosonen, K. & Young, C. (Eds.). (2009). Mother tongue as bridge language of instruction: Policies

and experiences in Southeast Asia. Bangkok, Thailand: Southeast Asian Ministers of

Education Organization (SEAMEO) Secretariat. Retrieved July 9, 2016 from

http://www-

wds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2010/08/27/0003

33037_20100827001316/Rendered/PDF/563290PUB0Box31guage0of0Instruction.pdf

Lartec, J., et al. (2014). Strategies and problems encountered by teachers in implementing mother

tongue - based instruction in a multilingual classroom. The IAFOR Journal of Language

Learning, 1(1). Retrieved July 9, 2016 from

http://iafor.org/archives/journals/language-learning/4-Jane-K-Lartec-et-al.pdf

Metila, R. (2014). A theory-based evaluation of a language program: A catalyst for a context-based

MTB-MLE evaluation model (Thesis). Quezon City: College of Education, University of the

Philippines Diliman.

Nolasco, R. (2009). 21 Reasons why Filipino children learn better while using their Mother

Tongue: A PRIMER on Mother Tongue-based Multilingual Education (MLE) & Other

Issues on Language and Learning in the Philippines. Mother Tongue Based Multilingual

Education (MTBMLE) - Philippines blogsite. Retrieved July 18, 2016 from

https://ccebb1a9-a-62cb3a1a-s-

sites.googlegroups.com/site/mlephilippines/Home/mle-resources/21reasons-

MLEPrimer.pdf?attachauth=ANoY7crOlqbrCEb7486nlG2ZqJ_6Dn4L6tMcOHfkI3UQPTic

mz9ypgfaps9jQPw05xUWqgWwl9kZk9tCbyk3Pm4EIhTqAb63fVUe_1NUGnKX24_F8CF0

LA-FKlt0UBYJTnBlEN8PMJwkaDqDh-

QOE7J2MnDTCsce_N4ytawXMy1gojlPWzB4pRpXUn3YSw1wmtw9whuoILQdaLvGpvDjN

LvDo6ubFTYi0tToXdRX5SR6a1KrcxbHyiO5sb4I0y7wYEu8_DWCVFeA&attredirects=0

The Official Gazette. (2013). Republic Act No. 10533. Retrieved July 19, 2016 from

http://www.gov.ph/2013/05/15/republic-act-no-10533/
 45

Rosario, F. Jr. (2010). Languages at home: The case of bi-/multilingualism in Pangasinan.

International Conference Proceedings of the International Conference on Language,

Culture and Society in Asian Contexts. Mahasarakham University, Thailand.

Yanagihara, Y. (2007). A study of bilingual education in the Philippines: Difference in pupils'

degree of understanding between learning mathematics in Cebuano and English. The

Keiai Journal of International Studies, 19. Retrieved July 9, 2016 from http://www.u-

keiai.ac.jp/issn/menu/ronbun/no19/19-175_yanagi.pdf
 46

7.0 Appendix

7.1 List of Figures

Figure 1. Barangay Guelew Page 2

Figure 2. Guelew Integrated School 3

Figure 3. Guelew within San Carlos City, 4

Pangasinan (SCCP) map

Figure 4. MTB-MLE Curriculum Framework 5

Figure 5. Distribution of age among 15

respondents

Figure 6. Number of speakers per language, 16

and comparison of usage as L1, as L2 or L3,

and as home language

Figure 7. Comparison of respondent and child 17

Figure 8. Examples of deep Pangasinan words 33

7.2 List of Tables

Table 1. Language of IMs and the MOI in each

class in Grade 4 25