Major 9: Language Programs and Policies in Multingual Society Indigenous Language Program

Download as docx, pdf, or txt
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1of 3

MAJOR 9: LANGUAGE PROGRAMS AND POLICIES IN MULTINGUAL SOCIETY

INDIGENOUS LANGUAGE PROGRAM

Indigenous languages in the Philippines are numerous. They are spoken by the minority groups in the many parts
of the country, usually in the rural or mountainous areas. These languages are reflections of the cultures of the indigenous
peoples (IP). It is unfortunate that some of these indigenous languages are at risk of extinction. If these are not
documented, preserved and promoted for use, these indigenous languages may no longer be heard forever.
Castro (2001) said that the Philippines is an archipelago composed of 7,107 islands with a population of 75
million people. Because of its archipelagic character, there are more than a hundred languages in the Philippines. The
Summer Institute of Linguistics identified at least 151 languages in the country. Except for one Creole language,
Chavacano, all of these languages belong to the Western Malaya-Polynesian subfamily of the Austronesian languages.
These languages are further classified as belonging to the following language groups: Northern Philippine (70 languages),
Central Philippine (46languages), Southern Philippine (22languages), Sarna Bajaw (7 languages), Southern Mindanao
(5languages), and Sulawesi Sangil (1 language).
Dagawan (2019) claimed that the state of indigenous languages today mirrors the situation of indigenous peoples.
In many parts of the world, they are on the verge of disappearance. The biggest factor contributing to their loss is state
policy. Some governments have embarked on campaigns to extinguish indigenous languages by criminalizing their use –
as was the case in the Americas, in the early days of colonialism. Some countries continue to deny the existence of
indigenous peoples in their territories – indigenous languages are referred to as dialects, and accorded less importance
than national languages, contributing to their eventual loss.
With the growing global recognition of indigenous knowledge systems, the hope that indigenous languages will
thrive and spread in spoken and written forms is being rekindled. Many indigenous communities have already instituted
their own systems of revitalizing their languages. The Ainu of Japan have set up a learning system where the elders teach
the language to their youth. Schools of Living Tradition in different indigenous communities in the Philippines similarly
keep their cultural forms, including languages, alive.
Teves (2019) said that among Philippine languages at risk for extinction are Arta, Binatak and Iguwak in Luzon,
Inata and Karolano in the Visayas as well as Manobo Kalamansig, Tigwahanon and Manobo Ilyanen in Mindanao.
KWF already identified the initial eight agencies that can help increase and sustain the use of endangered
indigenous languages nationwide.
These agencies are the National Commission for Culture and the Arts, National Commission on Indigenous
Peoples, National Museum, National Anti-Poverty Commission, Commission on Higher Education as well as the
education, interior, and social welfare departments.

Indigenous Language Policies in the Philippines

DO 32 s. 2015 - Adopting the Indigenous Peoples Education Curriculum Framework


Pursuant to DepEd Order No. 62, s. 2011 entitled Adopting the National Indigenous Peoples Education (IPEd)
Policy Framework and DepEd Order No. 43, s. 2013 entitled Implementing Rules and Regulations of Republic Act No.
10533 Otherwise Known as the Enhanced Basic Education Act of 2013, the Department of Education (DepEd) is
adopting the enclosed Indigenous Peoples Education Curriculum Framework.
Recognizing the right of indigenous peoples to basic education that is culturally rooted and responsive, the IPEd
Curriculum Framework seeks to provide guidance to schools and other education programs, both public and private, as
they engage with indigenous communities in localizing, indigenizing, and enhancing the K to 12 Curriculum based on
their respective educational and social contexts.
Fundamental to IPEd is establishing institutionalized partnership between indigenous communities and the
respective schools/learning programs which serve them. This is to be pursued through sustainable community
engagement which guarantees the meaningful participation of indigenous communities in the inclusion of their
Indigenous Knowledge Systems and Practices (IKSPs) and Indigenous Learning Systems (ILS) in the Basic Education
Curriculum.
The continuous process of community engagement and refinement of the IPEd Curriculum at the school
community level actualizes the Department’s commitment to the attainment of the abovementioned right of indigenous
peoples to education. In this regard, for schools and learning programs serving indigenous learners, the aims of the K to
12 Program are realized through IPEd.
The IPEd Curriculum Framework was formulated based on inputs from a series of consultations conducted by
the DepEd – Indigenous Peoples Education Office (IPsEO) with community elders, leaders, and implementers of
community-based IPEd initiatives.
DO 62 s. 2011
DepEd (as mentioned by Llego, 2011) handed down DO 62 s. 2011 as the Adopting the National Indigenous
Peoples Education Policy Framework which states that:
In line with the country’s commitment to achieve its Education for All (EFA) targets and the Millennium
Development Goals (MDGs), and in pursuit of the Basic Education Sector Reform Agenda (BESRA), the Department of
Education (DepEd) is adopting the enclosed National Indigenous Peoples Education Policy Framework. It was prepared
in consultation with the representatives from Indigenous Peoples (IP) communities, civil society, and other government
agencies.
This Policy Framework is intended to be an instrument for promoting shared accountability, continuous
dialogue, engagement, and partnership among government, IP communities, civil society, and other education
stakeholders. Recognizing education as a necessary means to realize other human rights and fundamental freedoms, the
DepEd urges the strengthening of its policy on IP education and develop and implement an IP Education Program. This
Program subscribes to the rights-based approach which gives primary importance to the principles of participation,
inclusion, and empowerment.
Many IP communities continue to lack access to decent basic social services; they have limited opportunities to
engage in the mainstream economy, and suffer social, economic, and political exclusion marginalization. A major factor
contributing to their disadvantaged position is the lack of access to culture-responsive basic education. Thus, the right of
indigenous peoples to education is provided in the 1987 Philippine Constitution, the Indigenous Peoples Rights Act
(IPRA) of 1997, and the numerous international human rights instruments, especially in the United Nations (UN)
Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (2007).

Indigenous Language Programs Abroad


Shawn (1997) examined four indigenous language programs to compare common components, problems, and
outcomes. The programs are Cree Way in Quebec, Canada, Hualapai in Arizona, Te Kohanga Reo (Maori) in New
Zealand, and Punana Leo (Hawaiian) in Hawaii.
These programs were chosen for four characteristics: (1) the languages are no longer transmitted to the younger
generation (in the home or community); (2) the programs all have curriculum development, community support, parent
involvement, and government support; (3) the programs exist in different countries; and (4) they are recommended as
model programs for endangered indigenous languages.
Each program's description covers historical background; program development; funding; parent, community, and
academic involvement; and current status. Each program has a curriculum that combines indigenous language and cultural
heritage, literacy, community involvement, and parent participation. Common problems are related to teacher availability,
teacher training, lack of written materials, and funding. Outcomes of all programs have included decreased dropout rates,
increased sense of heritage and identity, and improved test scores. It is concluded that the success of these types of
programs depends on home and community initiative and involvement; culture cannot be separated from the language. It
is also important to begin the program at an early age, preferably preschool; to have a firm theoretical foundation; and to
have written teaching materials.

ISSUES IN INDIGENOUS LANGUAGE EDUCATION


Haji-Othman (2017) cited the challenges in indigenous language education:
1. Standardization and codification (spelling and grammar)
2. Selection of variety (which word should be used; for example nalabaga and nalabbasit)
3. Resource and material production (scarcity of instructional materials)
4. Staffing and training in language teaching (teacher’s language competency)

References:
Castro, N. (2001). Indigenous languages for development: the Philippine experience.
http://langdevconferences.org/publications/2001- PhnomPenhCambodia/4%20Indigenous%20languages
%20for%20development- the%20Philippine%20experience-Nestor%20Castro.pdf
Dagawan, M. (2019). Indigenous languages: Knowledge and hope. UNESCO.
https://en.unesco.org/courier/2019-1/indigenous-languages-knowledge-and-hope
Department of Education. (23 March, 2020). DO 32 series 2015. https://www.deped.gov.ph/2015/07/29/do-32-s-2015-
adopting-the-indigenous-peoples- education-curriculum-framework/
Haji-Othman, NA. (2017). Challenges in indigenous language education: The Brunei experience.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/306080062_Challenges_in_Indigenous_Language
_Education_The_Brunei_Experience
Llego, MA. (2011). National Indigenous peoples education framework. https://www.teacherph.com/national-indigenous-
peoples-education-policy-framework/
Shawn, S. (1997). Four successful indigenous language programs. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED415079
Teves, C. (2019). KWF tightens bid to protect indigenous languages.
https://www.pna.gov.ph/articles/1076754

You might also like