The making of the MTB-MLE Operations Manual

For the past 1 1/2 years, I participated in developing the MTB-MLE Operations Manual. It was a joint project of UNICEF and DepEd. The process involved reviewing related literature and interviewing MTB-MLE implementers. Our team examined reports, scholarly articles, and other related literature on MTB-MLE and other forms of multilingual education. We also analyzed the practices that our Filipino teachers have developed for the past decade of program implementation. We found that many schools adopted the MTB-MLE training they received ten years ago and they also did their own tweaking. Some created new tools and approaches. The initiatives and results were uneven, depending on the presence of trained and committed education leaders and teachers. 

It is commendable that DepEd formulated policies that supported MTB-MLE that touched on teacher hiring (L1 proficiency is part of qualification), materials development, language mapping, integration of indigenous knowledge, the procedure in adding new languages as a medium of instruction, performance management, handling linguistically diverse contexts, etc. 

Literacy instruction in the MTB-MLE framework is informed by the balanced literacy approach that combines the whole language and code-based instruction. It is often called the Two-Track Approach introduced by SIL. Many schools used the Marungko and the Four-Pronged Approach introduced by our own literacy experts to teach literacy in L1. 

To provide content on bridging from L1 to L2, our team referred to the the training on Bridging plus multilingual education related programs in other countries like the following: Dual Language Immersion Program, Content and Language Integrated Learning (CLIL), Sheltered Instruction Observation Protocol (SIOP), Language Independent Literacies (LILIEMA) and Translanguaging. In addition to reading the manuals of these programs, we also interviewed their trainers and practitioners. 

I realized that MTB-MLE requires addressing the various dimensions of the teaching process. It must also be noted that for best results, the requirement for MTB-MLE is not just to change the medium of instruction and use L1 for a short time. There should be conditions to be met. The longitudinal study on bilingual education study involving 700,000 students conducted by Thomas and Collier (1997) found that positive results came about with the following factors:

• Cognitively challenging academic instruction in the students’ L1 for as long as possible, at least five or six years

• The use of interactive methods in teaching through the two languages.

• A school environment that supports multilingual learning.

Institutionalizing the program in the Philippine educational system demands examining how MTB-MLE can be embedded in the various parts of the bureaucracy. Moreover, since the teachers are asked to exert a lot of effort to make the program work, there should also be a corresponding mechanism for training and granting of support and incentives.   

Honestly, I realized more than ever, how daunting the task of implementing MTB-MLE. However, we cannot revert to the old English/Filipino-only education policy. It would certainly require commitment, perseverance, and time to make the program work all over the country. Tragically, some policymakers would like to rescind the policy without giving it the chance to take root. This insidious move in Congress should be constantly resisted. There is no other option but to move forward. Other stakeholders, especially the academe, should continuously and strongly support MTB-MLE towards its full implementation. 

Below are the major topics covered by the MTB-MLE Operations Manual.

•  Essential Components of the MTB-MLE Program
• The MTB-MLE Curriculum
• Four Minima for MTB-MLE Implementation
• Contextualization of the Mother Tongue Curriculum
• Development of Learning Resources
• Use of Mother Tongue in Teaching and Learning
• Oral Language Development
• Two-Track Method
• Instruction from L1 to L2/L3
• Planning and Management of the Curriculum
• Assessment and Reporting
• Classroom Assessment
• Contextualized, Linguistically Appropriate Assessment
• Language Proficiency vs Content Proficiency
• Professional Learning and Development of Teachers for MTB-MLE
• Recruitment, Hiring and Deployment of Teachers and Teacher Assistants
• Monitoring and Evaluation of MTB-MLE Program
• School Leadership
• MTB-MLE Transition Plan

Here is the link to the draft of the MTB-MLE Operations Manual. This is still a draft. It is not meant for reproduction. This however can be a basis for action research projects in various regions. UNICEF and DepEd would enhance the draft some more and be presented in a more readable format. Hopefully it would be accompanied with a DepEd Order or Memo.

The ones who provided content and direction were DepEd officials from the Bureau of Learning Delivery headed by Dr. Leila Areola, Regional MTB-MLE Focal Persons (led by the National MTB-MLE Focal Person, Dr. Rosalina Villaneza and her team Mr. Luiz Gaudencio and Ms. Nemia Cedo), the DepEd's National MTB-MLE Trainers, Ms. Ina Aquino (of ABC +) and UNICEF's Ms. Cheche Olayvar and Ms. Cecil Dajoyag.  The draft was validated by 3 groups - education supervisors, school heads and MT teachers. 

The following also commented on the contents: Dr. Diane Dekker, Dr. Fredrick Lupke, Ms. Mirriam Weidl and Mr. Efren Lubuguin.

Thanks to my friend Angel Vasquez for introducing me to her co-teachers who use SIOP.   

Members of the writing team were Dr. Sangsok Son, Mhawi Rosero, Svet Mendoza, Jakey Rosauro, Fern Colicol and yours truly (Ched Arzadon). 

Current Issues and Concerns in MTB-MLE (Philippines)

 On July 21, 2021, I was invited by the PhD English Language Studies of the University of Santo Tomas, Manila through Dr. Andrew Bernardo to give a lecture (originally exclusively for his class but was opened to the graduate students and faculty) on the "Current Issues & Trends in MTB-MLE." Though I was given only a few days to prepare, I appreciate the chance to consolidate and organize my notes from my recent study and readings on MTB-MLE. 

Thanks to UST for giving me a copy of the video recording. I am sharing it here hoping that researchers would see the broader terrain of MTB-MLE. I noticed that most MTB-MLE research topics were perception studies. I hope that through this lecture, there will be deeper and productive engagements. 

Here is the broad outline of my presentation (it was delivered mostly in Filipino):

• What is MTB-MLE? 
• Research supporting MTB MLE 
• Previous MTB-MLE-related initiatives in the Philippines  
• MTB-MLE programs in Africa and Asia-Pacific
• MTB-MLE brought shifts in literacy instruction 
• MTB-MLE brought shifts in teaching additional languages
• Framework for Functional MTB-MLE Program in Philippine context
• Official languages for MT subjects in the Philippines 
• Enabling Policies
• MTB-MLE Curriculum
• Teachers’ Training and Deployment
• Localized Production of MTB-MLE Learning Resources
• MTB-MLE Partnerships 
• BASA Pilipinas Findings  
• BASA Pilipinas’ Recommendations 
• International assessments and language of testing    
• Challenges (from DepEd-BCD Consultations) 
• Possibilities 

I discussed the components of functional MTB-MLE program for country-wide implementation. I color-coded the ones needing urgent attention (yellow as urgent and red as more urgent). 

  

Key references cited in the presentation:

Areola, L. (2021). Updates on MTB MLE implementation.  International Mother Language Conference and Festival. February 22, 2021  

Arzadon, M. (2021). Policy Enactment in MTB-MLE Big Book Making Among Teachers in Buguias, Benguet. Unpublished Dissertation, College of Education, University of the Philippines. 

DepEd Order 21 s. 2019. Policy Guidelines on the K-12 Basic Education Program

DO 74, s. 2009 Institutionalizing Mother Tongue-Based Multilingual Education (MLE)

Republic of the Philippines. (2013). Republic Act No. 10533: An act enhancing the Philippine basic education system by strengthening its curriculum and increasing the number of years for basic education, appropriating funds therefor and for other purposes

Monje, JD.; Jr., Orbeta, A., Francisco-Abrigo, KA; Capones, EM (2019). ‘Starting Where the Children Are’: A Process Evaluation of the Mother Tongue-Based Multilingual Education Implementation. Philippine Institute for Development Studies.

 

USAID (2018). Basa Pilipinas Program 

The video clip from a dual language class (Spanish and English) can be viewed in its entirety here:  SEAL.org

The LILIEMA Approach

 In linguistically diverse classes where several languages are spoken as L1, a language inclusive approach is suggested based on the LILIEMA approach.  LILIEMA means Language-Independent Literacies for Inclusive Education in Multilingual Areas. Dr. F. Lüpke and her team from SOAS University of London/Helsinki University, which includes local experts, teachers and trainers, introduced LILIEMA in a highly multilingual region in Senegal (due to cohabitation, migration, intermarriage and fostering as widely occurring cultural practices).  

2.       Using each of the languages and their unique orthography is not feasible in such a low-resource area. Using one language in instruction does not also reflect the actual speaking and writing culture of the learners. Using the LILIEMA approach, Dr. Friederike Lüpke and her team from SOAS University of London/Helsinki University teach basic literacy that builds on the features of multilingualism as actually used in spoken and written form.  

3.       Applying the LILIEMA approach begins by analyzing the daily informal conversations among the multilingual learners inside and outside the classroom.  Emerging from the language analysis would be frequently used words that can be used for reading exercises.  

4.       Lüpke’s team chose the orthography of one of the national languages and carefully chose the keyword for each sound. Each key word must be among the most frequently used words among the speakers. In other words, the keywords of each letter-sound are not limited to one language only. If adopted in the Philippine setting, the teacher would choose the most common word among Philippine languages. For example, the word “mata” for /m/ is a common term for “eyes” in probably all Philippine languages. The students' names can also be used as a language-neutral keyword (e.g., Toto for /t/; Nina for /n/).  In addition to the keywords, the team chose a list of frequently used words in multilingual conversations, including invented words like aba, bab, baab, abba. During literacy instruction, the learners can also contribute words that will be included to expand the word bank for the next batch of students. Open exercises allow learners to write words and texts in their entire repertoire.

For more information see https://liliema.com/  

Source:
https://soascrossroads.org/2017/06/26/liliema-language-independent-literacies-for-inclusive-education-in-multilingual-areas-by-friederike-lupke-text-and-miriam-weidl-videos/comment-page-1/

My dissertation journey

 

I have "hibernated" the past three years to complete my dissertation for my PhD in Anthropology and Sociology of Education at the UP College of Education. I would say that my dissertation journey is the most challenging and intense experience I have ever had as a graduate student and teacher. I often wished that I was younger and had more energy.  Despite the pains and difficulties, I believe that it was worth it. It was heartwarming to go back to places in Benguet where I spent my first years of schooling and be reminded of the thrill of holding and reading storybooks for the first time. 

It was a great privilege to meet the trailblazing and creative big book makers and teachers of Buguias. I genuinely hope that their examples will be multiplied in all villages. I would like to appreciate the following madams especially --Herminia Osting, Teresita Madinno, Nerissa Culas, Patricia Allatis, Mildred Julian, Pilita Sab-it, Rose Organo, Elizabeth Lawa, Margarette Palasi, Nila Marcelo, Ofelia Osting, Claire Balasin, Juliet Cario, Rosevelle Satur, and Fabielyn Baguista; Benguet CID Chief Dr. Rizalyn Guznian and SDS Dr. Carolyn Verano. Namwaw. Sinaay dissertation ko et para en dakayo.

As I end this journey, I honestly say that I could not have completed the course without the support given by my panel members, friends, and colleagues.  I am genuinely grateful to my dissertation adviser, Dr. Eufracio Abaya, for his brilliance and unconditional commitment in guiding me closely until the end despite my many shortcomings. It was an honor to have Sir Fras and my former thesis adviser, Dr. Julian Abuso, as mentors in ethnographic research.  I thank my critic-reader, Dr. Romylyn Metila, for her meticulousness and thoroughness in reviewing my manuscript and for sharing my passion for MTB-MLE. My heartfelt appreciation to the other members of my dissertation panel -- Dr. Clement Camposano, Dr. Virgilio Manzano, and Dr. Aleli Bawagan. Their critical insights informed by their scholarly endeavors have enriched my research practice. 

Maraming salamat for the warm encouragements expressed by friends and colleagues. To my parents and family, agyamanak unay iti addu nga kararag ken dakkel nga ayatyo.  Finally, unending praise and thanksgiving to our great God for sustaining me and making all things possible. May the stories and knowledge produced through this dissertation help accomplish His purposes for a happier, just, and more nurturing world. 

*******

Title: Policy Enactment in MTB-MLE Big Book Making Among Teachers in Buguias, Benguet

Abstract

This ethnographic research, informed by Anthropology and Sociology of Educational Policy, examines the policy enactment in the MTB-MLE big book making among teachers in  Buguias, Benguet. Policy enactment is the complex way policies are perceived and interpreted alongside/against contextual factors by various actors. 

The research setting is the school district of Buguias, Benguet, known to have produced more than 300 big book stories. Data collection and validation were undertaken from September 2018 to April 2020. The study utilized various data elicitation strategies of ethnography like participant observation, class observation, interviews, document, and artifact analysis.  

The findings of the study reveal that the local policy actors translated the MTB-MLE policy into a localized book supply chain that generated the big books for the MTB-MLE program in Buguias. Secondly, the policy was enacted through contextualization practices that created stories about the place, cultural values, and environmental concerns. And thirdly, the policy was translated as a literacy instruction approach called ANIDUT. This approach utilizes a locally made Kankanaey primer, standardized and intellectualized academic register of the local  language, a set of big books, and ways that made reading a positive experience.  

Fulfilling the roles of policy actors were the teachers, school heads, supervisors, illustrators, digital printing shop operators, language experts, and the big book (as a non-human actor). Being policy entrepreneurs and enthusiasts, the teachers developed expertise as teacher-writers, teacher-ethnographers, and teacher as MTB-MLE literacy leaders. The big book makers were motivated in various ways -- to provide a child-friendly learning experience, fulfill the expectations of an MTB-MLE pilot school, become counted in a collective effort of big book making, and earn merits for career advancement.  The agency of the big book as a policy actant became apparent as it heightened the visibility and symbolic value of the MTB-MLE policy. The MTB-MLE policy as an actant was found to be limited in its power.

The analysis of contextual factors uncovers the following enabling conditions: the spaces for creativity provided by the piloting stage; training and mentoring relationships; teacher incentives; technical resources; and the situatedness of the place. The disabling conditions include the stringent quality assurance processes, lack of funding support, limited authorship, adversarial relationships, normalization of impoverished (storybook-less) literacy instruction, and the economistic and hierarchical view of languages.

As a contribution to the discourse on Anthropology and Sociology of Educational Policy as well as the field of MTB-MLE, this study has attempted to demonstrate the importance of educational ethnography in grounding the complexities of policy enactments embodied in the making and use of the MTB-MLE big books in a given locale. Accordingly, the study has formulated a conceptual model for analyzing policy enactments of MTB-MLE big book making that may be conducted in other settings. 

You can read the full text here.  

I gave a 15 minute presentation of my dissertation during the NAKEM 16th Conference 

In a symposium organized by S4SES, I discussed the chapter on the meanings and practices of contextualization of learning resources.