The Atenean Voice
July Issue

“Do you agree with CHED Memorandum No. 20, series of 2013, which will remove Filipino from the General Education Curriculum before 2018? Why or why not?”

“Naniniwala ako na kailangang ituro ang Filipino, at hindi lang ang Filipino as a language; naniniwala ako na ang Filipino ay isang larangan. Malabo ang usapin ng Filipino [sa ibinibigay na General Education courses]—napaka-generic at napaka-broad. Ang posisyon ng [Kagawaran ng Filipino ay] naniniwala kami na kailangang ituro ang Filipino as a discipline, hindi lang as a medium of instruction. Marami pang kailangang gawin para i-emancipate ang mga Pilipino dito sa very colonial at very Westernized na educational system. Ituro ang disiplinang Filipino.”

Instructor, Filipino Department, Christopher Mitch Cerda

“Personally, I [oppose] CHED’s memo regarding the removal of Filipino subjects in college. [First], the memo in itself is a legitimate affirmation of the marginalization of a national language, ironically, in its own country. What country does this? We have long fought for our independence and this definitely is a blatant presentation of a regression from that. It is truly sad to see that our own government is questionable on its patriotism when, in the first place, it should be the champion for nationalism and love of country. [Second], it’s a given fact that yes, [the Philippines is] for globalization. But is this the right path toward it? A neglect for a large part of our culture? It’s bad enough that we can’t agree on a certain identity for ourselves as a nation, but wouldn’t this aggravate the current situation of the Philippines? In my heart, I am hoping that this [won’t] pull through. I know that the government is trying to fix the country’s educational system, but I believe there is another way.”

Dyan Francisco, editor-in-chief, Matanglawin

“Sapagkat naniniwala ako na mahaba pa ang babaybayin ng Filipino tungo sa inaasam-asam nitong intelektuwalisasyon, dapat manatili ang pagtuturo ng Filipino sa kolehiyo. Mga isyu gaya ng post-kolonyalismo, feminismo, LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender) [at] marami pang iba ang nabibigyang-laya at lalim sa kolehiyo, hindi tulad sa hayskul. Aywan ko sa ibang paaralan, ngunit ang naranasan ko sa tatlong core subjects sa ilalim ng Kagawaranng Filipino ay nakapagbigay sa akin ng iba-ibang perspektibong malapit sa kamalayang Filipino, mga ideyang labis na nakatutulong sa aking pagdadalubhasa sa agham pampolitika.”

Kjerrimyr Andres (III AB-MA POS)

“I might prefer to speak in English most of the time, but I am still a Filipino who would still like to speak in Filipino every now and then. Not that CHED Memorandum No. 20, [series of 2013] takes that away from me. Marunong pa naman ako mag-Tagalog; it’s just that I could learn more. My stance, however, is to agree on this. You were already taught enough Filipino in both elementary and high school; I think maybe it’s time you focus on your specialization and leave the advanced Filipino lessons to those who will really benefit from it after they graduate. My opinion might still change though. Since I came into the Ateneo, Filipino has been an increasingly interesting subject.”

Kyle Nathan Fazonela (I BS MIS)

“I don’t [agree], and this is based on what I’ve learned from the three Filipino subjects that I took [here in the Ateneo]. I can say that these classes helped me see Filipino–and our culture in general–from a different perspective. It somehow opened my eyes to the potential that our language has.”

Kimberly Maris (II BS MGT-H)

“I guess the Filipino subjects could be placed into high school. I think it’s a better option—[because] Filipino is one of the basic skills that students need to learn before actually entering college. And with the presence of Filipino before in high school than during college, students will be more equipped [for] subjects that are taught in [the Filipino] medium. Once they are prepared with the basics, they get to appreciate the Filipino language and the Filipino culture on a deeper basis.”

Lea Bolante (IV AB IS)

“I really hated Filipino back in high school. I often told myself, ‘Pilipino naman ako, alam ko na paano gamitin ang Filipino.’ But as I went through [Sining ng Pakikipagtalastasan sa Filipino I and II (Fil 11 and 12)] in my freshman year as an Atenean, I realized that I still [have] ways to go and that there is so much to learn in the Filipino language and literature. I believe that Filipino is essential in the holistic development of an individual in his or her college years. I believe that learning Filipino is an ongoing process that should be taught not only in the early years of a student’s life but also in the later years. What makes me sad is that some are rejoicing over this memorandum. But for me, it makes me sad that the future college students may not be able to learn Filipino in a manner different from grade school and high school education.”

Sandra Grace Duenas (II BS MGT)

“In the university level of learning Filipino, based on my experience here in the Ateneo, there is a more in-depth understanding of our national language in terms of its historical and cultural context. A relatively heavier use of critical thinking is involved as discourses delve into areas such as social analysis and popular culture, as compared to high school level Filipino. This is why I strongly disagree with the said CHED memo. I see Filipino as a unifying aspect of our society, and it is deeply ingrained in our culture. I share the sentiments of my English professor, Sir Louie Sanchez: ‘Ang pag-aaral ng wika ang batayan ng pagkamakabansa ng mamamayan.’”

Alexa Grace Fontanilla (II AB DS)

“I don’t agree with this mandate from CHED, simply because I have been taught Filipino as a subject for the majority of my learning years. Why take it away from the curriculum when college, the climax of education for most people, is also the climax of education for most of the core subjects? If they do intend to take the last few years of Filipino away from many, why not just strip it down altogether from the beginning instead of leaving it an unfinished work of learning?”

Rej Alejandro (II BS MGT-H)

“Ang punto ko dito ay kapag tinuro mo ang Filipino sa mga Grade 11 at Grade 12 [na mag-aaral], matututunan nila ang wika pero hindi mismo ang pagkatao o ‘yung pagiging Pilipino.”

Gabriel Aquino (III BFA CW)

“We shouldn’t lose Filipino in our curriculum because we’ll also lose our own identity and culture as a country. Internationalization might be a step [in] the right direction, but this kind of ordinance would only lead to more chaos. What we should do is to find balance in our two languages and not lose one in the process.”

Angelo Mercado (III BS ECE)

“Hindi ako sang-ayon sa CHED Memorandum No. 20, [series of 2013] dahil mga [Pilipino] tayo sa bansang Pilipinas, na ang wika ay Filipino. [At] kung tatanggalin [ang Filipino] sa General Education Curriculum, ano tayo?”

Carl Cervantes (IV BS PSY)

“No, I do not [agree]. I was in disbelief when I first heard about this resolution. Removing Filipino from our education would be one of the most severe acts that will help take away what connects the next generation of Filipinos to our culture and heritage. It will be an insult to our heroes who fought for independence, if we allow the language that has helped define our unique culture to become largely exclusive to the past generations alone.”

Alexander Sison (II BFA CW)