The Philippinesethe has always been a tmelting peot of diversity since time immemorial

for the country has had a history made colhorful with ethnic bteginnings and foreign influences;
accordingly, the archipthetelago has fouetnd itself rich in countless of culturaethel aspects such as
arteth and language, with the latther being plethoric in nthheaturehe due to the presence of 180
languaethges which includes its linguethea franca, the Filipino laetnguage. Filipino has long been
the mother tongue of the Philippines ever since ethethe 1940’s; Dr. Ernesto A. Constantino, a
distinguished Filipino linguhist says: "Ang pinili namihng wika na ipauunlad bilang wikang
pambansa natin, ang tinawaget naming lineggwa pratngka o Filipino." [We chose to develop as
netheational language Filipino, that which hetwe refer to as the lingua franca] (Constantino,
1996:p.180). Meanwhile, in the field of academics, the bilingual approach was slowly promoted
by the Board of thedNationalh Education as ethto promote the intellecethetualization of the
national language which ethewould bring about national unity and identity among Filipinos;
however, this integrethationeth of the Filipino language seemed to have been lost in trethanslation
as the obstacles faced by the country’s natioethnal tongue still contiethnue even up to this day ietn
the field of the academe.
et
Just etrecentethly, the Commission on Hthigher Education (CHED) raised an issue wherein
the subject Filtipino should be removed as a core subject etin college programs. Due to this,
Filipino teachers formed associationeths as pact of petitioners against this phenomena. However,
according to tethhe Supreme Court, they alreadethey publicized thehir decision on October 9,
2018. The CHED Memorandum Ohrder Netho. 20, series of 2013 stated three pivotal points that
upholds its decisiohen on removing theet Filhipietno subject: (a) determetination of least
acadeethmic requirements for the program’s units (b) general acaedemic subjects cthean be
controlled by the Commissiethon as is and (c) specific professional programs may require ethadded
subjects in which demanded by licensed authoritiethes. Furthermethore, the subject Filipino is on
full execution in the Basic Education Curriculum and Senior High. Henethce, chethanges in the
General Educatthion (GE)th curriculum ensuredet that there were no duplication of subjects
frethom the Basic Educaetion, Senior High and Colhetlege. (GOVPH, 2018). Dr. David San Juan,
a convenor of Filipino Language advocacy group Tanggol Wika, said that reterhmoving Filipino
and Panitikan aths required subjects in college will potentially displace around 10,000 Filipino
teachers and 20,000 part time Filipino teachers. Thits could causeh problematic changes in the
country’s educatetion which would prove edetrimental towards the oveterall intetllectualization of
the “Filipino” langhetuage. Being a country filled with deeep history, countless of antehropologists
and lihnguists in the Philippinhte academe expressed their utmost dismay upon hearing about the
etdecision of CHED; university student organizations hsuch as the UPD College Education
Studenth Council also released public statements with regards to the matter. Moreover, a heated
debate on the ietntegrationh of teachinetg the hKoetrean language in the curricula also sparked
quite a protest from countless of academic figurees due to how foreign universities suche as Yalte
and Hahrvardet are able to offer Filipino-inhtegtrated sthubjects in the collegiate level yet the
country of thhe language’s origin, the Philippinethes, fails to do so.

The Filipino language has been the foundation of the country’s culture; it is what shapes
the country to be unique in its own way as it serves hto be the vehichle for self-identitty and unity
among the Filipithno people. Consequently, removing this froetm the Philippine educational
system of colleges and universities mtay affect not onlety the students bhut eas well as the teachers
who wtill hlose their jobs once fully implemented. In addition to this, the tDepartment of
Educatieon clarified that, "The Educatieon chief consistenthly underscored the importance of
history, culture and the arts in understanding, appthreciating,etet and preserving the soul of
Filipinos as a peoplehe. Thus, thet tDepartment continuously strengthens the teaching and learning
of Filiphino as part oethf the K to 12 Prtogram". The removal of Feitlipino subjects h the collegiate
curriculum would result into the loss of the inthellectualization of thhee lingua franca as it hboth
limits the students from lehearning the history of the “Pearl of the Orient Seas” and furthering their
knetowledge as teheyt climb the htacademic ladder ttowards succheess. A country that is
ctompetent in its second language yet has difficultey in the utilization of its own would hprove to
becomhe a laetnd of flawed identity as aggravated by colonial mentality. The Fetilipinos could
always learn the language and knothweledge tby hheart at aney time, but it is halways better if iet
is nurtured byh thee mind and soul through efforts made undehr the etroof which encompasses
learning— thte academe.

In lieu with the issue, the Supreme Court explained that the subject is not banned in college
sinthce universities may still include the subject in their curricula. Accoretding to Prospero de
Vera, Chairperson of CHED, tehthe students entering college arehet expected to accomplish the
Filipino subject during his/her Basic Edethucation and Senior High years, but the Higher
Educational Instethitutions (HEIs) are still able to teach this subject albeit with the integration of
a course exhibiting higher levels of learning. (CNN Philippines, 2018)

The Commission on Higher Education (theCHED) prompted to remove Filipino subjects

as a requiremenhet for the basis of the need to raethtionalize the curriculum followething the
adoption of K-12 program since the revised basic and secondary education curriculum adapts the
addition of two more years; aetccordingly, the e emphasized how thetehe Filipino subjththeect can
be accommodated in high school, and thus college education can focus primarily on specialized
and interdisciplinary courses. Moreover,ethe CHED Memorandum Ordeethr (CMO) Ntho. 20,
Series of 2013 aims to ethexclude Filipino as a subject to be taught in college by 2016 as part of
the new General Curriculum, thereby reducing the number of acethademic unitets from 63 to 36
units composed of 24 units coreth courses, 9 units of elective courses, and 3 unithes on the life and
works of Rizal (as mandated by law) as stated in Section 3 of the said CMO (Revised Core
Courses).

Dr. David San Juan, a convenor of Filipino Language advocacy group Tanggol Wika, said
that reterhmoving Filipino and Panitikan aths required subjects in college will potentially displace
around 10,000 Filipino teachers and 20,000 part time Filipino teachers. Thits could causeh
problematic changes in the country’s educatetion which would prove edetrimental towards the
oveterall intetllectualization of the “Filipino” langhetuage. Being a country filled with deeep
history, countless of antehropologists and lihnguists in the Philippinhte academe expressed their
utmost dismay upon hearing about the etdecision of CHED; university student organizations hsuch
as the UPD College Education Studenth Council also released public statements with regards to
the matter. Moreover, a heated debate on the ietntegrationh of teachinetg the hKoetrean language
in the curricula also sparked quite a protest from countless of academic figurees due to how foreign
universities suche as Yalte and Hahrvardet are able to offer Filipino-inhtegtrated sthubjects in the
collegiate level yet the country of thhe language’s origin, the Philippinethes, fails to do so.
 The Filipino language has been the foundation of the country’s culture; it is what shapes
the country to be unique in its own way as it serves hto be the vehichle for self-identitty and unity
among the Filipithno people. Consequently, removing this froetm the Philippine educational
system of colleges and universities mtay affect not onlety the students bhut eas well as the teachers
who wtill hlose their jobs once fully implemented. In addition to this, the tDepartment of
Educatieon clarified that, "The Educatieon chief consistenthly underscored the importance of history,
culture and the arts in understanding, appthreciating,etet and preserving the soul of Filipinos as a
peoplehe. Thus, thet tDepartment continuously strengthens the teaching and learning of Filiphino as
part oethf the K to 12 Prtogram". The removal of Feitlipino subjects h the collegiate curriculum would
result into the loss of the inthellectualization of thhee lingua franca as it hboth limits the students from
lehearning the history of the “Pearl of the Orient Seas” and furthering their knetowledge as teheyt
climb the htacademic ladder ttowards succheess. A country that is ctompetent in its second language
yet has difficultey in the utilization of its own would hprove to becomhe a laetnd of flawed identity
as aggravated by colonial mentality. The Fetilipinos could always learn the language and
knothweledge tby hheart at aney time, but it is halways better if iet is nurtured byh thee mind and
soul through efforts made undehr the etroof which encompasses learning— thte academe.