REVIEW OF ENGLISH CURRICULUM FOR PRIMARY SCHOOLS IN THE PHILIPPINES FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF A 21ST CENTURY LEARNING FRAMEWORK

REVIEW OF ENGLISH CURRICULUM FOR PRIMARY SCHOOLS IN THE PHILIPPINES FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF A 21ST CENTURY LEARNING FRAMEWORK

Tran Bich Hang* hangtb@gesd.edu.vn The Vietnam National Institute of Educational Sciences 52 Lieu Giai, Ba Dinh district, Hanoi, Vietnam
Do Thi Ngoc Hien hiendn@gesd.edu.vn The Vietnam National Institute of Educational Sciences 52 Lieu Giai, Ba Dinh district, Hanoi, Vietnam
Tran My Ngoc ngoctm@gesd.edu.vn The Vietnam National Institute of Educational Sciences 52 Lieu Giai, Ba Dinh district, Hanoi, Vietnam
Summary: 
Recent developments in the region and in the Philippines have prompted the Philippine Government to develop a new Basic Education Program. Accompanying this reform is the adoption of a new English curriculum, referred to as the English Language Arts and Multicultural Curriculum. This article examines the K-12 English Curriculum in the Philippines through the lens of a 21st-century learning framework. It is structured into two sections. The introductory section briefly outlines the new English curriculum and the 21st-century learning framework, applying both general terminology and terminology specific to English language teaching. The subsequent section evaluates the curriculum’s alignment with the principles of the 21st-century learning framework and the country’s established language teaching and learning principles. The findings indicate that the current curriculum requires enhancements in specificity, coherence, and the integration of essential principles from the 21st-century language learning and teaching framework. This paper underscores the challenges associated with implementing the curriculum, offers recommendations for its future design and execution, and suggests avenues for further research.
Keywords: 
Curriculum
primary English curriculum
curriculum innovation
21st-century learning framework.
Refers: 

[1] A. Malderez and M. Wedell. (2007). Teaching teachers: Processes and practices. A&C Black

[2] Curriculum Planning & Development Division. (2010). English language syllabus: Primary & secondary (express/normal [academic]).

[3] D. Chun, R. Kern, and B. Smith. (2016). Technology in language use, language teaching, and language learning, Mod. Lang. J., vol. 100, no. S1, pp. 64–80.

[4] D. Dekker and C. Young. (2005). Bridging the gap: The development of appropriate educational strategies for minority language communities in the Philippines. Curr. Issues Lang. Plan., vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 182–199

[5] Department of Education. K to 12 curriculum guide for English.

[6] Department of Education. (2009). Institutionalizing mother tongue-based multilingual education (MLE), [Online] Available: http://www.deped.gov.ph/ sites/default/files/order/2009/DO_s2009_74.pdf

[7] D. Nunan. (2003). The impact of English as a global language on educational policies and practices in the Asia-Pacific Region. TESOL Q., vol. 37, no. 4, pp. 589–613

[8] Department of Education. NAT overview and 2012 test results.

[9] Education for All Global Monitoring Report. (2014). Teaching and learning: Achieving quality for all.

[10] I. V. S. Mullis, M. O. Martin, E. J. Gonzalez, and S. J. Chrostowski. (2004). TIMSS 2003 International Mathematics Report: Findings from IEA’s Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study at the Fourth and Eighth Grades. ERIC.

[11] J. Wagner. (1991). Innovations in foreign language teaching, in Foreign/second language pedagogy research: A commemorative volume for Clause Faerch, Multilingual Matters Limited, pp. 288–306.

[12] J. S. Barrot. (2015). A sociocognitive-transformative instructional materials design model for second language (L2) pedagogy in the Asia Pacific: Development and validation, Asia-Pacific Educ. Res., vol. 24, pp. 283–297.

[13] J. S. Barrot. (2014). A macro perspective on key issues in English as second language (ESL) pedagogy in the postmethod era: Confronting challenges through sociocognitive-transformative approach. AsiaPacific Educ. Res., vol. 23, pp. 435–449.

[14] J. S. Barrot. (2019). English curriculum reform in the Philippines: Issues and challenges from a 21st century learning perspective, J. Lang. Identity Educ., vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 145–160.

[15] M. Kubanyiova and G. Crookes. (2016). Re-envisioning the roles, tasks, and contributions of language teachers in the multilingual era of language education research and practice, Mod. Lang. J., vol. 100, no. S1, pp. 117–132.

[16] M. Valerio. (2015). Factors affecting English instruction of grade 7 K to 12 curriculum as perceived by high school English teachers of the Division of Quirino, Int. J. English Lang. Teach., vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 48–67

[17] N. H. A Rahman. (2014). From curriculum reform to classroom practice: An evaluation of the English primary curriculum in Malaysia, University of York.

[18] Pazzibugan. (2016). K + 12’ still struggling, IQUIRER. NET. Accessed: Jul. 05, [Online]. Available: https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/419261/k-12-stillstruggling

[19] R. M. D. Nolasco, F. A. Datar, and A. M. Azurin. (2010). Starting where the children are: A collection of essays on Mother tongue-based multilingual education and language issues in the Philippines. 170+ Talaytayan MLE Incorporated.

[20] R. Tupas. (2015). Inequalities of multilingualism: Challenges to mother tongue-based multilingual education, Lang. Educ., vol. 29, no. 2, pp. 112–124.

[21] Seameo Innotech. (2012). K to 12 toolkit: Resource guide for teacher educators, school administrators and teachers, Quezon City SEAMO INNOTECH.

[22] UNESCO. Philippines Education for All 2015 review report

[23] UNESCO. Philippines Education for All 2015 review report. UNESCO. (2012). Why language matters for the millennium development goals.

[24] Unicef. (2000). Defining Quality in Education: A paper presented by UNICEF at the meeting of The International Working Group on Education

[25] The Partnership for 21st Century Learning. (2015). P21 framework definition, [Online]. Available: www.p21. org/storage/documents/docs/P21_Framework_ Definitions_New_Logo_2015.pdf

[26] T. G. Wiley and O. García. (2016). Language policy and planning in language education: Legacies, consequences, and possibilities, Mod. Lang. J., vol. 100, no. S1, pp. 48–63.

[27] Y. G. Butler and M. Iino. (2005). Current Japanese reforms in English language education: The 2003 ‘action plan. Lang. Policy, vol. 4, pp. 25–45.

[28] Y. Kirkgöz. (2008). A case study of teachers’ implementation of curriculum innovation in English language teaching in Turkish primary education, Teach. Teach. Educ., vol. 24, no. 7, pp. 1859–1875.

Articles in Issue