Mind Feeds / Mind Feeds
http://globalnation.inquirer.net/mindfeeds/mindfeeds/view/20080514-136457/Public-Education-Endangered-in-California
GLOBAL NETWORKING
Global Networking : Public Education Endangered in California
By Rodel Rodis
INQUIRER.net
Posted date: May 14, 2008
There are close to 4,000 Filipino students enrolled at the City College of San Francisco, by far the largest Filipino student body outside the Philippines. Their large presence accounts for why four of the last eight student body presidents at the main Ocean campus have been Filipinos. They are beneficiaries of California's landmark 1960 Master Plan for Education which transformed educational opportunity in California for several generations and became the national model for public higher education.
The Plan defined specific roles for the University of California (UC), the California State University (CSU), and the California Community Colleges system (CCC). Its underlying principle was that some form of higher education should be available to everyone, based not on their economic means but on their academic persistence and proficiency.
But now that principle is in jeopardy, after Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger announced that the projected budget deficit for this year is close to $20 billion dollars, which will mean deep cuts in education. Although the state has weathered budget crises in the past, this time may turn out to be the worst for California public education and particularly for its community colleges.
Because property tax revenues are coming in far lower than predicted when the budget was signed last summer, the Governor’s budget proposes to cut community colleges by nearly half a billion dollars to cover the shortfall, including about $92 million that will immediately be trimmed from their budgets by July 1, 2008.
For City College of San Francisco, this shortfall translates to nearly a $3 million loss, enough to defund about 460 course sections. Although operating costs continue to increase by nearly 5 percent, with health care costs increasing into the double digits, the state is not providing any money to cover the inflationary costs, creating an $8 million hole in the projected $195-M annual budget of City College.
How will City College deal with this budget crisis so that it can continue to educate its 110,000 students in 10 campuses throughout San Francisco?
Eighty-five percent of the students who attend City College work, so they need to get through college as fast as possible. Others need to make up or fill-in so that they can complete their studies or transfer to a 4-year college or university. Many want to accelerate their course work in order to enter the job market as soon as possible. For them, summer school classes are not a luxury, they are a necessity.
To deal with the crisis, City College will not replace administrative, faculty, or staff retirements. If the Governor’s proposed budget becomes a reality, City College will have no choice but to eliminate 500 classes, 50 of which are English as a Second Language (ESL) classes. This will result in larger class sizes, longer lines, fewer offerings, and less student services, all of which translate to a longer time before the students achieve their educational goals.
City College will also have to dip into its reserves to help balance its budget for this fiscal year. But, unfortunately, this is not a one-year budget problem. Next year, 2008-2009, is expected to be devastating.
To deal with the problem, the state’s Legislative Analyst is proposing a hike in student fees from $20 to $26 per unit, a 30% increase in one year. The last time tuition fees were increased, 300,000 students statewide dropped out, many postponing their college education for at least a year.
The impact of the proposed tuition fee increase will not be shared equally as it will fall hardest on the most vulnerable students, students who have just lost their jobs and cannot afford to pay the increased fees. Students who have budgeted $6 per day for food would have to go two weeks with no food to pay for the fee increases.
Furthermore, since the proposed tuition fee increases will be for all of public higher education in California, fewer students will be able to afford a CSU or UC education, and more of them will have to rely on the California community colleges for their education. Their entry will edge out the traditional community college student, with the least educated and those with the lowest income pushed out and denied their opportunity to achieve the American Dream.
The present fiscal crisis can be traced back to the November 17, 2003 Executive Order of Gov. Schwarzenegger eliminating the $200 Vehicle License Fee (VLF), an election vow he fulfilled but which has meant an aggregate loss of $9-B in general revenues, much of which would have gone to education.
To avert the crisis, new revenue enhancements need to be part of the budget solution, not just cuts. There should be no fee increases for the students as the budget should not be balanced on their backs.
Now, more than ever, the Filipino community should demand that public higher education must be enhanced, not reduced.
Rodel Rodis is a Trustee of the San Francisco Community College Board; he has served three terms as Board President and chair of the Finance Committee.
Comments can be sent to Rodel50@aol.com or log on to rodel50.blogspot.com or write to Law Offices of Rodel Rodis at 2429 Ocean Avenue, San Francisco, CA 94127, or call (415) 334-7800.
Wednesday, May 14, 2008
Save our pastor
Mind Feeds / Mind Feeds
http://globalnation.inquirer.net/mindfeeds/mindfeeds/view/20080506-134927/Save-our-pastor
GLOBAL NETWORKING
Global Networking : Save our pastor
By Rodel Rodis
INQUIRER.net
Posted date: May 06, 2008
When Pope Benedict XVI delivered a homily at the Nationals Stadium in Washington DC on April 17, 2008, he asked the congregation to “love your priests and to affirm them in the excellent work that they do.”
A few hundred miles north of that stadium in Piscataway, New Jersey, the faithful parishioners of the St. Frances Cabrini Parish led by Joseph Cicerella, are doing just that. They fervently love their parish priest, Fr. Edgardo Abano, and they’re waging a holy war against the local Bishop to get him back.
Last year Bishop Paul Gregory Bootkoski of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Metuchen, N.J. informed Fr. Abano that the diocese will be closing down St. Frances Cabrini Catholic School because enrollment was down, the school was underused and St. Frances Cabrini Church was subsidizing the school.
Despite the subsidy, Fr. Abano’s church was still able to pay the yearly assessments to the Diocese but not enough to pay the Diocesan debts. For some unknown reason, in 2000, the Metuchen Diocese “forgave” debts owed by many parishes in honor of Jubilee Year, with the exception of St. Frances Cabrini Parish. Bishop Bootkoski believed that if the Cabrini school closed down, the parish would be able to pay off its diocesan debts. But Fr. Abano disagreed and led his parishioners in protesting the planned closure of the parish school.
In the middle of this dispute in September last year, the diocese contacted the Middlesex County Prosecutor’s Office in New Jersey to report that Glenn Obrero, a Filipino diocesan employee and a seminarian at the Immaculate Conception Seminary, had filed a complaint of sexual misconduct against Fr. Abano in 2005. Obrero, who had been petitioned by the diocese for a work visa in 2005, complained that Fr. Abano had inappropriately touched him in the chest and buttocks when he first started working for the diocese.
Bishop Bootkoski did nothing about Obrero’s complaint until September of 2007 when he was locked in a dispute with Fr. Abano over the fate of the Cabrini school.
On October 19, 2007, Glenn Obrero was at a police station when he made a tapped phone call to Fr. Abano to wish him a happy birthday. As planned with the police investigators, Obrero steered the Tagalog conversation to the “touching” incident which occurred in 2005. After the phone call, a court interpreter, Bong Nepomuceno, translated the transcripts into English which were then reviewed by the police.
On October 23, 2007, after reviewing the transcripts, the police arrested Fr. Abano at the Cabrini parish rectory charging him with sexual misconduct. The police denied Fr. Abano’s request to be allowed to put on his clothes and was brought to the police station for booking in his undershirt, shorts and slippers. On the same night, he was released on $1,500 bail.
The following day, Bishop Bootkoski asked Fr. Abano to resign as Pastor of St. Frances Cabrini Parish (since 1992); as Director of the Office of Multicultural Ministries of the Metuchen Diocese that oversees nine ethnic ministries; as Chairman of the Commission for the Filipino Apostolate of the Diocese of Metuchen; and as Head Shepherd of the Association of Filipino Catholic Charismatic Prayer Communities of the U.S.A. and Canada, an association with around 40,000 members. Fr. Abano dutifully complied.
Fr. Abano was ordained as a priest in the United States on May 18, 1985 and had served many parishes in New Jersey prior to St. Frances Cabrini Parish including; Our Lady of Lourdes in Whitehouse Station; Immaculate Concepcion Church in Somerville, Saints Philip and James Church in Phillipsburg; and Our Lady of Fatima in Piscataway.
His arrest on October 23, 2007 was carried by local and international news and media services including The Filipino Channel, ABS-CBN, which reported the incident to its international audience.
Supporters of Fr. Abano set up a legal defense fund and hired Joseph Benedict, a highly-regarded criminal defense lawyer to represent Fr. Abano. They created a website, http:www.SaveOurPastor.org, to express show their full support for Fr. Abano.
Atty. Benedict hired another Tagalog interpreter to listen to the tape and translate it. The new translation showed that Fr. Abano denied ever touching Obrero while the first translation showed no such denial, which the police had misconstrued as affirming the misconduct.
“The denials were there (in the new transcript),” Benedict said, “I’m not sure that Fr. Abano would have been charged in the first place if they had an accurate transcript.” He then filed for trial by grand jury based on the new translation which contradicted the key piece of evidence the prosecutor’s office had on the alleged crime.
On February 22, 2008, Fr. Abano and Obrero both testified separately before a grand jury in New Brunswick, N.J. After only 45 minutes of grand jury deliberation, Middlesex Assistant Prosecutor Christie Bevacqua announced that the jury issued a “no bill” finding which meant that the prosecution had no case. All charges against Fr. Abano were dropped.
After the findings were announced, Bishop Bootkoski released a statement saying that he would review the grand jury’s findings and meet with Fr. Abano before making a decision about the priest’s future.
According to Fr. Abano’s sister, his primary focus right now is to “clear his good name” and that of his family. He wants “to get back his faculties to practice his priestly ministry.” This test of faith has “only strengthened his resolve and conviction that he will continue his vocation as a priest to serve God and His people.”
More than 70 days have passed and Bishop Bootkoski still has not made a decision about Fr. Abano’s fate. Please contact Bishop Bootkoski (bishop@diometuchen.org) and urge him to reinstate Fr. Abano to his parish and to the national posts that he was compelled to resign from. Tell him to heed the Pope's words.
My thanks to Merci Javier from Pinoywired.com for bringing this case to my attention. Please send comments to Rodel50@aol.com or log on to rodel50.blogspot.com or write to Law Offices of Rodel Rodis at 2429 Ocean Avenue, San Francisco, CA 94127, or call (415) 334-7800.
http://globalnation.inquirer.net/mindfeeds/mindfeeds/view/20080506-134927/Save-our-pastor
GLOBAL NETWORKING
Global Networking : Save our pastor
By Rodel Rodis
INQUIRER.net
Posted date: May 06, 2008
When Pope Benedict XVI delivered a homily at the Nationals Stadium in Washington DC on April 17, 2008, he asked the congregation to “love your priests and to affirm them in the excellent work that they do.”
A few hundred miles north of that stadium in Piscataway, New Jersey, the faithful parishioners of the St. Frances Cabrini Parish led by Joseph Cicerella, are doing just that. They fervently love their parish priest, Fr. Edgardo Abano, and they’re waging a holy war against the local Bishop to get him back.
Last year Bishop Paul Gregory Bootkoski of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Metuchen, N.J. informed Fr. Abano that the diocese will be closing down St. Frances Cabrini Catholic School because enrollment was down, the school was underused and St. Frances Cabrini Church was subsidizing the school.
Despite the subsidy, Fr. Abano’s church was still able to pay the yearly assessments to the Diocese but not enough to pay the Diocesan debts. For some unknown reason, in 2000, the Metuchen Diocese “forgave” debts owed by many parishes in honor of Jubilee Year, with the exception of St. Frances Cabrini Parish. Bishop Bootkoski believed that if the Cabrini school closed down, the parish would be able to pay off its diocesan debts. But Fr. Abano disagreed and led his parishioners in protesting the planned closure of the parish school.
In the middle of this dispute in September last year, the diocese contacted the Middlesex County Prosecutor’s Office in New Jersey to report that Glenn Obrero, a Filipino diocesan employee and a seminarian at the Immaculate Conception Seminary, had filed a complaint of sexual misconduct against Fr. Abano in 2005. Obrero, who had been petitioned by the diocese for a work visa in 2005, complained that Fr. Abano had inappropriately touched him in the chest and buttocks when he first started working for the diocese.
Bishop Bootkoski did nothing about Obrero’s complaint until September of 2007 when he was locked in a dispute with Fr. Abano over the fate of the Cabrini school.
On October 19, 2007, Glenn Obrero was at a police station when he made a tapped phone call to Fr. Abano to wish him a happy birthday. As planned with the police investigators, Obrero steered the Tagalog conversation to the “touching” incident which occurred in 2005. After the phone call, a court interpreter, Bong Nepomuceno, translated the transcripts into English which were then reviewed by the police.
On October 23, 2007, after reviewing the transcripts, the police arrested Fr. Abano at the Cabrini parish rectory charging him with sexual misconduct. The police denied Fr. Abano’s request to be allowed to put on his clothes and was brought to the police station for booking in his undershirt, shorts and slippers. On the same night, he was released on $1,500 bail.
The following day, Bishop Bootkoski asked Fr. Abano to resign as Pastor of St. Frances Cabrini Parish (since 1992); as Director of the Office of Multicultural Ministries of the Metuchen Diocese that oversees nine ethnic ministries; as Chairman of the Commission for the Filipino Apostolate of the Diocese of Metuchen; and as Head Shepherd of the Association of Filipino Catholic Charismatic Prayer Communities of the U.S.A. and Canada, an association with around 40,000 members. Fr. Abano dutifully complied.
Fr. Abano was ordained as a priest in the United States on May 18, 1985 and had served many parishes in New Jersey prior to St. Frances Cabrini Parish including; Our Lady of Lourdes in Whitehouse Station; Immaculate Concepcion Church in Somerville, Saints Philip and James Church in Phillipsburg; and Our Lady of Fatima in Piscataway.
His arrest on October 23, 2007 was carried by local and international news and media services including The Filipino Channel, ABS-CBN, which reported the incident to its international audience.
Supporters of Fr. Abano set up a legal defense fund and hired Joseph Benedict, a highly-regarded criminal defense lawyer to represent Fr. Abano. They created a website, http:www.SaveOurPastor.org, to express show their full support for Fr. Abano.
Atty. Benedict hired another Tagalog interpreter to listen to the tape and translate it. The new translation showed that Fr. Abano denied ever touching Obrero while the first translation showed no such denial, which the police had misconstrued as affirming the misconduct.
“The denials were there (in the new transcript),” Benedict said, “I’m not sure that Fr. Abano would have been charged in the first place if they had an accurate transcript.” He then filed for trial by grand jury based on the new translation which contradicted the key piece of evidence the prosecutor’s office had on the alleged crime.
On February 22, 2008, Fr. Abano and Obrero both testified separately before a grand jury in New Brunswick, N.J. After only 45 minutes of grand jury deliberation, Middlesex Assistant Prosecutor Christie Bevacqua announced that the jury issued a “no bill” finding which meant that the prosecution had no case. All charges against Fr. Abano were dropped.
After the findings were announced, Bishop Bootkoski released a statement saying that he would review the grand jury’s findings and meet with Fr. Abano before making a decision about the priest’s future.
According to Fr. Abano’s sister, his primary focus right now is to “clear his good name” and that of his family. He wants “to get back his faculties to practice his priestly ministry.” This test of faith has “only strengthened his resolve and conviction that he will continue his vocation as a priest to serve God and His people.”
More than 70 days have passed and Bishop Bootkoski still has not made a decision about Fr. Abano’s fate. Please contact Bishop Bootkoski (bishop@diometuchen.org) and urge him to reinstate Fr. Abano to his parish and to the national posts that he was compelled to resign from. Tell him to heed the Pope's words.
My thanks to Merci Javier from Pinoywired.com for bringing this case to my attention. Please send comments to Rodel50@aol.com or log on to rodel50.blogspot.com or write to Law Offices of Rodel Rodis at 2429 Ocean Avenue, San Francisco, CA 94127, or call (415) 334-7800.
The first Filipino
Mind Feeds / Mind Feeds
http://globalnation.inquirer.net/mindfeeds/mindfeeds/view/20080429-133372/The-first-Filipino
GLOBAL NETWORKING
Global Networking : The first Filipino
By Rodel Rodis
INQUIRER.net
Posted date: April 29, 2008
This is a speech I delivered after receiving the Dr. Jose Rizal Achievement Award at the induction of officers of the Filipino Bar Association of Northern California (FBANC) held on April 25, 2008 in San Francisco.
This award holds special significance to me as my mother was born and raised in Calamba, Laguna, just a short block from the home where Dr. Jose Rizal was born on June 19, 1861. As a child, I spent many summers with my grandfather where I would often stroll over to Rizal’s childhood home, which had become a museum. I remember devouring all the books about Rizal that I could find there.
As it turned out, I went to elementary school at the Letran College in Intramuros in the walled city of Manila just a few blocks from Fort Santiago, where Rizal was incarcerated and executed on December 30, 1896. In between his birth in Calamba and his death near Fort Santiago, Rizal informed and defined the Filipino national identity.
Before Dr. Rizal, the people who lived in Las Islas Filipinas were generally called indios by their colonial masters. In the logs of Spanish galleon ships plying the Manila-Acapulco trade, the native mariners were referred to as “Luzon indios” or “Visayan indios” but always “indios” regardless of whether they were Ilocanos, Tagalogs, Cebuanos, Ilonggos or any number of disunited, disparate tribes.
The word “Filipino,” after King Felipe II of Spain, was a pejorative insult employed by Spanish citizens born in Spain of pure Spanish blood to put down and denigrate Spanish citizens born in the Philippine Islands whose parents were not pure Spaniards. Through his writings, Dr. Rizal elevated Filipino and infused it with a distinct racial, ethnic, cultural and political identity. We became one people in one nation because of Dr. Jose Rizal and we all would not now be members of the "Filipino" Bar Association of Northern California if it were not for him.
I am aware that there are still many Filipinos who reject their own national identity. When I attended a conference in Atlanta many years ago, I sought out Filipinos from the thousands of delegates there. When I spotted someone who might be Pinoy, I went up to him and asked him if he was Filipino and he replied "I was."
What he does not understand is that while he may no longer consider himself a Filipino, others will. He may find himself as I did five years ago in a Walgreens store paying $44.32 worth of goods with an old but genuine $100 bill only to have the white manager call the police based on his suspicion that the bill may be counterfeit simply because the bearer is a Filipino. The white police officers may believe the bill is counterfeit simply because the suspect they arrested, as they wrote down in the police report, was wearing "khaki shirt, khaki pants" with perhaps a khaki skin.
Racial profiling does not distinguish between those who consider themselves Filipino and those who believe they are “former Filipinos.” What my Walgreens experience taught me is that even in this day and age, no matter what individual honors you achieve, you will not be judged by your character but by the mere color of your skin.
We are fortunate to belong to a legal profession that can do something about racial profiling. I sued Walgreens and that billion dollar company settled with me for an undisclosed sum. I sued the San Francisco Police Department and the police officers who arrested me. The police department issued an apology and issued a new policy directing officers not to arrest anyone suspected of using a counterfeit bill without some evidence that the suspect knew the bill was counterfeit.
But the two white San Francisco police officers that arrested me, admittedly without probable cause, brought my state civil case against them to the federal court where they filed a motion to dismiss my suit on the basis of qualified immunity. When the judge denied their motion, the officers appealed the case to the Ninth Circuit which issued a published opinion on August 28, 2007 upholding the federal court decision.
Unfortunately, the police officers have chosen to appeal the case all the way to the US Supreme Court. If that Court grants certiorari to hear their appeal, then I invite all the members of the Filipino Bar to join me in Washington DC to hear oral arguments on this significant civil rights issue. Chief Justice Charles Hughes once said “If you think the Constitution provides you security, remember that they are just words. If you think the laws provide you protection, remember that they are just statutes. The real power of the people lies in those who interpret the Constitution to benefit the people. “
That, my fellow Filipino attorneys, is our challenge - to use the law to help and benefit our community, in the proud spirit of Dr. Jose Rizal.
Please send comments to _Rodel50@aol.com_ (mailto:Rodel50@aol.com) or log on to rodel50.
http://globalnation.inquirer.net/mindfeeds/mindfeeds/view/20080429-133372/The-first-Filipino
GLOBAL NETWORKING
Global Networking : The first Filipino
By Rodel Rodis
INQUIRER.net
Posted date: April 29, 2008
This is a speech I delivered after receiving the Dr. Jose Rizal Achievement Award at the induction of officers of the Filipino Bar Association of Northern California (FBANC) held on April 25, 2008 in San Francisco.
This award holds special significance to me as my mother was born and raised in Calamba, Laguna, just a short block from the home where Dr. Jose Rizal was born on June 19, 1861. As a child, I spent many summers with my grandfather where I would often stroll over to Rizal’s childhood home, which had become a museum. I remember devouring all the books about Rizal that I could find there.
As it turned out, I went to elementary school at the Letran College in Intramuros in the walled city of Manila just a few blocks from Fort Santiago, where Rizal was incarcerated and executed on December 30, 1896. In between his birth in Calamba and his death near Fort Santiago, Rizal informed and defined the Filipino national identity.
Before Dr. Rizal, the people who lived in Las Islas Filipinas were generally called indios by their colonial masters. In the logs of Spanish galleon ships plying the Manila-Acapulco trade, the native mariners were referred to as “Luzon indios” or “Visayan indios” but always “indios” regardless of whether they were Ilocanos, Tagalogs, Cebuanos, Ilonggos or any number of disunited, disparate tribes.
The word “Filipino,” after King Felipe II of Spain, was a pejorative insult employed by Spanish citizens born in Spain of pure Spanish blood to put down and denigrate Spanish citizens born in the Philippine Islands whose parents were not pure Spaniards. Through his writings, Dr. Rizal elevated Filipino and infused it with a distinct racial, ethnic, cultural and political identity. We became one people in one nation because of Dr. Jose Rizal and we all would not now be members of the "Filipino" Bar Association of Northern California if it were not for him.
I am aware that there are still many Filipinos who reject their own national identity. When I attended a conference in Atlanta many years ago, I sought out Filipinos from the thousands of delegates there. When I spotted someone who might be Pinoy, I went up to him and asked him if he was Filipino and he replied "I was."
What he does not understand is that while he may no longer consider himself a Filipino, others will. He may find himself as I did five years ago in a Walgreens store paying $44.32 worth of goods with an old but genuine $100 bill only to have the white manager call the police based on his suspicion that the bill may be counterfeit simply because the bearer is a Filipino. The white police officers may believe the bill is counterfeit simply because the suspect they arrested, as they wrote down in the police report, was wearing "khaki shirt, khaki pants" with perhaps a khaki skin.
Racial profiling does not distinguish between those who consider themselves Filipino and those who believe they are “former Filipinos.” What my Walgreens experience taught me is that even in this day and age, no matter what individual honors you achieve, you will not be judged by your character but by the mere color of your skin.
We are fortunate to belong to a legal profession that can do something about racial profiling. I sued Walgreens and that billion dollar company settled with me for an undisclosed sum. I sued the San Francisco Police Department and the police officers who arrested me. The police department issued an apology and issued a new policy directing officers not to arrest anyone suspected of using a counterfeit bill without some evidence that the suspect knew the bill was counterfeit.
But the two white San Francisco police officers that arrested me, admittedly without probable cause, brought my state civil case against them to the federal court where they filed a motion to dismiss my suit on the basis of qualified immunity. When the judge denied their motion, the officers appealed the case to the Ninth Circuit which issued a published opinion on August 28, 2007 upholding the federal court decision.
Unfortunately, the police officers have chosen to appeal the case all the way to the US Supreme Court. If that Court grants certiorari to hear their appeal, then I invite all the members of the Filipino Bar to join me in Washington DC to hear oral arguments on this significant civil rights issue. Chief Justice Charles Hughes once said “If you think the Constitution provides you security, remember that they are just words. If you think the laws provide you protection, remember that they are just statutes. The real power of the people lies in those who interpret the Constitution to benefit the people. “
That, my fellow Filipino attorneys, is our challenge - to use the law to help and benefit our community, in the proud spirit of Dr. Jose Rizal.
Please send comments to _Rodel50@aol.com_ (mailto:Rodel50@aol.com) or log on to rodel50.
Tina’s children
Mind Feeds / Mind Feeds
http://globalnation.inquirer.net/mindfeeds/mindfeeds/view/20080423-132159/Tinas-children
GLOBAL NETWORKING
Global Networking : Tina’s children
By Rodel Rodis
INQUIRER.net
Posted date: April 23, 2008
The severe rice shortage that may yet result in food riots in the Philippines has forced the staunchly “Pro-Life” government of Pres. Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo to belatedly concede the need to raise public awareness of population control.
After years of rejecting United Nations and USAID funding for family planning programs, the government has finally realized that maintaining current levels of rice production is not nearly enough when the Philippine population is growing by at least 2 million a year. In 1945, there were 20-M Filipinos. By 2000, the population had risen to 76.5-M. Less than 8 years later, it is now 88.57-M and is expected to break the 100-M mark in just 5 years.
According to former Health Secretary Alberto Romualdez, “the worst part of it all is that the people who are growing at a faster rate are Filipinos who could not afford it. And the rich who have the money, are actually not growing at all, with a growth rate of zero percent,” he said.
With less arable land available for rice production and higher costs for fuel, seeds and fertilizers, the government is straining to retain previous levels of productivity that, even if successful, will still yield little or no rice for 2-M people.
According to a study just released by the European Union (2008 Philippine Development Forum), "Continued rapid population growth in the Philippines is draining health and economic resources and slowing down economic growth. It also threatens the sustainability of rural livelihoods and is inexorably destroying the remaining natural forest and marine habitats. The poor are paying the highest price, both individually and collectively. The European Union therefore calls for the effective implementation of a comprehensive national family planning policy, promoting access to family planning methods."
But raising public awareness of population control is not enough if the only kind of birth control endorsed by the government is the “natural family planning method” where couples are encouraged to have sex only during certain “safe” periods in a woman’s menstrual cycle, a method otherwise known as “the Vatican roulette”.
Alas, even this wholly unreliable method cannot be effectively promoted because, according to Malacañang Press Secretary Ignacio Bunye, the national government is “no longer involved in implementing the birth control program since this has been devolved to local government units (LGUs)” where the local chief executives are in charge of implementing birth control policies in their jurisdictions.
What compounds the problem is that even discussing the need for population control has drawn opposition from the Catholic Church and pro-lifers in the Arroyo Administration led by former Manila Mayor Lito Atienza, currently Secretary of the Environment and Natural Resources. Atienza believes that the solution to the present food crisis is a strong agricultural production program and not birth control.
When Atienza was mayor of Manila from 2000 to 2006, he issued Executive Order 003 (EO 003) banning the use of artificial contraceptives in all of Manila ’s public health facilities. Although not officially, this order was even extended to private pharmacies and drug stores in Manila which were prohibited from selling any artificial method of birth control, even condoms.
Although Atienza is no longer mayor, his ban still remains in effect. So in January of this year, 20 directly affected women filed suit to invalidate EO 003. One of the female plaintiffs, Tina, age 36, wanted to have only two children, according to her affidavit. Before Atienza was elected mayor, Manila had a health policy which allowed her to obtain contraceptive supplies from the Manila health system. After Atienza abolished this program, Tina gave birth to two more children. After 4 children, she asked to have her tubes tied (tubal ligation) so that she could no longer have babies, but this was not allowed because of EO 003. Tina now has eight children.
In her affidavit, Tina stated:
"Our daily income is 150 pesos from scavenging. My family’s breakfast includes three sachets of coffee and a few pieces of pandesal [bread rolls]. One kilo of rice is insufficient for lunch and dinner. We make do with soy sauce or salt if we can’t afford to buy ten pesos’ worth of cooked vegetable for lunch or dried fish for dinner. If our daily earnings only amount to below 70 pesos, we only have bread for dinner.
"My children are malnourished. Oftentimes, they miss a meal. My sixth child, who was underweight at birth, hasn’t recovered yet. I give each of my children five pesos for school allowance. I feel sorry for them because I can’t buy them school shoes. They miss lunch if they have to pay something in school. One of my children had to stop going to school.
"My eldest son died of rheumatic heart disease. Most of our earnings went to his medication. My husband lost his job as security guard, after he was unable to pay more than 3,000 pesos needed to renew his license.”
What kind of lives have Tina and her children been condemned to live? Is being pro-life being pro-miserable life?
Please send comments to Rodel50@aol.com or log on to rodel50.blogspot.com or write to Law Offices of Rodel Rodis at 2429 Ocean Avenue, San Francisco, CA 94127, or call (415) 334-7800.
http://globalnation.inquirer.net/mindfeeds/mindfeeds/view/20080423-132159/Tinas-children
GLOBAL NETWORKING
Global Networking : Tina’s children
By Rodel Rodis
INQUIRER.net
Posted date: April 23, 2008
The severe rice shortage that may yet result in food riots in the Philippines has forced the staunchly “Pro-Life” government of Pres. Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo to belatedly concede the need to raise public awareness of population control.
After years of rejecting United Nations and USAID funding for family planning programs, the government has finally realized that maintaining current levels of rice production is not nearly enough when the Philippine population is growing by at least 2 million a year. In 1945, there were 20-M Filipinos. By 2000, the population had risen to 76.5-M. Less than 8 years later, it is now 88.57-M and is expected to break the 100-M mark in just 5 years.
According to former Health Secretary Alberto Romualdez, “the worst part of it all is that the people who are growing at a faster rate are Filipinos who could not afford it. And the rich who have the money, are actually not growing at all, with a growth rate of zero percent,” he said.
With less arable land available for rice production and higher costs for fuel, seeds and fertilizers, the government is straining to retain previous levels of productivity that, even if successful, will still yield little or no rice for 2-M people.
According to a study just released by the European Union (2008 Philippine Development Forum), "Continued rapid population growth in the Philippines is draining health and economic resources and slowing down economic growth. It also threatens the sustainability of rural livelihoods and is inexorably destroying the remaining natural forest and marine habitats. The poor are paying the highest price, both individually and collectively. The European Union therefore calls for the effective implementation of a comprehensive national family planning policy, promoting access to family planning methods."
But raising public awareness of population control is not enough if the only kind of birth control endorsed by the government is the “natural family planning method” where couples are encouraged to have sex only during certain “safe” periods in a woman’s menstrual cycle, a method otherwise known as “the Vatican roulette”.
Alas, even this wholly unreliable method cannot be effectively promoted because, according to Malacañang Press Secretary Ignacio Bunye, the national government is “no longer involved in implementing the birth control program since this has been devolved to local government units (LGUs)” where the local chief executives are in charge of implementing birth control policies in their jurisdictions.
What compounds the problem is that even discussing the need for population control has drawn opposition from the Catholic Church and pro-lifers in the Arroyo Administration led by former Manila Mayor Lito Atienza, currently Secretary of the Environment and Natural Resources. Atienza believes that the solution to the present food crisis is a strong agricultural production program and not birth control.
When Atienza was mayor of Manila from 2000 to 2006, he issued Executive Order 003 (EO 003) banning the use of artificial contraceptives in all of Manila ’s public health facilities. Although not officially, this order was even extended to private pharmacies and drug stores in Manila which were prohibited from selling any artificial method of birth control, even condoms.
Although Atienza is no longer mayor, his ban still remains in effect. So in January of this year, 20 directly affected women filed suit to invalidate EO 003. One of the female plaintiffs, Tina, age 36, wanted to have only two children, according to her affidavit. Before Atienza was elected mayor, Manila had a health policy which allowed her to obtain contraceptive supplies from the Manila health system. After Atienza abolished this program, Tina gave birth to two more children. After 4 children, she asked to have her tubes tied (tubal ligation) so that she could no longer have babies, but this was not allowed because of EO 003. Tina now has eight children.
In her affidavit, Tina stated:
"Our daily income is 150 pesos from scavenging. My family’s breakfast includes three sachets of coffee and a few pieces of pandesal [bread rolls]. One kilo of rice is insufficient for lunch and dinner. We make do with soy sauce or salt if we can’t afford to buy ten pesos’ worth of cooked vegetable for lunch or dried fish for dinner. If our daily earnings only amount to below 70 pesos, we only have bread for dinner.
"My children are malnourished. Oftentimes, they miss a meal. My sixth child, who was underweight at birth, hasn’t recovered yet. I give each of my children five pesos for school allowance. I feel sorry for them because I can’t buy them school shoes. They miss lunch if they have to pay something in school. One of my children had to stop going to school.
"My eldest son died of rheumatic heart disease. Most of our earnings went to his medication. My husband lost his job as security guard, after he was unable to pay more than 3,000 pesos needed to renew his license.”
What kind of lives have Tina and her children been condemned to live? Is being pro-life being pro-miserable life?
Please send comments to Rodel50@aol.com or log on to rodel50.blogspot.com or write to Law Offices of Rodel Rodis at 2429 Ocean Avenue, San Francisco, CA 94127, or call (415) 334-7800.
Friday, April 18, 2008
English, Tagalog or both?
GLOBAL NETWORKING
Global Networking : English, Tagalog or both?
By Rodel Rodis
INQUIRER.net
Posted date: April 16, 2008
Russ Sandlin, an American businessman in the Philippines, recently closed his call center in Manila because he said he could not find enough English proficient workers. “Not even 3 percent of the students who graduate college here are employable in call centers,” he complained.
Sandlin cited a Philippine Department of Education report disclosing that 80 percent of secondary school teachers in the Philippines failed an English proficiency test last year. “English is the only thing that can save the country,” he wrote, “and no one here cares or even understands that the Filipinos have a crisis.”
Sandlin’s discouraging comments came in the form of an e-mail blasting the Philippine Daily Inquirer for publishing the op-ed article of Ateneo English Prof. Isabel Pefianco Martin, president of the Linguistic Society of the Philippines, who criticized the “persistent efforts of lawmakers to institutionalize English as the sole language of learning in basic education.”
“Good luck to the Inquirer. It needs to reevaluate its writers,” Sandlin wrote, “unless it supports such a misguided set of ideas. God save the Philippines. I hate to see the country falling ever deeper into an English-deprived abyss.”
Prof. Martin’s op-ed piece, which was published on April 8, 2008 (“Myths about languages in the Philippines”), criticized the narrow thinking behind a bill in the Philippine Congress (House Bill 305) mandating the use of English as the medium of instruction in all academic subjects from Grade 3 onwards and encouraging the use of English as the medium of interaction outside the classrooms. It also proposes English as the language of assessment in all government examinations and entrance tests in all public schools and state universities and colleges.
The bill which was sponsored by Cebu Rep. Eduardo R. Gullas and co-sponsored by 207 other legislators (more than 2/3rds of the House membership) was approved on its third and final reading in the Lower House late last year. The Senate is slated to take up the bill in June.
If enacted into law, the bill will repeal a 33-year old policy of bilingual teaching in Philippine schools which encouraged the use of English and Filipino (Tagalog) as mediums of instruction.
“Targeting the learning of two languages is too much for the Filipino learners, especially in the lower grades. And if the child happens to be a non-Tagalog speaker, this task actually means learning two foreign languages at the same time, an almost impossible task,” Gullas said.
Prof. Martin’s op-ed piece criticized the bill for its underlying premise that “if you don’t know English, you simply don’t know.” She explained that the link between intelligence and English language proficiency is very flimsy. “In this world, you will find intelligent people who cannot speak a word of English, as well as not-so-smart ones who are native speakers of the language,” she asserted.
Prof. Martin criticized the narrow goal of the bill which is “to produce English-proficient graduates for contact centers, hospitals and medical transcription offices, never mind if these graduates are unthinking products of the schools.”
“The ability to speak like an American will certainly not ensure excellent performance in the contact center jobs,” she wrote, if the students lack “the ability to manage culture-diverse environments,” she wrote.
Even if there were universal agreement that Filipinos should aspire to English proficiency, there is still the question of how best to reach that goal. According to Prof. Martin, “research studies prove that learning a language becomes more effective when emotional barriers are eliminated.” She cited Linguist Stephen Krashen who taught that the formula for success in learning a language is painfully simple: the lower the feelings of fear (low affective filter), the higher the chances of learning
California adopted a policy of bilingual education in public elementary schools to help non-English speaking students transition to regular classes that were taught in English. The Filipino Education Center (FEC) on Harrison Street in San Francisco, for example, was set up by the San Francisco Unified School District in 1976 to offer bi-lingual classes to newly-arrived Filipino immigrant students in a program where Tagalog-speaking teachers would teach the traditional elementary courses in both Tagalog and English so that the students would not fear English and not be traumatized by native American students ridiculing their accents.
My friend Marivic Bamba immigrated to the US with her family when she was 5 and couldn’t speak English. Her parents enrolled her in the FEC and she then transitioned into the regular school curriculum after three years of bilingual education. Marivic went on to graduate from college and obtain a master’s degree and be appointed by San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown to be a department head (Director of the SF Human Rights Commission).
Studies showed that immigrant students (Latinos, Chinese, etc.) who went through bi-lingual education learned English more effectively than students who were enrolled directly into regular American English-speaking classes without the benefit of a bi-lingual transition program.
Prof. Martin points out that most Filipinos speak at least three different languages and English might not even be one of them. “So when English is first introduced to them, it should be introduced slowly and gently, with much respect for their first languages,” she urged.
“Teaching and learning English in the Philippines may be a difficult task, but it need not be a frightening experience,” Prof. Martin wrote. “So much has already been spent on testing the proficiency of teachers and then training these teachers to become more proficient in the language. But simply focusing on testing and training, without recognizing the multilingual context of teaching and learning English in the Philippines, only reinforces fear of the language.”
English proficiency should not be viewed as the measure of a nation’s success. How can we explain the economic ascendancies of Japan, China, and Korea where English is hardly spoken? Those countries educated their populations in their native languages using their languages as tools of communication. English should be similarly seen as a tool of communication, not as the goal of education.
Contrary to Sandlin's impression, Prof. Martin was not opposed to the use of English as a medium of instruction in Philippine schools (she's an English professor at the Ateneo) but the reservations she expressed concerned the lack of thought given to how to best teach English to the population. The goal is the same – an educated English-speaking population. It is the path – bilingual or monolingual – to the goal that is in dispute.
Please send comments to Rodel50@aol.com or log on to rodel50.blogspot.com or write to Law Offices of Rodel Rodis at 2429 Ocean Avenue, San Francisco, CA 94127, or call (415) 334-7800.
Global Networking : English, Tagalog or both?
By Rodel Rodis
INQUIRER.net
Posted date: April 16, 2008
Russ Sandlin, an American businessman in the Philippines, recently closed his call center in Manila because he said he could not find enough English proficient workers. “Not even 3 percent of the students who graduate college here are employable in call centers,” he complained.
Sandlin cited a Philippine Department of Education report disclosing that 80 percent of secondary school teachers in the Philippines failed an English proficiency test last year. “English is the only thing that can save the country,” he wrote, “and no one here cares or even understands that the Filipinos have a crisis.”
Sandlin’s discouraging comments came in the form of an e-mail blasting the Philippine Daily Inquirer for publishing the op-ed article of Ateneo English Prof. Isabel Pefianco Martin, president of the Linguistic Society of the Philippines, who criticized the “persistent efforts of lawmakers to institutionalize English as the sole language of learning in basic education.”
“Good luck to the Inquirer. It needs to reevaluate its writers,” Sandlin wrote, “unless it supports such a misguided set of ideas. God save the Philippines. I hate to see the country falling ever deeper into an English-deprived abyss.”
Prof. Martin’s op-ed piece, which was published on April 8, 2008 (“Myths about languages in the Philippines”), criticized the narrow thinking behind a bill in the Philippine Congress (House Bill 305) mandating the use of English as the medium of instruction in all academic subjects from Grade 3 onwards and encouraging the use of English as the medium of interaction outside the classrooms. It also proposes English as the language of assessment in all government examinations and entrance tests in all public schools and state universities and colleges.
The bill which was sponsored by Cebu Rep. Eduardo R. Gullas and co-sponsored by 207 other legislators (more than 2/3rds of the House membership) was approved on its third and final reading in the Lower House late last year. The Senate is slated to take up the bill in June.
If enacted into law, the bill will repeal a 33-year old policy of bilingual teaching in Philippine schools which encouraged the use of English and Filipino (Tagalog) as mediums of instruction.
“Targeting the learning of two languages is too much for the Filipino learners, especially in the lower grades. And if the child happens to be a non-Tagalog speaker, this task actually means learning two foreign languages at the same time, an almost impossible task,” Gullas said.
Prof. Martin’s op-ed piece criticized the bill for its underlying premise that “if you don’t know English, you simply don’t know.” She explained that the link between intelligence and English language proficiency is very flimsy. “In this world, you will find intelligent people who cannot speak a word of English, as well as not-so-smart ones who are native speakers of the language,” she asserted.
Prof. Martin criticized the narrow goal of the bill which is “to produce English-proficient graduates for contact centers, hospitals and medical transcription offices, never mind if these graduates are unthinking products of the schools.”
“The ability to speak like an American will certainly not ensure excellent performance in the contact center jobs,” she wrote, if the students lack “the ability to manage culture-diverse environments,” she wrote.
Even if there were universal agreement that Filipinos should aspire to English proficiency, there is still the question of how best to reach that goal. According to Prof. Martin, “research studies prove that learning a language becomes more effective when emotional barriers are eliminated.” She cited Linguist Stephen Krashen who taught that the formula for success in learning a language is painfully simple: the lower the feelings of fear (low affective filter), the higher the chances of learning
California adopted a policy of bilingual education in public elementary schools to help non-English speaking students transition to regular classes that were taught in English. The Filipino Education Center (FEC) on Harrison Street in San Francisco, for example, was set up by the San Francisco Unified School District in 1976 to offer bi-lingual classes to newly-arrived Filipino immigrant students in a program where Tagalog-speaking teachers would teach the traditional elementary courses in both Tagalog and English so that the students would not fear English and not be traumatized by native American students ridiculing their accents.
My friend Marivic Bamba immigrated to the US with her family when she was 5 and couldn’t speak English. Her parents enrolled her in the FEC and she then transitioned into the regular school curriculum after three years of bilingual education. Marivic went on to graduate from college and obtain a master’s degree and be appointed by San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown to be a department head (Director of the SF Human Rights Commission).
Studies showed that immigrant students (Latinos, Chinese, etc.) who went through bi-lingual education learned English more effectively than students who were enrolled directly into regular American English-speaking classes without the benefit of a bi-lingual transition program.
Prof. Martin points out that most Filipinos speak at least three different languages and English might not even be one of them. “So when English is first introduced to them, it should be introduced slowly and gently, with much respect for their first languages,” she urged.
“Teaching and learning English in the Philippines may be a difficult task, but it need not be a frightening experience,” Prof. Martin wrote. “So much has already been spent on testing the proficiency of teachers and then training these teachers to become more proficient in the language. But simply focusing on testing and training, without recognizing the multilingual context of teaching and learning English in the Philippines, only reinforces fear of the language.”
English proficiency should not be viewed as the measure of a nation’s success. How can we explain the economic ascendancies of Japan, China, and Korea where English is hardly spoken? Those countries educated their populations in their native languages using their languages as tools of communication. English should be similarly seen as a tool of communication, not as the goal of education.
Contrary to Sandlin's impression, Prof. Martin was not opposed to the use of English as a medium of instruction in Philippine schools (she's an English professor at the Ateneo) but the reservations she expressed concerned the lack of thought given to how to best teach English to the population. The goal is the same – an educated English-speaking population. It is the path – bilingual or monolingual – to the goal that is in dispute.
Please send comments to Rodel50@aol.com or log on to rodel50.blogspot.com or write to Law Offices of Rodel Rodis at 2429 Ocean Avenue, San Francisco, CA 94127, or call (415) 334-7800.
English, Tagalog or both?
GLOBAL NETWORKING
Global Networking : English, Tagalog or both?
By Rodel Rodis
INQUIRER.net
Posted date: April 16, 2008
Russ Sandlin, an American businessman in the Philippines, recently closed his call center in Manila because he said he could not find enough English proficient workers. “Not even 3 percent of the students who graduate college here are employable in call centers,” he complained.
Sandlin cited a Philippine Department of Education report disclosing that 80 percent of secondary school teachers in the Philippines failed an English proficiency test last year. “English is the only thing that can save the country,” he wrote, “and no one here cares or even understands that the Filipinos have a crisis.”
Sandlin’s discouraging comments came in the form of an e-mail blasting the Philippine Daily Inquirer for publishing the op-ed article of Ateneo English Prof. Isabel Pefianco Martin, president of the Linguistic Society of the Philippines, who criticized the “persistent efforts of lawmakers to institutionalize English as the sole language of learning in basic education.”
“Good luck to the Inquirer. It needs to reevaluate its writers,” Sandlin wrote, “unless it supports such a misguided set of ideas. God save the Philippines. I hate to see the country falling ever deeper into an English-deprived abyss.”
Prof. Martin’s op-ed piece, which was published on April 8, 2008 (“Myths about languages in the Philippines”), criticized the narrow thinking behind a bill in the Philippine Congress (House Bill 305) mandating the use of English as the medium of instruction in all academic subjects from Grade 3 onwards and encouraging the use of English as the medium of interaction outside the classrooms. It also proposes English as the language of assessment in all government examinations and entrance tests in all public schools and state universities and colleges.
The bill which was sponsored by Cebu Rep. Eduardo R. Gullas and co-sponsored by 207 other legislators (more than 2/3rds of the House membership) was approved on its third and final reading in the Lower House late last year. The Senate is slated to take up the bill in June.
If enacted into law, the bill will repeal a 33-year old policy of bilingual teaching in Philippine schools which encouraged the use of English and Filipino (Tagalog) as mediums of instruction.
“Targeting the learning of two languages is too much for the Filipino learners, especially in the lower grades. And if the child happens to be a non-Tagalog speaker, this task actually means learning two foreign languages at the same time, an almost impossible task,” Gullas said.
Prof. Martin’s op-ed piece criticized the bill for its underlying premise that “if you don’t know English, you simply don’t know.” She explained that the link between intelligence and English language proficiency is very flimsy. “In this world, you will find intelligent people who cannot speak a word of English, as well as not-so-smart ones who are native speakers of the language,” she asserted.
Prof. Martin criticized the narrow goal of the bill which is “to produce English-proficient graduates for contact centers, hospitals and medical transcription offices, never mind if these graduates are unthinking products of the schools.”
“The ability to speak like an American will certainly not ensure excellent performance in the contact center jobs,” she wrote, if the students lack “the ability to manage culture-diverse environments,” she wrote.
Even if there were universal agreement that Filipinos should aspire to English proficiency, there is still the question of how best to reach that goal. According to Prof. Martin, “research studies prove that learning a language becomes more effective when emotional barriers are eliminated.” She cited Linguist Stephen Krashen who taught that the formula for success in learning a language is painfully simple: the lower the feelings of fear (low affective filter), the higher the chances of learning
California adopted a policy of bilingual education in public elementary schools to help non-English speaking students transition to regular classes that were taught in English. The Filipino Education Center (FEC) on Harrison Street in San Francisco, for example, was set up by the San Francisco Unified School District in 1976 to offer bi-lingual classes to newly-arrived Filipino immigrant students in a program where Tagalog-speaking teachers would teach the traditional elementary courses in both Tagalog and English so that the students would not fear English and not be traumatized by native American students ridiculing their accents.
My friend Marivic Bamba immigrated to the US with her family when she was 5 and couldn’t speak English. Her parents enrolled her in the FEC and she then transitioned into the regular school curriculum after three years of bilingual education. Marivic went on to graduate from college and obtain a master’s degree and be appointed by San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown to be a department head (Director of the SF Human Rights Commission).
Studies showed that immigrant students (Latinos, Chinese, etc.) who went through bi-lingual education learned English more effectively than students who were enrolled directly into regular American English-speaking classes without the benefit of a bi-lingual transition program.
Prof. Martin points out that most Filipinos speak at least three different languages and English might not even be one of them. “So when English is first introduced to them, it should be introduced slowly and gently, with much respect for their first languages,” she urged.
“Teaching and learning English in the Philippines may be a difficult task, but it need not be a frightening experience,” Prof. Martin wrote. “So much has already been spent on testing the proficiency of teachers and then training these teachers to become more proficient in the language. But simply focusing on testing and training, without recognizing the multilingual context of teaching and learning English in the Philippines, only reinforces fear of the language.”
English proficiency should not be viewed as the measure of a nation’s success. How can we explain the economic ascendancies of Japan, China, and Korea where English is hardly spoken? Those countries educated their populations in their native languages using their languages as tools of communication. English should be similarly seen as a tool of communication, not as the goal of education.
Contrary to Sandlin's impression, Prof. Martin was not opposed to the use of English as a medium of instruction in Philippine schools (she's an English professor at the Ateneo) but the reservations she expressed concerned the lack of thought given to how to best teach English to the population. The goal is the same – an educated English-speaking population. It is the path – bilingual or monolingual – to the goal that is in dispute.
Please send comments to Rodel50@aol.com or log on to rodel50.blogspot.com or write to Law Offices of Rodel Rodis at 2429 Ocean Avenue, San Francisco, CA 94127, or call (415) 334-7800.
Global Networking : English, Tagalog or both?
By Rodel Rodis
INQUIRER.net
Posted date: April 16, 2008
Russ Sandlin, an American businessman in the Philippines, recently closed his call center in Manila because he said he could not find enough English proficient workers. “Not even 3 percent of the students who graduate college here are employable in call centers,” he complained.
Sandlin cited a Philippine Department of Education report disclosing that 80 percent of secondary school teachers in the Philippines failed an English proficiency test last year. “English is the only thing that can save the country,” he wrote, “and no one here cares or even understands that the Filipinos have a crisis.”
Sandlin’s discouraging comments came in the form of an e-mail blasting the Philippine Daily Inquirer for publishing the op-ed article of Ateneo English Prof. Isabel Pefianco Martin, president of the Linguistic Society of the Philippines, who criticized the “persistent efforts of lawmakers to institutionalize English as the sole language of learning in basic education.”
“Good luck to the Inquirer. It needs to reevaluate its writers,” Sandlin wrote, “unless it supports such a misguided set of ideas. God save the Philippines. I hate to see the country falling ever deeper into an English-deprived abyss.”
Prof. Martin’s op-ed piece, which was published on April 8, 2008 (“Myths about languages in the Philippines”), criticized the narrow thinking behind a bill in the Philippine Congress (House Bill 305) mandating the use of English as the medium of instruction in all academic subjects from Grade 3 onwards and encouraging the use of English as the medium of interaction outside the classrooms. It also proposes English as the language of assessment in all government examinations and entrance tests in all public schools and state universities and colleges.
The bill which was sponsored by Cebu Rep. Eduardo R. Gullas and co-sponsored by 207 other legislators (more than 2/3rds of the House membership) was approved on its third and final reading in the Lower House late last year. The Senate is slated to take up the bill in June.
If enacted into law, the bill will repeal a 33-year old policy of bilingual teaching in Philippine schools which encouraged the use of English and Filipino (Tagalog) as mediums of instruction.
“Targeting the learning of two languages is too much for the Filipino learners, especially in the lower grades. And if the child happens to be a non-Tagalog speaker, this task actually means learning two foreign languages at the same time, an almost impossible task,” Gullas said.
Prof. Martin’s op-ed piece criticized the bill for its underlying premise that “if you don’t know English, you simply don’t know.” She explained that the link between intelligence and English language proficiency is very flimsy. “In this world, you will find intelligent people who cannot speak a word of English, as well as not-so-smart ones who are native speakers of the language,” she asserted.
Prof. Martin criticized the narrow goal of the bill which is “to produce English-proficient graduates for contact centers, hospitals and medical transcription offices, never mind if these graduates are unthinking products of the schools.”
“The ability to speak like an American will certainly not ensure excellent performance in the contact center jobs,” she wrote, if the students lack “the ability to manage culture-diverse environments,” she wrote.
Even if there were universal agreement that Filipinos should aspire to English proficiency, there is still the question of how best to reach that goal. According to Prof. Martin, “research studies prove that learning a language becomes more effective when emotional barriers are eliminated.” She cited Linguist Stephen Krashen who taught that the formula for success in learning a language is painfully simple: the lower the feelings of fear (low affective filter), the higher the chances of learning
California adopted a policy of bilingual education in public elementary schools to help non-English speaking students transition to regular classes that were taught in English. The Filipino Education Center (FEC) on Harrison Street in San Francisco, for example, was set up by the San Francisco Unified School District in 1976 to offer bi-lingual classes to newly-arrived Filipino immigrant students in a program where Tagalog-speaking teachers would teach the traditional elementary courses in both Tagalog and English so that the students would not fear English and not be traumatized by native American students ridiculing their accents.
My friend Marivic Bamba immigrated to the US with her family when she was 5 and couldn’t speak English. Her parents enrolled her in the FEC and she then transitioned into the regular school curriculum after three years of bilingual education. Marivic went on to graduate from college and obtain a master’s degree and be appointed by San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown to be a department head (Director of the SF Human Rights Commission).
Studies showed that immigrant students (Latinos, Chinese, etc.) who went through bi-lingual education learned English more effectively than students who were enrolled directly into regular American English-speaking classes without the benefit of a bi-lingual transition program.
Prof. Martin points out that most Filipinos speak at least three different languages and English might not even be one of them. “So when English is first introduced to them, it should be introduced slowly and gently, with much respect for their first languages,” she urged.
“Teaching and learning English in the Philippines may be a difficult task, but it need not be a frightening experience,” Prof. Martin wrote. “So much has already been spent on testing the proficiency of teachers and then training these teachers to become more proficient in the language. But simply focusing on testing and training, without recognizing the multilingual context of teaching and learning English in the Philippines, only reinforces fear of the language.”
English proficiency should not be viewed as the measure of a nation’s success. How can we explain the economic ascendancies of Japan, China, and Korea where English is hardly spoken? Those countries educated their populations in their native languages using their languages as tools of communication. English should be similarly seen as a tool of communication, not as the goal of education.
Contrary to Sandlin's impression, Prof. Martin was not opposed to the use of English as a medium of instruction in Philippine schools (she's an English professor at the Ateneo) but the reservations she expressed concerned the lack of thought given to how to best teach English to the population. The goal is the same – an educated English-speaking population. It is the path – bilingual or monolingual – to the goal that is in dispute.
Please send comments to Rodel50@aol.com or log on to rodel50.blogspot.com or write to Law Offices of Rodel Rodis at 2429 Ocean Avenue, San Francisco, CA 94127, or call (415) 334-7800.
Sunday, April 13, 2008
Imaginary Rice
Mind Feeds / Mind Feeds
http://globalnation.inquirer.net/mindfeeds/mindfeeds/view/20080409-129257/Imaginary-Rice
GLOBAL NETWORKING
Global Networking : Imaginary Rice
By Rodel Rodis
INQUIRER.net
Posted date: April 09, 2008
I asked a friend in Manila what he was doing nowadays and he replied that he wasn’t doing much, just waiting for GMA (Pres. Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo) to fall. I asked him if he was at all concerned about the rice crisis we have been hearing so much about. He said that he thought it was just a ploy used by GMA to divert attention from the many scandals facing her government.
The irony is that GMA just announced that there is no rice shortage in the country and that talk about such a shortage is “imaginary”.
The reality is that talk about the crisis has pushed the Philippine Senate hearings on government corruption out of the front pages of Manila’s dailies which are now filled with stories about the “imaginary” crisis.
The other reality is that there is a real rice crisis that has been brought about by external and internal factors within and without the control of the government. In the Philippines, the world-wide skyrocketing of food and fuel costs has been exacerbated by the government’s actions and inactions.
In 2003, the world price of rice was $200 per metric ton. Four years later, in 2007, it jumped to $300. In less than a year since then, the price has doubled to $600 per metric ton, and it is expected to rise to as much as $1,000 per metric ton within a year.
The Philippines consumes approximately 18-M metric tons of rice a year to feed its growing 90-M population. But the country only produces about 90% of the rice it needs requiring it to import about 1.8-M metric tons, making it the world’s largest importer of rice.
Less than a month ago, the Philippines signed an agreement with Vietnam to purchase 1.5-M metric tons of rice for the year. But the agreement has an escape clause that would allow Vietnam to back off from the deal in “circumstances of natural disaster and harvest loss.” One major storm in Vietnam could easily precipitate a major rice crisis in the Philippines.
According to Sen. Mar Roxas, president of the Liberal Party, the Philippines is facing a metaphorical “perfect storm" with the steep rise in the price of rice being compounded by skyrocketing fuel costs (oil at $110 a barrel) and a recession in the US economy. The latter is certain to dramatically reduce the remittances of overseas Filipinos which the country has relied on to stabilize the economy.
To avert the impending rice shortage, the Philippine government has asked fast food chains like Jollibee and MacDonald’s to lessen the rice served with their meals in order to conserve.
One serious solution is to improve the country’s post-harvest facilities. According to Rep. Abraham Mitra, “post-harvest losses in rice hovers around 14 to 25 percent.” If the country invested in more modern post-harvest facilities, there would be no need to import rice. At a cost of $600 per metric ton of rice for a total of 1.8 million metric tons, which the Philippines will be purchasing in the open market, the government will spend about $1 billion (P40 billion pesos), more than 100 times the Philippines annual post-harvest budget.
An official of the Philippine Department of Agriculture told the Manila Times that the country spends only 1,000 pesos per farmer, which is low compared to the equivalent of 3,000 to 4,000 pesos per farmer spent by countries like Thailand, Japan and other developed countries.
Former President Fidel Ramos blamed part of the problem on the conversion of farmlands into subdivisions and industrial zones. He said the government should change its land-use policy and prohibit the conversion of arable lands to commercial and industrial use.
But even where the land remains agricultural, much of the rice land has been converted into banana plantations, notably in Mindanao, because the price for banana exports is higher than the price of rice on the domestic market.
The Comprehensive Agricultural Reform Program (CARP) has also caused problems as millions of hectares of land have been divided up into small parcels of land where farmers can’t afford to buy and use tractors and machineries to improve production because of the economies of scale so they use carabaos instead, producing the average current yield of 2.5 tons of rice per hectare, the lowest in Asia.
Of the 8.5 million hectares of arable land in the Philippines, about 6.5 million hectares have been distributed under CARP to 4 million farmer-beneficiaries, about half of the area devoted to rice and corn. More than 3 million of the farmer beneficiaries have not received the support services and access to the credit they were promised and which they need to maximize the production of their land. The government spent 157 billion pesos to purchase the lands but has precious little to help the farmers once they own the land.
Former Pres. Ramos pointed out another problem exacerbating the rice crisis - too many mouths to feed. “The population issues, of course,” he said, “must also be revisited because the government has prohibited artificial family planning methods to be supported by the budget and therefore this is a very big withdrawal of support to the poorest families especially those in the countryside.”
As a concession to the powerful Catholic Church, the Arroyo government has refused to accept millions of dollars in aid from the United Nations and the USAID in support for population and family planning programs. Ramos denounced the rejection of UN family planning assistance “because we are going contrary to what is being practiced in the most Catholic countries in the world, like Italy, Spain, Portugal, France, Austria, Ireland, which are enjoying a population growth rate of less than one percent,” he said.
Ramos said the country’s birthrate is three times that of the countries mentioned, “so that this infringes on all of these new problems that we are now encountering including rice, and potable water.”
A growing Filipino population cannot be fed with imaginary rice.
Please send comments to Rodel50@aol.com or log on to rodel50.blogspot.com or write to Law Offices of Rodel Rodis at 2429 Ocean Avenue , San Francisco , CA 94127 , or call (415) 334-7800.
http://globalnation.inquirer.net/mindfeeds/mindfeeds/view/20080409-129257/Imaginary-Rice
GLOBAL NETWORKING
Global Networking : Imaginary Rice
By Rodel Rodis
INQUIRER.net
Posted date: April 09, 2008
I asked a friend in Manila what he was doing nowadays and he replied that he wasn’t doing much, just waiting for GMA (Pres. Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo) to fall. I asked him if he was at all concerned about the rice crisis we have been hearing so much about. He said that he thought it was just a ploy used by GMA to divert attention from the many scandals facing her government.
The irony is that GMA just announced that there is no rice shortage in the country and that talk about such a shortage is “imaginary”.
The reality is that talk about the crisis has pushed the Philippine Senate hearings on government corruption out of the front pages of Manila’s dailies which are now filled with stories about the “imaginary” crisis.
The other reality is that there is a real rice crisis that has been brought about by external and internal factors within and without the control of the government. In the Philippines, the world-wide skyrocketing of food and fuel costs has been exacerbated by the government’s actions and inactions.
In 2003, the world price of rice was $200 per metric ton. Four years later, in 2007, it jumped to $300. In less than a year since then, the price has doubled to $600 per metric ton, and it is expected to rise to as much as $1,000 per metric ton within a year.
The Philippines consumes approximately 18-M metric tons of rice a year to feed its growing 90-M population. But the country only produces about 90% of the rice it needs requiring it to import about 1.8-M metric tons, making it the world’s largest importer of rice.
Less than a month ago, the Philippines signed an agreement with Vietnam to purchase 1.5-M metric tons of rice for the year. But the agreement has an escape clause that would allow Vietnam to back off from the deal in “circumstances of natural disaster and harvest loss.” One major storm in Vietnam could easily precipitate a major rice crisis in the Philippines.
According to Sen. Mar Roxas, president of the Liberal Party, the Philippines is facing a metaphorical “perfect storm" with the steep rise in the price of rice being compounded by skyrocketing fuel costs (oil at $110 a barrel) and a recession in the US economy. The latter is certain to dramatically reduce the remittances of overseas Filipinos which the country has relied on to stabilize the economy.
To avert the impending rice shortage, the Philippine government has asked fast food chains like Jollibee and MacDonald’s to lessen the rice served with their meals in order to conserve.
One serious solution is to improve the country’s post-harvest facilities. According to Rep. Abraham Mitra, “post-harvest losses in rice hovers around 14 to 25 percent.” If the country invested in more modern post-harvest facilities, there would be no need to import rice. At a cost of $600 per metric ton of rice for a total of 1.8 million metric tons, which the Philippines will be purchasing in the open market, the government will spend about $1 billion (P40 billion pesos), more than 100 times the Philippines annual post-harvest budget.
An official of the Philippine Department of Agriculture told the Manila Times that the country spends only 1,000 pesos per farmer, which is low compared to the equivalent of 3,000 to 4,000 pesos per farmer spent by countries like Thailand, Japan and other developed countries.
Former President Fidel Ramos blamed part of the problem on the conversion of farmlands into subdivisions and industrial zones. He said the government should change its land-use policy and prohibit the conversion of arable lands to commercial and industrial use.
But even where the land remains agricultural, much of the rice land has been converted into banana plantations, notably in Mindanao, because the price for banana exports is higher than the price of rice on the domestic market.
The Comprehensive Agricultural Reform Program (CARP) has also caused problems as millions of hectares of land have been divided up into small parcels of land where farmers can’t afford to buy and use tractors and machineries to improve production because of the economies of scale so they use carabaos instead, producing the average current yield of 2.5 tons of rice per hectare, the lowest in Asia.
Of the 8.5 million hectares of arable land in the Philippines, about 6.5 million hectares have been distributed under CARP to 4 million farmer-beneficiaries, about half of the area devoted to rice and corn. More than 3 million of the farmer beneficiaries have not received the support services and access to the credit they were promised and which they need to maximize the production of their land. The government spent 157 billion pesos to purchase the lands but has precious little to help the farmers once they own the land.
Former Pres. Ramos pointed out another problem exacerbating the rice crisis - too many mouths to feed. “The population issues, of course,” he said, “must also be revisited because the government has prohibited artificial family planning methods to be supported by the budget and therefore this is a very big withdrawal of support to the poorest families especially those in the countryside.”
As a concession to the powerful Catholic Church, the Arroyo government has refused to accept millions of dollars in aid from the United Nations and the USAID in support for population and family planning programs. Ramos denounced the rejection of UN family planning assistance “because we are going contrary to what is being practiced in the most Catholic countries in the world, like Italy, Spain, Portugal, France, Austria, Ireland, which are enjoying a population growth rate of less than one percent,” he said.
Ramos said the country’s birthrate is three times that of the countries mentioned, “so that this infringes on all of these new problems that we are now encountering including rice, and potable water.”
A growing Filipino population cannot be fed with imaginary rice.
Please send comments to Rodel50@aol.com or log on to rodel50.blogspot.com or write to Law Offices of Rodel Rodis at 2429 Ocean Avenue , San Francisco , CA 94127 , or call (415) 334-7800.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
