Teaching nationalism to students who want whiter skin

A REACTION PAPER ON THE ISSUE

CITIZENSHIP EDUCATION IN THE PHILIPPINES: LESSONS, PROSPECTS AND POSSIBILITIES

Presented by Sherry Marasigan

AS PART OF THE SEMINAR

THE HUMAN DIMENSION IN PHILIPPINE EDUCATION:

Theories, Policies and Practices

Written by

Marcial I. Enginco

Submitted to

Michael Muega, PhD

Professor, EDFD 201

University of the Philippines Diliman, College of Education

  

What is a Filipino and can it be taught inside the classroom? This is a basic but very important question that sums up Sherry Marasigan’s quandary as a Social Studies teacher mandated to teach citizenship to young students.

In her brief but thought-provoking talk Marasigan, an instructor at Colegio San Juan de Letran and a PhD student of Education, pointed out alarming but very familiar behavior among many students that would belie their attitudes towards being a Filipino, among which include the students’ apparent disconnect while observing nationalistic activities such as flag-raising ceremony, apathy towards and sometimes ignorance of pressing national issues, and the overwhelming drive to get out of the country to pursue greener pastures after they graduate from college.

Due to time limitations Marasigan was not able to expound on the gravity of the issue nor did she offer concrete solutions or at least show a road map to guide educators on how to infuse and ingrain a sense of national pride amongst the youth inside the classroom.  However, whatever was shared during her brief tenure at the podium was enough to spur me into rumination.   The more I ponder over this prevailing situation the more I realize that that challenge to teach citizenship is enormous and growing more herculean, even quixotic, with the passing of time.

Consider these.

The Philippines, a nation of close to a 100 million people, does not own a unifying language.  Tagalog, or the politically-safe term Filipino, is perhaps the closest to a mother-tongue that the Philippines has and it is so because, for the longest time, the National Capital Region – in conjunction with surrounding Tagalog-speaking provinces --  has been the country’s seat of power and economic activity.  But based on the number of native speakers Tagalog is not even the language of the majority but merely of the plurality, with significant numbers of Filipinos counting on Ilocano, Ilonggo, Cebuano and numerous other regional dialects as their native tongue.  Thus the country’s fractured language base is in itself a barrier to attaining a firm sense of national identity.   It does not help the nationalist perspective either that English, a foreign language, is institutionalized in the educational system, government, the business sector and even in cyberspace as the preferred language for communication, in line with the rest of the world.

As the country inches forward to a rapidly homogenizing world where ideas, culture and technology are as freely exchanged as market commodities, the issue of teaching citizenship further hits a barrier that is very difficult to overcome.  A cursory inventory at what many youths value today – iPhone, Korean boy bands, imported clothings and articles, and whitening soaps, lotions and cream – will give educators a sense that the Filipino youth, at least extrinsically, is more comfortable being a global citizen than as a local, patronizing local products, choosing to look local. 

Can this trend be reversed?  I am hopeful but I have my doubts.

So what is a Filipino?  Physically, we don’t have an accurate model of what majority of Filipinos should look like.  We are tall as we are short, light-skinned as we are dark, round-eyed as we are slit-eyed --there’s just no distinct Filipino look.  However, when I ask my college students what they believe are traits that best describe the Filipino, being hospitable is always by  far the top answer, followed by being friendly and being a happy people.

But being all those, especially being hospitable, did not come by accident.  A keen analysis of the lessons of history will show that we, as a people, did not choose to act and behave in such agreeable terms but were constrained to do so.  We are a hospitable people because over a span of more than 4 centuries colonizers, one after the other, called our country theirs, and took whatever they liked and desired inside our homes and farms as if they were extension of theirs.   We couldn’t call our country ours, let alone our homes.   And we were trained to smile because if we didn't and instead showed displeasure over such stark inequality then the oppressive guests may then just decide to take the last thing that our countrymen held precious  – their lives.

This is, in principle, the foundation of a giving, hospitable culture.  A typical Filipino host telling the grateful guest, “Consider what we have in our home yours, as well” is an accurate description of the mindset that has been wired deeply into our psyche. 

We have grown comfortable being with other people, be they from a neighboring barangay or from a far-off nation.  It is no wonder then that Filipinos are touted all over the world as great adapters, with chameleon-like skills in seamlessly blending with the crowd in just about every nation they are in, under any condition.  This ability is, I believe, also a natural by-product of being exposed to all kinds of foreign body in our own country.

So can Citizenship and its ideals be taught inside Philippine schools?  I am hopeful but I have my doubts.  If we can identify our National Identity beyond what our national anthem or national flower is, we can.  If we can define what a generic Filipino is, we will.  If we have convinced Filipinos that their future lies here in local shores, and that the proverbial greener pasture can be realized locally using their talents, intelligence and daring, then we have.