![Readings in Philippine History](https://mindanaotoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/RAI-Bollozos-Sanchez.jpg)
Readings in Philippine History | By: RAI Bollozos Sanchez
Mindanaotoday.com | Readings in Philippine History
By: RAI Bollozos Sanchez
FIRST of all, my sincerest apologies I could not write last week – I got busy preparing my modules for Readings in Philippine History for the “Intersession Term.”
Since 2014, we went into considerable changes in the curriculum because of K to 12. For one is the Commission on Higher Education issued Memorandum Order No. 20, Series of 2013 (CMO No. 20, S. 2013), “subjecting the revision of the General Education Curriculum (GEC) to become holistic, intellectual, and civic competencies of the learners.”
Since the issuance of CMO No. 20, S. 2013, CHED invested its capabilities in training teachers to become competent in teaching GEC subjects.
The course RiPH is a course that views the past from various lenses of selected primary sources from different periods.
Further, the students are asked to analyze and interpret these sources according to their “content” and “context.”
In short, the learner is taught the correct historical method in analyzing primary sources for them to gain knowledgeable perspectives about the past and may critically relate to our present conditions.
Additionally, since the course touches on civic responsibilities, the RiPH enables the student to appreciate human nature, knowing the value of being a Filipino with full respect for moral norms relating to social and individual experiences using history as a medium.
It has been four years since the inauguration of the first college batch of K to 12, and they are about to graduate or have already graduated.
Now, I am contemplating whether these students met the intellectual and civic competencies required to understand RiPH?
Well, my apologies, and in my assessment, nothing has changed in teaching the course in the past 4-years. In fact, nothing has changed despite the reforms of CMO No. 20, S. 2013, especially in learning Readings in Philippine History.
For example, many RiPH professors resort to the usual convenience of historical reporting with no proper discussion of historical concepts.
For example, Magellan’s arrival using the Pigafetta manuscript over their experiences on some islands in the Visayas is still perceived as “the discovery of the Philippines”—which is again not!
The point, Magellan never discovered the Philippines, nor was the coming of Christianity. Historically, many islands in the pre-colonial Philippines were part of a vast network of the Asian maritime sea trade starting in the 9th century.
These pre-colonial Filipinos were already known for their maritime skills. Lastly, it was not the coming of Christianity because the Philippines was not colonized until 1565.
However, using the Pigafetta manuscript and proper guidance of the historical methods are boundless nuances that await discoveries.
I joke with my students that I can discuss various Philippine histories using the Pigafetta manuscript alone.
May it be culinary history because of Sinugba and Kinilaw and how it is prepared and served; may it be diplomatic history because of the discussions of Magellan with various Datus or Rajahs.
May it be the pre-colonial social history of our indigenous ancestors because of their rituals noticed during the First Mass in Limasawa or the conversion of Humabon to Christianity.
Lastly, military history on the geography of Mactan and the unfamiliarity of Magellan pursued his defeat and death. See, the manuscript of Pigafetta alone can deposit various historical perspectives!
However, how persevering can the teacher be willing to unlearn and relearn the historical nuances without bearing the responsibility of letting their students read without setting proper historical guidance.
I think history teachers should revisit their values of why they teach. Remember, in many instances, the laziness of the teacher reflects the stubbornness of their students.
Learning history is not about convenience, but learning history is about persevering the value of perseverance.
Teaching history should not be canned-good but rather be home-cooked — well prepared and made out from the love of it.
If they think they are not competent enough, then many historians who are trained with CMO No. 20, S. 2013 are willing to be of service. They just have to reach out.