Talk:Education in the Philippines during Spanish rule

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject United States Territories  
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States Territories, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of United States Territories on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Tambayan Philippines  
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Tambayan Philippines, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics related to the Philippines on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
 

Untitled[edit]

During Spain's colonial days, illiteracy was common in Spain. Hunger was a problem in Spain and was lagging behind its European neighbors in economic progress. Education in the Philippines did not gain importance until after WW2. Under the American rule, people were still farmers. Children went to school but few graduated from primary schools. A primary school graduate does not speak English well and has limited comprehension skills with a language not spoken at home. Spain never achieved what it wanted to do: Filipino natives speaking Spanish. There are books written in Spanish by those who were in the Philippines during Spain's colonizing era, many related that the natives spoke their native languages but not Spanish.

My Sources: 1. Memoria Complementaria De La Seccion 2 Del Programa - Official Edition - Printed in the University of Santo Tomas in 1887


Page 337 - The natives generally did not have an understanding of Spanish. Read on to the next pages you will find writer's description of the poor quality of classrooms, lack of resources (e.g, papers, books), the teachers who were not doing a good job that it was as if there were no teachers at all. It also described the students who could read but could not understand what they were reading.

2. printed in Madrid 1897 Filipinas: Estudio de algunos asuntos de actualidad by RP PROCURADOR Y COMISARIO DE

 AGUSTINOS CALZADOS MISIONEROS DE DICHAS ISLAS - 


Page 132 - The Author was defending the missionaries on why the teaching of Spanish as mandated by law has not come to fruition, an admission that the method of teaching was poor

Page 150 - The author stated that it has been centuries yet it has been proven with evidence that teaching Spanish has been impossible. Those who are advocating for learning Spanish by the natives believing that Spanish will improve natives' status in the society and cause the natives to relate more to the Castilians are in a state of erroneous belief. A native may get along with a Castilian and be sincere in his dealings but will never feel the identity of a Castilian. — Preceding unsigned comment added by KalahatingKano (talkcontribs) 10:12, 10 October 2014 (UTC)


There was a school in every village in the Islands[edit]

The following line needs to be corrected: "The total school population for that year is given as 230,358 for a total population in the islands of 4,411,261. That equates to less than 6% of the population attending schools", Because that's wrong, it is including ALL the population, including babies and old people.

And then, based on that assumption, this contributor concludes that: "Any suggestion that there was a school in every village in the Islands, is not borne out by the official figures, and seems to be just another romanticism"

To calculate the percentage of children on scholar age, you only take into account Elementary School-Age Children (ages 5 through 13) and High School-Age Children (ages 14 through 17)

In the first case, taking as a base the U.S. Census Bureau (http://www.census.gov/newsroom/releases/archives/population/cb05-32.html), we find that the highest proportion of its total population in Elementary School-Age in 2004 was 14.9%, while the highest proportion in High School-Age was 6.2% in 2004.

That yields a total percentage of around 20% of the total population. Since the 1887 census yielded a count of 6,984,727, 20% would be approximately 1,4 million. Also, by 1892 the number of schools had more than doubled to 2,137, 1,087 of which were for boys and 1,050 for girls, which means that the number of children attending school also did, to at least 500,000, by a conservative estimate. That's about 35% of the population in School Age.

Also, since the total number of municipalities in the archipelago was 900, those numbers reveal that there was not only a school in every municipality in the Islands, but in most cases two or more. —Preceding unsigned comment added by RafaelMinuesa (talkcontribs) 13:05, 22 May 2011 (UTC) During Spain's colonial days, illiteracy was common in Spain. Hunger was a problem in Spain and was lagging behind its European neighbors in economic progress. Education in the Philippines did not gain importance until after WW2. Under the American rule, people were still farmers. Children went to school but few graduated from primary schools. A primary school graduate does not speak English well and has limited comprehension skills with a language not spoken at home. Spain never achieved what it wanted to do: Filipino natives speaking Spanish. There are books written in Spanish by those who were in the Philippines during Spain's colonizing era, many related that the natives spoke their native languages but not Spanish.

My Sources: 1. Memoria Complementaria De La Seccion 2 Del Programa - Official Edition - Printed in the University of

   Santo Tomas in 1887 

Page 337 - The natives generally did not have an understanding of Spanish. Read on to the next pages you will find writer's description of the poor quality of classrooms, lack of resources (e.g, papers, books), the teachers who were not doing a good job that it was as if there were no teachers at all. It also described the students who could read but could not understand what they were reading.

2. printed in Madrid 1897 Filipinas: Estudio de algunos asuntos de actualidad by RP PROCURADOR Y COMISARIO DE

  AGUSTINOS CALZADOS MISIONEROS DE DICHAS ISLAS - 

Page 132 - The Author was defending the missionaries on why the teaching of Spanish as mandated by law has not come to fruition, an admission that the method of teaching was poor

Page 150 - The author stated that it has been centuries yet it has been proven with evidence that teaching Spanish has been impossible. Those who are advocating for learning Spanish by the natives believing that Spanish will improve natives' status in the society and cause the natives to relate more to the Castilians are in a state of erroneous belief. A native may get along with a Castilian and be sincere in his dealings but will never feel the identity of a Castilian. — Preceding unsigned comment added by KalahatingKano (talkcontribs) 10:06, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

Removal of content[edit]

Your calculations and especially it's ludicrous conclusions are WP:OR (and of course thinly veiled nationalist propaganda) and not allowed on wiki. I'm therefore removing that whole part from the criticisms section. Furthermore your contributions are full of arbitrary judgments. How is compulsory schooling advanced? Homeschooling is still practiced widely in the US and studies show that those children usually fair better in High-school/College than children who went to public primary schools. Please find a proper, scholary, peer-reviewed source for your claims. Especially the part about Filipinos being better educated than Americans. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.53.210.36 (talk) 18:30, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

I'm afraid it is you the one that has to reference your assertions. The content you removed was properly sourced. Please refrain from doing it again. In your talk page it has been explained to you how to proceed if you feel that such edits are needed.
--RafaelMinuesa (talk) 11:33, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Stop claiming I did not give an explanation when I did give one on this talk page. I did exactly what Katieh5584 said, I merely forgot to reference what I had said on this page in the edit summary the first time and then corrected that. And please explain why I have to reference my assertions when I do not even make any.

The only things that are sourced in this section are the Census of the Overall Population and something about the US school system in 1900. The rest is all your biased OR conclusions. As you admit on this talk page (but not the article) even the 20% for children in school age are pulled from a source that's about the USA in 2004! I hope I do not have to explain that the US situation in 2004 is not a source for 19th Century Philippines.

Note that I'm not claiming that the education system was bad (I don't know anything about it) but this article (mostly your article) is horrible. Full of nationalist bias, victimization, defensiveness (why is (supposed) 19th century American propaganda relevant? You should not refer to it at all) and tons of fallacies. What makes a "renowned Swedish economist" a greater authority on the subject than the US commission in charge of analyzing it? Why do you compare it with random (or rather cherry picked) countries that introduced a public education system later? They are just as irrelevant as the (of course not mentioned) countries that had one earlier. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.53.210.36 (talk) 16:46, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

The issue at hand is that the criticism of the Spanish public system made by the Philippine Commission as reported to the US War Department was basically post-war propaganda, full of fallacies, and as such they are easily exposed by just providing a few statistical facts and reliable sources. You'd surely agree that if a false statement was issued, and we know as a fact today that it was false, it is mandatory to have both the false statement and the (sourced) proof of its falsehood published. Otherwise we would be rightly accused of bias.
Again, if you feel that there are "tons of fallacies" in the article, please help us spot them and improve on the article by providing the necessary sources that in your opinion would nullify the references already cited here.
Thank you --RafaelMinuesa (talk) 17:46, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Education in the Philippines during Spanish rule. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:30, 17 September 2017 (UTC)