EDUCATION SINCE AMERICAN OCCUPATION

EDUCATION SINCE AMERICAN OCCUPATIONIt is the chief glory of American connection with the Philippines, that no sooner was their easy conquest an assured fact, than attention was directed toward the education of the peoples who thus came under the control of the western democracy. In spite of the more than three centuries of Spanish rule, although many measures had been dictated by the government and by the religious orders, although the college of San José, the Dominican university of Santo Tomás, the college of San Juan de Letran, and various other institutions had flourished for the greater or less part of Spanish domination, and especially, although the active government measures, beginning with the memorable decree of December 20, 1863, had induced a wider result in primary instruction, the educational methods in force in the islands were antiquated, often without result, and narrowing, and to a certain degree tended to shackle rather than to free the mind. The best work was done by the Jesuits who had adopted the most progressive methods used in the islands during Spanish occupancy. The religious orders are not without praise for having established, as early as they did, educational institutions where some Filipinos could,to a certain extent, take on the advantages of the occidental polish and education which Spain had to offer. But it must be remembered that Spain itself has never, since the early days when the great Salamanca University flourished as one of the most advanced outposts of education in the world, been renowned as a center of learning. Hence, it may be said, whatever the cause for its deficiency, that Spain gave to the Philippines the best that it had in the way of education; with the reservation that the remoteness of the colony from the mother country gave opportunity for neglect and carelessness on the part of both official and ecclesiastic, and for the furthering of private or corporation ends, at the expense of and detriment to the colony. Quite apparently, a country cannot give to a colony what it does not itself possess. Had Spain possessed a more modern and effective system of education, doubtless the same would have been true in the Philippines. To determine the reason for the backwardness of education in the islands, therefore, one must examine the causes for its poor condition in Spain, and the two will be found in great measure to be the same. The root of the matter will be found in the close connection between Church and State—this connection dating back in greatest measure to 1493, when the ecclesiastical patronage of the Spanish monarch became a settled fact, and Church and State were irrevocably bound together—and a misconception as to where the educational function primarily resides—which we take to be a function of government.We cannot, in the short compass allowed, enter into the discussion of the factors involved, the most important of which is the question of the friar ordersand the transference of their power in greater proportion even than in Spain, into the Philippines. Suffice it to say here that those who would blame the friar orders exclusively for the backward state of the Philippines in education as in other things, go astray; and the same is equally true of those who would excuse them altogether. The same remark holds true of the government. Both the religious orders, or even more broadly, the entire ecclesiastical government, and the civil government, are to be reproached for the deplorable condition of Philippine education.It is the results of the pre-American education that allows the following to be said: “The party which follows the intellectual leadership of Leon Guerrero (director ofEl Renacimiento) is quietly resisting what they call the ‘Anglo-Saxonization’ of their people through the schools. These men are really Spanish at heart (the older, mostly so in blood), and they have a Spanish-Latin feeling of hostility to the very name of ‘Anglo-Saxon.’ They prefer Latin education and educational methods, and Latin molds of civilization. Where they go astray is in their assumption, entirely gratuitous, that they really represent the Filipino people and Filipino ways of thought, desires and aspirations which are to be ‘squelched’ by this new campaign of instruction in English. Now, superficially, there are little evidences to corroborate this view, as would be inevitable, as the results of three centuries of tutelage according to Spanish models. But the man who looks beneath the surface sees at once that the Filipinos are not ‘Latins’ and were not ‘Latinized,’ and that these intellectual Latins, floating at the top of Filipino society are as mistaken as can be in assumingthat they are representative of their people. The truth is, the Filipinos, in the mass, are, as regards the purposes of any real education, virgin material to work upon. Not only has their national and social life not been cast over in Latin molds, but Spanish influence was just sufficient, added to their undeveloped state at the time of the conquest, so that there are no ‘Filipino molds’ of civilization. They are really just ready to be worked upon, and whatever fundamental elements of ‘Filipino nationality’ there are latent, whatever inherent or acquired social traits properly constituting a ‘Filipino soul,’ will come to the front with this new opportunity.”1It is impossible to give a comprehensive résumé of American efforts toward the education of the Filipinos. The captious critic will emphasize the mistakes which have been made and which will be made in the future, and it is yet perhaps too early to make a pronounced statement as to the results; but this much may be said, and in no spirit of American self-congratulation, namely, that the Filipino is at present enjoying the greatest opportunity that has ever been offered to him to acquire an education. The chief problem of the Philippines has well been said to be that of education.2Chief among future developments must be industrial education, which will not only train rightly the great dexterity of the Filipino, but also teach him the dignity of work with the hands, whatever his rank or station, and thus help to fit him for, and hasten the time when he shall enjoy greater self-government than he enjoys at present.Below we give the direct available sources for astudy of American education in the Philippines, from which the student may be able to study the question in its many phases. It is to be noted that a study of the present-day education in the islands must always be made hand-in-hand with that of the past. As might be expected, the majority of such sources are government documents.Public LawsandResolutionspassed by the United States Philippine Commission (published by authority of the U. S. Philippine Commission, Manila). The various volumes of these laws contain the following acts concerned with education (number of act and date alone being given).1900—3, Sept. 12; 4, Sept. 12; 11, Oct. 3; 15, Oct. 10; 32, Oct. 24. 1901—69, Jan. 5 (accompanied later in vol. by arguments of Dr. T. H. Pardo de Tavera and others against the rector of the university of Santo Tomás, and the Roman Catholic Church, in regard to the college of San José; and appearing also inSenate doc., no. 190, 56th Congress, 2d session); 74, Jan. 21; 93, Mar. 4; 97, Mar. 9; 110, Mar. 30; 129, May 16; 156, July 1; 163, July 13; 180, July 24; 201, Aug. 13; 222, Sept. 6; 228, Sept. 7; 239, Sept. 25; 248, Oct. 2; 264, Oct. 14; 285, Oct. 29; 291, Nov. 2; 311, Dec. 4. 1902—330, Jan. 9; 339, Jan. 28; 373, Mar. 7; 407, May 24; 415, June 9; 446, Aug. 15; 453, Oct. 8; 490, Oct. 27; 512, Nov. 10; 514, Nov. 11; 524, Nov. 18; 532, Nov. 24; 563, Dec. 22; 565, Dec. 22. 1903—600, Jan. 27; 661, Mar. 5; 672, Mar. 7; 682, Mar. 14; 686, Mar. 17; 734, April 8; 744, April 8; 795, July 23; 807, July 27; 810, July 30; 832, Aug. 12; 837, Aug. 24; 846, Aug. 24; 854, Aug. 26; 858, Aug. 27; 880, Sept. 10; 904, Sept. 25; 917, Oct. 1; 919, Oct. 2; 997, Nov. 17; 1018, Dec. 2. 1904—1048, Feb. 6; 1049, Feb. 11; 1057, Feb. 20; 1085, Mar. 10; 1133, Apr. 28; 1175, June 2; 1188, June 29; 1199, July 19; 1216, Aug. 17; 1225, Aug. 31; 1231, Oct. 14; 1251, Nov. 25; 1275, Dec. 6. 1905—Jan. 12.Of these the most important is act no. 74 (and its various amendments), establishing a Department of Public Instruction in the Philippines, and appropriating$40,000 for the organization and maintenance of a normal and trade school in Manila, and $15,000 for the organization and maintenance of an agricultural school in the island of Negros, for the year 1901. Many of the acts are appropriations for various purposes. In addition to the above, acts touching archives and laboratories, as well as various other matters, may be considered as having educational value.Reportsof the Philippine Commission (Washington). Of chief value in this publication are the annual reports of the Secretary of Public Instruction, such reports beginning for the year 1902. It is to be noted that these reports contain the following (we cite from the Commission report for 1905, just issued): General report of the secretary of Public Instruction; report of the superintendent of Education; report of the chief of the Bureau of Architecture and Construction of Public Buildings; report of the Public Printer; report of the Bureau of Archives, Patents, Copyrights, etc.; report of the acting librarian of the American circulating Library; report of the editor of the Official Gazette. Special references in the various reports are as follows:1900—i, pp. 17–42; 1901—i, pp. 133–148, ii, pp. 511–575 (appendix FF containing Fred W. Atkinson’s report); 1902—first annual report of the Secretary of Public Instruction, year ending Oct. 15, 1902, ii, pp. 865–1049; 1903—second annual report of the Secretary of Public Instruction, iii, pp. 667–985; 1900–1903—containing various general reports for those years, and which occur in the preceding volumes, pp. 121–129, 257–272, 399–434, and 685–721; 1904—third annual report, etc., iii, pp. 811–971; 1905—fourth annual report, etc., ending June 30, 1905, iv, pp. 369–652.In addition to the above much other educationalmatter will be found scattered through the other volumes for each year. These volumes are also published separately in the Reports of the War Department.Reportsof the Commissioner of Education (Washington). Several of these reports contain matter on the Philippines, as follows:1899–1900—ii, chap. xxix (in part), pp. 1595–1640, “Intellectual attainments and education of the Filipinos” (contains some Spanish data, act. 74, of the Philippine Commission, a bibliography, and the Tagálog alphabet); 1901—ii, chap. xxix, pp. 1317–1440, “Present educational movement in the Philippines,” by Fred W. Atkinson; 1902—ii, chap. i, pp. 2219–2271, “Education in the Philippines;” 1903—chap. xlvi (in part), pp. 2385–2388, “Education in the Philippines” (taken from report of David P. Barrows for the year ending Sept. 30, 1903).Bulletinsof the Bureau of Education (Manila, 1904 and 1905), as follows:No. 1, Philippine Normal School prospectus for the year 1903–4, (in both English and Spanish); no. 2, Course of study in vocal music (for vacation normal institutes); no. 3, Philippine School of Arts and Trades (1904–1905, in both English and Spanish); no. 4, Philippine Nautical School (prospectus for the year 1904–1905, in both English and Spanish); no. 5, Notes on the treatment of Smallpox (for use of teachers); no. 6, Report of Industrial Exhibits of the Philippine Schools (Louisiana Purchase Exposition); no. 7, Courses of Instruction for the Public Schools of the Philippine Islands; no. 8 (?); no. 9, List of Philippine Baptismal Names; no. 10, Government in the United States (prepared for use in the Philippine public schools); no. 11, Courses in mechanical drawing, woodworking, and ironworking for provincial secondary schools; no. 12, Advanced and postgraduate studies offered by the Philippine Normal School (preparation for entrance to American colleges and universities or to the university of the Philippines; in English and Spanish).Municipal Code(Manila, 1905). Contains matter on schools, teachers, etc.Censusof the Philippine Islands (Washington, 1905), iii, pp. 638–669, “[Education] under the Americans,” by Prescott F. Jernegan, of the Philippine Normal School (a short account through 1903). Also, another division entitled, “Schools: schedule; summary of statistics; classification; buildings; teachers; pupils; sources of revenue; expenditures,” pp. 670–694.Bulletinof the Bureau of Labor. No. 58, May, 1905 (Washington, 1905), pp. 721–905, “Labor Conditions in the Philippines,” by Victor S. Clark. Much of this will be found to have a bearing on education.Books on the PhilippinesAtkinson, Fred W.:The Philippine Islands(Ginn and Co., 1905); especially chap. xiv, pp. 373–412, “Education.”Freer, William B.:Philippine experiences of an American teacher(New York, 1906).LeRoy, James A.:Philippine Life in town and country(New York and London, 1905); especially chap. vii, pp. 202–245, “Education and public opinion.” Most of this book has a bearing on educational matters.Stuntz, Homer C.:The Philippines and the Far East(Cincinnati and New York); especially chap. xii, pp. 185–215, “Educating a nation.”Willis, Henry Parker:Our Philippine problem(New York, 1905), especially chap. x, pp. 226–246, “American education in the Philippines.” See a criticism of this book by James A. LeRoy, inPolitical Science Quarterly, for June, 1906.We shall bring this brief statement regarding American education in the Philippines to a close with a short abstract of the recent address by Dr. T. H. Pardo de Tavera, before the teachers assembled at Manila in order to attend the Summer Institute, founded by the director of Public Instruction, and inaugurated this year, and published in the supplement of the issue of May 17, 1906, ofEl Renacimiento. His point of view of true civilization and education is in the main that they are the resultant of not one but of many factors, and that those of one race may be debtors to another race and yet not lose their identity. True progress does not consist in exclusiveness but in the admittance of all that is good notwithstanding its source. By adopting Anglo-Saxon civilization and education, Filipinos will not weaken, but strengthen themselves. The viewpoint of a people may change, and must change often in order that they may progress. To speak of special mentalities is vague and misleading. On whatever side the situation of the Philippines be considered, he says, whether political, social, or economic, it is seen that “public instruction is the chief factor, to which we should direct the most vigorous action of our energies.” Progress is the direct and necessary result of education, and the Filipinos realizing this desire the extension of schools. It has often been said that the Filipinos need an education in harmony with their customs and traditions, in order that they may preserve their peculiar manner of existence, or “that the conscience called poetically ‘the Filipino soul’ might not be changed or disfigured.” Let those who criticize the American method of education, on the ground that it is destroying the “Filipinosoul” define that term, and name the characteristic qualities belonging to it, which will disappear with the new education; and let them propose a system of education. Some wish to preserve the traditional education of Filipinos which is conservative and exclusive. The teaching of Filipinos, since Spain is a Catholic monarchy, where the divine origin of rulers is a tenet, has always been dogmatic, and blind obedience is to be given to the government. Such teaching produces a conservative and exclusive society, which is opposed to change. The Filipinos desire a democratic government, but their traditions and education form in them a mentality quite opposed to democratic ideas. Consequently, they must first change their mental viewpoint before they can become democratic. It must be a work of peaceful evolution, through free instruction. Living as they are now under a democratic form of government, Filipinos should adopt a form of education in accordance with the ideals of democracy. The two forces working in the formation of the character of individuals, and hence peoples, are conservatism and the reforming force, the latter of which means progress and constitutes education. Those peoples who do not progress live under the laws of conservatism, inheritance, and tradition. Those progress who have conquered inherited and traditional traits by means of education. Some races are inferior to others, but that inferiority is not necessarily permanent. Inferiority is purely an historical cause, and inferior races are those that preserve their national soul unchanged through the centuries. The Spanish race is not inferior to the Anglo-Saxon, but its education is under a political and religious dogmatism which hasmade of Spain a country with a traditional and truly conservative soul. Italy has gone through and is even now going through a period of regeneration. In Spain, men are struggling for better education based on Anglo-Saxon principles.3Before the Filipino revolution, many Filipinos were sent to Europe to study without any fear of destroying the “Filipino soul;” but now that the civilization that they went to seek has sought them, under the form of Anglo-Saxon public instruction, there is a strange reaction. The Franks and Gauls who submitted to Roman civilization have not lost their peculiar identity. Had they not adopted the Roman civilization, their condition would have been that of the Malays under British domination, who are now inferior. Since they did adopt it they were enabled to raise their coefficient of capacity. The Filipino mentality has been already changed by Spanish education, the customs and life of the two races having been quite distinct. Civilization is the result of the contact of peoples by means of which the victories obtained in all departments of intelligence and morality may be increased, perfected, and transmitted from one to another. Anglo-Saxon education will not cause the Filipinos to lose their desire for independence. The Filipino revolution was started by men who received a Spanish education. The entire Filipinist movement was guided by men educated in Europe and the University, the latter of which was Spanish. Theywere broader men. The Anglo-Saxon education cannot make submissive peoples. It is destined to form individuals capable of thinking for themselves, and of working according to their own impulses. Those civilizations that mark an epoch in history were the result of other civilizations. The Anglo-Saxon race today bear the torch of civilization formerly borne by the Romans. The Anglo-Saxon civilization will extend, but not Anglo-Saxon domination. The Japanese are an example of a race who have changed their standpoint in regard to civilization. Filipino mentality is composed of good and bad traits. Complete education must be arrived at by conserving the good and eliminating the bad. Complete assimilation cannot take place. The Filipino character cannot entirely change, for the instruction in the schools is not sufficient to cause such a radical change. Happiness does not consist in seeking easeful and unresponsible repose, but in the struggle for existence that entails work. Filipinos must learn that true progress comes through struggle and a show of energy. The Filipinos are intelligent, easy to educate, and prepared by their Spanish education of three centuries for the new education now offered them. Education means advance. The greater means of communication that are to be established will aid in the work by destroying inequalities and composing differences. The various dialects are a great barrier to Filipino homogeneity, and a common language is needed. The Filipino people free and capable of self-government will be formed by the American and Filipino teachers. “Filipino soul”4is a poetical expression which reveals apoetical mentality in those who use it. Such mentality is insufficient for the progress of a people along the true path of modern civilization.1In a letter from James A. LeRoy, of June 27, 1906.↑2J. A. LeRoy:Philippine Life.↑3Chief among these men may be cited Francisco Giner de los Rios, of the Madrid University, who has established the Free Institution of Teaching in Madrid for the training of teachers. He follows principally American methods. Both Church and State have opposed him, but he has persevered and his institution has had good results.↑4Apropos of the “Filipino soul,” James A. LeRoy says, in the letter cited,ante, note 118, “No Filipino on earth, if pinned down, could tell what the ‘Filipino soul’ is today, as Tavera hints.”↑Table of ContentsCONTENTS OF VOLUME XLVI7ILLUSTRATIONS11PREFACE13DOCUMENT OF 1721–173929EVENTS IN FILIPINAS, 1721–173931BIBLIOGRAPHICAL DATA63APPENDIX: EDUCATION IN THE PHILIPPINES65PRIMARY INSTRUCTION67FIRST GOVERNMENTAL ATTEMPTS67ORGANIZED EFFORT OF LEGISLATION72ROYAL DECREE ESTABLISHING A PLAN OF PRIMARY INSTRUCTION IN FILIPINAS76Exposition76Royal decree79REGULATIONS FOR THE NORMAL SCHOOL FOR TEACHERS OF PRIMARY INSTRUCTION FOR THE NATIVES OF THE FILIPINAS ISLANDS86Of the object of the normal school86Of the branches and duration of the studies86Of the scholars of the normal school88Of the director, teachers, and dependents of the normal school91Of examinations93Of holidays and vacations93Of rewards and punishments94Of the interior regulations of the school94Of textbooks94Of special examinations to obtain certificates as assistant teacher95Of the issuance of teachers’ and assistant teachers’ certificates95REGULATIONS FOR THE SCHOOLS AND TEACHERS OF PRIMARY INSTRUCTION FOR THE NATIVES OF THE PHILIPPINE ARCHIPELAGO96Of textbooks98Of the schools99Of the teachersOf women teachers107Of Sunday schools108Of the supervision of the primary instruction among the natives109Final resolution111INTERIOR REGULATIONS OF THE SCHOOLS OF PRIMARY INSTRUCTION FOR THE NATIVES OF THE PHILIPPINE ARCHIPELAGO112Of the interior arrangement of the schools112Of the teachers112Of the pupils113Of school days and hours114Of the progress of education115Of rewards and punishments117Of examinations118DECREE OF THE SUPERIOR CIVIL GOVERNMENT APPROVING THE REGULATIONS OF THE MUNICIPAL GIRLS’ SCHOOL OF MANILA119REGULATIONS FOR THE MUNICIPAL GIRLS’ SCHOOL PROPOSED BY THE EXALTED AYUNTAMIENTO OF MANILA119I.Object and character of the municipal school119II.Pupils of the municipal school121III.Classes and studies122IV.Distribution of time for classes and studies123V.Holidays and vacations124VI.Rewards and punishments124VII.Supervision and oversight125CIRCULAR OF THE SUPERIOR CIVIL GOVERNMENT GIVING RULES FOR THE GOOD DISCHARGE OF SCHOOL SUPERVISION125I.Inspection of schools129II.Correction and suspension of teachers131III.School attendance132IV.Admission into the schools134V.Propositions for improvements135VI.VI138DECREE OF THE GENERAL GOVERNMENT APPROVING, WITH THE CHARACTER OFad interim, THE REGULATIONS FOR THE NORMAL SCHOOL FOR WOMEN TEACHERS OF PRIMARY EDUCATION IN THE DIOCESE OF NUEVA-CACERES142REGULATIONSad interimFOR THE NORMAL SCHOOL FOR WOMEN TEACHERS OF PRIMARY EDUCATION IN THE DIOCESE OF NUEVA-CACERES142I.Object of the school142II.Subjects taught and duration of studies144III.Of the staff of the school147IV.Of scholars and their admission148V.Of the directress of the school and the teachers of the same152VI.Of examinations153VII.Of holidays and vacations154VIII.Of rewards and punishments154IX.Of textbooks156X.Of the issuing of certificates156XI.Of the interior regulations of the school157XII.Of the supervision and oversight of the school157XIII.Of the bookkeeping of the school159Transitory regulations160ROYAL DECREE CREATING IN MANILA A NORMAL SCHOOL FOR WOMEN TEACHERS IN CHARGE OF THE AUGUSTINIAN NUNS OF THE ASSUMPTION ESTABLISHED IN THE ROYAL SCHOOL OF SANTA ISABEL OF MADRID160Exposition160Royal decree163ROYAL ORDER 241 OF THE MINISTRY OF THE COLONIES APPROVING THE REGULATIONS FOR THE SUPERIOR NORMAL SCHOOL FOR WOMEN TEACHERS IN MANILA166REGULATIONS OF THE SUPERIOR NORMAL SCHOOL FOR WOMEN TEACHERS IN MANILA167I.OF THE OBJECT OF THE NORMAL SCHOOL167I.CHAPTER I167Of the subjects to be taught167Elementary grade168Superior grade169Of school equipment169II.Of the teaching force170Administrative force171III.Of the directress171Of the instructresses174IV.Of the secretary175V.Of the librarian176VI.Of the assistants177VII.Of the subordinates177VII.Of the board of instructresses178IX.Of disciplinary Councils179II.OF THE ECONOMIC MANAGEMENT180I.Of the annual budgets180II.Collection, distribution, and payment of accounts181III.OF TEACHING181I.Of the opening and duration of the term[curso]181II.Of the order of classes and methods of teaching183III.Of material equipments for instruction184IV.OF THE SCHOLARS186I.Of the qualifications which the scholars must possess in order to be admitted to matriculation186II.Concerning matriculation188III.Obligations of the pupils193IV.Of the examinations194V.Of rewards198VI.Certificates and decisions200VII.Of faults against academic discipline and means of checking them201V.REVALIDA EXAMINATIONS[i.e., examinations for a degree]203Of the practice school208Additional article210DECREE OF THE GENERAL GOVERNMENT ELEVATING TO THE GRADE OF SUPERIOR THE NORMAL SCHOOL FOR MEN TEACHERS IN MANILA, AND APPROVING PROVISIONALLY THE NEW REGULATIONS OF THIS SCHOOL210Decree216REGULATIONS OF THE SUPERIOR NORMAL SCHOOL FOR MEN TEACHERS218Of the object of the superior normal school218Of the studies and their duration218Of the pupils of the normal school221Of the director, teachers, and dependents of the normal school222Of examinations223Of holidays and vacations223Concerning rewards and punishments224Of the interior regulations of the school224Of textbooks224Concerning special examinations for obtaining assistants’ certificates225Of the issuing of teachers’ and assistants’ certificates225Of the competitive examinations to obtain a regular appointment in the término schools of first and second grades.225SCHOOL LEGISLATION, 1863–1894228Normal Schools228Schools of primary instruction235DOMINICAN EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS, 1896–1897261College and University of Santo Tomás261College of San Juan de Letrán262College of San Alberto Magno263School of Santa Catalina de Sena263School of Nuestra Señora del Rosario, of Lingayén (Pangasinan)263School of Nuestra Señora del Rosario of Vigan(Founded in 1893)264School of Santa Ymelda of Tuguegarao (Cagayán)(Founded in 1892)264REPORT OF RELIGIOUS SCHOOLS, 1897265Relation of the houses and number of pupilswhom the sisters of charity had in a school here in Filipinas in the year 1897.265Relation of the number of pupils in the seminary schools here in Filipinas in the year 1897.266EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS OF THE RECOLLECTS268Beaterio de Santa Rita268School of San José of Bacolod, Negros269Seminary school of Vigan270School of Santa Rosa270THE FRIAR VIEWPOINT272I.EDUCATION272II.II319EDUCATION SINCE AMERICAN OCCUPATION364

It is the chief glory of American connection with the Philippines, that no sooner was their easy conquest an assured fact, than attention was directed toward the education of the peoples who thus came under the control of the western democracy. In spite of the more than three centuries of Spanish rule, although many measures had been dictated by the government and by the religious orders, although the college of San José, the Dominican university of Santo Tomás, the college of San Juan de Letran, and various other institutions had flourished for the greater or less part of Spanish domination, and especially, although the active government measures, beginning with the memorable decree of December 20, 1863, had induced a wider result in primary instruction, the educational methods in force in the islands were antiquated, often without result, and narrowing, and to a certain degree tended to shackle rather than to free the mind. The best work was done by the Jesuits who had adopted the most progressive methods used in the islands during Spanish occupancy. The religious orders are not without praise for having established, as early as they did, educational institutions where some Filipinos could,to a certain extent, take on the advantages of the occidental polish and education which Spain had to offer. But it must be remembered that Spain itself has never, since the early days when the great Salamanca University flourished as one of the most advanced outposts of education in the world, been renowned as a center of learning. Hence, it may be said, whatever the cause for its deficiency, that Spain gave to the Philippines the best that it had in the way of education; with the reservation that the remoteness of the colony from the mother country gave opportunity for neglect and carelessness on the part of both official and ecclesiastic, and for the furthering of private or corporation ends, at the expense of and detriment to the colony. Quite apparently, a country cannot give to a colony what it does not itself possess. Had Spain possessed a more modern and effective system of education, doubtless the same would have been true in the Philippines. To determine the reason for the backwardness of education in the islands, therefore, one must examine the causes for its poor condition in Spain, and the two will be found in great measure to be the same. The root of the matter will be found in the close connection between Church and State—this connection dating back in greatest measure to 1493, when the ecclesiastical patronage of the Spanish monarch became a settled fact, and Church and State were irrevocably bound together—and a misconception as to where the educational function primarily resides—which we take to be a function of government.We cannot, in the short compass allowed, enter into the discussion of the factors involved, the most important of which is the question of the friar ordersand the transference of their power in greater proportion even than in Spain, into the Philippines. Suffice it to say here that those who would blame the friar orders exclusively for the backward state of the Philippines in education as in other things, go astray; and the same is equally true of those who would excuse them altogether. The same remark holds true of the government. Both the religious orders, or even more broadly, the entire ecclesiastical government, and the civil government, are to be reproached for the deplorable condition of Philippine education.It is the results of the pre-American education that allows the following to be said: “The party which follows the intellectual leadership of Leon Guerrero (director ofEl Renacimiento) is quietly resisting what they call the ‘Anglo-Saxonization’ of their people through the schools. These men are really Spanish at heart (the older, mostly so in blood), and they have a Spanish-Latin feeling of hostility to the very name of ‘Anglo-Saxon.’ They prefer Latin education and educational methods, and Latin molds of civilization. Where they go astray is in their assumption, entirely gratuitous, that they really represent the Filipino people and Filipino ways of thought, desires and aspirations which are to be ‘squelched’ by this new campaign of instruction in English. Now, superficially, there are little evidences to corroborate this view, as would be inevitable, as the results of three centuries of tutelage according to Spanish models. But the man who looks beneath the surface sees at once that the Filipinos are not ‘Latins’ and were not ‘Latinized,’ and that these intellectual Latins, floating at the top of Filipino society are as mistaken as can be in assumingthat they are representative of their people. The truth is, the Filipinos, in the mass, are, as regards the purposes of any real education, virgin material to work upon. Not only has their national and social life not been cast over in Latin molds, but Spanish influence was just sufficient, added to their undeveloped state at the time of the conquest, so that there are no ‘Filipino molds’ of civilization. They are really just ready to be worked upon, and whatever fundamental elements of ‘Filipino nationality’ there are latent, whatever inherent or acquired social traits properly constituting a ‘Filipino soul,’ will come to the front with this new opportunity.”1It is impossible to give a comprehensive résumé of American efforts toward the education of the Filipinos. The captious critic will emphasize the mistakes which have been made and which will be made in the future, and it is yet perhaps too early to make a pronounced statement as to the results; but this much may be said, and in no spirit of American self-congratulation, namely, that the Filipino is at present enjoying the greatest opportunity that has ever been offered to him to acquire an education. The chief problem of the Philippines has well been said to be that of education.2Chief among future developments must be industrial education, which will not only train rightly the great dexterity of the Filipino, but also teach him the dignity of work with the hands, whatever his rank or station, and thus help to fit him for, and hasten the time when he shall enjoy greater self-government than he enjoys at present.Below we give the direct available sources for astudy of American education in the Philippines, from which the student may be able to study the question in its many phases. It is to be noted that a study of the present-day education in the islands must always be made hand-in-hand with that of the past. As might be expected, the majority of such sources are government documents.Public LawsandResolutionspassed by the United States Philippine Commission (published by authority of the U. S. Philippine Commission, Manila). The various volumes of these laws contain the following acts concerned with education (number of act and date alone being given).1900—3, Sept. 12; 4, Sept. 12; 11, Oct. 3; 15, Oct. 10; 32, Oct. 24. 1901—69, Jan. 5 (accompanied later in vol. by arguments of Dr. T. H. Pardo de Tavera and others against the rector of the university of Santo Tomás, and the Roman Catholic Church, in regard to the college of San José; and appearing also inSenate doc., no. 190, 56th Congress, 2d session); 74, Jan. 21; 93, Mar. 4; 97, Mar. 9; 110, Mar. 30; 129, May 16; 156, July 1; 163, July 13; 180, July 24; 201, Aug. 13; 222, Sept. 6; 228, Sept. 7; 239, Sept. 25; 248, Oct. 2; 264, Oct. 14; 285, Oct. 29; 291, Nov. 2; 311, Dec. 4. 1902—330, Jan. 9; 339, Jan. 28; 373, Mar. 7; 407, May 24; 415, June 9; 446, Aug. 15; 453, Oct. 8; 490, Oct. 27; 512, Nov. 10; 514, Nov. 11; 524, Nov. 18; 532, Nov. 24; 563, Dec. 22; 565, Dec. 22. 1903—600, Jan. 27; 661, Mar. 5; 672, Mar. 7; 682, Mar. 14; 686, Mar. 17; 734, April 8; 744, April 8; 795, July 23; 807, July 27; 810, July 30; 832, Aug. 12; 837, Aug. 24; 846, Aug. 24; 854, Aug. 26; 858, Aug. 27; 880, Sept. 10; 904, Sept. 25; 917, Oct. 1; 919, Oct. 2; 997, Nov. 17; 1018, Dec. 2. 1904—1048, Feb. 6; 1049, Feb. 11; 1057, Feb. 20; 1085, Mar. 10; 1133, Apr. 28; 1175, June 2; 1188, June 29; 1199, July 19; 1216, Aug. 17; 1225, Aug. 31; 1231, Oct. 14; 1251, Nov. 25; 1275, Dec. 6. 1905—Jan. 12.Of these the most important is act no. 74 (and its various amendments), establishing a Department of Public Instruction in the Philippines, and appropriating$40,000 for the organization and maintenance of a normal and trade school in Manila, and $15,000 for the organization and maintenance of an agricultural school in the island of Negros, for the year 1901. Many of the acts are appropriations for various purposes. In addition to the above, acts touching archives and laboratories, as well as various other matters, may be considered as having educational value.Reportsof the Philippine Commission (Washington). Of chief value in this publication are the annual reports of the Secretary of Public Instruction, such reports beginning for the year 1902. It is to be noted that these reports contain the following (we cite from the Commission report for 1905, just issued): General report of the secretary of Public Instruction; report of the superintendent of Education; report of the chief of the Bureau of Architecture and Construction of Public Buildings; report of the Public Printer; report of the Bureau of Archives, Patents, Copyrights, etc.; report of the acting librarian of the American circulating Library; report of the editor of the Official Gazette. Special references in the various reports are as follows:1900—i, pp. 17–42; 1901—i, pp. 133–148, ii, pp. 511–575 (appendix FF containing Fred W. Atkinson’s report); 1902—first annual report of the Secretary of Public Instruction, year ending Oct. 15, 1902, ii, pp. 865–1049; 1903—second annual report of the Secretary of Public Instruction, iii, pp. 667–985; 1900–1903—containing various general reports for those years, and which occur in the preceding volumes, pp. 121–129, 257–272, 399–434, and 685–721; 1904—third annual report, etc., iii, pp. 811–971; 1905—fourth annual report, etc., ending June 30, 1905, iv, pp. 369–652.In addition to the above much other educationalmatter will be found scattered through the other volumes for each year. These volumes are also published separately in the Reports of the War Department.Reportsof the Commissioner of Education (Washington). Several of these reports contain matter on the Philippines, as follows:1899–1900—ii, chap. xxix (in part), pp. 1595–1640, “Intellectual attainments and education of the Filipinos” (contains some Spanish data, act. 74, of the Philippine Commission, a bibliography, and the Tagálog alphabet); 1901—ii, chap. xxix, pp. 1317–1440, “Present educational movement in the Philippines,” by Fred W. Atkinson; 1902—ii, chap. i, pp. 2219–2271, “Education in the Philippines;” 1903—chap. xlvi (in part), pp. 2385–2388, “Education in the Philippines” (taken from report of David P. Barrows for the year ending Sept. 30, 1903).Bulletinsof the Bureau of Education (Manila, 1904 and 1905), as follows:No. 1, Philippine Normal School prospectus for the year 1903–4, (in both English and Spanish); no. 2, Course of study in vocal music (for vacation normal institutes); no. 3, Philippine School of Arts and Trades (1904–1905, in both English and Spanish); no. 4, Philippine Nautical School (prospectus for the year 1904–1905, in both English and Spanish); no. 5, Notes on the treatment of Smallpox (for use of teachers); no. 6, Report of Industrial Exhibits of the Philippine Schools (Louisiana Purchase Exposition); no. 7, Courses of Instruction for the Public Schools of the Philippine Islands; no. 8 (?); no. 9, List of Philippine Baptismal Names; no. 10, Government in the United States (prepared for use in the Philippine public schools); no. 11, Courses in mechanical drawing, woodworking, and ironworking for provincial secondary schools; no. 12, Advanced and postgraduate studies offered by the Philippine Normal School (preparation for entrance to American colleges and universities or to the university of the Philippines; in English and Spanish).Municipal Code(Manila, 1905). Contains matter on schools, teachers, etc.Censusof the Philippine Islands (Washington, 1905), iii, pp. 638–669, “[Education] under the Americans,” by Prescott F. Jernegan, of the Philippine Normal School (a short account through 1903). Also, another division entitled, “Schools: schedule; summary of statistics; classification; buildings; teachers; pupils; sources of revenue; expenditures,” pp. 670–694.Bulletinof the Bureau of Labor. No. 58, May, 1905 (Washington, 1905), pp. 721–905, “Labor Conditions in the Philippines,” by Victor S. Clark. Much of this will be found to have a bearing on education.Books on the PhilippinesAtkinson, Fred W.:The Philippine Islands(Ginn and Co., 1905); especially chap. xiv, pp. 373–412, “Education.”Freer, William B.:Philippine experiences of an American teacher(New York, 1906).LeRoy, James A.:Philippine Life in town and country(New York and London, 1905); especially chap. vii, pp. 202–245, “Education and public opinion.” Most of this book has a bearing on educational matters.Stuntz, Homer C.:The Philippines and the Far East(Cincinnati and New York); especially chap. xii, pp. 185–215, “Educating a nation.”Willis, Henry Parker:Our Philippine problem(New York, 1905), especially chap. x, pp. 226–246, “American education in the Philippines.” See a criticism of this book by James A. LeRoy, inPolitical Science Quarterly, for June, 1906.We shall bring this brief statement regarding American education in the Philippines to a close with a short abstract of the recent address by Dr. T. H. Pardo de Tavera, before the teachers assembled at Manila in order to attend the Summer Institute, founded by the director of Public Instruction, and inaugurated this year, and published in the supplement of the issue of May 17, 1906, ofEl Renacimiento. His point of view of true civilization and education is in the main that they are the resultant of not one but of many factors, and that those of one race may be debtors to another race and yet not lose their identity. True progress does not consist in exclusiveness but in the admittance of all that is good notwithstanding its source. By adopting Anglo-Saxon civilization and education, Filipinos will not weaken, but strengthen themselves. The viewpoint of a people may change, and must change often in order that they may progress. To speak of special mentalities is vague and misleading. On whatever side the situation of the Philippines be considered, he says, whether political, social, or economic, it is seen that “public instruction is the chief factor, to which we should direct the most vigorous action of our energies.” Progress is the direct and necessary result of education, and the Filipinos realizing this desire the extension of schools. It has often been said that the Filipinos need an education in harmony with their customs and traditions, in order that they may preserve their peculiar manner of existence, or “that the conscience called poetically ‘the Filipino soul’ might not be changed or disfigured.” Let those who criticize the American method of education, on the ground that it is destroying the “Filipinosoul” define that term, and name the characteristic qualities belonging to it, which will disappear with the new education; and let them propose a system of education. Some wish to preserve the traditional education of Filipinos which is conservative and exclusive. The teaching of Filipinos, since Spain is a Catholic monarchy, where the divine origin of rulers is a tenet, has always been dogmatic, and blind obedience is to be given to the government. Such teaching produces a conservative and exclusive society, which is opposed to change. The Filipinos desire a democratic government, but their traditions and education form in them a mentality quite opposed to democratic ideas. Consequently, they must first change their mental viewpoint before they can become democratic. It must be a work of peaceful evolution, through free instruction. Living as they are now under a democratic form of government, Filipinos should adopt a form of education in accordance with the ideals of democracy. The two forces working in the formation of the character of individuals, and hence peoples, are conservatism and the reforming force, the latter of which means progress and constitutes education. Those peoples who do not progress live under the laws of conservatism, inheritance, and tradition. Those progress who have conquered inherited and traditional traits by means of education. Some races are inferior to others, but that inferiority is not necessarily permanent. Inferiority is purely an historical cause, and inferior races are those that preserve their national soul unchanged through the centuries. The Spanish race is not inferior to the Anglo-Saxon, but its education is under a political and religious dogmatism which hasmade of Spain a country with a traditional and truly conservative soul. Italy has gone through and is even now going through a period of regeneration. In Spain, men are struggling for better education based on Anglo-Saxon principles.3Before the Filipino revolution, many Filipinos were sent to Europe to study without any fear of destroying the “Filipino soul;” but now that the civilization that they went to seek has sought them, under the form of Anglo-Saxon public instruction, there is a strange reaction. The Franks and Gauls who submitted to Roman civilization have not lost their peculiar identity. Had they not adopted the Roman civilization, their condition would have been that of the Malays under British domination, who are now inferior. Since they did adopt it they were enabled to raise their coefficient of capacity. The Filipino mentality has been already changed by Spanish education, the customs and life of the two races having been quite distinct. Civilization is the result of the contact of peoples by means of which the victories obtained in all departments of intelligence and morality may be increased, perfected, and transmitted from one to another. Anglo-Saxon education will not cause the Filipinos to lose their desire for independence. The Filipino revolution was started by men who received a Spanish education. The entire Filipinist movement was guided by men educated in Europe and the University, the latter of which was Spanish. Theywere broader men. The Anglo-Saxon education cannot make submissive peoples. It is destined to form individuals capable of thinking for themselves, and of working according to their own impulses. Those civilizations that mark an epoch in history were the result of other civilizations. The Anglo-Saxon race today bear the torch of civilization formerly borne by the Romans. The Anglo-Saxon civilization will extend, but not Anglo-Saxon domination. The Japanese are an example of a race who have changed their standpoint in regard to civilization. Filipino mentality is composed of good and bad traits. Complete education must be arrived at by conserving the good and eliminating the bad. Complete assimilation cannot take place. The Filipino character cannot entirely change, for the instruction in the schools is not sufficient to cause such a radical change. Happiness does not consist in seeking easeful and unresponsible repose, but in the struggle for existence that entails work. Filipinos must learn that true progress comes through struggle and a show of energy. The Filipinos are intelligent, easy to educate, and prepared by their Spanish education of three centuries for the new education now offered them. Education means advance. The greater means of communication that are to be established will aid in the work by destroying inequalities and composing differences. The various dialects are a great barrier to Filipino homogeneity, and a common language is needed. The Filipino people free and capable of self-government will be formed by the American and Filipino teachers. “Filipino soul”4is a poetical expression which reveals apoetical mentality in those who use it. Such mentality is insufficient for the progress of a people along the true path of modern civilization.

We cannot, in the short compass allowed, enter into the discussion of the factors involved, the most important of which is the question of the friar ordersand the transference of their power in greater proportion even than in Spain, into the Philippines. Suffice it to say here that those who would blame the friar orders exclusively for the backward state of the Philippines in education as in other things, go astray; and the same is equally true of those who would excuse them altogether. The same remark holds true of the government. Both the religious orders, or even more broadly, the entire ecclesiastical government, and the civil government, are to be reproached for the deplorable condition of Philippine education.

It is the results of the pre-American education that allows the following to be said: “The party which follows the intellectual leadership of Leon Guerrero (director ofEl Renacimiento) is quietly resisting what they call the ‘Anglo-Saxonization’ of their people through the schools. These men are really Spanish at heart (the older, mostly so in blood), and they have a Spanish-Latin feeling of hostility to the very name of ‘Anglo-Saxon.’ They prefer Latin education and educational methods, and Latin molds of civilization. Where they go astray is in their assumption, entirely gratuitous, that they really represent the Filipino people and Filipino ways of thought, desires and aspirations which are to be ‘squelched’ by this new campaign of instruction in English. Now, superficially, there are little evidences to corroborate this view, as would be inevitable, as the results of three centuries of tutelage according to Spanish models. But the man who looks beneath the surface sees at once that the Filipinos are not ‘Latins’ and were not ‘Latinized,’ and that these intellectual Latins, floating at the top of Filipino society are as mistaken as can be in assumingthat they are representative of their people. The truth is, the Filipinos, in the mass, are, as regards the purposes of any real education, virgin material to work upon. Not only has their national and social life not been cast over in Latin molds, but Spanish influence was just sufficient, added to their undeveloped state at the time of the conquest, so that there are no ‘Filipino molds’ of civilization. They are really just ready to be worked upon, and whatever fundamental elements of ‘Filipino nationality’ there are latent, whatever inherent or acquired social traits properly constituting a ‘Filipino soul,’ will come to the front with this new opportunity.”1

It is impossible to give a comprehensive résumé of American efforts toward the education of the Filipinos. The captious critic will emphasize the mistakes which have been made and which will be made in the future, and it is yet perhaps too early to make a pronounced statement as to the results; but this much may be said, and in no spirit of American self-congratulation, namely, that the Filipino is at present enjoying the greatest opportunity that has ever been offered to him to acquire an education. The chief problem of the Philippines has well been said to be that of education.2Chief among future developments must be industrial education, which will not only train rightly the great dexterity of the Filipino, but also teach him the dignity of work with the hands, whatever his rank or station, and thus help to fit him for, and hasten the time when he shall enjoy greater self-government than he enjoys at present.

Below we give the direct available sources for astudy of American education in the Philippines, from which the student may be able to study the question in its many phases. It is to be noted that a study of the present-day education in the islands must always be made hand-in-hand with that of the past. As might be expected, the majority of such sources are government documents.

Public LawsandResolutionspassed by the United States Philippine Commission (published by authority of the U. S. Philippine Commission, Manila). The various volumes of these laws contain the following acts concerned with education (number of act and date alone being given).

1900—3, Sept. 12; 4, Sept. 12; 11, Oct. 3; 15, Oct. 10; 32, Oct. 24. 1901—69, Jan. 5 (accompanied later in vol. by arguments of Dr. T. H. Pardo de Tavera and others against the rector of the university of Santo Tomás, and the Roman Catholic Church, in regard to the college of San José; and appearing also inSenate doc., no. 190, 56th Congress, 2d session); 74, Jan. 21; 93, Mar. 4; 97, Mar. 9; 110, Mar. 30; 129, May 16; 156, July 1; 163, July 13; 180, July 24; 201, Aug. 13; 222, Sept. 6; 228, Sept. 7; 239, Sept. 25; 248, Oct. 2; 264, Oct. 14; 285, Oct. 29; 291, Nov. 2; 311, Dec. 4. 1902—330, Jan. 9; 339, Jan. 28; 373, Mar. 7; 407, May 24; 415, June 9; 446, Aug. 15; 453, Oct. 8; 490, Oct. 27; 512, Nov. 10; 514, Nov. 11; 524, Nov. 18; 532, Nov. 24; 563, Dec. 22; 565, Dec. 22. 1903—600, Jan. 27; 661, Mar. 5; 672, Mar. 7; 682, Mar. 14; 686, Mar. 17; 734, April 8; 744, April 8; 795, July 23; 807, July 27; 810, July 30; 832, Aug. 12; 837, Aug. 24; 846, Aug. 24; 854, Aug. 26; 858, Aug. 27; 880, Sept. 10; 904, Sept. 25; 917, Oct. 1; 919, Oct. 2; 997, Nov. 17; 1018, Dec. 2. 1904—1048, Feb. 6; 1049, Feb. 11; 1057, Feb. 20; 1085, Mar. 10; 1133, Apr. 28; 1175, June 2; 1188, June 29; 1199, July 19; 1216, Aug. 17; 1225, Aug. 31; 1231, Oct. 14; 1251, Nov. 25; 1275, Dec. 6. 1905—Jan. 12.

Of these the most important is act no. 74 (and its various amendments), establishing a Department of Public Instruction in the Philippines, and appropriating$40,000 for the organization and maintenance of a normal and trade school in Manila, and $15,000 for the organization and maintenance of an agricultural school in the island of Negros, for the year 1901. Many of the acts are appropriations for various purposes. In addition to the above, acts touching archives and laboratories, as well as various other matters, may be considered as having educational value.

Reportsof the Philippine Commission (Washington). Of chief value in this publication are the annual reports of the Secretary of Public Instruction, such reports beginning for the year 1902. It is to be noted that these reports contain the following (we cite from the Commission report for 1905, just issued): General report of the secretary of Public Instruction; report of the superintendent of Education; report of the chief of the Bureau of Architecture and Construction of Public Buildings; report of the Public Printer; report of the Bureau of Archives, Patents, Copyrights, etc.; report of the acting librarian of the American circulating Library; report of the editor of the Official Gazette. Special references in the various reports are as follows:

1900—i, pp. 17–42; 1901—i, pp. 133–148, ii, pp. 511–575 (appendix FF containing Fred W. Atkinson’s report); 1902—first annual report of the Secretary of Public Instruction, year ending Oct. 15, 1902, ii, pp. 865–1049; 1903—second annual report of the Secretary of Public Instruction, iii, pp. 667–985; 1900–1903—containing various general reports for those years, and which occur in the preceding volumes, pp. 121–129, 257–272, 399–434, and 685–721; 1904—third annual report, etc., iii, pp. 811–971; 1905—fourth annual report, etc., ending June 30, 1905, iv, pp. 369–652.

In addition to the above much other educationalmatter will be found scattered through the other volumes for each year. These volumes are also published separately in the Reports of the War Department.

Reportsof the Commissioner of Education (Washington). Several of these reports contain matter on the Philippines, as follows:

1899–1900—ii, chap. xxix (in part), pp. 1595–1640, “Intellectual attainments and education of the Filipinos” (contains some Spanish data, act. 74, of the Philippine Commission, a bibliography, and the Tagálog alphabet); 1901—ii, chap. xxix, pp. 1317–1440, “Present educational movement in the Philippines,” by Fred W. Atkinson; 1902—ii, chap. i, pp. 2219–2271, “Education in the Philippines;” 1903—chap. xlvi (in part), pp. 2385–2388, “Education in the Philippines” (taken from report of David P. Barrows for the year ending Sept. 30, 1903).

Bulletinsof the Bureau of Education (Manila, 1904 and 1905), as follows:

No. 1, Philippine Normal School prospectus for the year 1903–4, (in both English and Spanish); no. 2, Course of study in vocal music (for vacation normal institutes); no. 3, Philippine School of Arts and Trades (1904–1905, in both English and Spanish); no. 4, Philippine Nautical School (prospectus for the year 1904–1905, in both English and Spanish); no. 5, Notes on the treatment of Smallpox (for use of teachers); no. 6, Report of Industrial Exhibits of the Philippine Schools (Louisiana Purchase Exposition); no. 7, Courses of Instruction for the Public Schools of the Philippine Islands; no. 8 (?); no. 9, List of Philippine Baptismal Names; no. 10, Government in the United States (prepared for use in the Philippine public schools); no. 11, Courses in mechanical drawing, woodworking, and ironworking for provincial secondary schools; no. 12, Advanced and postgraduate studies offered by the Philippine Normal School (preparation for entrance to American colleges and universities or to the university of the Philippines; in English and Spanish).

Municipal Code(Manila, 1905). Contains matter on schools, teachers, etc.

Censusof the Philippine Islands (Washington, 1905), iii, pp. 638–669, “[Education] under the Americans,” by Prescott F. Jernegan, of the Philippine Normal School (a short account through 1903). Also, another division entitled, “Schools: schedule; summary of statistics; classification; buildings; teachers; pupils; sources of revenue; expenditures,” pp. 670–694.

Bulletinof the Bureau of Labor. No. 58, May, 1905 (Washington, 1905), pp. 721–905, “Labor Conditions in the Philippines,” by Victor S. Clark. Much of this will be found to have a bearing on education.

Books on the Philippines

Atkinson, Fred W.:The Philippine Islands(Ginn and Co., 1905); especially chap. xiv, pp. 373–412, “Education.”

Freer, William B.:Philippine experiences of an American teacher(New York, 1906).

LeRoy, James A.:Philippine Life in town and country(New York and London, 1905); especially chap. vii, pp. 202–245, “Education and public opinion.” Most of this book has a bearing on educational matters.

Stuntz, Homer C.:The Philippines and the Far East(Cincinnati and New York); especially chap. xii, pp. 185–215, “Educating a nation.”

Willis, Henry Parker:Our Philippine problem(New York, 1905), especially chap. x, pp. 226–246, “American education in the Philippines.” See a criticism of this book by James A. LeRoy, inPolitical Science Quarterly, for June, 1906.

We shall bring this brief statement regarding American education in the Philippines to a close with a short abstract of the recent address by Dr. T. H. Pardo de Tavera, before the teachers assembled at Manila in order to attend the Summer Institute, founded by the director of Public Instruction, and inaugurated this year, and published in the supplement of the issue of May 17, 1906, ofEl Renacimiento. His point of view of true civilization and education is in the main that they are the resultant of not one but of many factors, and that those of one race may be debtors to another race and yet not lose their identity. True progress does not consist in exclusiveness but in the admittance of all that is good notwithstanding its source. By adopting Anglo-Saxon civilization and education, Filipinos will not weaken, but strengthen themselves. The viewpoint of a people may change, and must change often in order that they may progress. To speak of special mentalities is vague and misleading. On whatever side the situation of the Philippines be considered, he says, whether political, social, or economic, it is seen that “public instruction is the chief factor, to which we should direct the most vigorous action of our energies.” Progress is the direct and necessary result of education, and the Filipinos realizing this desire the extension of schools. It has often been said that the Filipinos need an education in harmony with their customs and traditions, in order that they may preserve their peculiar manner of existence, or “that the conscience called poetically ‘the Filipino soul’ might not be changed or disfigured.” Let those who criticize the American method of education, on the ground that it is destroying the “Filipinosoul” define that term, and name the characteristic qualities belonging to it, which will disappear with the new education; and let them propose a system of education. Some wish to preserve the traditional education of Filipinos which is conservative and exclusive. The teaching of Filipinos, since Spain is a Catholic monarchy, where the divine origin of rulers is a tenet, has always been dogmatic, and blind obedience is to be given to the government. Such teaching produces a conservative and exclusive society, which is opposed to change. The Filipinos desire a democratic government, but their traditions and education form in them a mentality quite opposed to democratic ideas. Consequently, they must first change their mental viewpoint before they can become democratic. It must be a work of peaceful evolution, through free instruction. Living as they are now under a democratic form of government, Filipinos should adopt a form of education in accordance with the ideals of democracy. The two forces working in the formation of the character of individuals, and hence peoples, are conservatism and the reforming force, the latter of which means progress and constitutes education. Those peoples who do not progress live under the laws of conservatism, inheritance, and tradition. Those progress who have conquered inherited and traditional traits by means of education. Some races are inferior to others, but that inferiority is not necessarily permanent. Inferiority is purely an historical cause, and inferior races are those that preserve their national soul unchanged through the centuries. The Spanish race is not inferior to the Anglo-Saxon, but its education is under a political and religious dogmatism which hasmade of Spain a country with a traditional and truly conservative soul. Italy has gone through and is even now going through a period of regeneration. In Spain, men are struggling for better education based on Anglo-Saxon principles.3Before the Filipino revolution, many Filipinos were sent to Europe to study without any fear of destroying the “Filipino soul;” but now that the civilization that they went to seek has sought them, under the form of Anglo-Saxon public instruction, there is a strange reaction. The Franks and Gauls who submitted to Roman civilization have not lost their peculiar identity. Had they not adopted the Roman civilization, their condition would have been that of the Malays under British domination, who are now inferior. Since they did adopt it they were enabled to raise their coefficient of capacity. The Filipino mentality has been already changed by Spanish education, the customs and life of the two races having been quite distinct. Civilization is the result of the contact of peoples by means of which the victories obtained in all departments of intelligence and morality may be increased, perfected, and transmitted from one to another. Anglo-Saxon education will not cause the Filipinos to lose their desire for independence. The Filipino revolution was started by men who received a Spanish education. The entire Filipinist movement was guided by men educated in Europe and the University, the latter of which was Spanish. Theywere broader men. The Anglo-Saxon education cannot make submissive peoples. It is destined to form individuals capable of thinking for themselves, and of working according to their own impulses. Those civilizations that mark an epoch in history were the result of other civilizations. The Anglo-Saxon race today bear the torch of civilization formerly borne by the Romans. The Anglo-Saxon civilization will extend, but not Anglo-Saxon domination. The Japanese are an example of a race who have changed their standpoint in regard to civilization. Filipino mentality is composed of good and bad traits. Complete education must be arrived at by conserving the good and eliminating the bad. Complete assimilation cannot take place. The Filipino character cannot entirely change, for the instruction in the schools is not sufficient to cause such a radical change. Happiness does not consist in seeking easeful and unresponsible repose, but in the struggle for existence that entails work. Filipinos must learn that true progress comes through struggle and a show of energy. The Filipinos are intelligent, easy to educate, and prepared by their Spanish education of three centuries for the new education now offered them. Education means advance. The greater means of communication that are to be established will aid in the work by destroying inequalities and composing differences. The various dialects are a great barrier to Filipino homogeneity, and a common language is needed. The Filipino people free and capable of self-government will be formed by the American and Filipino teachers. “Filipino soul”4is a poetical expression which reveals apoetical mentality in those who use it. Such mentality is insufficient for the progress of a people along the true path of modern civilization.

1In a letter from James A. LeRoy, of June 27, 1906.↑2J. A. LeRoy:Philippine Life.↑3Chief among these men may be cited Francisco Giner de los Rios, of the Madrid University, who has established the Free Institution of Teaching in Madrid for the training of teachers. He follows principally American methods. Both Church and State have opposed him, but he has persevered and his institution has had good results.↑4Apropos of the “Filipino soul,” James A. LeRoy says, in the letter cited,ante, note 118, “No Filipino on earth, if pinned down, could tell what the ‘Filipino soul’ is today, as Tavera hints.”↑

1In a letter from James A. LeRoy, of June 27, 1906.↑

2J. A. LeRoy:Philippine Life.↑

3Chief among these men may be cited Francisco Giner de los Rios, of the Madrid University, who has established the Free Institution of Teaching in Madrid for the training of teachers. He follows principally American methods. Both Church and State have opposed him, but he has persevered and his institution has had good results.↑

4Apropos of the “Filipino soul,” James A. LeRoy says, in the letter cited,ante, note 118, “No Filipino on earth, if pinned down, could tell what the ‘Filipino soul’ is today, as Tavera hints.”↑

Table of ContentsCONTENTS OF VOLUME XLVI7ILLUSTRATIONS11PREFACE13DOCUMENT OF 1721–173929EVENTS IN FILIPINAS, 1721–173931BIBLIOGRAPHICAL DATA63APPENDIX: EDUCATION IN THE PHILIPPINES65PRIMARY INSTRUCTION67FIRST GOVERNMENTAL ATTEMPTS67ORGANIZED EFFORT OF LEGISLATION72ROYAL DECREE ESTABLISHING A PLAN OF PRIMARY INSTRUCTION IN FILIPINAS76Exposition76Royal decree79REGULATIONS FOR THE NORMAL SCHOOL FOR TEACHERS OF PRIMARY INSTRUCTION FOR THE NATIVES OF THE FILIPINAS ISLANDS86Of the object of the normal school86Of the branches and duration of the studies86Of the scholars of the normal school88Of the director, teachers, and dependents of the normal school91Of examinations93Of holidays and vacations93Of rewards and punishments94Of the interior regulations of the school94Of textbooks94Of special examinations to obtain certificates as assistant teacher95Of the issuance of teachers’ and assistant teachers’ certificates95REGULATIONS FOR THE SCHOOLS AND TEACHERS OF PRIMARY INSTRUCTION FOR THE NATIVES OF THE PHILIPPINE ARCHIPELAGO96Of textbooks98Of the schools99Of the teachersOf women teachers107Of Sunday schools108Of the supervision of the primary instruction among the natives109Final resolution111INTERIOR REGULATIONS OF THE SCHOOLS OF PRIMARY INSTRUCTION FOR THE NATIVES OF THE PHILIPPINE ARCHIPELAGO112Of the interior arrangement of the schools112Of the teachers112Of the pupils113Of school days and hours114Of the progress of education115Of rewards and punishments117Of examinations118DECREE OF THE SUPERIOR CIVIL GOVERNMENT APPROVING THE REGULATIONS OF THE MUNICIPAL GIRLS’ SCHOOL OF MANILA119REGULATIONS FOR THE MUNICIPAL GIRLS’ SCHOOL PROPOSED BY THE EXALTED AYUNTAMIENTO OF MANILA119I.Object and character of the municipal school119II.Pupils of the municipal school121III.Classes and studies122IV.Distribution of time for classes and studies123V.Holidays and vacations124VI.Rewards and punishments124VII.Supervision and oversight125CIRCULAR OF THE SUPERIOR CIVIL GOVERNMENT GIVING RULES FOR THE GOOD DISCHARGE OF SCHOOL SUPERVISION125I.Inspection of schools129II.Correction and suspension of teachers131III.School attendance132IV.Admission into the schools134V.Propositions for improvements135VI.VI138DECREE OF THE GENERAL GOVERNMENT APPROVING, WITH THE CHARACTER OFad interim, THE REGULATIONS FOR THE NORMAL SCHOOL FOR WOMEN TEACHERS OF PRIMARY EDUCATION IN THE DIOCESE OF NUEVA-CACERES142REGULATIONSad interimFOR THE NORMAL SCHOOL FOR WOMEN TEACHERS OF PRIMARY EDUCATION IN THE DIOCESE OF NUEVA-CACERES142I.Object of the school142II.Subjects taught and duration of studies144III.Of the staff of the school147IV.Of scholars and their admission148V.Of the directress of the school and the teachers of the same152VI.Of examinations153VII.Of holidays and vacations154VIII.Of rewards and punishments154IX.Of textbooks156X.Of the issuing of certificates156XI.Of the interior regulations of the school157XII.Of the supervision and oversight of the school157XIII.Of the bookkeeping of the school159Transitory regulations160ROYAL DECREE CREATING IN MANILA A NORMAL SCHOOL FOR WOMEN TEACHERS IN CHARGE OF THE AUGUSTINIAN NUNS OF THE ASSUMPTION ESTABLISHED IN THE ROYAL SCHOOL OF SANTA ISABEL OF MADRID160Exposition160Royal decree163ROYAL ORDER 241 OF THE MINISTRY OF THE COLONIES APPROVING THE REGULATIONS FOR THE SUPERIOR NORMAL SCHOOL FOR WOMEN TEACHERS IN MANILA166REGULATIONS OF THE SUPERIOR NORMAL SCHOOL FOR WOMEN TEACHERS IN MANILA167I.OF THE OBJECT OF THE NORMAL SCHOOL167I.CHAPTER I167Of the subjects to be taught167Elementary grade168Superior grade169Of school equipment169II.Of the teaching force170Administrative force171III.Of the directress171Of the instructresses174IV.Of the secretary175V.Of the librarian176VI.Of the assistants177VII.Of the subordinates177VII.Of the board of instructresses178IX.Of disciplinary Councils179II.OF THE ECONOMIC MANAGEMENT180I.Of the annual budgets180II.Collection, distribution, and payment of accounts181III.OF TEACHING181I.Of the opening and duration of the term[curso]181II.Of the order of classes and methods of teaching183III.Of material equipments for instruction184IV.OF THE SCHOLARS186I.Of the qualifications which the scholars must possess in order to be admitted to matriculation186II.Concerning matriculation188III.Obligations of the pupils193IV.Of the examinations194V.Of rewards198VI.Certificates and decisions200VII.Of faults against academic discipline and means of checking them201V.REVALIDA EXAMINATIONS[i.e., examinations for a degree]203Of the practice school208Additional article210DECREE OF THE GENERAL GOVERNMENT ELEVATING TO THE GRADE OF SUPERIOR THE NORMAL SCHOOL FOR MEN TEACHERS IN MANILA, AND APPROVING PROVISIONALLY THE NEW REGULATIONS OF THIS SCHOOL210Decree216REGULATIONS OF THE SUPERIOR NORMAL SCHOOL FOR MEN TEACHERS218Of the object of the superior normal school218Of the studies and their duration218Of the pupils of the normal school221Of the director, teachers, and dependents of the normal school222Of examinations223Of holidays and vacations223Concerning rewards and punishments224Of the interior regulations of the school224Of textbooks224Concerning special examinations for obtaining assistants’ certificates225Of the issuing of teachers’ and assistants’ certificates225Of the competitive examinations to obtain a regular appointment in the término schools of first and second grades.225SCHOOL LEGISLATION, 1863–1894228Normal Schools228Schools of primary instruction235DOMINICAN EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS, 1896–1897261College and University of Santo Tomás261College of San Juan de Letrán262College of San Alberto Magno263School of Santa Catalina de Sena263School of Nuestra Señora del Rosario, of Lingayén (Pangasinan)263School of Nuestra Señora del Rosario of Vigan(Founded in 1893)264School of Santa Ymelda of Tuguegarao (Cagayán)(Founded in 1892)264REPORT OF RELIGIOUS SCHOOLS, 1897265Relation of the houses and number of pupilswhom the sisters of charity had in a school here in Filipinas in the year 1897.265Relation of the number of pupils in the seminary schools here in Filipinas in the year 1897.266EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS OF THE RECOLLECTS268Beaterio de Santa Rita268School of San José of Bacolod, Negros269Seminary school of Vigan270School of Santa Rosa270THE FRIAR VIEWPOINT272I.EDUCATION272II.II319EDUCATION SINCE AMERICAN OCCUPATION364

Back to Index Next