Introduction

The growing body of research underscores the potential benefits of mother-tongue instruction in early childhood education (Burton, 2013). Southeast Asian nations like Cambodia, Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand, Timor-Leste, and Vietnam have implemented MTI programs with varying degrees of success (Kosonen & Young, 2009). However, concerns regarding policy implementation and its impact on learning outcomes have been raised in developing countries (Burton, 2013; Rao, 2013; Tupas & Martin, 2016; Velasco, 2016). At the classroom level, teachers grapple with pedagogical challenges arising from multilingual environments, particularly in navigating the use of diverse languages for instruction. Several studies emphasize the critical role of teachers as active agents in shaping and adapting language policies (Johnson & Freeman, 2010; Varghese, 2008). Brown (2010) emphasizes the role of teachers in navigating a space for instruction within a sociocultural context often fraught with ideological tensions. The Philippines presents a unique case study for mother tongue-based multilingual education (MTBMLE) implementation as it stands as the only Southeast Asian nation to fully institutionalize the policy in mainstream education. Despite the Philippines being highly multilingual, the Department of Education mandates strict nationwide implementation, requiring the use of the mother tongue as the medium of instruction in the first three years of primary school. This policy creates a tension between valuing languages for national and cultural identity, and pragmatic considerations related to economic mobility. In a developing nation like the Philippines, local languages serve as symbols of national identity, while high English proficiency remains a prized commodity in the job market. Scholars have dissected the Philippines’ language policy, highlighting its intricate interplay of political, cultural, and ideological factors (Dekker & Young, 2005; Walter & Dekker, 2011). Tupas and Martin (2016) describe the nation’s linguistic landscape as a space where competing visions of nationhood and ideologies regarding language use are constantly negotiated. A multilingual language policy, by its very nature, can embody national beliefs about cultural and linguistic diversity, equal educational opportunities, and human rights (Wa-Mbaleka, 2014). This study investigates the role of teachers in the MTBMLE implementation, moving beyond the notion of teachers as passive recipients of policy directives. This study suggests that teachers act as conduits, mediating the policy within the realities of their classrooms.

Language Ideologies or Beliefs About Language

The concept of language ideologies emerged as a distinct field of study within linguistic anthropology in the late 20th century (Silverstein, 1979). While earlier ethnographic work touched upon what we now understand as language ideologies, Silverstein’s (1979) work provided a foundational definition: ’any set of beliefs about language articulated by the users as a rationalization or justification of perceived language structure and use’ (p. 193). Kroskrity (2004) emphasizes the context-specific nature of language ideologies, defining them as "beliefs, or feelings about languages as used in their social world" (p. 498). He argues that language ideologies are rooted in social experiences, vary across individuals, and are multifaceted rather than uniform. Crucially, Kroskrity (2004) differentiates language ideologies from attitudes. Attitudes are individual dispositions, while ideologies represent recurring expressions of a more structured belief system. Attitudes are personal, whereas ideologies are typically shared within a community. More recently, Rosa and Flores (2017) have introduced the concept of raciolinguistic ideology, highlighting the intersection of language and race. Their framework posits that specific language repertoires are perceived as deficient, often based on racial stereotypes. This perspective invites educators and scholars to consider the adaptability of language acquisition and the limitations imposed by racial categorization. a. Linguistic unification vs. linguistic pluralism. The ideology of linguistic unification, also known as the "one-nation-one-language" concept, is associated with Johann Gottfried Herder’s notion of language as the "Volksgeist" or "spirit of a people" (Woolard & Schieffelin, 1994). This perspective posits a natural correspondence between linguistic boundaries and national or ethnic identities (Woolard & Schieffelin, 1994). The comparison of language with culture held significant political weight, as linguistically unified nations tied to a specific territory could claim legitimacy for statehood (Gal & Irvine, 1995). This ideology remains influential today, particularly regarding minority languages and multilingualism. The Philippines’ previous policy of using Filipino (derived from Tagalog) alongside English as the medium of instruction exemplifies this ideology. Linguistic unification often views multilingualism and code-switching as atypical behaviors, while linguistic pluralism advocates for the maintenance and vitality of minority languages (Skutnabb-Kangas, 2008). Proponents of linguistic pluralism generally support multilingual approaches to education, a key topic in discussions of linguistic human rights. Skutnabb-Kangas (2008) has raised concerns about the rapid decline of global languages, estimating that 90–95% could be extinct or critically endangered by 2100. The Summer Institute of Linguistics (SIL) reports that the Philippines is home to a staggering 175 living languages as of 2023, with a majority being indigenous (SIL International, 2023). However, 48 of these languages are currently endangered, and two have become extinct. b. English as the language of globalization. Another prevalent language ideology positions English as a significant language of globalization (Phillipson, 1992). This perspective aligns with the notion that modernization is a prerequisite for global development (Pennycook, 2002). In the Philippines, for example, English has become associated with economic advancement. Local stakeholders often view English proficiency as a gateway to white–collar jobs and improved social mobility, particularly for those from disadvantaged backgrounds (Sibayan, 1999).

Language Policy Appropriation

Shifting the perspective on teachers from passive recipients to active language policy actors reframes policy itself as a dynamic sociocultural process, extending beyond legal mandates (Levinson et al., 2009). Levinson et al. (2009) describe this process as policy appropriation, encompassing human interaction, negotiation, and resistance. Appropriation refers to "the ways that creative agents interpret and take in elements of policy, thereby incorporating these discursive resources into their own schemes of interest, motivation, and action" (Levinson et al., 2009, p. 779). A sociocultural approach to language policy acknowledges that teachers, through appropriation, can make policy their own.

MTBMLE: the Philippine Context

This study focused on the widely held beliefs and practices of teachers in implementing the MTBMLE in the Philippines. Recent literature views active language policy and planning as multi-modal, multi-level, and linked to multi-layered ideological orientations. MTBMLE is challenging in multilingual countries because the notion of mother tongue becomes elusive in classrooms where students bring several language varieties (Gacheche, 2010; Ghimire, 2012; Wa-Mbaleka, 2014). According to Quijano (2012) the migration of students from region to region, where the languages are different, creates gaps in their learning and makes it more difficult for them to succeed academically. Gumalal & Vilbar (2019) found that teachers believe that using the mother tongue in teaching a content area such as science is counter-intuitive realizing that their students were mostly multilingual who could not understand the pure version of the mother tongue. The findings were corroborated by testimonies from teachers, who reported that certain subject areas in the elementary school curriculum are not appropriate for instruction in the mother tongue due to the absence of academic terminology for subjects like mathematics and science (Lopez et al., 2019). Apparently, teachers are grappling with the decision on how to deliver instruction most effectively: in the mother tongue or in English, particularly in content areas that were previously taught in English. Moreover, several research studies have found that teachers often face pedagogical challenges due to a lack of sufficient knowledge about their own mother tongue and skills to teach it, as well as insufficient training to implement language policies (Tupas & Martin, 2016; Velasco, 2016). Misalignments between national language policies and teachers’ interpretations of these policies in the classroom can also cause difficulties (Burton, 2013). Hence, there are calls for the Department of Education (DepEd) to re-evaluate the MTBMLE and to consider reinstituting the bilingual policy, using English as MOI in some subjects and to make the mother tongue as a supplementary language (Apolonio, 2022).

A critical gap exists in our understanding of how teacher language beliefs influence MTBMLE implementation. Few studies have examined the policy through the lens of teacher beliefs. This research aims to address this gap by investigating the ongoing pedagogical practices employed by teachers and the corresponding language beliefs that inform them. Teacher beliefs are known to significantly impact classroom practices and shape educational realities in ways that may not be fully captured by traditional research agendas (Mante-Estacio & Tupas, 2022). A review of empirical studies on MTBMLE in the Philippines reveals recurring themes related to teacher language beliefs and also on pedagogical challenges associated with successful policy implementation (Abrea et al., 2020; Lopez et al, 2019; Dagalea et al., 2022; Velasco, 2016; Apolonio, 2022; Gumalal & Vilbar, 2019). However, scholars have called for further research that examines MTBMLE classroom practices alongside teacher language beliefs. This study aligns with this perspective, as the existing literature critiques MTBMLE but lacks a critical examination of policy implementation that incorporates teacher beliefs.

Theoretical Framework

This study utilizes the Socio-Cultural Approach to Policy (Sutton & Levinson, 2001) to examine how teachers implement the Mother Tongue-Based Multilingual Education (MTBMLE) policy in the Philippines. This approach views policy as a dynamic social process, shaped by various actors within different school and community contexts (Sutton & Levinson, 2001). It emphasizes that an official policy undergoes transformation as it is implemented across different settings in a school. The socio-cultural approach allows for the examination of the cultural meanings teachers use to make sense of their experiences and guide their implementation practices. This study focuses on how teachers, as key social actors, interpret and adapt the MTBMLE policy in their classrooms.

Grounded on the theoretical underpinning mentioned, this study investigated teachers’ language policy appropriation of the MTBMLE policy. Specifically, it sought answers to the following:

  1. 1.

    How do teachers implement the MTBMLE policy in their classrooms?

  2. 2.

    What language ideologies do teachers hold in the context of the MTBMLE policy?

  3. 3.

    How do teachers’ implementation practices and their language ideologies interact in shaping the overall enactment of the MTBMLE policy within the classroom setting?

Methodology

Research Design

The study utilizes a mixed-methods approach, employing both qualitative and quantitative data collection methods to explore the relationship between teacher beliefs (language ideologies) and the appropriation of Mother Tongue-Based Multilingual Education (MTBMLE) policy in the Philippines.

Research Participants

A total of 25 teachers from two urban school districts participated in the focus group discussions (FGDs). Twelve of the 25 teachers who are all female were subject to classroom observations and semi-structured informal interviews. Table 1 below presents the summary of research participants and data source.

Table 1 Participants profile
Full size table

Data Collection

The multiple data sources inform the research questions in a manner that helped crystallize the data collection method. Table 2 below presents the research questions in relation to data source.

Table 2 Summary of research questions in relation to data source
Full size table

Qualitative Data Analysis

The transcripts of the classroom observations, FGDs and interviews were all verbatim. Through a sociocultural framework, a thematic analysis was conducted to find recurrent themes pertaining to teachers’ language ideologies and how these influence their implementation of the MTBMLE. The transcripts and observations were coded for themes such as beliefs about the value of different languages, perceived challenges and benefits of MTBMLE, and teacher strategies for language use in the classroom. The analysis involved a multi-step process as outlined below:

  1. 1.

    Initial Coding. Themes pertaining to language beliefs, instructional strategies, and rationales for linguistic decisions were coded line by line or segment by segment in the transcripts. Codes were assigned based on a pre-determined coding scheme informed by the research question and existing literature on language ideologies in education.

  2. 2.

    Developing Themes. Codes were reviewed and grouped into broader categories representing emerging themes. This involved identifying patterns and relationships between the codes.

  3. 3.

    Refining Themes. Themes were further refined through an iterative process that involved defining clear definitions for each theme and going over the coded data to ensure coherence within and between categories.

  4. 4.

    Identifying Language Ideologies. Thematic analysis concentrated on finding recurrent notions regarding the importance and purposes of several languages (Hiligaynon, English, and Filipino). Codes were assigned to FGD and interview segments where teachers expressed beliefs about the value and function of different languages (Hiligaynon, English, Filipino). These persistent viewpoints were classified as language ideologies.

Quantitative Data Analysis

The data from the classroom observation audio recording transcripts were analyzed using descriptive statistics that calculated for the frequency of recurrence of each language (Hiligaynon, Filipino, English). The researcher speaks fluent Hiligaynon, Filipino and English and undertook a manual counting of the words from the classroom observation transcript. Table 3 below presents the data and data analysis techniques.

Table 3 The data and data analysis techniques
Full size table

Analytical Framework for Ideology and Appropriation

To explore the relationship between language ideologies and teacher appropriation of MTBMLE policy, a thematic analysis of interview data was conducted to identify recurring themes related to teachers’ beliefs about language. Classroom observation data are coded to identify specific teacher actions related to MTBMLE implementation, such as the use of different languages in different contexts and instructional strategies employed. The identified language ideologies are compared and contrasted with observed teacher actions exploring how the teachers mobilized specific ideologies to justify their practices. For instance, even if the MTBMLE policy encourages the use of the mother tongue, how many teachers still opted to use more English in the classroom. By employing this framework, the research provided a nuanced understanding of how teacher beliefs (language ideologies) shape their appropriation of the MTBMLE policy and influence language use practices in the classroom.

Ethical Considerations

This study adhered to ethical research protocols to ensure participant protection. Approval from the School’s Division Superintendent was obtained, following standard procedures for educational research. Teacher participants were provided with informed consent forms that explained the study’s purpose, data collection methods, their rights, and how confidentiality would be maintained. Similarly, students were informed about the study and their assent to participate was obtained alongside parental consent through informed consent forms. Additionally, all data collection procedures ensured participant anonymity and no identifying information will be collected or used in reporting the results.

Results and Discussion

The MTBMLE Policy Implementation

The study captured classroom observation data analyzed quantitatively to identify the frequency and distribution of languages used by the teacher-participants. Language use analysis reveal patterns in how Hiligaynon, Filipino and English are used in the context of the MTBMLE directive.

Language Use in the MTBMLE Classrooms

Classroom observations, FGDs and informal interviews provided insights into teacher practices. Essentially, the MTBMLE is reflected in DepEd Order 31 s. 2012:

“Mother tongue shall be used as the medium of instruction and as a subject from Grade 1 to 3. English or Filipino is used from Grade 4 to 10. Both languages are taught from Grade 1-10”

hence, MTBMLE mandates teachers to use the learners’ mother tongue as the medium of instruction and to teach it as a separate subject in Grades 1–3. Filipino or English is then gradually introduced from Grade 4 onwards. The policy seemingly intends a compartmentalized view of language use where the MT and other languages are to be used separately. Thus, to assess how teachers implemented the MTBMLE, twelve teachers from Grade 1 to Grade 3 were observed by performing a quantitative analysis of the classroom observation transcripts. Word counts and categorization by language use revealed the specific languages used and their frequency in one-hour class sessions as shown in Table 4 below.

Table 4 Teacher language practices showing tallies of languages used as MOI per class session of one hour
Full size table

While the average teacher talk was 2120 words per hour, a key finding is that teachers used a combination of languages: their students’ mother tongue (Hiligaynon), Filipino, and English. It was observed that Hiligaynon was the dominant language used by teachers, with usage ranging from 93% (Grade 1 MT class) to 0% (Grade 3 Science class). While the MTBMLE policy mandates instruction solely in Hiligaynon from Grades 1 to 3, all observed teachers incorporated Filipino and English to varying degrees. Notably, English use averaged 35% across classes, reaching 100% in a Grade 3 Science class. This finding suggests a nuanced approach to policy implementation. While no teacher conducted lessons entirely in Hiligaynon, it could be argued that there was a 99% compliance rate, considering varying degrees of adherence. This disparity highlights the agency of teachers as more than mere policy implementers. Drawing on the socio-cultural approach to policy studies (Levinson et al., 2009), teachers are "policy actors" who interpret directives through their own understanding and the sociocultural context of their environment. The data provides valuable information on how teacher practices align with the MTBMLE policy’s language use expectations in Grades 1–3.

However, while the MTBMLE promotes a compartmentalized approach to language use, classroom realities necessitate a more dynamic approach since treating languages as separate entities may not fully reflect the complexities of classroom practice. In this study, teachers were observed to strategically integrate all three languages to facilitate meaning-making, foster student relationships, and ensure instructional effectiveness. This dynamic approach involves translanguaging between languages based on specific learning objectives or individual student needs. Additionally, teachers leverage elements from different languages, such as cognates or translations, to enhance student comprehension.

Teacher Language Ideologies and the MTBMLE Policy

This section explores the language ideologies of teachers within the context of the MTBMLE policy. Language beliefs refer to the language ideologies attached to language and language use that underlie the policy. Members of a speech community share a general set of beliefs about appropriate language practices (Spolsky, 2004). These beliefs are herein thematically organized, corresponding to the overarching language ideologies constructed by the teachers.

Hiligaynon and the Ilonggo Identity

A recurring theme is the implicit belief in a natural association between a language and its speakers, in the instant case, between Hiligaynon and Ilonggo identity. Specifically, the teachers appear to subscribe to the ideology which posits that Ilonggo identity is inherently tied to fluency in Hiligaynon acknowledging the widespread proficiency in the L1, leading some to question the necessity of actively promoting its use. This highlights a potential dissonance between the perceived necessity of Hiligaynon for cultural transmission and the reality of its widespread use. Teachers find the use of the L1 unavoidable considering that students are Hiligaynon speakers; however, some of them intimated that there were students who entered grade one who had English instruction previously in pre-school and had to grapple with Hiligaynon.

We have students who were taught in English in pre-school and who were surprised when they learned that Hiligaynon is the medium of instruction in grade one.

(Teacher, School A)

Interestingly, some participants observed the increased comfort and fluency when using the L1 in class. Observations during the study suggest a correlation between Hiligaynon instruction and increased student engagement, possibly supporting the participants’ claims.

However, one thing which I have observed with the MTBMLE implemented, especially in grade one, it seems that our students are more vocal. They can converse; they can organize their ideas.

(Teacher, School A)

Overall, teachers argued that widespread spoken proficiency in Hiligaynon rendered explicit instruction unnecessary and insisted that the reported benefits of Hiligaynon were primarily limited to facilitating communication within the immediate community. The teachers’ beliefs illustrate the enduring influence of such ideologies in shaping language attitudes.

The Preference for English

A predominant view among the teachers is that Hiligaynon offers limited benefits for early literacy development. They believe that early exposure to English fosters greater proficiency, ultimately leading to a more advantageous linguistic skillset for the learners. When asked to rank the three languages (Hiligaynon, Filipino, English) in terms of instructional importance, the teachers overwhelmingly favored English.

Hiligaynon should just be a subject, like Math and other subjects, but the medium of instruction should be English.

(Teacher, School A)

The data indicates a strong sentiment among teachers advocating for the continued use of English as the medium of instruction (MOI). They expressed concerns about the potential impact of the MTBMLE policy on students’ English proficiency. This concern stems from the requirement for students to take high-stakes standardized tests, often administered in English, such as board exams or certifications.

English as the Language for International Communication

This preference aligns with the ideology that positions English as the primary tool for international communication. To them, the development of English proficiency is viewed as having a more significant long-term impact on students’ success.

In my opinion, Ma’am, you can’t say that Hiligaynon would be useful to the child because later on, English would still be the medium of instruction. They will take the board exams in English, they will be interviewed in English and the child would really find use knowing and being proficient in English early.

(Teacher, School A)

When we do math, they count in English, the disadvantage of Hiligaynon is that the students are lazy in reading their test questions because they find them quite long.

(Teacher, School B)

Teachers questioned the rationale behind shifting the MOI from English to Hiligaynon in the primary grades, followed by a later transition back to English in higher grades. They advocate for an earlier introduction of English, suggesting a belief that a stronger foundation in English from a young age is crucial for future success.

English and Professional Identity

While the concept of colonial mentality might be relevant in broader discussions of language prestige, its direct application to this study’s findings may be less pertinent. The data suggests a more nuanced perspective among the participating teachers whose positive regard for English appears to be linked to its association with the teaching profession.

With the MTBMLE, we, teachers, feel like we are deteriorating. Our English skills are no longer developed further because we speak Hiligaynon more. It’s somehow difficult.

(Teacher, School A)

Instead of getting better in English, we have to dwell so much on Hiligaynon. A lot of time is devoted to preparing for MT and teaching in the MT.

(Teacher, School B)

Ideologically, the teachers seem to equate strong English proficiency with professional competence. Following this logic, they perceive honing their own English skills as a form of continuous professional development. This ideology posits a social connotation of prestige associated with English proficiency, particularly within the teaching profession.

English and Social Mobility

The analysis reveals that the teachers perceive English language proficiency as a social and economic necessity. They view a lack of English skills as a potential handicap, hindering students’ future prospects. The data suggests that teachers associate English with upward social mobility, believing it to be a key factor in achieving a higher social status. This perspective is underscored by the participants’ emphasis on the potential opportunities English skills can provide for their students.

In the past years, when MTBMLE was not yet implemented, I know a lot of graduates from high school who trained in TESDA. They are now call center agents. From prep, grade 1, until elementary, they had English, Ma’am. How can the students now apply as call center agents after [high school] graduation because of MTBMLE? If in case they cannot pursue college? In this curriculum, students would not even know basic English in grade one.

(Teacher, School B)

The study highlights a concern among teachers regarding the MTBMLE’s potential impact on students’ employability, particularly in the call center sector. Teachers consider English proficiency valuable to students seeking employment and their apprehension stems from the belief that the MTBMLE might hinder students’ English language development, jeopardizing their ability to secure positions in call centers, known for offering relatively high salaries. This concern extends to students who may not pursue higher education, as even high school graduates with strong English skills can find employment in this sector. Consequently, the teachers perceive the MTBMLE as potentially counterproductive, potentially hindering economic advancement and inadvertently inducing poverty.

I think about the current time, Ma’am. Instead of moving forward, we are moving backwards. We cannot compete globally. How can we compete globally with this policy? Instead of exposing them to the global world, it’s like we are going back to darkness.

(Teacher, School A)

This ideology posits that English proficiency is a key factor in achieving upward mobility. Teachers subscribe to the belief that fluency in English can improve one’s life prospects and is essential for navigating the future. Conversely, a lack of English skills is perceived negatively and viewed as a potential handicap.

Challenges to MTBMLE Implementation

A recurring theme within the data analysis revealed a critical stance among teachers towards the Mother Tongue-Based Multilingual Education (MTBMLE) policy. Teacher discourse concerning the policy’s effectiveness could be characterized as rather unenthusiastic.

It is difficult to use Hiligaynon in teaching. It is best to retain it only as a subject.

(Teacher, School B)

What should be done? First, the policy should be abandoned. Hiligaynon as MOI is proving very difficult for us teachers. Second, if it must really stay then it has to be retained as a subject just like Filipino.

(Teacher, School B)

It’s like introducing another language, instead of bridging, you are creating a gap.

(Teacher, School B)

Even teachers are confused; I speak Filipino in Filipino class, then speak English in our English class, and by the time I teach Social Studies, I forget that I should already speak Hiligaynon and I still speak Filipino or English.

(Teacher, School B)

During discussions regarding appropriate language of instruction for various subjects, a persistent preference for English emerged within the teachers’ discourse. They highlighted the challenges associated with L1 use in subjects like Math and Science, citing the limitations of Hiligaynon vocabulary in adequately translating domain-specific terminology.

There are terms in Math, where, instead of saying eleven you need to say ‘napulo kag isa’ which is the Hiligaynon of eleven. Presently, we don’t use ‘napulo kag isa’ anymore and students already understand eleven. But MTBMLE instructs us to use the Hiligaynon term so we introduce this to students.

(Teacher, School B)

I feel that some words were just coined so that there are Hiligaynon equivalents for grammar lessons like ‘subject’ and ‘predicate’. I have never encountered ‘tuluyuon’ (subject) and ‘panagsari’ (predicate) before MTBMLE.

(Teacher, School A)

The perceived lack of standardized Hiligaynon orthography emerged as a significant concern among teachers. This absence was viewed as hindering the establishment of clear conventions for written Hiligaynon, encompassing aspects such as spelling rules, hyphenation, and capitalization necessary for MT instruction. Furthermore, teachers expressed dissatisfaction with the availability of instructional materials, which they described as often containing archaic terminology that even educators found challenging and unfamiliar.

The Interplay Between Language Policy Implementation and Language Ideologies

Unveiling the Link Between Language Ideologies and Policy Implementation

This section explores how teachers’ language ideologies identified in the previous section, shape the ways teachers appropriate the MTBMLE policy in practice. The identified language ideologies serve as a crucial lens for interpreting how teachers appropriate the MTBMLE policy in practice. This study suggests that such appropriation emerges from the dynamic interaction between policy mandates and teacher cognition that can result in diverse modes of policy enactment. Mediated by their knowledge and belief systems, teachers in the study engage in various modes of appropriation–accommodation, negotiation, nuanced resistance, – resulting in a spectrum of policy enactment on the ground.

Language Ideologies and Accommodation

Teachers who hold strong beliefs in the value of MT instruction and recognize their role as dutiful enactors within the Department of Education’s legal framework are more likely to accommodate the MTBMLE by prioritizing Hiligaynon. They adapted their teaching materials and lessons to incorporate more MT resources and activities. Their actions align with their perceived professional duty to comply with the DepEd mandates that require full accommodation. The data on teachers’ language practices (Table 4) showing a bigger percentage of teachers’ use of Hiligaynon supports this contention.

School power dynamics denotes another layer to language policy process whereby ground level implementers acknowledge the authority that derives from a Department Order or from a Republic Act.

Language Ideologies and Negotiation

Teachers who held nuanced views on language roles, acknowledging both the benefits of MTB and the perceived necessity of English for specific purposes, often engaged in negotiation with the policy. This involved strategic language use is consistent with translanguaging (Vogel & García, 2017; Langman, 2014)–seamlessly integrating Hiligaynon, Filipino, and English, suggesting a more complex negotiation. This translanguaging approach allows teachers to leverage Hiligaynon whenever possible and allows for the strategic use of English or Filipino when encountering limitations in Hiligaynon vocabulary for specific content or technical terms.

Teacher: Ano ang makita mo nga mga butang sa kahawaan nga makita mo sa laragway?

What can you find in space that you can see in this picture?

Pupil: Adlaw!

Sun!

Teacher: Adlaw. Correct. Kag may ara sang….?

Sun. Correct. And what else can you find (in the picture)?

Pupils: Balangaw!

Rainbow.

Teacher: Balangaw. What is balangaw in English?

Pupils: Rainbow!

(Classroom observation transcript, Grade 3 Science)

Teacher: Sitsiritsit alibangbang!Alibangbang no? Sa English ano na sya?

Hey, hey, butterfly! Is it a butterfly? What is it in English?

Pupil: Butterfly!

Butterfly!

Teacher: This time, may ipakita ko sa inyo nga picture sang isa ka butterfly ukon

alibangbang.

This time, I will show you a picture of a butterly.

(Classroom observation transcript, Grade 1 MT)

The process of mixing languages as seen in the excerpt is perhaps the teacher’s way of checking for comprehension especially since Science was previously taught in English. The teachers describe a seemingly delicate balancing act between adhering to the policy’s emphasis on MT instruction and addressing the perceived need to prepare students for future academic success.

Language Ideologies and Nuanced Resistance

Several teacher participants voiced anxieties regarding the limitations of Hiligaynon as the sole medium of instruction, especially for subjects perceived to necessitate a more technical vocabulary. These concerns likely stemmed from a belief in the instrumentality of English, potentially leading to a form of subtle policy resistance. These teachers hold strong ideologies about the importance of English for future careers and international communication. Furthermore, some teachers expressed skepticism towards the necessity of mother-tongue instruction, arguing that Hiligaynon is already the dominant language of communication within the school environment. They challenged the Department of Education’s (DepEd) rationale for the policy, suggesting that cultural and identity preservation can be achieved even with English as the medium of instruction.

People in Bacolod City speak Hiligaynon. Almost everyone you meet here in school, whether students or teachers, all speak Hiligaynon. So why do we still need to teach it? (Teacher, School B)

Finally, anxieties regarding the suitability of Hiligaynon as a language of academic discourse were also expressed, implying a perceived lack of preparedness for its use in this context. For instance, this study documented a grade one teacher who opted to deliver Science instruction entirely in English despite the policy. The teacher cited a lack of preparation and appropriate Hiligaynon equivalents for scientific concepts.

I did not have any training in MTBMLE and I think it’s best to teach my Science class in English of which I’m more knowledgeable. I guess it’s better than teaching Science in Hiligaynon incorrectly using some terminologies.

(Teacher, School A)

Closer examination revealed extenuating circumstances influencing this appropriation. This was the teacher’s first week of teaching, and exercising professional judgment, the teacher prioritized student success over policy adherence, believing that immediate instruction in Hiligaynon would be detrimental in the absence of proper resources. This case exemplifies how personal circumstances and beliefs regarding perceived pedagogical consequences shape classroom practice. Importantly, this resistance was not characterized by outright defiance, but rather a measured approach based on their professional judgment about effective instruction.

Conclusion

This study investigated the interplay between teachers’ beliefs and the MTBMLE policy (DepEd Order No. 31 series of 2012) implementation in the Philippines. The findings highlight the critical role of teacher beliefs in shaping policy appropriation through implementation. Teachers’ perceptions regarding the impact of Hiligaynon instruction on English language acquisition significantly influenced their instructional language choices. Those who held anxieties about Hiligaynon hindering English proficiency tended to integrate more English, while those who felt a strong sense of duty due to their role and hierarchical structures within the educational system were more likely to prioritize Hiligaynon use. These findings reinforce the crucial link between teacher beliefs and implementation practices in policy appropriation.

Furthermore, the research underscores the significance of socio-contextual factors in policy appropriation. This study aligns with previous work (Heineke & Cameron, 2013; Langman, 2014; Rivers, 2011; Siagto-Wakat et al., 2013) by demonstrating how the interplay between socio-cultural contexts that inform teacher beliefs and policy implementation leads to a process of appropriation. School dynamics, professional obligations, and personal circumstances all interact with teacher beliefs that ultimately shape classroom practices. In light of these findings, this study recommends that DepEd integrate ground-level knowledge and perspectives into policy development. By acknowledging the expertise, opinions, and concerns of teachers, DepEd can potentially mitigate future implementation challenges and create a more effective and sustainable MTBMLE program.