Prospects and Challenges in Implementing a New Mathematics Curriculum in the Philippines

  • Debbie Marie B. Verzosa
  • Catherine P. Vistro-YuEmail author
Part of the Mathematics Education – An Asian Perspective book series (MATHEDUCASPER)


The Philippine Department of Education recently introduced a major revamp in the curriculum, providing for an additional two years in basic education. Three provisions of this new program directly relate to mathematics education. First was the shift of language of instruction in early primary education from English to the mother tongue. Second was the development of a new mathematics curriculum that places critical thinking and problem solving as the goal of mathematics education. Third was the extended opportunities for specialization in non-academic tracks. In this chapter, we draw upon studies in the Philippines to examine the issues and concerns that need to be addressed to derive the intended outcomes of the new curriculum. We first provide an overview of curricular changes in the Philippines. Next, we discuss the prospects and warrants of the curricular changes, given that the use of English to teach mathematics has been fraught with coping strategies, and that the relevance of school mathematics has repeatedly been questioned. Finally, we argue that achieving the intended goals is not simple, particularly in resource-poor classrooms where mathematical learning is often viewed as the ability to imitate procedures set forth by the teacher or text. In a developing country like the Philippines, there is a particular need to acknowledge the constraints within the working environment where reforms will take place. A curriculum that offers some prospects for improving mathematics education can only succeed if it follows through to the most crucial stage—that of providing sustained and practical guidance for supporting implementation and managing constraints.



Thanks to Macquarie University and Ateneo de Manila University (LS Scholarly Work Grant) for support during various stages of collecting the data presented in this chapter.


  1. Bago, A. L. (2001). Curriculum development; The Philippine experience. Manila, Philippines: De La Salle University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Ball, D. L., & Bass, H. (2004). Knowing mathematics for teaching. In R. Strasser, G. Brandell, B. Grevholm, O. Helenius (Eds.), Educating for the Future: Proceedings of an International Symposium on Mathematics Teacher Education (pp. 159–178). Sweden: The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences.Google Scholar
  3. Bansilal, S. (2011). Assessment reform in South Africa: Opening up or closing spaces for teachers? Educational Studies in Mathematics, 78, 91–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Basco, L. V., Dimaculangan, F. A., Gomez, B. G., Nool, N. R., Torino, I., Fortes, E., & Villena-Diaz, R. (2013). Mathematics curriculum analysis of selected TEIs in the Philippines. Paper presented at the 9th Biennial Conference of the Philippine Council of Mathematics Teacher Educators, Bacolod City, Philippines.Google Scholar
  5. Bautista, D., Mitchelmore, M., & Mulligan, J. T. [P1]. (2009). Factors influencing Filipino children’s solutions to addition and subtraction word problems. Educational Psychology, 29, 729–745.Google Scholar
  6. Bernardo, A. B. I. (1999). Overcoming obstacles to understanding and solving word problems in mathematics. Educational Psychology, 19, 149–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bernardo, A. B. I. (2008). English in Philippine education: Solution or problem? In M. L. S. Bautista & K. Bolton (Eds.), Philippine English: Linguistic and literary perspectives (pp. 29–48). Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Bernardo, A. B. I., & Limjap, A. (2012). Investigating the influence of teachers’ pedagogical beliefs and reported practices on student achievement in basic mathematics. Paper presented at the 12th International Congress on Mathematical Education, Seoul, Korea. Retrieved December 30, 2013, from
  9. Borlongan, A. M. (2009). Tagalog-English code-switching in English language classes: Frequency and forms. TESOL Journal, 1, 28–42.Google Scholar
  10. Chitera, N. (2011). Language of learning and teaching in schools: An issue for research in mathematics teacher education? Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 14, 231–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Department of Education [DepEd]. (2002). Implementation of the 2002 Basic Education Curriculum (Order 25). Retrieved from
  12. Department of Education [DepEd]. (2003). Basic education curriculum (Philippine learning competencies): Mathematics. Pasig City, Philippines: Department of Education.Google Scholar
  13. Department of Education [DepEd]. (2010). Policy guidelines on the implementation of the 2010 Secondary Education Curriculum (SEC) (Order 76). Retrieved from
  14. Department of Education [DepEd]. (2012). K to 12 curriculum guide: Mathematics. Pasig City: Department of Education. Retrieved December 30, 2013, from
  15. Dofitas, C. V., & Gumba, L. L. (2012). What’s in a word problem? Suggestions for the increased transparency in mathematics word problems. Presented at the 2nd MTBMLE Conference, Iloilo City, Philippines.Google Scholar
  16. Fillmore, L. W. (2007). English learners and mathematics learning: Language issues to consider. In A. H. Schoenfeld (Ed.), Assessing mathematical proficiency (pp. 333–344). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gallos, F. (2006). Students’ private discourse in a Philippine classroom: An alternative to teacher’s classroom discourse? In D. Clarke, C. Keitel, Y, Shimizu (Eds.) Mathematics classrooms in twelve countries: The insider’s perspective. The Netherlands: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
  18. Gonzalez, A. (1996). Using two/three languages in Philippine classrooms: Implications for policies, strategies, and practices. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 17, 210–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Goos, M. (2013). Knowledge for teaching secondary school mathematics: What counts? International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology, 44, 972–983.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hoyles, C., Noss, R., & Pozzi, S. (2001). Proportinal reasoning in nursing practice. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 32, 4–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Johnson, S., Hodges, M., & Monk, M. (2000). Teacher development and change in South Africa: A critique of the appropriateness of transfer of northern/western practice. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 30, 179–192.Google Scholar
  22. Lee-Chua, Q. (2011, October 30). Misunderstanding UBD. Philippine Daily Inquirer. Retrieved December 30, 2013, from
  23. Lewis, M. P. (Ed.). (2009). Ethnologue: Languages of the world (16th ed.). Dallas, Texas: SIL International. Retrieved December 30, 2013, from
  24. Martin, I. P. (2006). Language in Philippine education: Enfeebling or enabling? Asian Englishes Journal, 9(2), 48–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. McTighe J., & Wiggins, G. (2012). Understanding by Design® framework in the Philippines. Retrieved November 8, 2013, from
  26. National Institute for Science and Mathematics Education Development (NISMED) & Foundation for the Advancement of Science Education, Inc (Agham, Ink.). (2001). One hundred years of science and mathematics education in the Philippines. Quezon City, Philippines: NISMED & Agham, Ink.Google Scholar
  27. Nebres, B. (1984). The problem of universal mathematics education in developing countries. In P. Damerow, M. E. Dunkley, B. F. Nebres, & B. Werry (Eds.), Mathematics for all. Paris, France: UNESCO.Google Scholar
  28. Nebres, B. (1988). School mathematics in the 1990’s: Recent trends and the challenge to developing countries (Plenary Address). In A. Hirst & K. Hirst (Eds.), Proceedings of the Sixth International Congress on Mathematical Education (pp. 11–28). Budapest, Hungary: ICME.Google Scholar
  29. Nebres, B. (2006). Philippine perspective on the ICMI comparative study. In F. K. S. Leung, K.-D. Graf, & F. J. Lopez-Real (Eds.), Mathematics education in different cultural traditions: A comparative study of East Asia and the West (pp. 277–284). New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Nolasco, R. M. (2008). The prospects of multilingual education and literacy in the Philippines. Paper presented at the 2nd International Conference on Language Development, Language Revitalization, and Multilingual Education in Ethnolinguistic Communities, Bangkok. Retrieved December 30, 2013, from
  31. Perry, B., Vistro-Yu, C., Howard, P., Wong, N.-Y., & Keong, F. H. (2002). Beliefs of primary teachers about mathematics and its teaching and learning: Views from Singapore, Philippines, Mainland China, Hong Kong, Taiwan, and Australia. In B. Barton, K. C. Irwin, M. Pfannkuch, & M. O. J. Thomas (Eds.) Mathematics education in the South Pacific (Proceedings of the 25th Annual Conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia, Auckland, pp. 551–558). Sydney: MERGA.Google Scholar
  32. Polya, G. (1962). Mathematical discovery: On understanding, learning and teaching problem solving: Volume I. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  33. Posel, D., & Casale, D. (2011). Language proficiency and language policy in South Africa: Findings from new data. International Journal of Educational Development, 31, 419–426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Roth, W. M. (2005). Mathematical inscriptions and the reflexive elaboration of understanding: An ethnography of graphing and numeracy in a fish hatchery. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 7(2), 75–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Science Education Institute of the Department of Science and Technology [DOST-SEI] & Philippine Council of Mathematics Teacher Educators [MATHTED]. (2011). Mathematics framework for Philippine basic education. Quezon City: DOST-SEI & MATHTED.Google Scholar
  36. Scriven, M., & Paul, R. (1987). Defining critical thinking. Retrieved December 30, 2013, from
  37. Shulman, L. (1986). Knowledge growth in teaching: Those who understand. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Southeast Asian Ministers of Education Organization [SEAMEO] Regional Center for Educational Innovation and Technology [INNOTECH]. (2012). K to 12 toolkit. Quezon City, Philippines: SEAMEO INNOTECH.Google Scholar
  39. Thoms, J. J. (2012). Classroom discourse in foreign language classrooms: A review of the literature. Foreign Language Annals, 45(S1), S8–S27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Triantafillou, C. (2011). Mathematical literacy skills in a workplace context: The case of reading and interpreting data. In B. Ubuz (Ed.) Proceedings of the 35th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol. 4, pp. 265–272). Ankara, Turkey, PME.Google Scholar
  41. University of the Philippines Baguio. (1996). The algebra of weaving patterns, gong music, and kinship system of the Kankana-ey of Mountain Province. Pasig City: DepEd and UP.Google Scholar
  42. van den Berg. E. (2009). A case study of pedagogical content knowledge and faculty development in the Philippines. Retrieved from the Digital Academic Repository of Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  43. van den Berg, E., Locaylocay, J. R., & Gallos, M. R. (2007). Ten best practices in a science and mathematics teacher education program in the Philippines. In M. Nagao, J. M. Rogan, & M. C. Magno (Eds.), Mathematics and science education in developing countries: Issues, experiences, and cooperation prospects (pp. 231–251). Quezon City, Philippines: The University of the Philippines Press.Google Scholar
  44. Verzosa, D., & Mulligan, J. (2013). Learning to solve addition and subtraction word problems in English as an imported language. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 82, 223–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Vistro-Yu, C. (2010). Ethnomathematics for capacity building in mathematics education. Intersection, 11, 2–15.Google Scholar
  46. Walter, S. L., & Dekker, D. E. (2011). Mother tongue instruction in Lubuagan: A case study from the Philippines. International Review of Education, 57, 667–683.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Wedell, M. (2005). Cascading training down into the classroom: The need for parallel planning. International Journal of Educational Development, 25(6), 637–651.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by design (2nd ed.). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.Google Scholar
  49. World Bank & Australian Aid. (2012). Philippines: Basic education public expenditure review. Manila: Author.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Debbie Marie B. Verzosa
    • 1
  • Catherine P. Vistro-Yu
    • 2
    Email author
  1. 1.University of Southern MindanaoKabacanPhilippines
  2. 2.Ateneo de Manila UniversityQuezon CityPhilippines

Personalised recommendations