top of page

DepEd’s Controversial Distance Learning Modules



written by: Phoebe Carios

visual by: Basia Lewiniska


The Department of Education (DepEd) has resolved to produce and distribute self-learning modules (SLM) for students to better adapt to remote learning, which was implemented over a year ago. This is a great solution for many students who cannot access online classes. The offline modular alternatives, consisting of printed textbooks and radio and television-based learning, allow students to learn despite the many obstacles they face with remote learning. However, since the beginning of its execution, many netizens and critics have called out the errors and inaccuracies that came with these modules. Whether they be misprints, factual errors, or even lessons containing social prejudices and discrimination, these factors directly affect the current quality of education for 24 million remote learners nationwide.


One of the biggest concerns are the factual errors present in the modules. In one report by the DepEd Error Watch last October the modules for this school year, 41 errors were found. The most common occurrences were factual and computational errors, which made up 27 of the 41 errors. For example, a question found in the eighth grade english module contained both a grammatical and factual error, with the answer implying that the term “picturesque” was an adjective. Additionally, Taal Volcano, the question’s subject, was called a mountain. Another example would be how the solving steps to an algebraic problem aired on DepEd’s television channel were wrong, consequently resulting in a wrong answer. Other minor problems discovered were in the form of typographies, usage of the incorrect format, misprints, grammar and spelling errors, and repetitions of lesson entries with DepEd’s learning videos on Youtube. This is deeply concerning, especially the academic errors, because students have no way to fact-check these themselves. These are educational tools, which mean that students will follow and believe exactly what is written on their booklets and the possibly wrong information they may gain will not change unless someone corrects them.


Another alarming issue is the prejudiced and sometimes discriminatory ideas found in the module lessons. Many have criticized the fact that the modules contain offensive and discriminatory text against certain minorities. Modules have been noted to have blatant stereotyping, body-shaming, sexism, classism, and antiquated racial beliefs. In one textbook question, the answer implies that a criminal is identified by their tattoos. Gender stereotypes were also scattered throughout the modules. One activity that was included in the lower grade worksheets asked to identify which toys belonged to boys and girls. Students were also asked to distinguish the actions of a boy or girl in a venn diagram, such as fixing a broken faucet or singing in public. Body shaming was also not missed in the modules. A PE lesson used a celebrity as an example and called her “obese,” reasoning that she constantly ate in Mang Inasal and never did any physical activities. One of the most controversial modular content which provoked a lot of people was the illustration of a farmer’s family, stereotyping them as poor and rugged. More recent news that caused concerns from the Cordillera region were about module statements regarding Igorots, a Filipino indigenous group, and making discriminatory statements against them, disrespecting their culture and looks. This by far was the most provocative to the public, especially since it discriminates against an ethnic minority. Discussions regarding the integration of these ideas have reached the congress, demanding DepEd officials to take responsibility for these wrong teachings.


These prompted DepEd to create a watch error initiative called the DepEd Error Watch in which the public has access to modules being used and be able to point out mistakes made. They also stated that they will do something to rectify the errors made especially with the upcoming school year. A glimpse into some of the content that is being taught to Filipino students shows us that educational inequity is beyond the lack of resources. Educational inequity is present in the Philippines not just because of resource shortages, but also with the differences in morals and principles taught which overall affects education quality.


Works Cited

  • Bonz Magsambol. “30 Errors Found in DepEd’s Learning Modules.” Rappler, Rappler, 23 Oct. 2020, www.rappler.com/nation/errors-identified-deped-learning-modules-distance-learning. Accessed 13 Feb. 2021.

  • ---. “Mistakes Were Made: Errors in DepEd Distance Learning Materials.” Rappler, Rappler, 23 Oct. 2020, www.rappler.com/newsbreak/iq/distance-learning-mishaps-errors-instances-deped-failed-students-school-year-2020-2021. Accessed 13 Feb. 2021.

  • “DepEd Cordillera Seeks Correction of Modules Wrongfully Depicting Igorots.” Cnn, 2021, www.cnnphilippines.com/regional/2021/2/3/deped-cordillera-correction-wrong-modules-igorots.html. Accessed 13 Feb. 2021.

  • Domingo, Katrina. “‘Zero Tolerance’: DepEd to Issue Disclaimer on ‘Poor’ Depiction of Farmer in Module.” ABS-CBN News, ABS-CBN News, 19 Nov. 2020, news.abs-cbn.com/news/11/20/20/zero-tolerance-deped-to-issue-disclaimer-on-poor-depiction-of-farmer-in-module. Accessed 13 Feb. 2021.

  • “The Culture of Stereotyping, Body-Shaming, and Discrimination on DepEd’s Learning Module.” Thelookout.com.ph, 2020, thelookout.com.ph/article/the-culture-of-stereotyping-body-shaming-and-discrimination-on-depeds-learning-module. Accessed 13 Feb. 2021.


Comentarios


bottom of page