The Philippines' Cebu's first district Representative Eduardo Gullas has been lobbying on his English Bill for years, but since the bill's introduction in 2004, it has "accumulated dust." The English Bill believes that to be globally competitive, Filipinos should be proficient in the English language. With this belief, the bill proposes that English should be the mandatory medium of instruction in all Philippine schools. The argument of the bill, of course, is flawed, but from one perspective, the English Bill may be one of the solutions to the country's ailing English proficiency. Rep. Gullas may have a point.

The Philippines, for years, has boasted its excellent grasp of the English language, but recent English proficiency test results suggest that the country should not be holding on to this belief forever. Actually, one need not rely on test results to see that the Philippines indeed has English issues. Here is a simple test. Ask some people for directions, and then count how many of them can give you a clear answer in straight English. Some educated may even fail this simple test.

What, then, should be done?

Some detractors of the English Bill argue that it is not dwindling or low English proficiency that makes the Philippines "globally uncompetitive." They are correct. The Koreans admit that they are poor in English, but Korea is one of the fastest growing economies in the world. How did they manage to develop and grow so rich after the Civil War with just mountains for resources? There are many factors, of course, but perhaps their one strategy that greatly paid off was when they emphasized the industrial sector. They capitalized on science and technology teaching Math and Science in their native tongue.

But the Koreans didn't stop there. They also understand that communication and language are important and that to attain full competitiveness, they must speak the world language. And now they are learning English - as a second language.

I understand what Rep. Eduardo Gullas is trying to say. Not much is done by our government to acknowledge our people's skills and persuade them to stay, so they seek greener pastures. There is a pressing demand to fill in the hospitality, medical, education, and outsourcing industries of rich countries, and most of our countrymen want to earn more money by getting hired in these industries. The problem is, Filipinos are not the only ones wanting to supply America's and other opulent countries' demands. We face competition from our Chinese and Indian brothers, and English proficiency definitely plays a role in the competition. With poor English skills, we cannot be "globally competitive" in these fields.

But I also see and understand the anti-English Bill's arguments. Language or English is not the (only) key to global competitiveness, and when English is made the mandatory medium of instruction, it may "hurt learning" especially in Science and Math. On a side note, a UNESCO study finds that teaching Science and Math in the mother tongue is more effective than when taught in a second or foreign language like English. The anti-English Bill say that if the Philippines want to be competitive, we should invest in science and technology and produce brilliant scientists and mathematicians so that we can create sophisticated technologies that can compete with those manufactured by Samsung, Microsoft, and Apple. But as I said, global competitiveness has many requirements.

To appease both sides, I say Rep. Gullas should re-draft his bill and consider this: We should introduce ESL programs in Philippine schools and teach Science and Mathematics in the native tongue.

There are many English programs that can be taught depending on some factors such as the needs and purpose of the student and the country or location he wants to study, live, or use English in. ESL is English taught in a country where the primary language is English. On the other hand, English taught in countries where English is not the main language is EFL or English as a Foreign Language. If we stick to definitions -- and I suggest we should at least for now to avoid confusion -- EFL is the English taught in the Philippines, Taiwan, Japan, South Korea, and all countries where English is not the main language.

So why ESL?

ESL is about communicative competence. If you went to elementary and high school in the Philippines, you know that the goal of your English classes is mainly on grammar competence, not really on communicative competence. In short, you can speak the language well because you wanted to learn it, and so you trained yourself. Your learning process went past the classroom. Your classmates who did not think it necessary to hone their English skills or just relied on what your English teacher taught probably know a thing or two about grammar but may stutter a lot when asked to speak English. So, if we adopt or add the ESL curriculum, we can achieve both grammar and communicative competence.

It is also worth mentioning that the ESL curriculum is different from your ordinary English classes. ESL is about language functions and survival. It is about learning how to speak enough language to function in a country where English is the predominant language. It is about practical English. It is about using English outside the classroom. Those wishing to go abroad will find ESL useful.

In ESL, English is not mandatory. English is taught at the learners' pace while still being able to get the best education possible, and thus it does not hurt learning as some people fear once English becomes the mandatory medium of instruction in all schools in the country.

Of course, teacher quality and other things should also be considered. I said this before, and I'll say it again. Before one can become an English teacher, he should possess three things: excellent English skills, good teaching skills, and extensive knowledge of English.

Some private schools and colleges in the Philippines already started adopting the ESL curriculum and hiring native speakers for their ESL programs. I say this is a good start. At least the private sector is brave enough to admit and do something about the problem on English proficiency.

We all want a knowledgeable civil engineer with excellent communication skills who can easily direct construction engineers in the building of a new bridge, so why don't we invest in English, Science, Math, and education, in general, now?

Ande Geronimo, EFL Teacher Trainer: Your one and ultimate source for online English teaching http://queerenglish.blogspot.com/.