The newest assessment snapshots should end the era of excuses. Filipino learners are not mastering foundational skills early, and gaps widen with every grade. If we read the data honestly, one reform rises to the top in a multilingual country—teach children first in the language they use at home.

EDCOM 2’s analysis of DepEd standardized assessments (2023–2025) shows a sharp decline in the share of learners rated “proficient” to “highly proficient” as they advance through basic education. In 2024, the Early Language, Literacy, and Numeracy Assessment (ELLNA) found only 30.52 percent of Grade 3 learners reached proficiency. That means roughly seven in 10 Grade 3 children still struggle with basics: recognizing letters and sounds, reading common words, understanding short passages, counting independently, and solving simple numerical problems. By Grade 6, the 2024 National Achievement Test snapshot shows proficiency falling to 19.56 percent—about one in five.

These are not just percentages; they are doors closing. EDCOM 2 notes that nearly half of learners are not reading at grade level by the end of Grade 3, and that disadvantage hardens into a learning gap of 5.5 years by age 15. International results echo the same story: by age 15, 76 percent of Filipino students score below minimum proficiency in Reading (PISA), and UNICEF and the World Bank report that 91 percent of late-primary-age children cannot read and understand a simple story.

DepEd Order No. 55, s. 2016 exists precisely to prevent denial. It requires system-level assessments by key stage, administered to representative samples, to monitor whether students are meeting learning standards and to guide priorities and reforms. The assessments are doing their job: they are revealing, in plain numbers, a system-wide failure to secure the basics early.

We should also interpret labels carefully. Under current rules, students scoring at least 75 percent are deemed “proficient” or “highly proficient,” while 50–74 percent is “nearly proficient.” A PIDS study commissioned by EDCOM 2 suggests that standard-setting methods could classify more students as proficient than the current 75 percent threshold—hinting that the bar may be miscalibrated. But even if we adjust cut scores, the pattern remains: too many children cannot read well enough, early enough, to keep up.

So where do reforms begin? Start with the most basic question: do children understand the language of instruction?

The Philippines is not monolingual. Children arrive at school making sense of the world in Cebuano, Ilocano, Waray, Hiligaynon, Kapampangan, Tausug, Chavacano, Tagalog, and dozens of other languages—often mixed naturally. Yet many are expected to begin reading, problem-solving, and “comprehending” in a school language that is not the one they use at home. When the language is unfamiliar, learners spend mental energy translating instead of learning. Reading acquisition slows, comprehension weakens, and math becomes a vocabulary test rather than a logic exercise. In the early grades, this language mismatch can be the first shove down a slope that ends in years of accumulated loss.

Teaching in the home language is not anti-Filipino or anti-English. It is pro-learning. The goal is not to keep children in one language; it is to give them a strong foundation—decoding, fluency, comprehension, and confidence—so they can transfer those skills to Filipino and English more effectively. Strong first-language literacy is a bridge, not a barrier.

What would a serious “teach in the language of home” reform look like?

First, make early-grade instruction language-realistic. In Kindergarten to Grade 3, prioritize literacy and numeracy teaching in the dominant community language or the learner’s most used home language, while building oral Filipino and oral English daily. Transition to reading and writing in Filipino and English should be planned and paced—never abrupt, never assumed.

Second, fund materials that match policy: decodable readers, graded texts, teacher guides, and assessments in the local language. Without these, teachers will revert to whatever exists, aligned or not.

Third, train and coach teachers for multilingual classrooms. Teachers need practical support on teaching early reading in the local language, using code-switching strategically to build meaning, bridging vocabulary across languages, and spotting reading difficulties early.

Fourth, diagnose early and intervene fast. Use diagnostics in the language of instruction to identify who cannot decode and who cannot comprehend. Pair this with sustained remediation so Grade 3 is not the point where gaps harden into permanent disadvantage.

Finally, prioritize the most vulnerable. In GIDA and Last Mile Schools, the most recent assessments show only 0.13 percent of Grade 12 learners reached proficiency, with none highly proficient. These schools need the strongest support first: smaller instructional groups, specialized literacy assistance, adequate learning resources, and consistent coaching.

The data is already telling us where the crisis begins: the earliest grades. Multiculturalism, in education, is not just a celebration of identity. It is a design principle: teach in the language children understand, secure the foundations early, and then build multilingual mastery with confidence. Read the data—and institute reforms that match who our learners are. We can’t afford another lost cohort, period.