It is the chief glory of American connection with the Philippines, that no sooner was their easy conquest an assured fact, than attention was directed toward the education of the peoples who thus came under the control of the western democracy. In spite of the more than three centuries of Spanish rule, although many measures had been dictated by the government and by the religious orders, although the college of San JosÉ, the Dominican university of Santo TomÁs, the college of San Juan de Letran, and various other institutions had flourished for the greater or less part of Spanish domination, and especially, although the active government measures, beginning with the memorable decree of December 20, 1863, had induced a wider result in primary instruction, the educational methods in force in the islands were antiquated, often without result, and narrowing, and to a certain degree tended to shackle rather than to free the mind. The best work was done by the Jesuits who had adopted the most progressive methods used in the islands during Spanish occupancy. The religious orders are not without praise for having established, as early as they did, educational institutions where some Filipinos could, to a certain extent, take on the advantages of the occidental polish and education which Spain had to offer. But it must be remembered that Spain itself has never, since the early days when the great Salamanca University flourished as one of the most advanced outposts of education in the world, been renowned as a center of learning. Hence, it may be said, whatever the cause for its deficiency, that Spain gave to the Philippines the best that it had in the way of education; with the reservation that the remoteness of the colony from the mother country gave opportunity for neglect and carelessness on the part of both official and ecclesiastic, and for the furthering of private or corporation ends, at the expense of and detriment to the colony. Quite apparently, a country cannot give to a colony what it does not itself possess. Had Spain possessed a more modern and effective system of education, doubtless the same would have been true in the Philippines. To determine the reason for the backwardness of education in the islands, therefore, one must examine the causes for its poor condition in Spain, and the two will be found in great measure to be the same. The root of the matter will be found in the close connection between Church and State—this connection dating back in greatest measure to 1493, when the ecclesiastical patronage of the Spanish monarch became a settled fact, and Church and State were irrevocably bound together—and a misconception as to where the educational function primarily resides—which we take to be a function of government.

We cannot, in the short compass allowed, enter into the discussion of the factors involved, the most important of which is the question of the friar orders and the transference of their power in greater proportion even than in Spain, into the Philippines. Suffice it to say here that those who would blame the friar orders exclusively for the backward state of the Philippines in education as in other things, go astray; and the same is equally true of those who would excuse them altogether. The same remark holds true of the government. Both the religious orders, or even more broadly, the entire ecclesiastical government, and the civil government, are to be reproached for the deplorable condition of Philippine education.

It is the results of the pre-American education that allows the following to be said: “The party which follows the intellectual leadership of Leon Guerrero (director of El Renacimiento) is quietly resisting what they call the ‘Anglo-Saxonization’ of their people through the schools. These men are really Spanish at heart (the older, mostly so in blood), and they have a Spanish-Latin feeling of hostility to the very name of ‘Anglo-Saxon.’ They prefer Latin education and educational methods, and Latin molds of civilization. Where they go astray is in their assumption, entirely gratuitous, that they really represent the Filipino people and Filipino ways of thought, desires and aspirations which are to be ‘squelched’ by this new campaign of instruction in English. Now, superficially, there are little evidences to corroborate this view, as would be inevitable, as the results of three centuries of tutelage according to Spanish models. But the man who looks beneath the surface sees at once that the Filipinos are not ‘Latins’ and were not ‘Latinized,’ and that these intellectual Latins, floating at the top of Filipino society are as mistaken as can be in assuming that they are representative of their people. The truth is, the Filipinos, in the mass, are, as regards the purposes of any real education, virgin material to work upon. Not only has their national and social life not been cast over in Latin molds, but Spanish influence was just sufficient, added to their undeveloped state at the time of the conquest, so that there are no ‘Filipino molds’ of civilization. They are really just ready to be worked upon, and whatever fundamental elements of ‘Filipino nationality’ there are latent, whatever inherent or acquired social traits properly constituting a ‘Filipino soul,’ will come to the front with this new opportunity.”1

It is impossible to give a comprehensive rÉsumÉ of American efforts toward the education of the Filipinos. The captious critic will emphasize the mistakes which have been made and which will be made in the future, and it is yet perhaps too early to make a pronounced statement as to the results; but this much may be said, and in no spirit of American self-congratulation, namely, that the Filipino is at present enjoying the greatest opportunity that has ever been offered to him to acquire an education. The chief problem of the Philippines has well been said to be that of education.2 Chief among future developments must be industrial education, which will not only train rightly the great dexterity of the Filipino, but also teach him the dignity of work with the hands, whatever his rank or station, and thus help to fit him for, and hasten the time when he shall enjoy greater self-government than he enjoys at present.

Below we give the direct available sources for a study of American education in the Philippines, from which the student may be able to study the question in its many phases. It is to be noted that a study of the present-day education in the islands must always be made hand-in-hand with that of the past. As might be expected, the majority of such sources are government documents.

Public Laws and Resolutions passed by the United States Philippine Commission (published by authority of the U. S. Philippine Commission, Manila). The various volumes of these laws contain the following acts concerned with education (number of act and date alone being given).

Of these the most important is act no. 74 (and its various amendments), establishing a Department of Public Instruction in the Philippines, and appropriating $40,000 for the organization and maintenance of a normal and trade school in Manila, and $15,000 for the organization and maintenance of an agricultural school in the island of Negros, for the year 1901. Many of the acts are appropriations for various purposes. In addition to the above, acts touching archives and laboratories, as well as various other matters, may be considered as having educational value.

Reports of the Philippine Commission (Washington). Of chief value in this publication are the annual reports of the Secretary of Public Instruction, such reports beginning for the year 1902. It is to be noted that these reports contain the following (we cite from the Commission report for 1905, just issued): General report of the secretary of Public Instruction; report of the superintendent of Education; report of the chief of the Bureau of Architecture and Construction of Public Buildings; report of the Public Printer; report of the Bureau of Archives, Patents, Copyrights, etc.; report of the acting librarian of the American circulating Library; report of the editor of the Official Gazette. Special references in the various reports are as follows:

In addition to the above much other educational matter will be found scattered through the other volumes for each year. These volumes are also published separately in the Reports of the War Department.

Reports of the Commissioner of Education (Washington). Several of these reports contain matter on the Philippines, as follows:

Bulletins of the Bureau of Education (Manila, 1904 and 1905), as follows:

Municipal Code (Manila, 1905). Contains matter on schools, teachers, etc.

Census of the Philippine Islands (Washington, 1905), iii, pp. 638–669, “[Education] under the Americans,” by Prescott F. Jernegan, of the Philippine Normal School (a short account through 1903). Also, another division entitled, “Schools: schedule; summary of statistics; classification; buildings; teachers; pupils; sources of revenue; expenditures,” pp. 670–694.

Bulletin of the Bureau of Labor. No. 58, May, 1905 (Washington, 1905), pp. 721–905, “Labor Conditions in the Philippines,” by Victor S. Clark. Much of this will be found to have a bearing on education.

Books on the Philippines

Atkinson, Fred W.: The Philippine Islands (Ginn and Co., 1905); especially chap. xiv, pp. 373–412, “Education.”

Freer, William B.: Philippine experiences of an American teacher (New York, 1906).

LeRoy, James A.: Philippine Life in town and country (New York and London, 1905); especially chap. vii, pp. 202–245, “Education and public opinion.” Most of this book has a bearing on educational matters.

Stuntz, Homer C.: The Philippines and the Far East (Cincinnati and New York); especially chap. xii, pp. 185–215, “Educating a nation.”

Willis, Henry Parker: Our Philippine problem (New York, 1905), especially chap. x, pp. 226–246, “American education in the Philippines.” See a criticism of this book by James A. LeRoy, in Political Science Quarterly, for June, 1906.

We shall bring this brief statement regarding American education in the Philippines to a close with a short abstract of the recent address by Dr. T. H. Pardo de Tavera, before the teachers assembled at Manila in order to attend the Summer Institute, founded by the director of Public Instruction, and inaugurated this year, and published in the supplement of the issue of May 17, 1906, of El Renacimiento. His point of view of true civilization and education is in the main that they are the resultant of not one but of many factors, and that those of one race may be debtors to another race and yet not lose their identity. True progress does not consist in exclusiveness but in the admittance of all that is good notwithstanding its source. By adopting Anglo-Saxon civilization and education, Filipinos will not weaken, but strengthen themselves. The viewpoint of a people may change, and must change often in order that they may progress. To speak of special mentalities is vague and misleading. On whatever side the situation of the Philippines be considered, he says, whether political, social, or economic, it is seen that “public instruction is the chief factor, to which we should direct the most vigorous action of our energies.” Progress is the direct and necessary result of education, and the Filipinos realizing this desire the extension of schools. It has often been said that the Filipinos need an education in harmony with their customs and traditions, in order that they may preserve their peculiar manner of existence, or “that the conscience called poetically ‘the Filipino soul’ might not be changed or disfigured.” Let those who criticize the American method of education, on the ground that it is destroying the “Filipino soul” define that term, and name the characteristic qualities belonging to it, which will disappear with the new education; and let them propose a system of education. Some wish to preserve the traditional education of Filipinos which is conservative and exclusive. The teaching of Filipinos, since Spain is a Catholic monarchy, where the divine origin of rulers is a tenet, has always been dogmatic, and blind obedience is to be given to the government. Such teaching produces a conservative and exclusive society, which is opposed to change. The Filipinos desire a democratic government, but their traditions and education form in them a mentality quite opposed to democratic ideas. Consequently, they must first change their mental viewpoint before they can become democratic. It must be a work of peaceful evolution, through free instruction. Living as they are now under a democratic form of government, Filipinos should adopt a form of education in accordance with the ideals of democracy. The two forces working in the formation of the character of individuals, and hence peoples, are conservatism and the reforming force, the latter of which means progress and constitutes education. Those peoples who do not progress live under the laws of conservatism, inheritance, and tradition. Those progress who have conquered inherited and traditional traits by means of education. Some races are inferior to others, but that inferiority is not necessarily permanent. Inferiority is purely an historical cause, and inferior races are those that preserve their national soul unchanged through the centuries. The Spanish race is not inferior to the Anglo-Saxon, but its education is under a political and religious dogmatism which has made of Spain a country with a traditional and truly conservative soul. Italy has gone through and is even now going through a period of regeneration. In Spain, men are struggling for better education based on Anglo-Saxon principles.3 Before the Filipino revolution, many Filipinos were sent to Europe to study without any fear of destroying the “Filipino soul;” but now that the civilization that they went to seek has sought them, under the form of Anglo-Saxon public instruction, there is a strange reaction. The Franks and Gauls who submitted to Roman civilization have not lost their peculiar identity. Had they not adopted the Roman civilization, their condition would have been that of the Malays under British domination, who are now inferior. Since they did adopt it they were enabled to raise their coefficient of capacity. The Filipino mentality has been already changed by Spanish education, the customs and life of the two races having been quite distinct. Civilization is the result of the contact of peoples by means of which the victories obtained in all departments of intelligence and morality may be increased, perfected, and transmitted from one to another. Anglo-Saxon education will not cause the Filipinos to lose their desire for independence. The Filipino revolution was started by men who received a Spanish education. The entire Filipinist movement was guided by men educated in Europe and the University, the latter of which was Spanish. They were broader men. The Anglo-Saxon education cannot make submissive peoples. It is destined to form individuals capable of thinking for themselves, and of working according to their own impulses. Those civilizations that mark an epoch in history were the result of other civilizations. The Anglo-Saxon race today bear the torch of civilization formerly borne by the Romans. The Anglo-Saxon civilization will extend, but not Anglo-Saxon domination. The Japanese are an example of a race who have changed their standpoint in regard to civilization. Filipino mentality is composed of good and bad traits. Complete education must be arrived at by conserving the good and eliminating the bad. Complete assimilation cannot take place. The Filipino character cannot entirely change, for the instruction in the schools is not sufficient to cause such a radical change. Happiness does not consist in seeking easeful and unresponsible repose, but in the struggle for existence that entails work. Filipinos must learn that true progress comes through struggle and a show of energy. The Filipinos are intelligent, easy to educate, and prepared by their Spanish education of three centuries for the new education now offered them. Education means advance. The greater means of communication that are to be established will aid in the work by destroying inequalities and composing differences. The various dialects are a great barrier to Filipino homogeneity, and a common language is needed. The Filipino people free and capable of self-government will be formed by the American and Filipino teachers. “Filipino soul”4 is a poetical expression which reveals a poetical mentality in those who use it. Such mentality is insufficient for the progress of a people along the true path of modern civilization.