Although earlier studies found negative or inconclusive results, more recent studies have generally been supportive of the Whorf hypothesis formulated by Benjamin Lee Whorf. This hypothesis contends that language, culture, and cognition are interrelated; individuals with different linguistic and cultural backgrounds think differently because language shapes thought as languages “carve up” reality in different ways.

Cognitive revolutions are fueled by the language used to teach children. Levinson (2001) tells us that, “When a child learns a language, he or she is undergoing a cognitive revolution, learning to construct new macro-concepts. These macro concepts which are part of our cultural baggage are precisely the contribution of language to our thinking. Language invades our thinking because languages are good to think with.”

Asian languages represent numbers differently than English. According to David Carroll (Psychology of Language, 5th edition, ©2008), Asian-speaking children are more natural at counting numbers than English-speaking children. It is unfortunate that Filipino children are deprived of their Asian language mother tongue advantage in mathematics which is taught in English.

Nihongo, Hangeul, and Mandarin-speaking children are better at counting from 11 (eleven) to 99 (ninety-nine) than English-speaking children. The English child carries the extra burden of understanding the sense of numerals “eleven, twelve, thirteen, fourteen, fifteen, sixteen, seventeen, eighteen, nineteen.” In contrast, Japanese children can effortlessly cognize “ju ichi, ju ni, ju san, ju yon, ju go, ju roku, ju shichi, ju hachi, ju kyu,” because there is the marker “ju” which means 10 (ten) preceding each added number for 1 up to 9 (ichi, ni, san, yon, go, roku, shichi, hachi, kyu). It is comparable to Tagalog’s labing-isa, labindalawa, labintatlo, labing-apat, labinlima , labing-anim, labimpito,labing-walo at labinsiyam. These numerals are analogous to Bisaya’s napulog-usa, napulog-duha, napulog-tulo, napulog-upat, napulog-lima, napulog-unom, napulog-pito, napulog-walo, napulog-siyam. As a consequence, an Asian child finds little difficulty in figuring out addition, subtraction, multiplication and division of numbers. The Asian child is stereotyped as a math genius compared to his or her American counterpart. Although language is only one aspect that influences mathematical intelligence, it appears that Asian languages provide an advantage with regard to numbers and mathematical calculations.

The DepEd hierarchy continue to be fixated with celebrating achievements of the gifted few while ignoring the rest of the cohort’s mediocre academic performance that hinder higher order thinking skills. Aside from being distracted with non-essentials, it cannot be denied that those in charge are apparently keen on preserving the colonial bias for English as primary medium of instruction in spite of the fact that it is not the primary language of most Filipinos, especially among the poor and the powerless. DepEd officials remind me of birdbrained shamans as they promote the delusional belief that proficiency in this branch of the Germanic language family tree will inexplicably catapult the nation to a higher income per capita economy and radically ameliorate our ranking in PISA,TMMS and SEA-PLM. They refuse to acknowledge the fact that the Constitution pigeonholed English as an expendable language that can be dropped as an official language of communication anytime by law. In contrast, Filipino and local languages that all belong to the Austronesian language family tree can never be discarded even by law.

According to Kimmo Kosonen (2017) Southeast Asian language of instruction policies have traditionally emphasized the official and national languages. However, over the past two decades, a movement towards multilingual education (MLE) has arisen in the region. Currently, policy support for the use of minority learners’ home languages differs widely between Southeast Asian nations. Multilingual education which includes learners’ home language is increasing in Cambodia, the Philippines, Thailand, Timor-Leste, and Viet Nam. It is utterly unsound for the Philippines to reverse course when the rest of Southeast Asia are getting to be more inclusive in their language in education policies.

The cognitive revolution brought about by the all-inclusive multi lingual language in education policy shift that started in 2013 in the Philippines is taking place with or without confidential funds. It is about time decisionmakers abandon their Americanization mindset and hearken to the resonating footfalls of teachers and their students buying in to this cognitive revolution fueled by the 170 Asian languages of the vast majority of the weak and powerless Filipinos that have been dismissed as worthless by the rich and powerful Pacific Negroes who control the State.