Abstract

The ways in which indigenous peoples’ identities are constructed in social studies textbooks in the Philippines and the discursive and social practices that are at play in this construction are the overarching issues that animate this paper. Using Fairclough’s Three-Tiered Model for Critical Discourse Analysis, three different contextual levels are examined: text, discursive practice, and social practice. A “critical” reading of the selected textbooks reveals some recurrent themes that could be clustered into two prongs: the seeming hegemonic and condescending attitude towards indigenous peoples; and the counter-hegemonic, agentive, and civilized side. On the one hand, the dominant and pejorative views about indigenous peoples include the imaginaries of indigenous peoples as poor, marginalized, and inferior, and the shifting, ambiguous, and selective use of the word “indigenous” to refer to different groups hi the Philippines with references to certain binaries such as remote and backward, or urban and civilized. On the other hand, there are also more emancipatory and agentive views that include references to indigenous peoples as civilized, endowed with rights, partners in development, and as part of the Filipino nation. This paper links these constructions of indigenous peoples to textbook policy reforms and the disjuncture between educational philosophy and curriculum development in the Philippines. It also reflects on how the colonial past, postcolonial nation-building and contemporary globalization have unsettled notions of “Filipinoness” and ushered in the normalization of die “mainstream” and the “other.” Lastly, this paper offers die possibility that these texts, despite their symbolic violence, can be viewed as possible spaces for counter-discursive practices.