129-C Matatag Street, Diliman, Quezon City 1104 [email protected]




Reference: Vilma Liao, ASSERT vice-president




           Teaching as a profession, requires conscientious preparation of lessons to ensure quality in the delivery of instruction. In fact, it is emphasized in Republic Act 9155, otherwise known as “An Act Instituting a Frame Work of Governance for Basic Education, Establishing Authority and Accountability, Renaming the Department of Education, Culture and Sports as the Department of Education, and for Other Purposes,” Chapter I, Section 7, letter E, paragraph 3 that the School Head shall have authority , accountability and responsibility for implementing the school curriculum and being accountable for higher learning outcomes. To ensure that this objective is attained, the School Head must monitor the teachers’ daily preparation of lesson plans to see to it that there is quality in the delivery of instruction.

            Under Republic Act 7836, otherwise known as Code of Ethics for Professional Teachers, Section I of the provision on “The Teacher and the Community”, a teacher is a facilitator of learning and of the development of the youth; he/she shall, therefore, render the best service by providing an environment conducive to such learning and growth. In section 2 of the same Act of the provision on “A Teacher and the Profession,” every teacher shall uphold the highest possible standards of quality education, shall make the best preparations for the career of teaching, and shall be at his best at all times and in the practice of his profession. To ensure that these provisions are translated into concrete results, the teacher is expected to do careful preparations before engaging into actual classroom teaching.

            From these legal bases, we can draw out that we cannot do away with the daily preparations of lessons to ensure that the teacher is well-prepared before facing his students and to ensure that quality instruction is delivered.

            While it is true that teachers need to undergo the process of designing each daily lesson, we also believe that the process of doing so can be facilitated and can be made less time-consuming so that the teachers can devote more of their time in the preparation of instructional materials (IMs) which are very essential in the delivery of instruction because through these IMs, learning is facilitated, children’s interest is sustained, children themselves, experience doing the activities and concepts are being generated by the learners themselves.

            In the advent of DepEd Order No. 42, s. 2015, varied reactions from teachers all over the country ensued just few days after they were mandated to use the new daily lesson log (DLL). Upon interview and conducting random surveys, a lot of reasons can be drawn out from the teachers’ responses, in which most of them are quite negative. In fact, there were rumors that some teachers were already hospitalized because of this tedious preparation.

            Here are some reasons why the teachers regard the new DLL as “not teacher- friendly”:

  1. Too many steps are required in the procedure where there were only five (5) before;
  2. There were a lot of subcomponents where the teacher’s precious time is mostly consumed instead of devoting it in activities that could promote quality instruction like preparation of IMs.
  3. They are required to write a reflection which is another time-consuming activity. The teachers often ask the need for doing so when realizations can be made without translating them into written form;
  4. Teachers who are teaching one (1) subject a day due to departmentalization, experienced preparing the DLL. According to them one (1) DLL consumed two (2) hours of their time. How much more for teachers holding self-contained classes where teachers are required to prepare eight (8) DLLs a day;
  5. DLL aggravates the condition of teachers who are already loaded with too much clerical work. Among others, these clerical work that are taking too much time are the:
  • Phil-IRI
  • Numeracy
  • School Improvement Plan (SIP)
  • Continuing Improvement Plan (CIP)
  • LIS updating where teachers experience server error most of the time
  • Canteen Works for teachers in the small schools
  • Preparations of students ID because they can no longer be charged against school MOOE
  • Activities such as deworming, vaccination etc.
  • School-Based Management (SBM)
  • School Monitoring, Evaluation and Adjustment (SMEA)
  • Preparation of School Report Card
  • Narrative reports of various school activities and other DepEd programs
  • Preparations of minutes of different meetings
  • Physical Fitness Test
  • Nutritional Status Report
  • School-Based Feeding Program
  • Reports on Child Abuse Cases

In addition to these too much clerical works that are time-consuming, DepEd allows various programs from other stakeholders outside of the department which again will require the quality time of teachers that could have been spent for the children because the present trend is late dissemination of memorandum but submission is “as soon as possible (ASAP)”. The clerical works that are so required in actual teaching are not yet included in the above activities such as accomplishing Forms 1 to 7, Form 138, Form 137, computation of grades and many others.

The bottom line is that the teachers see the need for the DLL. However, they want quality time for their pupils. They do not want to be burdened with too much clerical works while delivering instruction. This had been the teachers’ perennial problem years back. They were airing their sentiments regarding these voluminous paper works but it seems that nobody sees their point. For once, let us listen to their voice. They know best how thechildren will learn. The teachers need to live and work in an environment which is free from distraction so that they can plan their lessons well. In most cases, reality shows that teachers accomplished the required DLL well but they can no longer deliver quality instruction because of exhaustion due to sleepless nights. Teachers never complain of being overworked. They were used to it. What they complain about is being blamed for achieving poor school performance when they know the real issue. They know best how to address the problem on poor performance. Poor performance accounts for lack of quality time for children not the different innovations that the department introduces. All the teachers want is to go back to the basic—spending quality time with children under their care.

Thus, in the face of all these and specifically the new DLL, we the leaders and members of ASSERT are seeking an audience with DepEd Secretary Leonor “Liling” Briones to air our grievances and find solutions to these for the betterment not only of instruction but of education as a whole.

Action and Solidarity for the Empowerment of Teachers (ASSERT)

July 29, 2016


Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *