Teachers and Wiki volunteers at Bislig Elementary School during the Wiki Advocates PH Outreach Activity | Photo via Wikimedia Commons
EDCOM II, the 2nd Congressional Commission on Education, documented mass promotion as a systemic issue driven by performance incentives tied to high promotion rates, low dropout rates, and zero dropouts. This practice persists despite the absence of an official DepEd policy, as teachers and principals face pressure from metrics in the Results-Based Performance Management System (RPMS) and the Office Performance Commitment and Review Form (OPCRF).
EDCOM II’s “Turning Point” report, released in January 2026, confirmed mass promotion as a “de facto” culture that inflates achievement data and hinders learning recovery. Independent assessments showed non-proficiency rising from 30% in Grade 3 to 74% in Grade 12, despite near-100% promotion rates, with only 200,000 students retained amid declining proficiency. Schools promote failing students to avoid scrutiny, as retention triggers approvals and blame for “failure rates,” distorting data for curriculum reforms.
RPMS and OPCRF link teacher evaluations to completion, passing, and dropout rates, incentivizing mass promotion over mastery. EDCOM II found these “headline metrics” pressure educators, with principals discouraging failures; earlier critiques noted evaluations prioritize zero dropouts over learning quality. Grade transmutation further enables the passage of unqualified students, thereby weakening standards.
EDCOM II urges revising RPMS/OPCRF by 2027 to remove promotion/dropout incentives, protect teacher judgment, and shift to learning-focused metrics. It calls for phasing out mass promotion and transmutation by 2027-2028, paired with remediation such as the ARAL Program’s tutoring, and for using data for targeted support rather than penalties. The 2026-2035 National Education Plan sets 90% proficiency targets by 2035.
RPMS (Results-Based Performance Management System) and OPCRF (Office Performance Commitment and Review Form) guide DepEd teacher evaluations through a four-phase cycle: planning, monitoring, review, and rewarding. Teachers use the Individual Performance Commitment and Review Form (IPCRF), aligned with RPMS-PPST (Philippine Professional Standards for Teachers), with incentives tied to meeting Key Result Areas (KRAs) such as learner outcomes.
“Clearly, a greater reliance on internationally benchmarked learning is needed. We fool only ourselves when the educational subculture increasingly reflects the corrupt society at large.”
RPMS covers all DepEd personnel, using SMART objectives under 3-5 KRAs weighted by priority (e.g., 40% for top KRA), assessed on quality, efficiency, and timeliness. Performance indicators are scored on a 1-5 scale (Poor to Outstanding), with final ratings computed as weighted averages; for example, Outstanding (4.50-5.00) requires exceeding targets. Competencies are assessed separately for development, not final ratings.
High ratings qualify for Performance-Based Bonus (PBB), PRAISE awards, and top 5% recognition ceremonies. School heads’ OPCRF explicitly incentivizes zero dropout (5 points for 0%), 100% completion/promotion/graduation rates (5 points), sustaining enrollment, and literacy gains. Teachers’ KRAs are indirectly linked via instructional leadership; low dropout rates/high promotion rates boost ratings, although EDCOM II critiques this as encouraging mass promotion.
These metrics pressure educators, as poor ratings trigger interventions or administrative action.
When DepEd policymakers developed the current teacher and principal assessment methodology, the emphasis was on how the assessments could be manipulated to maximize bonuses, a practice now evident. It was never about student achievement, success, or performance. Put succinctly, an honest annual competency examination for both students and teachers needs to be in place. An instructor’s competency cannot be based on how many of their own students they can promote to the next grade, but rather on how many of those students can demonstrate grade-level basic competencies. Clearly, a greater reliance on internationally benchmarked learning is needed. We fool only ourselves when the educational subculture increasingly reflects the corrupt society at large.
