Rep. Antonio Tinio of the ACT Teachers Party-list has raised serious concerns over the Department of Education’s (DepEd) proposed shift to a three-semester (trisem) school calendar. The plan’s 10-day end-of-term block unrealistically crams multiple major requirements into a very short period, setting up schools, teachers, and learners for rushed compliance, greater workload, and weaker learning support.
Unrealistic 10-Day Block
The proposal creates a 10-day end-of-term block where DepEd wants to fit nearly everything at once. According to Tinio, you cannot squeeze remedial learning, grading and paperwork, co-curricular activities, report distribution, teacher training, and wellness breaks into ten days without sacrificing quality and without overburdening teachers.
DepEd’s own end-of-term schedule attempts to compress the following into a single 10-day window:
- Academic Recovery and Accessible Learning (ARAL) Program implementation
- Computation of grades and completion of school forms
- Co-curricular and extracurricular activities
- Distribution of progress/performance reports
- In-service training for teachers
- Wellness break for learners
- Wellness break for teachers
Tinio emphasized that cramming ARAL, grading, school forms, activities, release of report cards, In-Service Training (INSET), and wellness breaks into ten days is unrealistic. Ultimately, teachers will be burdened and children will lose quality support.
Wellness Breaks at Risk
The setup risks turning “wellness breaks” into paper breaks only, as teachers are pressured to finish grading, accomplish forms, attend trainings, and comply with multiple end-of-term deliverables while also being tasked to implement learning interventions. Tinio stated, “If DepEd wants wellness, it must protect actual time and reduce load — not rename overloaded days as ‘wellness breaks.’”
Insufficient Learning Time
The proposed calendar fails to address the core problem of insufficient learning time. Under the proposed three-term setup, total contact time between teachers and learners will only be around 173 days. This does not solve the learning crisis; it institutionalizes reduced instructional time and normalizes learning loss.
Tinio noted that the Department has not presented a single pilot study demonstrating that shifting to a three-term calendar is an effective intervention to address learning gaps. He asked, “How can we gamble with our children’s future based on a mere hunch, especially when shortages in classrooms, seats, textbooks, and other basic resources remain persistent?”
He added that there is no scientific basis for this proposal. DepEd is replacing real solutions to shortages in classrooms and equipment with an unproven calendar experiment.
Lack of Consultation
Tinio pointed out a lack of meaningful consultation with major teachers’ organizations and unions before the policy was floated. Changes of this scale cannot be imposed top-down and then forced onto schools to implement on the ground. He stressed that such a huge change cannot be suddenly handed down and passed on to schools to deal with implementation. Major organizations and unions, including the ACT NCR Union and other rank-and-file representatives, should have been consulted.
Call for Pause and Evidence
The lawmaker urged DepEd to pause any rushed rollout, present the evidence base for the proposal, and open genuine consultations with teachers and education workers, especially on workload impacts and the feasibility of the end-of-term requirements. Reforms should help teachers teach and learners learn. A calendar that compresses essential tasks into an unworkable 10-day block and cuts down contact time without evidence will only deepen the education crisis.
