By Estanislao Albano, Jr.
(Note: Starting this week, we will serialize our letter proving Angara was dead wrong when in a statement on May 15, 2025, he claimed that the DepEd does not have a mass promotion policy, that the practice is not pervasive and that the practice came to be accidentally. The letter was emailed on September 29, 2025 and the receipt thereof was acknowledged by the office of the Undersecretary for Curriculum and Training the following day. At the time we wrote the letter, we were not aware that Angara had in effect already legalized the unwritten mass promotion policy by repealing DepEd Order No. 45, s. 2002, which barred the promotion of non-readers to Grade 4 through DepEd Order No. 018, s. 2025. Please read our column “DepEd repeals DepEd Order No. 45, s. 2002, formalizes mass promotion policy” in the November 2, 2025 issue. At any rate, we still believe that the letter was not in vain as Angara and the DepEd were made aware that there are people who know that the DepEd is the moving force behind the mass promotion policy and although the agency is fully aware of the incalculable damage the policy is wreaking, it is still hell-bent on maintaining the policy.. The DepEd never responded to the letter.)
This is to dispute the following assertions made in the Department of Education (DepEd) statement on the subject of mass promotion posted in the “Sonny Angara” Facebook page on May 15, 2025:
1. The assertion that the DepEd has no automatic promotion policy is not true. While it is true that there is no official policy explicitly directing the promotion of all learners regardless of performance, there are official policies which allow mass promotion to take place and which prove that the DepEd is the moving force behind the scheme specifically the following:
a. DepEd Order No. 8, s. 2015, (Policy Guidelines on Classroom Assessment for the K to 12 Education Program) introduced grade transmutation or padding of grades. In 2002, DepEd incorporated the transmutation scheme in DepEd Order No. 43, s. 2002, (The 2003 Basic Education Curriculum) but the following year, through DepEd Order No. 70, s. 2003, (Revised Grading System for Elementary and Secondary Schools), the agency rescinded the provision explaining that the same was not officially authorized.
However, in 2015, the DepEd flip-flopped again and institutionalized grade transmutation through DepEd Order No. 8, s. 2015. Under the system, a score of 0 is equivalent to a grade of 60 and a score of 60 to 75. In the old grading system (DepEd Order No. 70, s. 2003), 0 was 0 and 60 was 60. Tagging it as a mass promotion modus operandi, teachers claim that transmutation enables the ineligible to pass and for nearly the entire class including even functional illiterates to land in the honor roll.
b. DepEd Order No. 13, s. 2018, (Implementing Guidelines on the Conduct of Remedial and Advancement Classes during Summer for the K to 12 Basic Education Program) allows the enrolment of learners who failed in not more than two subjects in the next grade level in the following school year even if they do not pass the subjects they failed during the summer remedial classes. The policy directs that the promoted flunkers be provided with tutorial services in the next grade but the fact remains that they are being promoted despite not passing all their subjects which is what mass promotion is all about. The policy amended the provision of DepEd Order No. 8, s. 2015, that learners who fail in not more than two subjects should take and pass the subjects in the summer remedials otherwise they will be retained in their current grades.
Having deliberately loosened the policy on the promotion of laggards to allow the passing of those who fail in not more than two subjects, the DepEd has no shred of credibility whatsoever to claim that it is not allowing the promotion of learners who fail in three or more subjects and that it has nothing to do with the entrenchment of the mass promotion practice in the public school system.
c. DECS Order No. 34, s. 2001, (Two Books a Year per Student) requires learners to show evidence they have read at least one book in the vernacular and one book in English per year before being promoted to the next grade or year level.”
DepEd Order No. 45, s. 2002 (Reading Literacy Program in the Elementary Schools) prohibits the promotion of Grade 3 pupils unless they could read.
Per DepEd Memorandum No. 324, s. 2004, along with the Philippine Informal Reading Inventory (Phil-IRI), the reading assessment tool of the DepEd, DECS Order No. 34, s. 2001, and DepEd Order No. 45, s. 2002, are support mechanisms of the Every Child a Reader Program (ECARP), a DepEd flagship program intended “to make every child a reader at his/her grade level.” **To be continued
