Teacher groups are raising questions about the process behind a major overhaul of the public school calendar, even as the Marcos administration moves forward with implementing it next school year.
President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. approved the shift from a four-quarter to a three-term academic structure last week, acting on the recommendation of his economic advisers. The change takes effect in school year 2026-2027, with classes set to open in early June.
The 201-day school calendar will be divided into three blocks: June to September, September to December, and January to March. Each term covers 54 to 61 instructional days and is followed by an assessment or enrichment period.
The Presidential Communications Office said the setup is designed to give students longer stretches of uninterrupted learning, reduce lesson fragmentation, and improve the overall pacing of instruction.
The policy change comes against the backdrop of a documented problem with instructional time loss. A joint study by EDCOM II and the Philippine Institute for Development Studies found that 53 teaching days — nearly equivalent to one full quarter — were lost during school year 2023-2024, largely due to typhoons, extreme heat, local holidays, and non-teaching duties assigned to teachers. EDCOM II has also flagged more than 150 legislated celebrations and observances that cut into classroom time annually.
Education Secretary Sonny Angara first floated the proposal on February 13. It drew immediate scrutiny from teachers’ groups and Sen. Bam Aquino, chair of the Senate basic education committee, who questioned whether proper consultations had taken place. DepEd responded on February 17 by saying no final decision had been made and that consultations were ongoing. A Senate hearing was held on March 3, and the National Economic and Development Authority approved the policy on March 19.
The Palace’s own statement acknowledged that no pilot testing has been conducted. “While the proposal has not undergone pilot testing, consultations have been conducted with various educational institutions prior to its presentation,” the PCO said.
The Alliance of Concerned Teachers was more direct in its opposition. Chairperson Ruby Bernardo said the school calendar is not the root of the country’s education crisis and pointed instead to classroom shortages, inadequate teacher salaries, and a lack of learning materials. The group called on DepEd to suspend implementation and engage teachers’ unions in genuine dialogue.
The Teachers’ Dignity Coalition stopped short of outright rejection. The group acknowledged the three-term model “may offer practical solutions” to problems like lost school days and unfinished lessons, and said structured breaks could benefit teacher wellbeing. However, it conditioned that assessment on whether pilot testing and meaningful consultations with teachers take place before rollout. “This reform must be pursued with clear planning, sufficient support, and the meaningful participation of those on the ground,” the group said.
Marcos directed DepEd to ensure the new calendar preserves the mandated 180 contact days for teachers and students, and to align the three-term structure with the existing semestral system in senior high school. The department has yet to release formal implementation guidelines.
