DepEd Field Offices Take Action, Suspend RPMS Implementation

Teachers' Coalition Praises Field Offices for Suspending RPMS Amid Central Office Silence

The Results-Based Performance Management System (RPMS) for the school year 2023-2024 has become a focal point of controversy within the educational sector. This system, designed to evaluate the performance of teachers, has faced unprecedented scrutiny and opposition this year. The Department of Education (DepEd) central office has notably maintained a stance of silence on the matter, refraining from issuing any definitive guidance or decisions regarding the RPMS. This absence of a clear directive has left many educators and administrative bodies in a state of uncertainty.
In response to the central office's silence, various field offices have taken it upon themselves to address the concerns raised by educators. These field offices have made significant decisions to suspend the implementation of the RPMS for the current school year. Such actions have been commended by many within the teaching community, who feel that the demands and pressures of the RPMS are untenable under the current circumstances.

A key figure in advocating for the suspension of the RPMS is Benjo Basas, the national chairperson of the Teachers’ Dignity Coalition (TDC). Basas has been instrumental in voicing the collective concerns of teachers and pushing for a temporary halt to the performance evaluation system. His efforts have been pivotal in bringing attention to the challenges faced by educators and the need for a more considerate approach during these times.

This controversy highlights the broader issues within the educational system, particularly the need for clear communication and supportive measures from the central administration. As the situation continues to evolve, the actions of the field offices and the advocacy of leaders like Basas remain crucial in shaping the future direction of the RPMS and its impact on teachers nationwide.

Decisive Actions by Regional Directors and Schools Division Superintendents
The proactive measures undertaken by regional directors and schools division superintendents to suspend the Results-Based Performance Management System (RPMS) have been pivotal during a period characterized by central office silence. In particular, the efforts by regional directors from Region V, the National Capital Region (NCR), Region VII, the Cordillera Administrative Region, Region XII, and Region IX have garnered extensive commendation from the Teachers' Dignity Coalition (TDC) and have been warmly received by educators and school principals alike.

These decisive actions have not only provided much-needed relief to teachers but have also underscored the significant role that regional leadership plays in addressing immediate concerns within the educational sector. Among the noted leaders, Manila Schools Division Superintendent (SDS) Rita Riddle's directive to defer RPMS submissions stands out. Her instructions have been instrumental in alleviating the pressure on educators, allowing them to focus on their primary teaching responsibilities without the added burden of performance assessments.

The TDC's recognition of these efforts highlights the importance of responsive and empathetic leadership in the educational system. By suspending the RPMS, regional directors and superintendents have demonstrated a profound understanding of the challenges faced by teachers, particularly in the context of unprecedented disruptions to the educational landscape. The positive reception from teachers and principals further underscores the necessity and efficacy of such interventions.

The collective actions of these regional leaders exemplify a commitment to supporting educators and ensuring that their professional responsibilities remain manageable. This approach not only fosters a more conducive teaching environment but also enhances the overall well-being of educators, thereby indirectly benefitting the students they serve. As the educational community continues to navigate various challenges, the leadership displayed by regional directors and superintendents serves as a model of effective and compassionate governance.

TDC's Advocacy and Communication Efforts
The Teachers' Dignity Coalition (TDC) has been at the forefront of advocating for the suspension of the Results-based Performance Management System (RPMS), demonstrating a proactive approach in addressing the concerns of educators. In their efforts, the TDC took the significant step of sending two formal letters to the Department of Education's (DepEd) central office. These letters articulated the pressing issues and the collective voice of teachers, urging the central office to reconsider the implementation of RPMS under the current circumstances.

Despite the clarity and urgency conveyed in these communications, the central office has remained silent, leading to a palpable sense of confusion and frustration among educators. The absence of a definitive response has left many in the field uncertain about the expectations and requirements regarding RPMS. This lack of communication has not only disrupted the workflow but has also impacted the morale of teachers who are striving to adapt to ongoing challenges.

In light of the central office's silence, the TDC took the initiative to reach out directly to regional directors. This strategic move was aimed at seeking clarity and support at a more localized level. The response from the regional directors was notably positive, with several regions taking the pragmatic step of suspending RPMS over the weekend. This decisive action by field offices has been a source of relief for many educators, who have expressed their appreciation for the responsiveness and understanding demonstrated by their regional leaders.

The TDC's advocacy and communication efforts underscore the importance of open, transparent dialogues between educators and administrative bodies. By directly engaging with regional directors and receiving their cooperative responses, the TDC has not only highlighted the critical role of effective communication but has also reinforced the need for a more responsive and empathetic approach in addressing the concerns of teachers nationwide.

Executive Order No. 61: Context and Implications
Executive Order No. 61, recently signed by President Marcos, marks a significant shift in the operational framework of government agencies, including the education sector. This executive order mandates the suspension of the Results-Based Performance Management System (RPMS) and the Performance-Based Incentive System (PBIS) across all government entities. The immediate cessation of RPMS policies is a response to numerous calls for a more equitable and less burdensome evaluation system for government employees.

The suspension stipulated by Executive Order No. 61 aims to alleviate the administrative burden on government personnel, particularly educators, who have expressed concerns over the extensive documentation and evaluation processes inherent in RPMS. By halting these procedures, the order intends to provide a reprieve and an opportunity to reassess and redesign the current performance evaluation systems to better suit the needs of government workers.

Additionally, Executive Order No. 61 designates the year 2023 as a transition period for the Performance-Based Bonus (PBB) system. During this time, government agencies are expected to formulate and implement new guidelines and criteria for performance-based incentives. This transition year is crucial for ensuring that the new systems are more aligned with the realities of government service and are developed through consultations with stakeholders, including teachers and administrative staff.

The implications of this executive order are far-reaching. For teachers, who have often found the RPMS to be a source of considerable stress, this suspension offers a much-needed respite. It also signals a potential shift towards more holistic and supportive approaches to performance evaluation and incentive distribution. The focus on redesigning these systems suggests an acknowledgment of the need for more flexible and context-sensitive evaluation criteria that genuinely reflect the diverse roles and contributions of government employees.

In summary, Executive Order No. 61 represents a proactive step towards reforming the performance evaluation and incentive systems in government agencies. By suspending RPMS and PBIS, and designating 2023 as a transition year, the order opens the door for more inclusive and effective approaches that prioritize the well-being and professional growth of government employees.

Calls for Nationwide Suspension of RPMS
Throughout the ongoing discourse on the suspension of the Results-based Performance Management System (RPMS), various stakeholders have voiced their concerns. Central to these appeals is the call from Teachers' Dignity Coalition (TDC) spokesperson, Lester Beleno, who has urged schools division superintendents nationwide to emulate the actions of regional directors who have already suspended RPMS. Beleno's strong advocacy highlights the pressing need for a unified approach to ensure consistency across the education system.

The call for nationwide suspension of RPMS is deeply rooted in the context of Executive Order 61 (EO 61), which provides a framework for managing public sector performance. Beleno and other education advocates emphasize the importance of adhering to EO 61, especially in the face of ambiguity from the central office. They argue that clear and decisive action is essential to alleviate the stress and confusion among teachers who are currently navigating a challenging educational landscape.

Moreover, the emphasis on providing unambiguous instructions to teachers cannot be overstated. The current situation, marked by a lack of clear guidance from the central office, has left many educators in a state of uncertainty. By suspending RPMS, schools division superintendents can offer much-needed clarity and support, enabling teachers to focus on their primary responsibility of delivering quality education to their students.

In light of these considerations, the calls for a nationwide suspension of RPMS underscore a broader commitment to the welfare of teachers. By following the lead of progressive regional directors, schools division superintendents have the opportunity to foster a more supportive and coherent environment for educators. This, in turn, can enhance the overall quality of education, benefiting not only teachers but also students and the wider educational community.

Support from School Principals and NAPSSHI
In the wake of the Teachers' Coalition's commendation of field offices for suspending the Results-Based Performance Management System (RPMS), significant support has also emerged from school principals and the National Association of Public Secondary School Heads, Inc. (NAPSSHI). The deferment of RPMS has been lauded as a crucial decision, particularly for its positive implications on teachers' preparation and their well-deserved vacation time.

Dr. Roland Dela Cruz, President of NAPSSHI, has been vocal in his endorsement of this action. He remarked that the suspension allows educators to focus on rejuvenation and professional development without the immediate pressure of performance evaluations. According to Dr. Dela Cruz, "The deferral of RPMS is a timely and much-needed respite for our teachers. It acknowledges their hard work throughout the year and grants them the necessary period to recuperate and prepare effectively for the upcoming academic challenges."

School principals have echoed these sentiments, recognizing the deferment as a strategic move that ultimately benefits the educational ecosystem. They highlight that the suspension provides educators with the opportunity to engage in reflective practice, enhancing their instructional strategies without the looming burden of RPMS deadlines. This period of reflection is seen as vital for sustained educational quality and teacher well-being.

Furthermore, principals believe that the decision aligns with the broader objectives of educational excellence and teacher support. One principal noted, "By suspending RPMS, we are prioritizing our teachers' mental and emotional health, which is indispensable for their effectiveness in the classroom. This move shows a deep understanding of the multifaceted challenges teachers face and offers a practical solution to alleviate unnecessary stress."

Overall, the backing from both NAPSSHI and school principals underscores a collective recognition of the importance of teacher welfare. The suspension of RPMS is thus seen not only as a pause in administrative demands but as a strategic step towards fostering a more supportive and effective educational environment.

Proposals for a Simplified Performance Appraisal System
The Teachers' Dignity Coalition (TDC) has put forward a compelling proposal to revert to the Simplified Performance Appraisal System for Teachers (PAST). This initiative aims to address the increasing concerns regarding the current, more complex performance appraisal systems. The TDC argues that a simplified performance appraisal system is not only more practical but also more effective in evaluating teachers' skills and performance.

The PAST framework offers a streamlined approach, which many educators believe would significantly reduce the administrative burden currently placed on teachers. The existing systems are often criticized for being overly complex and time-consuming, detracting from teachers' primary focus—educating students. A simplified appraisal system would ensure that teachers can dedicate more time to their instructional responsibilities rather than navigating bureaucratic hurdles.

Moreover, a simplified performance appraisal system is seen as more realistic. By focusing on core teaching competencies and classroom effectiveness, the appraisal process becomes more reflective of a teacher's actual performance. The TDC emphasizes the importance of an appraisal system that is both fair and transparent, providing a more accurate representation of a teacher’s contributions and areas for improvement.

In addition, the TDC underscores the need for a performance rating system that genuinely measures teachers' skills and performance. The current metrics often fail to capture the nuanced and multifaceted nature of teaching. By reverting to the PAST, the performance evaluation can become more aligned with the real-world challenges and achievements experienced by teachers in their daily work.

In essence, the TDC's proposal for a simplified performance appraisal system seeks to create a more manageable, realistic, and accurate mechanism for assessing teacher performance. This approach could lead to enhanced teacher morale, better instructional quality, and ultimately, improved student outcomes.

Conclusion: Urgency for DepEd Central Office Response
The suspension of the Results-Based Performance Management System (RPMS) by field offices has underscored the pressing need for an immediate response from the Department of Education (DepEd) central office. The current state of confusion and ambiguity surrounding the RPMS has placed additional strain on teachers who are already engaged in various tasks and preparations for the upcoming school year. Clarity and direction from the central office are crucial to mitigate uncertainties and streamline processes.

Given the pivotal role that teachers play in shaping the educational landscape, it is imperative that the DepEd central office provides definitive guidelines to ensure a cohesive and unified approach across all regions. The lack of a centralized response risks creating disparities in the implementation of educational policies, which could ultimately affect the quality of education delivered to students.

Moreover, a timely and coordinated response from the central office would demonstrate a commitment to supporting teachers and addressing their concerns. This proactive stance would not only alleviate the immediate pressures faced by educators but also foster a more collaborative and supportive environment within the education sector. By prioritizing clear communication and decisive action, the DepEd central office can help ensure a smooth transition into the new school year, thereby enhancing the overall effectiveness of the educational system.

In conclusion, the urgency for a prompt and comprehensive response from the DepEd central office cannot be overstated. As teachers continue to navigate the demands of their profession, it is essential that they receive the necessary support and guidance from the central authorities. Unified action and clear directives are essential to maintain consistency and uphold the standards of education, ultimately benefiting both educators and students alike.
----

Public School Teachers Welcome Suspension of Results-Based Performance Management and Performance-Based Incentive Systems

Recently, the government announced the suspension of the Results-Based Performance Management System (RPMS) and the Performance-Based Incentive (PBI) system, a decision that has been met with a positive response from public school teachers nationwide. These performance systems were initially implemented to enhance accountability and improve the overall effectiveness of public education by linking educators' performance to specific metrics and incentives.

Introduced as part of broader educational reforms, RPMS was designed to evaluate teachers based on predefined performance indicators, while the PBI system aimed to offer financial rewards to high-performing educators. The core objective of these systems was to foster a results-oriented culture within public schools, thus elevating the quality of education. However, over time, concerns emerged regarding the practicality and fairness of these systems.

Public school teachers reported numerous challenges associated with the RPMS and PBI systems, including the additional administrative burden, the pressure to meet often-unrealistic targets, and the limited consideration of varying classroom conditions. These issues led to growing discontent among educators, who argued that the systems imposed undue stress and detracted from their primary teaching responsibilities.

The government's decision to suspend these performance management systems reflects an acknowledgment of these concerns and a commitment to reevaluating the efficacy and impact of such policies. This move aims to alleviate the pressures faced by public school teachers and to create a more supportive and equitable working environment, ultimately benefiting the educational system as a whole.

Teachers' Response to the Suspension
The recent suspension of the Results-Based Performance Management System (RPMS) and the Performance-Based Incentive (PBI) system by President Marcos has been met with considerable relief and approval from public school teachers across the nation. Particularly vocal in their response is the Alliance of Concerned Teachers-National Capital Region (ACT-NCR) union, which has long advocated for the reassessment of these performance metrics. Teachers and their representative unions have expressed that the suspension marks a significant step towards addressing the prevalent issues within the educational system that have burdened educators for years.

Members of ACT-NCR and other educational stakeholders have welcomed the decision, citing the RPMS and PBI systems as sources of undue stress and pressure. They argue that these performance-based systems often fail to consider the complexities and challenges faced by teachers in diverse classroom environments. The systems were designed to enhance accountability and reward high performance, but many educators felt that the metrics used were not always fair or reflective of their actual contributions and efforts.

Teachers have voiced that the suspension allows for a much-needed pause and a re-evaluation of how performance should be measured and incentivized. They hope that this will lead to the development of a more holistic and supportive framework that truly recognizes the multifaceted nature of teaching. The relief is not only in the suspension itself but also in the possibility of future reforms that could lead to more equitable and realistic expectations for educators.

ACT-NCR has emphasized that while the suspension is a positive development, it should be viewed as the beginning of a broader dialogue on teacher welfare and educational quality. The union has called for continued engagement with the government to ensure that any new systems put in place are developed in consultation with teachers, taking into account their experiences and insights. The collective response from public school teachers thus underscores a hopeful optimism for a more balanced and supportive approach to performance management in education.

Criticisms of the RPMS and PBI Systems
The Results-Based Performance Management System (RPMS) and Performance-Based Incentive (PBI) systems have faced substantial criticism from educators and unions. Teachers and union leaders, such as Ruby Bernardo, have voiced concerns regarding the additional workload these systems impose. The meticulous documentation and reporting requirements demanded by RPMS and PBI are seen as burdensome. Teachers argue that these processes detract from their primary responsibility: delivering quality education to students.

Moreover, the stress associated with meeting performance metrics has been a significant point of contention. Educators have reported heightened levels of anxiety and burnout, attributing this to the pressure of achieving specific targets. This sentiment is echoed by many who believe that the systems place an undue emphasis on quantitative measurements, often at the expense of qualitative aspects of teaching. As a result, the overall morale among teachers has been adversely affected, with many feeling undervalued and overburdened.

Another critical issue raised pertains to the perceived lack of a meaningful impact on education quality. Despite the implementation of RPMS and PBI, teachers argue that these systems have not substantially improved student learning outcomes. Critics contend that the focus on performance metrics does not necessarily translate into better educational experiences for students. Instead, it may lead to a box-ticking approach, where the fulfillment of bureaucratic requirements takes precedence over innovative and student-centered teaching methods.

Ruby Bernardo and other union leaders have emphasized the need for a more holistic approach to teacher evaluation and incentives. They advocate for systems that recognize and reward the diverse contributions teachers make, beyond what can be quantified through rigid performance metrics. By addressing these criticisms, there is hope for developing a more supportive and effective framework that genuinely enhances the quality of education.

Call for Complete Repeal of the RPMS and PBI
The Alliance of Concerned Teachers-National Capital Region (ACT-NCR) union, alongside other teacher advocacy groups, has persistently called for the complete repeal of the Results-Based Performance Management System (RPMS) and the Performance-Based Incentive (PBI) system. Their arguments for the abolition of these systems are multifaceted, primarily revolving around the belief that these frameworks are burdensome and duplicative.

Teachers argue that the RPMS and PBI systems impose an excessive administrative load. The documentation and compliance requirements associated with these systems are seen as detracting from their core teaching responsibilities. Instead of focusing on lesson planning, classroom instruction, and student engagement, educators find themselves entangled in a web of paperwork and performance metrics. This shift, according to the ACT-NCR, undermines the educational process and places undue stress on teachers.

Furthermore, the union emphasizes that these performance management systems are often redundant. Many of the evaluation criteria under RPMS and PBI overlap with existing assessment tools already in place within the educational framework. This redundancy not only complicates the evaluation process but also creates confusion and frustration among educators who are subjected to multiple, often conflicting, performance reviews.

Another critical point raised by teacher groups is the fairness and accuracy of these systems. They argue that the metrics used to gauge teacher performance are not always reflective of the actual classroom environment and the diverse challenges faced by educators. Factors such as socio-economic disparities, resource availability, and student diversity are often not adequately considered in performance assessments, leading to skewed results that do not truly represent a teacher's effectiveness.

The call for repeal also highlights the psychological impact of these systems on teachers. The pressure to meet performance benchmarks and secure incentives can create a high-stress environment, contributing to burnout and diminishing job satisfaction. Instead of fostering a supportive and collaborative educational atmosphere, the RPMS and PBI systems are perceived as fostering competition and anxiety.

In light of these concerns, the ACT-NCR union and other teacher groups continue to advocate for the complete repeal of the RPMS and PBI systems. They urge educational policymakers to consider alternative evaluation methods that are more aligned with the realities of teaching and more supportive of educators' professional growth and well-being.

Executive Order 61:
Executive Order 61, issued by President Marcos, aims to harmonize and streamline government performance management and incentive systems. This directive is a significant step towards enhancing the efficiency and effectiveness of public sector operations. By aligning these systems with international standards and ease of doing business initiatives, the order seeks to ensure a more integrated and coherent approach to public administration.

The primary goal of Executive Order 61 is to establish a unified performance management framework that incorporates best practices from around the world. This includes the adoption of metrics and evaluation criteria that are recognized globally, thus facilitating a more transparent and accountable governance structure. The order underscores the importance of consistency and coherence in evaluating the performance of government employees, including public school teachers, whose roles are pivotal in the nation’s development.

In addition to standardizing performance assessments, Executive Order 61 also focuses on optimizing the incentive systems within the public sector. By streamlining these systems, the government aims to reduce redundancies and ensure that incentives are fairly and effectively distributed. This approach not only motivates employees to perform better but also aligns their goals with the broader objectives of national development and public service enhancement.

Furthermore, the order is in line with ease of doing business initiatives, which are designed to foster a more conducive environment for economic activities. By improving the performance management and incentive systems, the government is also indirectly supporting these initiatives. Efficient and motivated public sector employees contribute to a smoother and more reliable public service delivery, which is crucial for businesses and citizens alike.

Overall, Executive Order 61 represents a comprehensive effort to modernize the public sector’s approach to performance and incentives. It acknowledges the need for a more systematic and internationally-aligned framework, which is essential for sustaining long-term growth and development. Public school teachers, as key stakeholders, are expected to benefit significantly from these reforms, ultimately enhancing the quality of education and public service in the country.

Impact of RPMS and PBI on Teachers' Workload
The Results-Based Performance Management System (RPMS) and the Performance-Based Incentive (PBI) systems were introduced with the intention of enhancing accountability and efficiency within the educational sector. However, many educators, including Ruby Bernardo, have voiced concerns about the unintended consequences these systems have had on their workloads. The RPMS and PBI frameworks require extensive documentation and continuous monitoring, translating into a significant increase in administrative tasks for teachers.

Ruby Bernardo, a veteran teacher with over two decades of experience, shared her experience, stating, "The amount of paperwork has become overwhelming. Instead of focusing on teaching and engaging with students, I find myself buried in forms and reports." This sentiment is echoed by many educators who feel that the time and energy spent on administrative duties detract from their primary role of educating students.

One of the critical issues highlighted by teachers is the requirement to provide detailed evidence for each performance indicator. This often involves compiling lesson plans, student assessments, feedback forms, and various other documents. These tasks, while intended to foster accountability, have inadvertently increased the workload to an unsustainable level. Teachers are now spending evenings and weekends completing paperwork, which has led to burnout and reduced job satisfaction.

Moreover, the focus on quantitative metrics has shifted attention away from qualitative aspects of teaching. Teachers report that the emphasis on measurable outcomes has led to a more mechanical approach to education, where the richness of classroom interaction and the nurturing of critical thinking skills are sometimes sidelined. The need to meet specific benchmarks has also led to a more rigid teaching style, leaving little room for creativity and adaptability in lesson delivery.

In summary, while the RPMS and PBI systems were designed to improve performance and accountability, they have inadvertently imposed significant administrative burdens on teachers. The need for substantial documentation and compliance with performance metrics has reduced the time and energy teachers can dedicate to their core mission: educating and inspiring students.

Proposals for Improving Teacher Compensation and Conditions
Teachers' unions have long advocated for enhanced compensation and improved working conditions to attract and retain quality educators in the public school system. A primary proposal put forth by these unions is a substantial increase in salaries. They emphasize that competitive wages are essential not only to acknowledge the dedication and expertise of teachers but also to ensure the profession remains attractive to new entrants. The call for higher salaries also aims to mitigate the financial stress that many teachers face, allowing them to focus more effectively on their instructional responsibilities.

In addition to salary increases, teachers' unions are advocating for improved benefits. This includes comprehensive health insurance plans that cover mental health services, which are crucial given the high-stress nature of the teaching profession. Retirement benefits are another key focus, with proposals suggesting more robust pension plans that provide financial security for educators after decades of service. Unions argue that these benefits are fundamental in providing teachers with the stability they need to perform their roles effectively.

Furthermore, unions are calling for more meaningful support for professional growth and development. This encompasses a range of initiatives, from providing funding for continued education and professional certifications to offering regular, high-quality professional development workshops. Such support is vital for teachers to stay abreast of the latest educational strategies and technologies, thereby enhancing the overall quality of education delivered to students. Additionally, mentoring programs for new teachers and opportunities for experienced educators to take on leadership roles without leaving the classroom are seen as crucial components of professional development.

Overall, these proposals aim to create a more supportive and rewarding environment for teachers, recognizing their critical role in shaping future generations. By addressing compensation, benefits, and opportunities for professional growth, the unions hope to foster a system where educators feel valued and empowered to excel in their profession.

Engagement with Teachers' Unions
Teachers' unions have long been vocal advocates for more equitable and transparent appraisal systems. The recent suspension of the Results-Based Performance Management System (RPMS) and Performance-Based Incentive System (PBIS) has reignited their calls for closer engagement with the government. These unions argue that meaningful dialogue and collaboration are essential to crafting appraisal mechanisms that genuinely reflect the complexities and challenges of the teaching profession.

The importance of listening to teachers' voices cannot be overstated. Teachers are on the front lines of education, and their insights and experiences are invaluable in identifying what works and what doesn't in performance management systems. By involving teachers' unions in the development and refinement of these systems, the government can ensure that the resulting policies are not only fair but also practical and effective.

Collaboration with teachers' unions can lead to more nuanced and comprehensive appraisal mechanisms. These organizations have a deep understanding of the diverse needs and contexts of teachers across different regions and school environments. Their input can help create systems that accommodate these variations, thereby promoting a more just and supportive professional environment for all educators.

Moreover, engaging with teachers' unions can enhance the legitimacy and acceptance of new appraisal mechanisms. When teachers feel that their concerns have been heard and addressed, they are more likely to buy into and actively participate in the system. This cooperative approach can foster a sense of ownership and empowerment among teachers, ultimately leading to better educational outcomes for students.

In summary, the suspension of the RPMS and PBIS presents an opportunity for the government to reset its relationship with teachers' unions and work together towards more effective and equitable performance management systems. By valuing and incorporating the voices of teachers, we can build a stronger, more resilient education system that benefits everyone involved.