Rappler and Manila Bulletin report complaints raised against proposed trimester education calendar

CHEERS TO Manila Bulletin and Rappler for discussing concerns raised about the trimester school calendar announced by the Department of Education (DepEd), and for examining the proposed changes in the light of other urgent challenges presented by the country’s education crisis. 

On February 13, DepEd proposed the shift of the basic education school calendar from the quarterly system to a trimester or “three-term” structure.

Education Secretary Juan Edgardo “Sonny” Angara described the change as part of a “holistic approach” to prevent disruptions in student learning and improve the overall quality of education. Angara cited the findings of the Second Congressional Education Commission (EDCOM II) which revealed an alarming decline in the proficiency levels of Filipino students (See “EDCOM II: Media on findings and future effects“). DepEd also argued that the trimester system will benefit teachers by reducing lesson interruptions, allowing more time for other responsibilities.

On March 23, President Ferdinand Bongbong Marcos Jr. approved the proposal, which would take effect in the public school system nationwide in the next academic year 2026-2027. 

Educators push back

Teachers’ groups have been critical of the reform since it was proposed, pointing to the burden of adjustments that would fall on both students and educators, especially if poorly implemented.

While other news organizations gave prominence to the policy shift, the articles of Rappler and Manila Bulletin stood out for their more extensive discussion of the issues involved. 

Rappler underscored teachers’ concerns from the outset. In a February 17 article, it emphasized the teachers’ complaint about the need for broader consultations.

Upon the policy’s approval in late March, Rappler revisited these earlier concerns, providing important context for the public and showing that issues around the consultation had already been raised prior to the enactment of the new system. Teachers said that students risk becoming “lab rats,” recalling the K-12 program — another major reform that required an overhaul years after its implementation. 

Manila Bulletin also framed the reform within a broader context. Its March 23 article, citing teachers’ groups, situated the calendar change within the ongoing education crisis in the country. The report discussed this as yet another policy change that attempts to fix one issue without addressing the more fundamental challenges that DepEd must urgently address, including the perennial shortage of classrooms and teachers, as well as concerns related to children’s nutrition and other basic developmental needs.

The report underscored the gap between DepEd’s policy response and the deeper structural weaknesses in the education system. The article also made clear that teachers and students end up bearing the full impact of such policies or their poor implementation. 

Journalists must continue to follow up on the developments emerging from the findings of EDCOM II. Reports should also ensure that the narratives of students and educators, those most directly affected, are consistently reflected in the coverage of the reforms in the education sector.