End mass promotion culture
Jon* was struggling to keep up with his seventh-grade lessons. Unlike some of his other classmates who could perform independent learning tasks, he required additional help to complete them. It’s because at 14 years old, Jon still could not read basic text. He was not alone. Jon had 60 other batchmates who were identified by the school as nonreaders.
Empathetic to their plight, some teachers volunteered to tutor them, sometimes excusing the students from their other classes or staying after school.
Unfortunately, the students were often teased by their classmates about not being able to read, every time they were pulled out to attend the remedials. Though initially interested to learn, Jon eventually stopped attending the sessions.
Reading about the 90 percent learning poverty rate in the Philippines is one thing. Experiencing firsthand the realities on the ground is much more jarring.
In the past months, my team and I have been visiting various schools to better understand how an after-school program can strengthen students’ literacy skills and foster reading interests.
At one national high school, 40 percent of the seventh-grade students were nonreaders. When I asked a teacher how these students managed to graduate from elementary school, she hesitated before admitting, “I guess the previous teachers just decided to give them passing grades.”
Mass promotion in education refers to advancing students to the next grade level regardless of their academic performance, allowing them to progress without acquiring the necessary skills. Although the Department of Education claims no official mass promotion policy exists, it acknowledges its prevalence in certain schools.
A recent report by the Philippine Business for Education, based on a survey of over 300 teachers and school heads, confirmed widespread instances of grade adjustments and the promotion of underperforming students. A simple online search also reveals numerous posts from frustrated teachers sharing concrete examples of mass promotion in their schools.
About three months ago, a Facebook post went viral after a teacher shared how he was pressured to frequently adjust a student’s grades so they could advance to the next level. The teacher lamented in the now-deleted post about the child being undeserving of the scores and ill-equipped for higher learning.
Similarly, another public school teacher shared on Reddit how their school faculty initially agreed during deliberations not to promote a student who stopped attending mid-year. However, when the grades were finalized, he discovered that all the other teachers had given a passing grade except for him.
According to these posts, when a teacher decides to fail a student, they must extensively defend their decision, often facing criticism for supposedly not doing enough to help.
Some school heads urge teachers to pass students either as an act of compassion or as something necessary due to limited classroom space. Other teachers pressure fellow teachers to adjust grades, arguing that failing a student will inconvenience faculty members because they will be required to conduct summer classes, and it could negatively impact their performance evaluations.
The mass promotion culture connects to the broader issue of incentivizing schools to prioritize appearances over actual impact. Vladimer Quetua, chair of the Alliance of Concerned Teachers, said that school administrators often “openly encourage” mass promotion to avoid having too many repeaters, which could compromise the school’s reputation.
Teachers, in turn, face “indirect pressure” to promote students to secure performance-based bonuses or enhance their school’s standing in regional rankings.
As Sen. Sonny Angara assumes his new role as education secretary on July 19, I urge him to prioritize reviewing and reformulating performance metrics and incentives.
While linking school funding and salary bonuses to high enrollment and student achievement was intended to motivate, this approach has backfired, leading to inflated grades and the erosion of the country’s educational standards, as evidenced by consistently poor performance in the Programme for International Student Assessment (Pisa) tests and cases like Jon’s.
In contrast, Finland excels in Pisa and has no mandated standardized tests besides one senior year exam. There are no rankings, comparisons, or competition between schools or regions, and funding is equitable.
Finnish educators are evaluated comprehensively, considering their professional growth, contributions to school development, and ability to create inclusive learning environments. This holistic approach ensures teachers are motivated to improve their practice, support genuine learning, and avoid inflating grades.
We need to rebuild a culture in Philippine public schools that encourages teachers to identify and support struggling students early, rather than pressuring them to conceal these students’ difficulties.
Teachers should also be recognized and adequately compensated for implementing needed interventions and should be given the necessary resources and comprehensive training to do so effectively.
By refocusing on genuine learning outcomes rather than superficial achievements, we can restore the true purpose of education and ensure every Filipino student receives the quality education they deserve.
