BY EDISON MARTE SICAD
LET US be clear at the outset: Vice President Sara Duterte is not the Department of Education. In the same manner, the teachers are not the Department of Education; neither are the political parties, nor the random FB post — not even this columnist.
For here’s the thing: for a democratic society to function for the common good — taking into consideration our varied social roles and personal interests — there has to be an ideal standard, a universal precept, that we must all be accountable for as public officials, as employees, as citizens. In this particular case, as teachers.
What is this universal precept?
It is an expectation (more of a Kantian Categorical Imperative) that the Department of Education has set for everyone to fulfill regardless of rank, situation, opinion, or unfair treatment.
We are expected to act with Professionalism: by practicing what we preach, by following a code of conduct (in this case R.A. 6713, otherwise known as the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees) as the ideal and non-negotiable condition that teachers must take into consideration for all intents and purposes.
And this is where the problem lies: We, the teachers, are sometimes guilty of corruption—in our own small actions and conspiratorial practices. Biases abound from a simple class activity to a bureaucratic “educational” transaction. Grudges color our intentions and interactions—from expressing with destructive criticisms to “cooperating” with a crab mentality. Pride and ego would sometimes dominate the classroom setting and thus tempt teachers to behave in harmful ways.
With over 900,000 teaching personnel and at least 60,000 schools nationwide, how do you protect the more than 27.1M students from school-related abuses?
In Loco Parentis and Parens Patriae
Vice President Sara Duterte said that this (DO No. 49) is meant to minimize biases that teachers wittingly or unwittingly do (for the bias had become a culture) as well as prevent criminal incidents from occurring. Rightly so.
It is the duty of the State to protect its citizens. It is the role of the teachers to provide “parental” guidance to students (for the school is the second home). And to ensure that the classroom is conducive for learning and the students are safe to learn, this DepEd ORDER No. 049, s. 2022, for all intents and purposes, has been issued for the common good.
But there is an opposing view (as expected).
Rep. France Castro (ACT Teachers party-list) questioned the intention of the order:
“Why does the Department of Education feel the need to create such an order that gags and threatens teachers and education support personnel which treats them as mere creatures only of the school and dehumanizes them preventing them to exercise their right to free speech, expression, to organize and be able to voice out their grievances?”
The intention of the order changed from Professionalism to Dehumanization. And by the way, Freedom of Expression is a fundamental human right (Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights) as well as a Constitutional Right (Article III, Section 4, Bill of Rights of the 1987 Philippine Constitution). With this, then, a Department Order can NEVER violate or take that right away (pun intended).
Further, Rep. Castro said:
“If the education department insists on gagging its employees online and offline and prevents them from relating to others on things, not about the school, what else is left of them?”
The said criticisms refer, among others, to the following sections:
1. (e) Raise issues and concerns regarding basic education via formal and appropriate DepEd channels, either directly to the Office of the Secretary or through the concerned Assistant Secretary or Undersecretary, without resorting to any political or third-party intervention or accommodation (emphasis mine);
2. (e) Avoid relationships, interaction, and communication, including following social media with learners outside of the school setting, except if they are relatives (emphasis mine); and
3. (c) Shall not disparage DepEd and must always be mindful of the reputation and honor of the organization (emphasis mine).
To answer the question “what else is left of them?”, then that would be Professionalism: that there is a line between personal preference and professional interactions.
I personally believe that teachers cannot use social media the way their students do. For our actions will always be associated with our chosen profession, whether we like it or not.
I am not trying to cover up the flaws of the Department of Education. I am here to expose our own hypocrisy. For I always believe that personal responsibility and accountability come first, then individual rights second.
A credo to remind me:
To be grateful to DepEd for testing my resolve to still choose to be a teacher even if the ideals are swallowed by the practicalities. Because this is all about learning. And learning is an ongoing process. For teachers, it is professionalism every step — and mistake — along the way.
“If the ship is sinking, I will find a way to save the people. I don’t have the time to blame the captain and begrudgingly wear the lifejacket—and keep swimming.”
I will teach those students. I will read those books. I will correct my mistakes. I will not give up. And this, in itself, is what I want my students to understand: That in any profession, it won’t be fun and smooth sailing all the way. There will be chaos, betrayals, downright hypocrisy, and immorality: a perfect storm. Now what will you do? Your very life is your contribution to the problem or the solution.
Akala natin, magtuturo lang. Eh, hindi naman ganyan sa totoong buhay: na andiyan na lahat at walang kulang o kulelat. Kahit nga sa pag-iibigan nagkakasakitan. Gusto ko lang naman ituon ang ating pansin sa realidad na ang pagtuturo ay hindi para lang na gawing “matalino” ang mga estudyante. Sa kabilang banda, sila ay nasa paaralan para matutunan nila kung paano mabigyan solusyon ang mga problem sa buhay pag sila ay “nakapagtapos na sa pag-aaral.”
IN CLOSING, DepEd ORDER No. 049, s. 2022 is a commendable move by the DepEd. Unless the opposing side presents a better alternative instead of just having a “political tantrum,” then this policy is worthy of consideration for its overall message: that we are all professionals. And as professionals, there is a certain ideal we need to follow for being part of the system; as professionals, the impunity of others is not a justification for us to behave in the same way.
We do what is right not only because it is expected from us, but more importantly, because that’s who we are: Professional Teachers./PN
