REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

CORDILLERA ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

Wangal, La Trinidad, Benguet, 2601

LAYLA B. MAABA
Complainant, INV. No. BENG-2017-006

-versus-

DANIEL D. PEREDO

ALVIN C. GUAKI

JULLA D. GAIWEN

Respondents,

x---------------------------x

COUNTER AFFIDAVIT

We, Daniel D. Peredo, Alvin C. Guaki, Julla D. Gaiwen, all Filipinos and of legal age with
residential address at ______________,______________, _____________ respectively, after
having been sworn to in accordance with law hereby depose and state that:

1. We are the above named respondent for Gross Misconduct;

2. We are the Principal, Research 9 Teacher and Class adviser of Michael Gabriel D. Maaba
at Cordillera Regional Science High School;
3. We admit the allegations of the complainant from paragraph 1 to paragraph 6;
4. Regarding paragraph 7 and 8, it is not correct that the sole reason for denying the
enrollment application of Michael Gabriel D. Maaba is his Grade of 75 in Reasearch 9. We
politely explained to Mr. Cruz’s that Michael Gabriel D. Maaba cannot be accepted
anymore because he was previously on probation and that he failed again to meet the
prevailing standard being observed in all Regional Science High Schools. DepEd Order No.
41 expressly provides for strict adherence. Hence, we are left with no option but to enforce
DepEd Order No. 41, s. 2005 which provides in its guidelines that:
“Retention. For a student to remain in the program, he or she should obtain a final
grade of at least 85% in English, Science and Mathematics with no grade lower than 80%
in any of these subjects, in any grading period, and a final grade not lower than 83% in the
 rest of the subjects. Failure to meet the latter grade requirement shall put the incoming
Second Year or Third Year student under probation for a period of one year.”
5. Regarding paragraph 9, we may have failed to notify and exercise extra-ordinary effort to
inform the parent immediately regarding the grades of her son, a concern, caring and
responsible parent would have been alarmed and exercise due diligence in checking her
son’s grade knowing that Michael Gabriel’s grade during the second and third grading was
below the threshold of 85.
6. Par. 10
7. Par. 11
8. Par. 12
9. Par. 13-15
10.
11. Does not fall under learner of ‘below expectation’ as defined by DepEd order no. 8, s.2015
to warrant remediation since his final Grade is 82 which is far higher than grade of below
75.
12. Par. 20. DepEd order not violated
13. Par. 21. No policy putting the burden of informing every parent of a learners low grade.
The parent should have exercise extra ordinary effort knowing the grades of her son in the
previous gradings which were below 85.
14. Check form 137
15.