ANNOTATIONS ON THE CODE OF ETHICS FOR PROFESSIONAL

TEACHERS IN THE PHILIPPINES

DR. MARIO M. BELLO, JR.1

April, 2021

Ethical standards for professional teachers; sources

1
University of Southern Mindanao, Kabacan, Cotabato
1
 Every profession requires certain degree of standards both in terms of
admitting a person in the profession and his continuous practice thereof. These
standards are determined and implemented by the State in the exercise of its
police power or the power to regulate some acts to ensure that the welfare of the
people will be sustained. This is the reason why the medical doctors are regulated
by the State to ensure that the people will receive appropriate healthcare. The
lawyers are regulated just the same. The engineers have to subject themselves to
some regulations before they could practice their profession. So are the teachers.

There are several laws, policies, and issuances passed by the Congress or
issued by regulating agencies for each profession. In the case of the teachers as
professionals, some of these laws are the Code of Ethics for Professional
Teachers, the Magna Carta for Public School Teachers, among several others.
For this particular unit, the discussion is focused on the Code of Ethics for
Professional Teachers.

Basically, the definition of ethical standards for professional teachers in

the Philippines is governed by the Code of Ethics for Professional Teachers. This
sprouts from Par. e, Sec. 6, Article II, RA 7836 otherwise known as the Philippine
Teachers Professionalization Act of 1994. The said provision of the law
specifically provides that the Board for Professional Teachers is to prescribe
ethical standards for the practice of teaching profession in the Philippines, and
that such standards shall be made effective after its publication.

Therefore, it could be said that the ethical standards governing teachers in

the Philippines is not to be defined or otherwise established from any other
grounds other than what were stipulated in the Code of Ethics for Professional
Teachers. Acts or omissions made by a teacher are to be determined as ethical or
not based on what are provided in the Code and no other. Stated differently,
personal, cultural, or even religious biases should not be made as bases in
determining whether or not the acts or omissions made by a teacher is ethical.

The Preamble

The Code of Ethics for Professional Teachers is composed of a preamble

and 13 articles. It is defined that a preamble is the introductory part of a statute or
deed, stating its purpose, aims, and justification. One specific and popular
example of preamble are those present in most Fundamental Laws of the States
around the world. The 1987 Philippine Constitution for one also has a preamble.
It clearly stated the purpose, aims, and the objectives of the Constitution. As with
the Constitution, the preamble of the Code of Ethics for Professional Teachers has
the same objective. It serves as the introductory part and intends to state the
whole purpose and aims of the Code.

The preamble of the Code is written in the following fashion:

2
 Teachers are duly licensed professionals who possesses
dignity and reputation with high moral values as well as technical
and professional competence in the practice of their noble
profession, they strictly adhere to, observe, and practice this set of
ethical and moral principles, standards, and values.

The first part of the preamble delineates the coverage of the Code.
Gleaning from the very words of the preamble, it could be said that the ethical
standards for teachers is intended for all teachers within the Philippines. What are
covered by the Code are discussed further under Article I of the Code. Section 1
thereof states that the Philippine Constitution provides that all educational
institution shall offer quality education for all competent teachers committed of
it’s full realization. The provision of this Code shall apply, therefore, to all
teachers in schools in the Philippines (emphasis supplied). This was defined
further under section 2 of the same Code. It reads, this Code covers all public and
private school teachers in all educational institutions at the preschool, primary,
elementary, and secondary levels whether academic, vocational, special,
technical, or non-formal. The term “teacher” shall include industrial arts or
vocational teachers and all other persons performing supervisory and/or
administrative functions in all school at the aforesaid levels, whether on full time
or part-time basis. It appears that teachers teaching in higher education are the
only ones’ not covered by the provisions of the Code.

The preamble also prescribes that the dignity, reputation, and moral
principles of teachers are to be governed by the Code. This simply means that the
dignity of a teacher must not be defined by any means other than what is provided
in the Code. So should the reputation of a teacher, and in the same manner his
moral principles.

Further, the Code prescribes ethical standards a teacher must observe in

dealing with the different stakeholders in the community. It prescribes standards
in the teacher’s dealing with the State (Article II), community (Article III),
profession (Article IV and V), higher authorities in the profession (Article VI),
standards which are to be observed by school officials, teachers, and other
personnel (Article VII), learners (Article VIII), parents (Article IX), business
(Article X), and some definitions as to the teacher as the person (Article XI).

Article II, The Teacher and the State

The primary objective of Article II is to set standards as to how the

teachers are to act as the trustee of the State in carrying out its obligations of
nurturing the young. As a trustee, the teachers have the obligation to carry out the
obligations of the principal (the government) for the benefit of another (the
children of the Republic).

3
 Stated in section 1 of Article II, the teacher has the obligation to transmit
to the young the cultural and educational heritage of the nation. The teacher is
also responsible to elevate national morality, promote national pride, cultivate
love of country, instill allegiance to the constitution and for all duly constituted
authorities, and promote obedience to the laws of the state. Some examples of the
activities being carried out in basic education schools to fulfil this mandate is the
conduct of the Buwan ng Wika every year in order to transmit the cultural
heritage of the nation to the next generations. Another example is the study of
Araling Panlipunan to promote national pride among many others.

Section 2 of the Code mandates the teachers to carry out the declared
policies of the state found under Article II of the Constitution. Some of these
state policies are the declaration that the Philippines is a democratic and a
republican state and the sovereign resides in the people. Another policy is that the
Philippines renounces war as an instrument of national policy, and that civilian
authority must be held supreme over military authority at all times.

The other obligations of the teachers include his full commitment and
devotion to duty (Section 3). A teacher shall not also engage in the promotion of
any political, religious, or other partisan interest, and shall not, directly or
indirectly, solicit, require, collect, or receive any money or service or other
valuable material from any person or entity for such purposes (Section 4). Take
note that the solicitations referred to here by the Code are solicitations for the
purpose of political, religious, or other partisan interest only such that if the
solicitation is for purposes other than those enumerated, the Code is not
applicable.

Also, the teachers are expected to exercise all other constitutional rights
and responsibility (Section 6), however, they must not use their position and
authority as a teacher to coerce any other to follow any political course of action
(Section 7). This is the reason why teachers are prohibited from participating in
any campaign activities during national or local elections.

Under Section 8 of Article II, it is declared that every teacher shall enjoy
academic freedom. The Supreme Court of the Philippines had provided for a
definition of academic freedom as applied to institutions of higher learning. This
definition is broad enough to ensure that the freedom of thought may be fully
encouraged among the academics, intellectuals, and scholars in the academe.
However, academic freedom as defined by the Court is attached only to higher
education institutions such that it could be fully construed that this wide latitude
of freedom is not available for basic education schools. In fact, the Code itself
under Section 8 restricts the kind of inquiries the basic education schools must
undertake. They are free to expound only on matters that are not inimical to the
declared policies of the State. Stated otherwise, basic education schools are not
free to inquire on matters that are against the declared policies of the Republic as
enumerated under Article II of the 1987 Constitution.

4
 Article III, The Teacher and the Community

The Code under Article III provides standards as to how the teachers
should deal with the community at large. It defines the teacher’s obligation to the
community not only as a professional but an active participant in the promotion of
the communities’ objectives.

Section 2 of Article III mandates the teachers to serve as leaders and

active participants in the promotion of moral, social, educational, economic, and
civic movements in the community. Thus, it is inevitable that the teachers should
participate in community activities that are promoting those that were earlier
enumerated. Teachers are therefore expected to at the least actively participate if
not to lead barangay fiesta, agricultural fairs, sports activities, among many others
that are designed to develop the moral, social, educational, economic, and civic
development of the people in the community.

The teachers are also expected to behave with honor and dignity at all
times and refrain for such activities as gambling, smoking, drunkenness, and other
excesses, much less illicit relations. In several cases, the Court had the
opportunity to instruct that a teacher serve as an example to his pupils, especially
during their formative years and stands in loco parentis to them. The Court
further instructed that consequently, it is but stating the obvious to assert that
teachers must adhere to the exacting standards of morality and decency. There is
no dichotomy of morality. A teacher, both in his official and personal conduct,
must display exemplary behavior. He must freely and willingly accept restrictions
on his conduct that might be viewed irksome by ordinary citizens. In other words,
the personal behavior of teachers, in and outside the classroom, must be beyond
reproach.

Accordingly, teachers must abide by a standard of personal conduct which

not only proscribes the commission of immoral acts, but also prohibits behavior
creating a suspicion of immorality because of the harmful impression it might
have on the students. Likewise, they must observe a high standard of integrity and
honesty (Puse v. Puse, GR No. 183678, March 15, 2010).

The Code instructed the teachers to live for and with the community and
shall study and understand local customs and traditions in order for them to have a
sympathetic attitude towards the community and its inhabitants (Section 4). The
teacher must also inform the community of the school’s needs, problems, and
accomplishments. They are also expected to render counseling services being one
of the intellectuals in the community. Generally, the teachers are expected to
maintain harmonious and pleasant personal relations with other professionals,
government officials and with the people present in the community. He also has
the freedom to attend church and worships as appropriate, but shall not use his
position and influence to proselyte others. It is to be understood that religious
education may be had in schools provided that some procedures be observed.

5
 Article IV, The Teacher and the Profession

The teacher is expected to insure teaching as the noblest profession. Some

of the obligations of the teacher to achieve this goal are the following: 1) he must
show genuine enthusiasm and pride in teaching; 2) he shall make the best
preparation for the career of teaching and is expected to continuously improve the
same through the Continuing Professional Education (CPE); 3) he shall help in
seeking for support for the school but not make improper misrepresentations; and
4) he shall use the teaching profession in a manner that makes it dignified means
for earning a decent living.

One recent controversy relative to these sections of the Code is the

requirement of Continuing Professional Education (CPE) in renewing the
teacher’s license. It has to be noted that even prior to the enactment of RA 10912
or the Continuing Professional Development Act of 2016 which mandates among
others that professionals are required to take CPD units before they may be able to
renew their licenses, the Code already requires teachers to exert efforts in
enhancing their competencies as professionals. This further means that even
without the mandates of RA 10912, teachers are still expected to improve their
skills as teachers through various means as mandated by the Code.

Article VI, The Teacher and Higher Authorities in the Profession

As professional teachers work, they are expected to work harmoniously

with the higher authorities in the bureau. It is inevitable at times that the interests
of the teachers are different from the interests of the higher authorities. This is
true especially when personal feelings and private opinions come in. The Code
fully understands these possibilities in the workplace. Thus, under Section 1,
Article VI of the Code, it categorically instructs that teachers are to make an
honest effort to understand and support the legitimate policies of the school and
the administration regardless of personal feeling or private opinion and shall
faithfully carry them out.

It has to be noted however that only the legitimate policies of the school
and the administration are to be carried out. If it is apparent that the policies of
the school are against laws, morals, good customs, public policy or order, the
teacher has the obligation to convey to the administrator the flaws of the policy
and may in good faith refuse to implement them. Refusal to implement an
unlawful order is an act expected especially of a public school teacher. His
acquiescence to an order despite its being unlawful may render him
administratively, civilly, or even criminally liable.

Article VI continued to direct under Section 2 that teachers in their dealing

with higher authorities should not make false accusations or charges against
superiors. Valid charges are however not proscribed by the Code.

6
 Also, to maintain harmony in the workplace, the teacher is expected to
transact official business through channels passing through the proper hierarchy
of officials except when a special procedure is prescribed for a particular
transaction. One example of this is when the school principal is the one
implicated in a complaint. In a regular complaint, meaning the school principal is
not the one involved, the regular procedure is that the principal presides the
hearings relative to the complaint. However, in case the school principal is the
one being accused in the complaint, he is relieved of his right to preside the
hearings of his own case. Another example of this is when a valid procedure is
opposed by the immediate supervisor, then the teacher has no resort but to
escalate the matter to the next higher authority.

Section 4, Article VI of the Code recognizes the right of the teachers to

seek redress against injustice to the administration. This same provision of the
Code is congruent to the Bill of Rights of individuals as stated in Article III of the
Constitution. Accordingly, the people have the right to peaceably assemble and
seek redress. However, it has been held several times over by the Court that as a
general rule, for government employees, the right to organize and seek redress
does not grant them the right to conduct rallies. It means that government
officials are prohibited by the law to rally as this will impair the obligations of the
government to serve the people.

Other issues such as appointment, promotions, and transfer of teachers are

addressed under section 5, and in relation to this is the obligation of the teacher to
perform his obligations as stated in the contract (Section 6). It has to be noted
that violations of Sections 5 and 6 has serious legal implications when violated.
Aside from administrative liability, civil and criminal liabilities may also arise.
One example is that a teacher from a private school whose contractual obligations
have not yet expired, terminated or extinguished cannot just readily leave the
school without the acquiescence of the latter. It is not like with public schools
where once a teacher resigns from the government service, there is no contract
that would prohibit him to do so. In private schools, a teacher who leaves the
school while some of his contractual obligations are not yet complied with such as
the number of years he has to serve the school may lead to litigations in a court of
law.

Article VIII, The Teacher and the Learner

This section of the Code outlines the obligations of the teachers in his
dealing with the learners. Section 1, Article VIII acknowledges that the teacher
has the right to determine the academic marks and the promotion of learners in the
subject he handles. Although he has the right to determine the grades of the
learners, it must however be in accordance with the generally accepted procedures
of evaluation and measurement and that grades must be given based on merits and
quality of academic performance only.

7
 Also, the Code reiterates the duty of the teacher to deal justifiably and
impartially with every student such that prejudice and discrimination must be at
all times avoided. In order to avoid biases, one act is proscribed in Section 4. It
is mentioned that teachers shall not accept favors or gifts from learners, their
parents or others in the behalf or in exchange for requested concessions,
especially if undeserved. For private school teachers it could be said that they
could accept gifts provided that it was given freely and without condition. What
the Code proscribes are only those gifts that were given in exchange for requested
concessions. For public school teachers however, being a public officer at the
same time, the policies proscribe them from receiving gifts from the public even if
without any attached conditions. This is to maintain the integrity of the public
service. Failure to abide by this policy may lead to prosecution from
administrative and criminal charges.

Section 7 admits the possibility that mutual attraction and subsequent love
may develop between a teacher and a learner. In cases such as this, the Code does
not absolutely prohibits such relations between a teacher and a learner. What it
does not allow is the subsequent scandal, gossip and preferential treatment of the
learner that may arise due to the deficient professional discretion of the teacher. It
could be said therefore that so long as the teacher practices utmost professional
discretion in his dealing with his amorous relationship with the student, and that
so long as it does not lead to scandal, gossip, and preferential treatment of the
learner, such relationship is not prohibited by the Code.

In the case of Chua-Qua v. Clave, Evelyn, 30 years old, was teaching at

Tay Tung High School where Bobby, 16 years old was her student. The two fell
in love and eventually got married. The school then filed a case against Evelyn
primarily alleging that she violated the Code of Ethics for Teachers specifically
by performing immoral acts with Bobby. There was however no evidence
presented to prove that the two performed immoral acts. The Court in its decision
stated that due to absence of evidence, the allegation that the Code of Ethics was
violated cannot be sustained. Indeed, if Evelyn and Bobby fell in love despite of
their difference in age and academic levels, it only proves one thing, that the heart
has reasons of its own which reason does not know, the Court said (Chua-Qua v.
Clave, GR No. 49549, August 30, 1990).

Section 8, Article VIII prohibits the teachers from inflicting corporal

punishment on offending learners nor make deductions from their scholastic
ratings as a punishment for acts which are clearly not manifestation of poor
scholarship. This provision of the Code must be read parallel with RA 7610 or
the Special Protection of Children Against Abuse, Exploitation and
Discrimination Act. Although the teachers have the obligation to discipline the
learners being a part of their substituted parental authority, they are however
prohibited from inflicting corporal punishment to the children. This was clearly
discussed by the Court in the case of Rosaldes v. PP, GR No. 173988, October 8,
2014. There are several cases as well where the Court had the occasion to

8
reiterate that corporal punishment is proscribed by the law as far as disciplining
the learners are concerned.

Article X, The Teacher and Business

The Code does not prohibit the teachers from engaging in business
activities provided that the following are met: 1) such business activities do not
relate to or adversely affect his work as a teacher; and 2) he shall not act as agent
or financially interested in any commercial venture which furnish textbooks and
other school commodities in the purchase and disposal of which he can exercise
official influence. This means that so long as the business activities of the teacher
are not in conflict with his function as a teacher then such economic activities are
allowed. He may however be allowed to engage in business that are related to
school concerns provided that his transactions with the school is sanctioned by
existing laws and policies.

Also Section 2, Article X of the Code reminds the teachers to maintain a

good reputation by settling his debts and loans satisfactorily.

References:

1. Code of Ethics for Professional Teachers

2. Puse v. Puse, GR No. 183678, March 15, 2010
3. Chua-Qua v. Clave, GR No. 49549, August 30, 1990
4. Rosaldes v. PP, GR No. 173988, October 8, 2014