Training for Master Teacher on the

Philippine Professional Standards

for Teachers

Gina O. Gonong
Director, Research Center for Teacher Quality

Caliraya Resort Club

September 20-22, 2017
 Brief Intro:
Applied Policy-Relevant Research
Partnership funded by the Australian
Government

The National Centre of Science, Information and

Philippine National
Communication Technology, and Mathematics
Research Center for Teacher Quality
Education for Rural and Regional Australia
 Applied Research Partnership Background

To undertake strategic applied research projects that involve

relevant Philippine Government Agencies, particularly DepED
and CHED.

Our mission is to gather data and provide evidence-based

policy advice that will strengthen and enhance teacher quality
initiatives across the Philippines, to support:

K to 12, ASEAN 2015, OBE for TEIs, and internationalisation of

education.
DepEd Order No. 42, s. 2017
 Work with DepEd OUCI, Bureaus and the Regions
Philippine Professional
Standards for Teachers Draft Teacher
(PPST) Induction
Program
Policy

BHROD
Draft Policy on
Continuing
Results-based Performance Professional
Management Tools (RPMS), Development
Classroom Observation
Tools (COT) and Self- Draft Policy on Teacher
Assessment Tools (SAT) Assessment
based on PPST
 Current work related to the Standards

• 3NS/COEs in Teacher Education are doing

curriculum quality audit using the
Professional Standards. BukSU and
WMSU will soon be ready to revise their
teacher education curriculum based on the
standards.

• Doing final review and refinement on

teacher assessment tools (COT, SAT,
RPMS tools)
 Current work related to the Standards
• Assisting Region IV-A in designing a
training program for:
i. 500 senior staff to understand the
Standards; and
ii. Master Teachers to ensure that they possess
the indicators expected of highly proficient
teachers

• Working with Region IV-A on lesson

exemplars (and videos) showing strands in
Domain 3 (with Regional Memo)
Current work…

• Planning the ‘elaborations’ of Domain 3,

Diversity of Learners, across Beginning,
Highly Proficient and Distinguished Teacher
practice

(Note: Proficient Practice has been

elaborated. For further refinements when all
indicators across career stages have been
elaborated.)
 “The quality of an
education system cannot
exceed the quality of its
teachers.”
(McKinsey & Co., 2007)
 Three things that matter most in top
school systems
(McKinsey & Co., 2007)

Getting the right Developing

people to them into
become teachers effective
instructors

Ensuring that
the system is able
to deliver the best
possible
instruction for
every child
Teacher’s Performance on Content
Knowledge (World Bank, 2014)
Support that Teachers Need
(World Bank, 2014)
Issues on Teacher Professional Development
(World Bank, 2014)

• Professional development opportunities currently

offered to teachers frequently fail to meet even
minimum levels of quality and fall short of what
teachers want and need

• Systems at the school level to support teachers and

identify their professional development needs are not
working well

• Utilization of budget allocated for human resource

training and development is often low, amounting to
only 57 percent of the budget in 2014
Internationally, Teacher Quality is articulated
in Professional Standards for Teachers
The Philippine Professional Standards for Teachers:

• Is a public statement of professional accountability

• Makes explicit what teachers should know, be able to

do and value in the profession

• Is sufficiently generic to represent practice across

Grade levels and subject areas
For many years, DepEd has used National
Competency-based Teacher Standards
(NCBTS) as a framework for teacher quality

• Training and Development System (DO 30, s. 2009)

• Teacher Strengths and Needs Assessment Tool,

Individual Plan for Professional Development, Teacher
Induction Program, Instructional Supervision,
Professional Development of Teachers (DO 32, s. 2009;
DO 23, s. 2010)

• Teacher Education and Development Program –

Deployment of Pre-service Teachers (DO 3, s. 2007)
In 2013, RA 10533 (K to 12 Reform) was
signed into law
This prompted the following:

• Need to revisit NCBTS as a Framework for Teacher

Quality; and, address teacher quality requirements in the
K to 12 (e.g., content knowledge and pedagogy, career
stages)

• Work on teacher standards was approved in 2012 by the

Joint Advisory Board chaired by Former Sec Armin
Luistro
The development of the new
Professional Standards for Teachers
A three-year, robust quantitative and qualitative research and
development work was undertaken that included, among
others:

• Wide consultation with key education stakeholders and

thousands of in- and pre- service teachers, principals,
supervisors, and teacher educators across the country

• Review and analyses of teacher standards across 42

international jurisdictions, as well as Philippine government
and media discourse on teacher quality

• National validation approved by Br. Armin in Feb 2015

• Finalization by TEC, Regional Directors, Bureau Directors in

August 2016
 Research Methodology
Phase One Phase Two

Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3 Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3

Consultations Draft Design National Validation Finalization of the Draft

Review of Drafting of the
with Key Clarification Study Studies Standards
Related Standards by
Stakeholders
Literature and the Technical
and the
Analysis of Working Group
Reference
Baseline Data (TWG)
Panel Revision by
the TWG

Consultations with Key Stakeholders and the Reference Panel

• What are the

• Lexical
Analysis of • Do the indicators participants’
perspectives/views/
Government have clarity of
opinions on the draft D-
Documents meaning? NCBTS domains,
and • How do teachers strands, indicators and Policy
Newspaper assess the level career stages?
• Are the indicators
Recommendations
Discourse
that Relate to of difficulty of assessable?
Teacher indicators across • What constitutes
evidence of meeting the
Quality the four stages?
indicators?
 Comparison of Professional Standards
(D-NCBTS) Strands with World Standards
 Validation Study Methodology

Draft Design
Clarification • Clarity of meaning of Indicators
Study • Level of difficulty across Career Stages

Validation
Studies
(Quantitative
and
Qualitative) • Participants’ perspectives/views/
National opinions on the draft Professional
Focus Standards for Teachers Domains,
Group Strands, Indicators and Career stages
Workshops • Assessability of Indicators
• Evidences of meeting the Indicators
 Item Fit Map of D-NCBTS Indicators
Table 9A: Rasch Analysis of DDC Form A Table 9B: Rasch Analysis of DDC Form B
INFIT
INFIT
MNSQ .53 Items .63 .77 1.00 1.30 1.60 1.90
MNSQ .53
Items .63 .77 1.00 1.30 1.60 1.90
--------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+----
57 item 57 . * | .
--------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+---- 58 item 58 . * | .
1 item 1 . | * . 59 item 59
60 item 60
. *
. *
|
|
.
.
2 item 2 . |* . 61 item 61 . * | .
62 item 62 . * .
3 item 3 . |* . 63 item 63 . * | .
4 item 4 . | * . 64 item 64 . * .
65 item 65 . * | .
5 item 5 . * . 66 item 66 . * | .
6 item 6 . | * . 67 item 67 . | . *

*
68 item 68 . *| .
7 item 7 . | . * 69 item 69 . * | .

*
70 item 70 . | . *
8 item 8 . * | .
9 item 9
10 item 10
.
.
*
| *
.
.
71 item 71
72 item 72
73 item 73
.
.
.
| *
|*
*
.
.
. *
Under-fit
74 item 74 . | * .
11 item 11
12 item 12
13 item 13
.
.
.
|
|*
* |
* .
.
.
Under-fit 75 item 75
76 item 76
77 item 77
78 item 78
.
.
.
.
* |
* |
|
*|
.
.
.
.
*

**
79 item 79 . | . *
14 item 14 . | * . 80 item 80
81 item 81
.
.
|
|
*
*
.
.
15 item 15 . | * . 82 item 82 . |* .
83 item 83 . | * .
16 item 16 . | * . 84 item 84 . | * .
17 item 17 . | * . 85 item 85 . |* .
86 item 86 . | * .
18 item 18 . *| . 87 item 87 . | * .
19 item 19 . * . 88 item 88
89 item 89
.
.
*
*
.
.
20 item 20 . * | . 90 item 90 . | * .
91 item 91 . * .
21 item 21 . * . 92 item 92 . * | .
22 item 22 . * . 93 item 93 . | * .
94 item 94 . |* .
23 item 23 . | * . 95 item 95 . * | .
24 item 24 . * | . 96 item 96
97 item 97
.
.
*
* |
.
.
25 item 25 . *| . 98 item 98 . * | .
99 item 99 . | * .
26 item 26 . |* . 100 item 100 . |* .
27 item 27 . * | . 101 item 101 . |* .
102 item 102 . | * .
28 item 28 . * | . 103 item 103 . * | .
104 item 104 . |* .
29 item 29 . * | . 105 item 105 . * | .
30 item 30 . | * . 106 item 106 . * | .
107 item 107 . * | .
31 item 31 . * | . 108 item 108 . * | .
32 item 32 . * | . 109 item 109
110 item 110
.
.
* |
*|
.
.
INFIT
33 item 33 . * | . 111 item 111
MNSQ .53 .63
.
.77
*|
1.00
.
1.30 1.60 1.90
112 item 112 . * | .
34 item 34 . * | . --------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+----
113 item 113 . | * .
35 item 35 . * . 114 item 114 . * | .
36 item 36 . *| . 115 item 115
116 item 116
.
. *
| *
|
.
.
37 item 37 . * . 117 item 117 . *| .
118 item 118 . | * .
38 item 38 . * | . 119 item 119 . |* .
39 item 39 . * | . 120 item 120 . * | .
121 item 121 . * | .
40 item 40 . * | . 122 item 122 . * | .
41 item 41 . | * . 123 item 123
124 item 124
.
. *
* |
|
.
.
42 item 42 . * | . 125 item 125 . * | .
126 item 126 . * | .
43 item 43 . * | . 127 item 127 . * | .
44 item 44 . *| . 128 item 128 . * | .
129 item 129 . | *
45 item 45 . * | . 130 item 130 . * | .
131 item 131 . * | .
46 item 46 . *| . 132 item 132 . * | .
47 item 47 . * | . 133 item 133 . * .
134 item 134 . * | .
48 item 48 . * | .
49 item 49
50 item 50
.
. *
* |
|
.
.
135 item 135
136 item 136
137 item 137
138 item 138
.
.
.
. *
*
* |
*
|
.
.
.
.
*
139 item 139 . * | .
51 item 51 . * | . 140 item 140 . * | .
52 item 52 . *| . 141 item 141 . * .
142 item 142 . * | .
53 item 53 . |* . 143 item 143 . * | .
54 item 54 . * | . 144 item 144
145 item 145
.
.
|
*|
* .
.
55 item 55 . * | . 146 item 146 . | * .
147 item 147 . * | .
56 item 56 . * | . 148 item 148 . | . *

*
 Reliability of Indicators
Summary of Psychometric Parameters
for the Anchored and Linked Models

Linked
Anchored Model
Model
Form A Form B
Item Item Item
0.88 0.91 0.89
Reliability Reliability Reliability
Case Case Case
0.95 0.96 0.95
Reliability Reliability Reliability
Indicators have demonstrated excellent reliability characteristics
(Note: reliability measures above 0.7 is considered acceptable.)
 Level of Difficulty: Domains

0.8

0.6

0.4
Level of Difficulty
(Tau Estimates)

0.2

-0.2

-0.4

-0.6
Domain 1 Domain 2 Domain 3 Domain 4 Domain 5 Domain 6 Domain 7
Tau Estimates 0.02 -0.2 0.73 0 0.24 -0.27 -0.53
 Consultations with DepED

Consultative Meeting Consultative Meeting

with Usec Dina Ocampo with Br. Armin Luistro, Usec Dina
February 13, 2014; DepED Ocampo and Dir Maria Lourdes Pantoja
February 3, 2015; DepED

Meeting with Directors about Focus Reference Panel Meetings

Group Workshops March 24, 2014; May 28, 2014; May 8,
Feb 27 2015; Century Park Hotel 2015
 MAR
March 17-18
Focus Group Workshops in Regions II and IV-A March 19-20
Focus Group Workshops in Regions I, VIII, CAR and
ARMM

Region II Region IV-A

March 23-24 Region I CAR
Focus Group Workshop
in Region III March 25-26
Focus Group Workshop
in Region XIII
March 26-27
Region III Focus Group Workshop Region VIII
in Region VI
Region VI
April 28-29
March 30-31
Focus Group
Focus Group
Workshops in Region
Workshops in Regions
IV-B and NCR NCR
Region IX V, VII, IX, X, XI and XII
APR
Region V
National Focus
Group
Workshops
Region XII Region X
 Consultations with
DepED, CHED and other
key Stakeholders
Lexical and content
Feedback from analyses of Teacher
National Quality Discourse and
Focus Group International Standards
Workshops

Work on the
Philippine
Professional
Standards for
Survey of in- Teachers
service and pre-
service teachers,
as well as
teacher
educators) Psychometric studies of
indicators
 Capturing teacher quality

K to 12 21st Century
(2013) Skills

National
Philippine
Competency-
Professional
based Teacher
Standards
Standardsfor
Teachers
(NCBTS)
Philippine
ASEAN Integration/
Qualifications Internationalization
Framework
Philippine Professional Standards for Teachers
as the New Framework for
Teacher Quality and Teacher Development
Professional Standards as a Framework for Teacher
Quality and Teacher Professional Development

Four Career Stages (developmental, lifelong learning)

Seven Domains (“distinctive spheres of the teaching-learning

process”)

(37) Strands (“more specific dimensions of positive teacher

practices”)

(37) Indicators per Career Stage (concrete, observable,

measure teacher practices)
Note: Please refer to the copy.
 Domains
Philippine Professional
NCBTS Standards for teachers

Subsumed 1 Social Regard for 1 Content Knowledge Central to the

in other Learning
domains
and Pedagogy new K to 12
Reform and
places, at the
2 Learning Environment 2 Learning Environment beginning,
the
importance
3 Diversity of Learners 3 Diversity of Learners of teachers
knowing their
4 Curriculum and 4 Curriculum and content and
Planning Planning knowing how
to teach it.
Assessing
5 Planning, 5 Assessment and
and Reporting Reporting
6 Community Linkages and
6 Community Linkages Professional Engagement
7 Personal Growth and 7 Personal Growth and
Professional Development Professional Development
 Social Regard for Learning
NCBTS
Strand 1.1. Teacher’s actions
demonstrate value for learning
1.1.1. Implements school policies
and procedures
1.1.2. Demonstrates punctuality
1.1.3. Maintains appropriate
appearance
1.1.4. Is careful about the effect of
one’s behavior on students
Strand 1.2. Demonstrates that
learning is of different kinds and
from different sources
1.2.1. Makes use of various learning
experiences and resources
PPST
Strand 6.4 School policies and procedures
6.4.2 Comply with and implement school policies
and procedures consistently to foster harmonious
relationships with learners, parents, and other
stakeholders.
Strand 6.3 Professional ethics
6.3.2 Review regularly personal teaching practice
using existing laws and regulations that apply to
the teaching profession and the responsibilities
specified in the Code of Ethics for Professional
Teachers.
Strand 2.3 Management of classroom
structure and activities
2.3.2 Manage classroom structure to engage
learners, individually or in groups, in meaningful
exploration, discovery and hands-on activities
within a range of physical learning environments.
 The Paradigm Shift

Before K to 12 Paradigm Shift K to 12

The Professional
NCBTS
Standards
(a continuum of teaching
practice defined in terms of
distinct career stages)
 Rationale for Career Stages
The description of standards
at different career stages
provides “a framework for the
teacher development continuum.”
(OECD,2005)

Teacher evaluation should be based on

professional teaching standards
and should be sophisticated enough
to assess teaching quality across
the continuum of development
from novice to expert teacher.
(Darling-Hammond in Strauss, 2012)
 Teacher Professional Growth
Teacher professional growth can be represented by:

Beginning Exemplary
training practice

It is valuable to have sign posts along the way to help identify

progress.

Teacher quality Stages are developmental in nature and exist

on a quality continuum.

This is about teachers, not leadership roles such as

Principals and Supervisors.
 Four Career Stages
The first (Beginning) concerns people who complete their
training from TEIs

The second (Proficient) concerns an acceptable standard for all

teachers. It should be a standard reached within the first few
years of teaching

The third (Highly Proficient) concerns accomplished

practitioners who mentor and work collegially with other staff

The fourth (Distinguished) concerns exemplary teachers who

have developed skills to lead colleagues in promoting quality
learning
 Career Stage Description
Career Stage 1: Career Stage 2: Career Stage 3: Career Stage 4:
Beginning Proficient Highly Proficient Distinguished
Teachers Teachers Teachers
• possess the • professionally • consistently • embody the
requisite independent in display a high highest
knowledge and the application level of standard for
skills vital to the of skills vital to performance in teaching
teaching and the teaching their teaching grounded in
learning and learning practice global best
process process • provide support practice
• seek • display skills in and mentoring • recognized as
professional planning, to colleagues in educators,
support from implementing their leaders,
more and managing professional contributors to
experienced learning development the profession
colleagues programs
 Career Stage 1 Career Stage 2 Career Stage 3 Career Stage 4
1
2
3
Positive Positive
4
5 use of ICT use of
6
7 ICT
8
9
10
11
CAREER STAGE Continuum
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
Teaching
23
24 and
25
26 learning
27
28 resources
29
30 including
31
32 ICT
33
34 Professional
35 Professional
36 reflection
37 reflection and
and learning
learning to
to improve
improve
practice
practice
 Targeted Professional Development for Teachers
Domain 3. Diversity of Learners

Strand 3.1 Learners’ gender, needs, strengths,

interests and experiences
Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3 Stage 4

3.1.1 3.1.4 Lead

3.1.2 Use 3.1.3. Work with
Demonstrate colleagues to
differentiated, colleagues to share
knowledge and evaluate
developmentally- differentiated,
understanding of differentiated
appropriate developmentally-
differentiated strategies to enrich
learning appropriate
teaching to suit teaching practices
experiences to opportunities to
the learners' that address learner
address learners’ address learners’
gender, needs, differences in
gender, needs, differences in
strengths, gender, needs,
strengths, interests gender, needs,
interests and strengths, interests
and experiences strengths, interests
experiences. and experiences
and experiences.

Learning Action Cells

 Features of a Developmental Approach
(AITSL, Looking at classroom practice, p.6)

• Gives clarification to what it means to “get better” in areas

of teacher expertise

• Defines direction: describes and illustrates professional

growth and development for teachers

• Enables teachers to reflect on their practice, diagnose

strengths and areas needing improvement

• Provides vision and details of the next level of

performance based on teacher quality

• Is sensitive to the continuum of lifelong learning of

teachers’ professional practice
Teacher Professional Development Framework

Career Path

Stage 4
Stage 3 (Distinguished)
Stage 2 (Highly
Recruitment Proficient)
Stage 1 (Proficient)
and Hiring
(Beginning)

Teacher
Teacher Entry Induction Rewards,
Requirement Compensation?
Program
12 Teacher Certification at Career
Stage 2, 3, 4 and Head Teacher Position
Teacher
Education Classroom Observation Tool & Self-assessment Tool
Targeted Professional Development and Teacher Training
System Anchored on Professional Standards
Professional
Development/
In-service
Training
Classroom Teacher Position
Observation and Competency
Tool Profile
(RPMS)
Standards
Across Career
Stages
Teacher
Self- Teacher Induction
Assessment (Career Stage 1 to
Tool 2); Accreditation
at Career Stage
2, 3, 4
 Self-Assessment Tools

Tools aligned with the Professional Standards for

Teachers

Full COT with 20 Indicators

RPMS Tools

Classroom Observation Tools

As articulated in the Philippine
Professional Standards, teachers must,
among others:
• Develop learners to become critical thinkers
• Recognize, respect and celebrate individual
differences
• Know what to teach and how to teach it
• Respond to the different needs of learners; see
learners in their social contexts
• Plan and design effective teaching and learning
processes
• Establish community relationships and uphold
professional ethics
• Engage in professional reflection
 Use of Mother Tongue,
Knowledge of research
Filipino and English in
Strategies for instruction
promoting literacy and Strategies for developing critical
numeracy and creative thinking skills
Know what
to teach Classroom
Engage in
communication
professional reflection and how to strategies
and assume
teach it Maintain a
responsibility for
personal learning-
professional Learners’
focused linguistic,
learning
environment cultural, socio-
economic and
religious
Establish backgrounds
community Learners in
relationships Teacher Quality
Are difficult
and uphold as articulated in
responsive circumstances
professional the Professional
to learner
ethics Use a variety of Standards diversity Learners
assessment
from
tools to inform Plan and
Indigenous
and enhance design
the teaching Groups
and learning effective
process instruction
Ideas?
Workshop: Understanding the Standards
1. What stands out to you about the Standards?
2. Are there unusual or unexpected ideas (e.g.,
career stages? domains?)
3. Are there strands or indicators that should not
be there? Strands or indicators that should be
there but appear to be missing?
4. Which indicators do you find as the easiest?
Most difficult? Most important? Least
important?
5. Which indicators do you usually demonstrate in
your teaching practice? Which ones do you
think are not applicable to your practice?
Thank you very much. 
-Gina
gonong.go@pnu.edu.ph

Connect with us through:

E-mail: rctq@pnu.edu.ph

Visit our page:

www.pnu.edu.ph/rctq/