Case Digest Fin

Educ 5 – The Teaching Profession 1

Name: Hanah Kryss C. Castre Date: Oct. 16, 2018
Section: 4D1-ECE
Code of Ethics
1. The three (3) most significant learning I’ve got from the topic are the following:
 To improve the ethics of the teaching profession and to protect
students from unethical conduct of a teacher.
 To improve regulation and control of teacher misconduct.
 To promote the professional identity among teacher.
2. Why are the learnings significant to me?
It is significant for me because it helps and tell people what the right thing
is, when the right thing is not clear. It can reinforce people’s resolve their readiness
to do the right thing when workplace pressures tempt them to act against their own
values. And also helps us to make sure the group is operating according to
a shared understanding of how they should behave. Through this, it helps reduce
conflict between the school, community and to the parents also.
3. Give your own insight and reflection about the topic.
In discussing the Code of Ethics in class, it helps us understand that when

a teacher gets a teaching position they are agreeing to follow the code of ethics. I
hadn't realized some the things that were in it so I am glad we went over it.
Teachers are expected to be fair to all their students and not to take advantage of
their position in any way. For example, you can't accept expensive gifts from
students because it is really unfair. You can't push your personal beliefs on
students because they are a "captive audience". You need to have a professional
relationship with all students and not let it get too casual and familiar. Apparently,
there is quite a bit of abuse that is happening in the school. You need to protect
your students' safety and do not believe that this is someone else's job. Teachers
at all levels of education should focus on imparting quality education. It is the prime
duty of the teacher to bring optimum development among the students. Teachers'
should show an equal level of dignity to his profession, institution, students,
colleagues and parents. Teachers' should specially stress on developing the
professional ethics within them. Teachers should take the liability of teaching
profession seriously and perform their duties efficiently. Therefore, for successful
teaching, the knowledge of professional ethics and its implementation is very
essential for teachers.

PHILOSOPHY KEYWORDS/KEY IDEAS
Existentialism freedom of choice, decision, unique
Pragmatism practical, “if it works, it’s true”, education must be useful
to society, activation of skills, learners learn from
experiences through interaction with the environment
Realism Science, real world, actualities of life, believes in the

importance of society, “to see is to believe”
Reconstructionism aims to develop inherent power of the learner, transform
the society, solution to the problem, social problem
Idealism spiritual, values, ideal, perfect, anything on your mind is

absolutely true, to develop the individual’s spiritually,
mentally, morally
Essentialism basic, 3Rs, specialization, fundamental, sequencing,
focuses on test scores
Empiricism senses
Naturalism innate, natural self, encourages learning by doing
Perennialism everlasting, classic, literature, traditional, power of
thought, passive learners
Progressivism child-centered, education is always in the process of
development, cultivation of individuality
Epicureanism perfection
Agnosticism atheist, unknown
Stoicism contentment,
Hedonism pleasure
Humanism “live life to the fullest”, rejects supernaturalism, do not
hesitate
Constructivism prior knowledge activation
Scholasticism rationalization of church
Utilitarianism the belief that a morally good action is one that helps the
greatest number of people
Rationalism the belief that reason and experience and not emotions
or religious should be the basis of action
Cynicism conventional, laws, policies

Section: 4D1-ECE
Reflection Paper on Philosophies of Education
The word philosophy is derived from two Greek words. The first word, philo, means
“love.” The second, sophy, means “wisdom.” Literally, then, philosophy means “love of
wisdom” (Power, 1982). Each individual has an attitude toward life, children, politics,
learning, and previous personal experiences that informs and shapes their set of beliefs.
Although you may not be conscious of it, this set of beliefs, or personal philosophy,
informs how you live, work, and interact with others. What you believe is directly reflected
in both your teaching and learning processes.
Behind every school and every teacher is a set of related beliefs that influences
what and how students are taught. A philosophy of education represents answers to
questions about the purpose of schooling, a teacher's role, and what should be taught
and by what methods. It is important to understand how philosophy and education are
interrelated. In order to become the most effective teacher you can be, you must
understand your own beliefs, while at the same time empathizing with others.
I believe we are all students as well as teachers. But It is important to know

thyself…to understand the basic underpinnings of your personal philosophical structure -
to know where you are coming from. This can be applied to any person, regardless of
profession. However, it has specific application in the teaching professions and your
philosophical approach to learning will have an impact on your teaching.

Republic of the Philippines
Department of Education
The National Competency-Based Teachers Standards (NCBTS)*
Introduction
The teaching profession has been struggling to keep pace with the changes in society and the
accompanying challenges of the technological world. With the notion that the teacher education,
which consists of the pre-service education of teachers (PET) and the In-service education of
teachers (INSET), has been unable to bridge the growing gap between the needs and expectations of
learners, and the knowledge and skill levels of both new and existing teachers, the Teacher
Education and Development Program (TEDP) was conceived. It has been initiated to advocate a
greater format partnership between the Commission on Higher education (CHED), Teacher
Education Institutes (TEIs), Philippine Regulatory Commission (PRC), Department of Education
(DepEd) and the Civil Service Commission (CSC) for the improvement of both pre-service and in-
service education.
This Department is committed to providing a quality system of public education. It provides schools
with teachers who are able to help students develop their abilities, attitudes and skills for them to
function effectively in an environment that is changing rapidly in many different ways. It has
commenced the implementation of a TEDP that seeks to conceptualize a teacher’s career path as a
continuum that starts with entry to a teacher education program and concludes when a teacher
reaches retirement from formal service. The TEDP will address each stage of this continuum as an
integrated part that is linked closely to preceding and ensuing elements. One key element in the
Program is the establishment of a set on Competency–Based Standards for Teacher Performance
so that teachers, pupils and parents are able to appreciate the complex set of behaviors, attitudes
and skills that each teacher must possess, in order to carry out a satisfactory performance of their
roles and responsibilities.
_______________________________
This document uses as its basis the Teacher Performance and Development Framework that was initially drafted under the Basic
Education Assistance to Mindanao (BEAM) Project in 2003-04. It has been modified and revised during two workshops held in Cebu City and
Subic in 2005, and a series of seven zonal and sectoral workshops from March to May 2006. The assistance of BEAM in providing this base
documentation fro this activity is gratefully acknowledged.

The set of competencies is incorporated in a Teacher Performance and Development Framework
(TPDF) that is based upon the core values of Filipino teachers and on the principles of effective
teaching and learning. The framework is divided into seven (7) domains that represent the desired
features of the teaching and learning process. These domains incorporate a series of strands of the
desired teaching performance statements, which identify observable indicators of a quality teacher’s
performance.
The seven domains are the following:
1. Social Regard for Learning (SRFL) 5. Planning, Assessing Reporting (PAR)
2. Learning Environment (LE) 6. Community Linkages (CL)
3. Diversity of Learners (DOL) 7. Personal Growth & Professional
4. Curriculum (Curr.) Development (PGPD)
Each of these domains will be expanded below as part of a Set of Competency-based Teacher
Standards that will lead to a National Teacher Performance & Development Framework. This
framework will allow teachers to self-assess their own performance against the Competency
Standards in order to identify areas of strength as well as areas that need to be developed further in
order for them to function more effectively as facilitators of learning.
Statement of Principle
Teachers in all Philippines public schools are committed and accountable for providing classroom
instruction with results that are manifested in high performance levels in terms of student learning
outcomes. Teachers are dedicated to the well-being of the students and communities they serve,
taking into account their cultural diversity, group aspirations and what is valued in education.

Domain 1. Social Regard for Learning (SRFL)
The SRFL domain focuses on the ideal that teachers serve as positive and powerful role models of the
value in the pursuit of different efforts to learn. The teacher’s action, statements, and different types of
social interactions with students exemplify this ideal.
Strands of Desired Teaching Performance Indicators

Performance
The teacher .. .
1.1.1 implements school policies and procedures;
1.1 Teacher’s actions demonstrate 1.1.2 demonstrates punctuality;

value for learning.
1.1.3 maintains appropriate appearance; and
1.1.4 is careful about the effect of one’s behavior on students.
Domain 2. Learning Environment (LE)
This domain focuses on importance of providing a social, psychological and physical environment
within which all students, regardless of their individual differences in learning, can engage in the different
learning activities and work towards attaining high standards of learning.

Performance
The teacher .. .
2.1 The teacher creates an environment 2.1.1 maintains a learning environment of courtesy and
that promotes fairness. respect for different learners’ abilities, culture, & gender;
2.1.2 provides gender-fair opportunities for learning; and
2.1.3 recognizes that every learner has strengths.

2.2 The teacher makes the classroom 2.2.1 maintains a safe, clean and orderly classroom free from
environment safe and conducive to distractions; and arranges challenging activities given the
learning. 2.2.2 physical environment.
2.3 The teacher communicates higher 2.3.1 uses individual and cooperative learning activities to
learning expectations to each learner. improve capacities of learner’s for higher learning;
2.3.2 encourages learners to ask questions; and
2.3.3 provides learners with a variety of learning experiences.
2.4 The teacher establishes 2.3.4 handles behavior problems quickly and with due respect
and maintain consistent to children’s nights;
standards of learners’ behavior. 2.3.5
gives timely feedback to reinforce appropriate to learners’
behavior;
2.3.6 guides individual learner requiring development of

appropriate social and learning behavior; and
2.3.7 communicates school policies and procedures for

classroom behavior and see to it that they are followed.
Domai n 3.
Diversity of Learners (DOL)
The DOL domain emphasizes the ide al that teachers can facilitate the learning process even with diverse
learners, by recognizing and respecting individual differences and by using knowledge about their
differences to
design diverse sets of learning activities to ensure that all learners can attain the desired learning goals.

Performance
The teacher .. .

3.1 The teacher is familiar with 3.1.1 uses information on the learning styles and needs of the
learners’ background learners to design and select learning experiences;
knowledge and experiences. 3.1.2 establishes goals that define appropriate expectations for
all learners;
3.1.3 paces lessons appropriate to needs and/or abilities of

learners;
3.1.4 provides differentiated activities for learners;
3.1.5 initiates other learning approaches for learners whose needs

have not been met by usual approaches; and
3.1.6 shows sensitivity to multi-cultural background of the
learners.

Performance
The teacher .. .
3.2 The teacher demonstrates 3.2.1 sets clear, challenging and achievable expectations on the
concern for holistic development of holistic development of all learners;
learners. 3.2.2 identifies learning gaps and takes action to enable learners
to catch up;
3.2.3 employs integrative and interactive strategies for
meaningful and holistic development of learners;
3.2.4 is sensitive to unusual behavior of learners and takes
appropriate action; and
3.2.5 provides opportunities to enhance learners growth in all
aspects.

Domain 4. Curriculum (Curr.)
The curriculum domain refers to all elements of the teaching-learning process that work in
convergence to help students understand the curricular goals and objectives, and to attain high standards of
learning defined in the curriculum. These elements include the teacher’s knowledge of subject matter and
the learning process, teaching-learning approaches and activities, instructional materials and learning
resources.
Strands of Desired Teaching Performance

Performance Indicators The Teacher .
..
4.1 The teacher demonstrates 4.11 delivers accurate and updated content knowledge using
mastery of the subject. appropriate methodologies, approaches and strategies;
4.12 integrates language, literacy and quantitative skill
development and values in his/her subject area;
4.13 explains learning goal, instructional procedures and content
clearly and accurately to learners;
4.14 links the current content with past and future lessons;
4.15 aligns lesson objectives with the teaching methods, learning

activities and instructional materials or resources
appropriate to learners;
4.16 creates situations that encourage learners to use high order
thinking skills;
4.17 engages and sustains learners’ interest in the subject by
making content meaningful and relevant to them;
4.18 integrates relevant scholarly works and ideas to enrich the
lesson as needed; and
4.19 integrates content of subject area with other disciplines.
4.2 The teacher communications clear 4.21 sets appropriate learning goals;
learning goals for the lessons
that are appropriate for learners. 4.22 makes the learners understand the learning goals; and
4.23 link the goals set with the expectations for every learner.
4.3 The teacher makes good use of 4.31 establishes routines and procedures to maximize
allotted instructional time. instructional time; and
4.32 plans lessons to fit within available instructional time.

Performance
The teacher .. .
4.4 The teacher selects teaching 4.41 translates learning competencies to instructional objectives;
methods, learning activities and
instructional materials or 4.42 selects, prepares and utilizes instructional materials
resources appropriate to learners appropriate to the learners and to the learning objectives;
and aligned to objectives of the 4.43 provides activities and uses materials which fit the learners’
lesson. learning styles, goals and culture;
4.44 uses a variety of teaching approaches and techniques
appropriate to the subject matter and the learners;
utilizes information derived from assessment to improve
teaching and learning; and
4.45 provides activities and uses materials which involve
students in meaningful learning.
Planning, Assessing & Reporting (PAR)
Domain 5.
t of assessment and planning activities. In particular, the PAR

This domain refers to the alignmen focuses
on the (1) use of assessment data to plan and revise teaching-learning plans;
(2) integration of assessment procedures in the plan and implementation of teaching-learning activities, and
(3)
reporting of the learners’ actual achievement and behavior.
Strands of Desired Teaching Performance

Performance Indicators The Teacher
...
5.1 The teacher communicates 5.11 conducts regular meetings with learners and parents to
promptly and clearly the learners’ report learners’ progress; and involves parents in school
progress to parents, superiors and 5.12 activities that promote learning.
to learners themselves.

5.2 The teacher develops and uses a 5.21 prepares formative and summative tests;
variety of appropriate assessment 5.22
strategies to monitor and evaluate employs non-traditional assessment techniques (portfolio,
learning. 5.23 authentic performance, journals, rubrics, etc.);
interprets and uses assessment results to improve
teaching and learning; and
5.24 identifies teaching-learning difficulties and their possible

causes to address gaps.
5.3 The teacher monitors regularly and 5.31 provides timely and accurate feedback to learners to
provides feedback on learners’ encourage them to reflect on and monitor their own
understanding of content. learning growth; and
keeps accurate records of grades with performance levels

of learners.
Domain 6. Community Linkages (CL)
The LC domain refers to the ideal that classroom activities are meaningfully linked to the experiences
and aspirations of the learners in their homes and communities. Thus, this domain focuses on teachers’
efforts directed at strengthening the links between schools and communities to help in the attainment of the
curricular goals.

Performance
The teacher . . .
6.1 The teacher establishes learning 6.11 involves community in sharing accountability for the learners’
environments that respond to the achievement;
aspirations of the community. 6.12 use community human and materials resources to support
learning;
6.13 uses the community as a laboratory for learning;
6.14 participates in community activities that promote learning;

and
6.15 uses community networks to publicize school events and

achievements.
onal Growth & Professional

Domain 7. PersDevelopment (PGPD)
ideal that teachers value having a high personal

The PGPD domain emphasizes the regard for the teaching
profession, concern for professional development, and continuous improvement as teachers.

Performance
The teacher . . .
7.1 The teacher takes pride in the maintains stature and behavior that upholds the dignity
nobility of teaching as a of teaching; allocates time for personal and professional
profession. development through :
(a) participation in educational seminars and workshops,
(b) enrolment in short-term courses and post graduate programs,
(c) reading educational materials regularly, and (e)
engaging in educational research.
7.13 manifests personal qualities such as enthusiasm, flexibility
and caring; and
7.14 articulates and demonstrates one’s personal philosophy of
teaching.
7.2 The teacher builds professional link 7.21 participates actively in professional teacher organizations;
with colleagues to enrich teaching 7.22 and keeps abreast with recent developments in education.
practice.

.3 The teacher reflects on the extent 7.31 reflects on the quality of his/her own teaching;
of the attainment of students’
learning goals 7.32 receives favorable rating from students, peers and
superiors; accepts personal accountability for learners’
7.33 achievement; and
7.34 uses self-evaluation to recognize and correct weaknesses
Edited and revised: April 30, 2008.

Annotated Case Summary #1
SECOND DIVISION
OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN, G.R. No. 177580

Petitioner,
Present:
- versus - QUISUMBING, J., Chairperson,

CARPIO MORALES,
TINGA,
VELASCO, JR., and
VICTORIO N. MEDRANO, BRION, JJ.
Respondent.
Promulgated:
October 17, 2008
x--------------------------------------------------x
DECISION
CARPIO MORALES, J.:
Challenged via Petition for Review on Certiorari are the Decision[1] dated June 29, 2006
and Resolution dated April 2, 2007 of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. SP No.
93165[2] which nullified the Decision dated July 19, 2004 of the Office of the Ombudsman
(petitioner), as modified, finding Victorio N. Medrano (respondent) guilty of sexual
harassment in the administrative complaint against him and dismissed the said
complaint for lack of jurisdiction.
Sometime in May 2003, Ma. Ruby A. Dumalaog (Ma. Ruby), a teacher at Jacobo Z.
Gonzales Memorial National High School in Bian, Laguna (the school), filed a sworn
letter-complaint[3] before the Office of the Ombudsman (for Luzon) charging her
superiorherein respondent, Officer-In-Charge (OIC) of the school and concurrently
the principal of San Pedro Relocation Center National High School in San Pedro,
Laguna, with (1) violation of Republic Act (R.A.) No. 7877 (Anti-Sexual Harassment Act
of 1995), docketed as OMB-L-C-03-0613-E (criminal case), and (2) grave misconduct,
docketed as OMB-L-A-03-0488-E (administrative case).
The administrative complaint, in essence, alleged that in the afternoon of March
28, 2003, respondent made sexual advances on Ma. Ruby and abused her sexually.

In his Counter-Affidavit,[4] respondent denied the charge, claiming that it was
maliciously designed to harass and threaten him to succumb to Ma. Rubys demand that
she be given a regular teaching post. He thus prayed for the dismissal of the complaint.
While the administrative case was pending investigation, Ma. Ruby filed an Urgent Ex-
Parte Motion for Preventive Suspension,[5] alleging that respondent was using the powers
of his office by utilizing his subordinates in harassing her. By Order[6] of July 29, 2003,
petitioner granted the motion and ordered the preventive suspension of respondent for
six (6) months without pay.
Respondent, this time assisted by counsel, Atty. Alan P. Cabaero, moved for the
lifting of the preventive suspension Order on the ground that the evidence of his guilt is
not strong.[7] It was denied.
Undaunted, respondent filed a Supplemental Motion for

Reconsideration[8] alleging that the Schools Division Superintendent Lilia T. Reyes had
already designated Hereberto Jose D. Miranda as the new OIC of the school in his stead,
effective September 1, 2003. By Order[9] of October 16, 2003, petitioner lifted the
preventive suspension Order.
By Decision[10] of July 19, 2004 rendered in the administrative case, petitioner

adjudged respondent guilty of grave misconduct and imposed upon him the penalty of
dismissal from the service.
With respect to the criminal case, petitioner, by Resolution [11] of July 19, 2004,
found probable cause to indict respondent for violation of the Anti-Sexual Harassment Act
of 1995. An information for violation of said Act, docketed as Criminal Case No. 29190
before the Metropolitan Trial Court (MeTC) of Bian, Laguna, was in fact filed.
Respondent moved for reconsideration of petitioners issuances in both

cases. Respecting the administrative case,[12] he assailed not only the factual findings
and conclusions of petitioner, but, for the first time, he challenged its jurisdiction over the
case. He argued that under Section 9 of R.A. No. 4670 (the Magna Carta for Public
School Teachers), an administrative complaint against a public school teacher should
be heard by an investigating committee of the Department of Education Culture & Sports,
now Department of Education (DepEd), composed of the school superintendent of the
division where the teacher belongs, a representative from a teachers organization, and a
supervisor of the division. He thus prayed for the dismissal of the administrative case as
petitioner has no jurisdiction over it.
By Joint Order[13] of April 8, 2005, petitioner affirmed its Resolution in the criminal
case but modified its Decision in the administrative case by finding respondent guilty of
sexual harassment, instead of grave misconduct, and meted on him the penalty
of suspension from the service for one (1) year, without pay.

In her Affidavit of Desistance, Ma. Ruby stated, inter alia:
2. That in retrospect and after an objective and sincere review of the

events that led to the filing of the instant cases [referring to the criminal and
administrative cases], I am now fully enlightened that said incident was just
a product of mistake of fact and clear misunderstanding between me and
the accused/respondent, who after all,
was not actually criminally nor immorallymotivated to do any form of offens
e/harm to my person. Thus, I
am now retracting everything I said against the accused/respondent in my
letter-complaint with the Office of the Ombudsman dated May 13, 2003,
which became the basis for the filing of the criminal and administrative
cases against him;
3. That x x x, I am no longer interested in pursuing the criminal and

administrative cases I filed against Mr. Victorio N. Medrano, and is now
requesting the Honorable Court [referring to the trial court in the criminal
case], the Office of the Ombudsman or the Honorable Supreme Court with
whom the administrative case is pending, to dismiss the said
cases. (Underscoring supplied)
Petitioner opposes respondents move, contending that Ma. Rubys Affidavit of

Desistance and the dismissal of the criminal case do not constitute legal bases for
dismissing the present petition and the administrative complaint.
The issues for resolution are:
1. Whether the petition has become moot and academic, Ma. Ruby having
executed an affidavit of desistance and the criminal case having been dismissed
due to her lack of interest to prosecute the same;
2. Whether petitioner has jurisdiction over the administrative complaint
against respondent; and
3. Whether respondent is estopped to question petitioners assumption of

jurisdiction over the administrative complaint.
With respect to the first issue, the Court holds in the negative.
The flaw in respondents argument that the execution of Ma. Rubys Affidavit of
Desistance and the dismissal of the criminal case must result in the dismissal of the
administrative case is that it ignores the whale of a difference between those two
remedies. In Gerardo R. Villaseor and Rodel A. Mesa v. Sandiganbayan and Louella Mae
Oco-Pesquerra (Office of the Special Prosecutor, Ombudsman),[24] the Court stressed

the distinct and independent character of the remedies available to an offended party
against any impropriety or wrongdoing committed by a public officer, thus:
Significantly, there are three kinds of remedies available against a public

officer for impropriety in the performance of his powers and the discharge
of his duties: (1) civil, (2) criminal, and
(3) administrative. These remedies may be invoked separately, alternately
, simultaneously or successively. Sometimes, the same offense may be the
subject of all three kinds of remedies.
Defeat of any of the three remedies will not necessarily preclude resort to
other remedies or affect decisions reached thereat, as different degrees of
evidence are required in these severalactions. In criminal cases, proof
beyond reasonable doubt is needed, whereas a mere preponderance of
evidence will suffice in civil cases. In administrative cases, only substantial
evidence is required.
SEC. 21. Officials Subject to Disciplinary Authority; Exceptions. The

Office of the Ombudsman shall
have disciplinary authority over all elective and appointive officials of theG
overnment and its subdivisions, instrumentalities and agencies, including
Members of the Cabinet, local government, government-owned or
controlled corporations and their
subsidiaries, except over officials who may be removed only by impea
chment or over Members of Congress and the Judiciary.
SEC. 22. Investigatory Power. The Office of the Ombudsman shall

have the power to investigate any serious misconduct in office allegedly
committed by officials removable by
impeachment, for the purpose of filing a verified complaint for impeachme
nt, if warranted.
In all cases of conspiracy between an officer or employee of the

government and a private person, the Ombudsman and his Deputies shall
have jurisdiction to include such private person in the investigation and
proceed against such private person as the evidence may warrant. The
officer or employee and the private person shall be tried jointly and shall be
subject to the same penalties and liabilities. (Underscoring supplied)
The above constitutional and statutory provisions taken together reveal the
manifest intent of the lawmakers to bestow upon the
petitioner full administrative disciplinarypower over public officials and
employees except those impeachable officials, Members of Congress and of the
Judiciary.

When an administrative charge is initiated against a public school teacher,
however, Section 9 of the Magna Carta for Public School Teachers specifically provides
that the same shall be heard initially by an investigating committee composed of the
school superintendent of the division, as chairman, a representative of the local or, in its
absence, any existing provincial or national teachers organization, and a supervisor of
the division, as members, thus:
SEC. 9. Administrative Charges. Administrative charges against

a teacher shall be heard initially by a committee composed of the
corresponding Schools Superintendent of the Divisionor a duly authorized
representative who should at least have the rank of a division supervisor,
where the teacher belongs, as chairman, a representative of the local or, in
its absence, any existing provincial or
national teachers organization and a supervisor of the Division, the last two
to be designated by the Director of Public
Schools. The committee shall submit its findings and
recommendations to the Director of Public Schools within thirty days from
termination of the hearings; Provided, however, That where the school
superintendent is the complainant or an interested party, all the members
of the committee shall be appointed by the Secretary of
Education. (Underscoring supplied)
In Fabella v. Court of Appeals,[31] the Court held:
The legislature enacted a special law, RA 4670 known as the Magna

Carta for Public School Teachers,
which specifically covers administrative proceedings involving publicscho
olteachers. Section 9 of said law expressly provides that the committee to
hear public schoolteachers administrative cases should be composed of the
school superintendent of the division as chairman, a representative of the
local or any existing provincial or national teachers organization, and a
supervisor of the division. x x x.
xxxx
In light of this, the Court holds that the administrative disciplinary authority of
the Ombudsman over a public school teacher is not an exclusive power but
is concurrent with the proper committee of the DepEd.
Thus, the administrative complaint against respondent should have been referred
by petitioner to the proper committee of the DepEd for the institution of appropriate
administrative proceedings, in light of Section 23 of The Ombudsman Act of 1989.
This brings the Court to the third issue. While petitioner should have desisted from
hearing the administrative complaint against respondent and referred it to the proper

DepEd committee, given that it had already concluded the proceedings and had rendered
a decision thereon, respondent is now barred from assailing petitioners acts under the
principle of estoppel. He had actively participated in the administrative proceedings
before petitioner. In his Counter-Affidavit, he asked petitioner for affirmative relief by
seeking the dismissal of the administrative complaint allegedly for being
baseless.[33] From then on, he was assisted by counsel in filing several motions. When
he was preventively suspended for six months without pay, he filed a Motion for
Reconsideration praying that a new Order be issued reversing or setting aside the
preventive suspension Order.[34] When this was denied, he again filed a Supplemental
Motion for Reconsideration[35] for the lifting of his suspension since he was already
replaced as OIC, which motion was granted. It was only after petitioner had rendered
an adverse Decision that he, in a Motion for Reconsideration, impugned petitioners
assumption of jurisdiction over his case. Verily, respondent cannot be permitted to
challenge petitioners acts belatedly.
In applying the principle of estoppel in Alcala v. Villar,[36] the Court held:
Respondent Jovencio D. Villar is the School Principal of Lanao

National High School, Pilar, Cebu City. In February 1998, x x x, teachers
of Lanao National High School, x x x, filed with the Office of the
Ombudsman an administrative complaint against respondent for
dishonesty.
xxxx
On June 22, 1999, the Office of the Ombudsman issued a resolution

finding respondent guilty of dishonesty and dismissing him from the service.
x x x.
On appeal, the Court of Appeals nullified and set aside the decision
of the Office of the Ombudsman on the ground that the latter was without
jurisdiction over the administrative complaints against public school
teachers. It ruled that the governing law is Republic Act No. 4670, otherwise
known as the Magna Carta for Public School Teachers,
and not Republic Act No. 6770, the Ombudsman Act of 1989. x x x.
The foregoing notwithstanding, the Court of Appeals erred when it

nullified the proceedings before the Office of the Ombudsman. x x x.
In Emin v. De Leon, a public school teacher was administratively charged
with and found guilty of dishonesty under P.D. No. 807 (Civil Service Law).
The Supreme Court ruled that R.A. No. 4670, the Magna Carta for Public
School Teachers, is the applicable law and that the Civil Service
Commission does not have jurisdiction over the administrative case.
Nevertheless, the Court affirmed the dismissal from the service of the public
school teacher as the latter was found to have been sufficiently afforded
due process. x x x. Thus

As held previously, participation by parties in the admi
nistrative proceedings without raising any
objection thereto bars them from raising any jurisdictiona
l
infirmityafter an adverse decision is rendered against th
em. x x x. Notably, in his Counter-Affidavit, petitioner himself
invoked the jurisdiction of the Civil Service Commission by x
x x further praying for any remedy or judgment which under
the premises are just and
equitable. It is an undesirable practice of a party
participating in the proceedings, submittinghis case for
decision and accepting the judgment only if favorable, but att
acking it for lack of jurisdiction when adverse.
xxxx
In the same vein, respondent in the case should be barred under t

he principle of estoppel by laches from assailing the jurisdiction of t
he Ombudsman. Therefore, the Court of Appeals should have resolved the
appeal on its merits, x x x. (Emphasis and underscoring supplied)
The appellate courts citation of Duero v. Court of Appeals[38] in which this Court
held that the therein private respondent Duero was not estopped from questioning
the RTC jurisdiction, despite his active participation in the proceedings before it, is
misplaced. For Duero involved lack of jurisdiction. The present case
involves concurrentjurisdiction.
WHEREFORE, the petition is GRANTED. The assailed Court of Appeals Decision

of June 29, 2006 and Resolution of April 2, 2007 in CA-G.R. SP No.
93165 are REVERSED and SET ASIDE. The case is REMANDED to the Court of
Appeals which is directed to decide the case on the merits.
SO ORDERED.
CONCHITA CARPIO MORALES

Associate Justice
WE CONCUR:
LEONARDO A. QUISUMBING
Associate Justice
Chairperson

Abused during CVIRAA, complaint filed vs teacher who ‘sexually
violated’ boy.
CEBU, Philippines
Asturias, Cebu police have filed a criminal complaint for child abuse yesterday
against an elementary school teacher who allegedly sexually abused a Grade 6 student.
The complaint was placed under preliminary investigation before the Cebu Provincial
Prosecutor’s Office. The 11-year-old victim alleged that he was molested by the Talisay
City Central School teacher on February 26 during the Central Visayas Regional Athletics
Association in Asturias town. The FREEMAN is withholding the names of the parties due
to the nature of the case. Mayor Johnny De los Reyes said the incident has placed Talisay
City in a bad light the teacher should be sanctioned, saying he felt ashamed over what
the suspect did. "Bati kaayo nga balita nga misugat nako sa akong pag-adto sa
Balamban. Unta congratulations ilang isugat nako pag-abot didto, pero gisugat ra man ko
og ngil-ad kaayo nga balita. Kinahanglang madisiplina gyud ang maong teacher," De los
Reyes said. Based on a report, Dr. Lea Noveras, Talisay City Schools Division
superintendent, said the incident happened outside the classroom, while athletes,
coaches, and teachers gathered and prayed for the success of their team. Noveras said
the minor was allegedly called by the teacher and brought at the back of the room, where
he allegedly took advantage of the minor inside a multicab. According to a police report,
the student reportedly received P100 from the teacher, who instructed him not to tell
anyone about what had happened. It was on February 28 when the minor confessed to
his coach what the 27-year-old teacher did to him. They then reported the matter to the
Asturias Police Station Women and Children’s Protection Desk, which filed against the
teacher a complaint for violating Republic Act (RA) 7610, or the Special Protection of
Children against Abuse, Exploitation and Discrimination Act. The minor was immediately
placed under medical examination after that. Department of Social Welfare and
Development-7 Children Sector Focal Person Grace Yana said psychosocial intervention
must be done to the victim to prevent him from developing a more serious condition like
Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. "If left untreated, the situation develops into PTSD. This
is the worst scenario that could happen, where professional therapists and psychologists'
help is needed. It is important that the child expresses his feeling and thoughts, especially
to his family," Yana said. She told The FREEMAN they are closely coordinating with their
Talisay City counterparts in making sure that the child gets enough psychological and
emotional intervention. "So far, our help is still not needed because we have the city social
welfare office in Talisay as frontliners. But we at the regional office can provide technical

assistance should they need any,” Yana said. “It is very important for the child to be
removed from the situation or environment where he experienced the trauma and that his
family and friends surround him with positive regard and support that he needs," she
added. Yana said the psychosocial intervention is best done simultaneous with the police
blotter and medico-legal processes and not later since the experience is still fresh. A
traumatized child could display the following behaviors: blank stare, episodes of bad
dreams, lack of appetite for food, among others. Yana said that teachers in the region
have been trained to conduct psychosocial intervention as trainings were conducted after
the Bohol earthquake and super typhoon Yolanda in 2013. "So even if social workers are
not readily available, some teachers can process the victim to lighten the burden of the
ones traumatized," the DSWD-7 official said. Meanwhile, in yesterday's Talisay City
Council session, Councilor Richard Francis Aznar called on the Department of Education
to investigate the matter. "As a legislator, a concerned citizen, and a parent, I request that
our DepEd would investigate the incident and propose measures to avoid similar incidents
from happening again," said the council committee on education chairman. Aznar, whose
family owns a university in Cebu, said he was saddened by the incident, as he has a very
high regard of teachers and look up to them as second parents while he was still a
student. "Let the proposed guidelines protect our children and teachers so that we, as
parents, will be confident when entrusting our children to them, and then the teachers will
be confident in their profession since they know they are admired and trusted," he said.

SECOND DIVISION
OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN, G.R. No. 172635

Petitioner,
Present:
CARPIO, J., Chairperson,

NACHURA,
- versus - LEONARDO-DE CASTRO,*
PERALTA, and
MENDOZA, JJ.
Promulgated:
PEDRO DELIJERO, JR.,
Respondent. October 20, 2010
x-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------x
DECISION
PERALTA, J.:
Before this Court is a petition for review on certiorari,[1] under Rule 45 of the Rules of
Court, seeking to set aside the June 7, 2005 Decision[2] and May 2, 2006 Resolution[3]of
the Court of Appeals (CA), in CA-G.R. SP No. 00017.
The facts of the case, as culled from the records, are as follows:
Respondent Pedro Delijero, Jr., was a public school teacher at

the Burauen Comprehensive National High School, Burauen, Leyte and was
administratively charged for Grave Misconduct.
A complaint against respondent was filed before petitioner Office of the Ombudsman as
a Request for Assistance (RAS) from the President of the Burauen Watchdog Committee
for Good Government. Philip Camiguing, Graft Prevention & Control Officer I, submitted
his final evaluation report and recommended that the RAS be upgraded into an
administrative and criminal complaint against respondent.[4]

The complainant, Cleofas P. dela Cruz, was the mother of the alleged victim Myra dela
Cruz (Myra). At the time of the incident, Myra was only 12 years old and a first year high
school student at the Burauen Comprehensive National High School. Respondent, on
the other hand, was Myra's 52-year-old Mathematics teacher.
Sometime in May 2003, complainant learned from her cousin that respondent was
courting her daughter Myra. Complainant then immediately confronted Myra, who
admitted having received from respondent several handwritten love letters, a Valentine's
card and Two Hundred Pesos as allowance.
In her Affidavit,[7] Myra gave the following declarations, to wit:
2. Sometime on August 12, 2002, our Mathematics teacher,

Mr. Pedro Delijero, started courting me, by sending love notes, valentines
cards thru my classmates Angelyn del Pilar, Maricel Gayanes, Irene Cajote;
3. Last April 7, 2003, at about 10:00 a.m., more or less, my

math teacher, Mr. Pedro Delijero, who was inside his room, [called] my
attention, and as I got inside the said room, he abruptly closed the open door,
thereby, immediately kissed my cheek, out of fear, I pushed him away from
me, and I rushed to the door of said room and went outside.[8]
Maricel Gayanes, Irene Cajote and Angelyn del Pilar, all classmates of Myra, submitted
their Joint Affidavit[9] the pertinent portions of which read:
In several instances, which we cannot anymore recall the dates, we

were requested by our Math teacher Mr. Pedro Delijero, Jr. to handed the
letters to my classmate Myra Dela Cruz,
4. We have the knowledge of all the letters sent to her,

as LOVE LETTERS as it was confirmed by our classmate Myra dela Cruz,
that those letters which we brought to her, were all love letters from our Math
teacher, Mr. Pedro Delijero, since Mr. Delijiro is courting her, same were true
with regard to Valentine's Cards, as well as the 2 pieces of One Hundred
Peso Bill (P100.00) being inserted at the intermediate pad paper, x x x
Respondent submitted a Counter-Affidavit[10] in his defense. Respondent denied
kissing Myra in the morning of April 7, 2003. Moreover, respondent claimed that Myra fell
in love with him and wrote him love letters. Respondent claimed that he was merely forced
to answer her letters as she threatened him that she would kill herself if he would not
answer her and reciprocate her love. Lastly, respondent claimed that their relationship
was merely platonic.
Petitioner called the parties to a preliminary conference and, after which, ordered them to
submit their respective position papers.

Respondent, however, did not submit a position paper but instead submitted a
Manifestation[11] stating that the administrative aspect of the complaint was likewise the
subject of a complaint filed by complainant before the Office of the Regional Director,
Department of Education, Regional Office VIII, Palo, Leyte.
On May 17, 2004, petitioner rendered a Decision[12] finding respondent guilty of Grave
Misconduct and meted him the penalty of dismissal, the dispositive portion of which reads:
WHEREFORE, premises considered, this Office finds respondent

PEDRO DELIJERO, JR. guilty of Grave Misconduct and, pursuant to Section
46 (b) of the Revised Administrative Code of 1987, he is, therefore, meted
the penalty of DISMISSAL from public service, forfeiture of all benefits and
perpetual disqualification to hold public office.
SO DECIDED.[13]
Respondent moved for a reconsideration[14] of petitioner's decision. Respondent asked

that the order of dismissal be reconsidered and, instead, be changed to a penalty of
suspension. On May 14, 2004, petitioner issued an Order[15] denying respondent's motion
for reconsideration.
Aggrieved, respondent then appealed to the CA.
On June 7, 2005, the CA rendered a Decision ruling in favor of respondent, the dispositive
portion of which reads:
WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing premises, judgment is hereby

rendered by us GRANTING the petition filed in this case and SETTING
ASIDE the Decision dated May 17, 2004 and the Order dated July 30,
2004 rendered and issued by the Office of the Ombudsman in OMB-VIS-A-
03-0506-4.
IT IS SO ORDERED.[16]
The CA, without ruling on the issues raised by respondent, instead tackled the issue of
jurisdiction motu proprio. The CA ruled that petitioner had no jurisdiction to investigate the
complaint filed before it as Republic Act No. 4670 (RA 4670), the Magna Carta for Public
School Teachers, specifically covers and governs administrative proceedings involving
public school teachers. The CA held that petitioner should have immediately dismissed
the case after respondent had informed it, through a manifestation, of the pendency of an
administrative complaint before the DECS. Moreover, the CA ruled that even
assuming arguendo that petitioner had the power to investigate the complaint, it still had
no power to directly impose sanctions against respondent as its power is limited to only
recommend the appropriate sanctions, but not to directly impose the same.

Petitioner then filed an Omnibus Motion to Intervene and for Reconsideration[17] assailing
the Decision of the CA. On May 2, 2006, the CA issued a Resolution denying petitioner's
motion.
Hence, herein petition, with petitioner raising the following issues for this Court's
resolution, to wit:
I.
THE OFFICE OF THE OMBUDSMAN HAS FULL AND COMPLETE
ADMINISTRATIVE DISCIPLINARY AUTHORITY OVER PUBLIC SCHOOL
TEACHERS, WHICH AUTHORITY IS CONCURRENT WITH OTHER
DISCIPLINING AUTHORITIES SANCTIONED BY NO LESS THAN
REPUBLIC ACT NO. 4670, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS THE MAGNA CARTA
FOR PUBLIC SCHOOL TEACHERS, AND THE CIVIL SERVICE LAW (PD
807, BOOK V OF EO 292).
II.
SECTION 9 OF REPUBLIC ACT NO. 4670 (MAGNA CARTA FOR PUBLIC
SCHOOL TEACHERS) HAS NOT ADDED PUBLIC SCHOOL TEACHERS
TO THE LIST OF SPECIAL PRIVILEGED CLASSES OF PUBLIC
SERVANTS EXEMPTED FROM THE OMBUDSMAN'S ADMINISTRATIVE
DISCIPLINARY AUTHORITY UNDER THE 1987CONSTITUTION, AND
ANY SUCH INTERPRETATION SUFFERS FROM THE VICE OF
UNCONSTITUTIONALITY.
III.
THE ISSUE OF WHETHER OR NOT THE OMBUDSMAN HAS THE
AUTHORITY TO DETERMINE THE ADMINISTRATIVE LIABILITY OF AN
ERRING PUBLIC OFFICIAL OR EMPLOYEE, AND TO DIRECT AND
COMPEL THE HEAD OF THE CONCERNED OFFICE OR AGENCY TO
IMPLEMENT THE PENALTY IMPOSED, HAS ALREADY BEEN SETTLED
BY THE HONORABLE COURT IN THE CASE OF LEDESMA VS COURT
OF APPEALS, ET AL., 465 SCRA 437 (2005).[18]
The above enumeration of the Ombudsmans far-reaching powers is not

exclusive as the framers of the Constitution gave Congress the leeway to
prescribe, by subsequent legislation, additional powers, functions or duties
to the Ombudsman, as mandated in Section 13(8), quoted above.
Pursuant to the constitutional command, Congress enacted R.A. No. 6770

(The Ombudsman Act of 1989) providing for the functional, structural
organization, and the extent of the administrative disciplinary authority of
the petitioner. The provisions of this law apply
to all kinds of malfeasance, misfeasance, and nonfeasance committed by

any officer or employee of the Government, or of any subdivision, agency
or instrumentality thereof, including government-owned or controlled
corporations, during his tenure in office. The acts or omissions which the
petitioner may investigate are quite extensive:
SEC. 19. Administrative Complaints. The Ombudsman shall

act
on all complaints relating, but not limited, to acts or omissio
ns which:
(1) Are contrary to law or regulation;

(2) Are unreasonable, unfair, oppressive or discriminatory;
(3) Are inconsistent with the general course of an agencys
functions, though in accordance with law;
(4) Proceed from a mistake of law or an arbitrary
ascertainment of facts;
(5) Are in the exercise of discretionary powers but for an
improper purpose; or
(6) Are otherwise irregular, immoral or devoid of justification.
Its mandate is not only to act promptly on complaints against such public
officers or employees, but also to enforce their administrative, civil and
criminal liability in every case where theevidence warrants in order to pro
mote efficient service by the Government to the people.
R.A. No. 6770, however, restrains the petitioner from exercising its
disciplinary authority over
officials who may be removed only by impeachment or over Members of C
ongress and theJudiciary, thus:
SEC. 21. Officials Subject to Disciplinary Authority;

Exceptions. The Office of the Ombudsman shall
have disciplinary authority over all elective and appointive off
icials of theGovernment and its subdivisions,
instrumentalities and agencies, including Members of the
Cabinet, local government, government-owned or controlled
corporations and their
subsidiaries, except over officials who may be removed o
nly by impeachment or over Members of Congress and t
he Judiciary.
SEC. 22. Investigatory Power. The Office of the Ombudsman

shall have the power to investigate any serious misconduct in
office allegedly committed by officials removable by

impeachment, for the purpose of filing a verified complaint fo
r impeachment, if warranted.
In all cases of conspiracy between an officer or employee of

the government and a private person, the Ombudsman and
his Deputies shall have jurisdiction to include such private
person in the investigation and proceed against such private
person as the evidence may warrant. The officer or employee
and the private person shall be tried jointly and shall be
subject to the same penalties and liabilities. (Underscoring
supplied)
The above constitutional and statutory provisions taken together reveal the
manifest intent of the lawmakers to bestow upon the
petitioner full administrative disciplinary power over public officials and
employees except those impeachable officials, Members of Congress and
of the Judiciary.
When an administrative charge is initiated against a public school teacher,

however, Section 9 of the Magna Carta for Public School
Teachers specifically provides that the same shall be heard initially by
an investigating committee composed of the school superintendent of the
division, as chairman, a representative of the local or, in its absence, any
existing provincial or national teachers organization, and a supervisor of the
division, as members, thus:
In light of this, the Court holds that the administrative disciplinary

authority of the Ombudsman over a public school teacher
is not an exclusive power but is concurrent with the proper committee
of the DepEd.
In the instant case, respondent, although designated as then OIC of a public

school and concurrently the school principal of another public school, is
undoubtedly covered by the definition of the term teacher under the second
paragraph of Section 2 of the Magna Carta for Public School
Teachers which provides:
SEC 2. Title Definition. This Act shall x x x apply to all public

school teachers except those in the professorial staff of state
colleges and universities.
As used in this Act, the term teacher shall mean all persons
engaged in the classroom, in any level of instruction; on full
time basis, including guidance counselors, school librarians,
industrial arts or vocational
instructors, and all other persons performing supervisory and

/or administrative functions in all schools, colleges and
universities operatedby the Government or its political subdiv
isions; but shall not include school nurses, school physicians,
school dentists, and other school employees. (Underscoring
supplied)
Thus, the administrative complaint against respondent should have been

referred by petitioner to the proper committee of the DepEd for the institution
of appropriate administrative proceedings, in light of Section 23 of The
Ombudsman Act of 1989.[20]
Based on the foregoing, while petitioner has concurrent administrative disciplinary

authority with the DECS over public school teachers, Section 23 of the Ombudsman Act
of 1989 provides that the Ombudsman may refer a complaint to the proper disciplinary
authority. Under the circumstances obtaining herein, it would have been more prudent for
petitioner to have referred the complaint to the DECS given that it would have been in a
better position to serve the interest of justice considering the nature of the controversy.
Respondent is a public school teacher and is covered by RA 4670, therefore, the
proceedings before the DECS would have been the more appropriate venue to resolve
the dispute.
In any case, the foregoing pronouncement does not automatically mean that this Court is
nullifying the proceedings before the Ombudsman as estoppel has already set in.
In Medrano, this Court ruled that the active participation of an individual before the
administrative proceedings and the belated challenge to the jurisdiction of the said body
bars him from assailing such acts under the principle of estoppel, to wit:
x x x While petitioner should have desisted from hearing the administrative
complaint against respondent and referred it to the proper DepEd committee,
given that it had already concluded the proceedings and had rendered a
decision thereon, respondent is now barred from assailing petitioners acts
under the principle of estoppel. He had actively participated in the
administrative proceedings before petitioner. In his Counter-Affidavit,
he asked petitioner for affirmative relief by seeking the dismissal of the
administrative complaint allegedly for being baseless. From then on, he was
assisted by counsel in filing several motions. When he was preventively
suspended for six months without pay, he filed a Motion for Reconsideration
praying that a new Order be issued reversing or setting aside the preventive
suspension Order. When this was denied, he again filed a Supplemental
Motion for Reconsideration for the lifting of his suspension since he was
already replaced as OIC, which motion was granted. It was
only after petitioner had rendered an adverse Decision that he, in a Motion
for Reconsideration, impugned petitioners assumption of jurisdiction over his
case. Verily, respondent cannot be permitted to challenge petitioners acts
belatedly. (Underscoring supplied).[21]

Likewise, in Office of the Ombudsman v. Galicia,[22] this Court ruled that the right to due
process was not violated, notwithstanding that the DECS had original jurisdiction to hear
the complaint, thus:
In the present case, records show that Galicia was given the right to
due process in the investigation of the charges against him. He participated
in the proceedings by making known his defenses in the pleadings that he
submitted. It was only when a decision adverse to him was rendered did he
question the jurisdiction of the Ombudsman.
Under the principles of estoppel and laches, We rule that it is now too
late for Galicia to assail the administrative investigation conducted and the
decision rendered against him.
xxxx
Lastly, anent the third issue raised by petitioner, the same is again meritorious.
The CA ruled that the power of the Ombudsman is only recommendatory and that
it cannot impose sanctions against respondent. Petitioner, for its part, argues that the
Office of Ombudsman has the authority to determine the administrative liability of an
erring public official or employee, and to direct and compel the head of the concerned
officer or agency to implement the penalty imposed.
Petitioner is correct.
In Office of the Ombudsman v. Masing,[27] this Court settled that the power of the
Ombudsman to determine and impose administrative liability is not merely
recommendatory but actually mandatory, to wit:
We reiterated this ruling in Office of the Ombudsman v.
Laja, where we emphasized that the Ombudsmans order to remove,
suspend, demote, fine, censure, or prosecute an officer or employee is not
merely advisory or recommendatory but is actually mandatory.
Implementation of the order imposing the penalty is, however, to be
coursed through the proper officer. Recently, in Office of the Ombudsman
v. Court of Appeals, we also held
While Section 15(3) of RA 6770 states that the Ombudsman

has the power to recommend x x x removal, suspension,
demotion x x x of government officials and employees, the
same Section 15(3) also states that the Ombudsman in the
alternative may enforce its disciplinary authority as
provided in Section 21 of RA 6770. (Emphasis supplied.)[28]
This Court notes that the CA granted respondent's petition on the sole ground of
petitioner's alleged lack of jurisdiction which it tackled motu proprio. The CA did not

discuss the other issues raised by respondent involving the appreciation of the findings
of fact of the Ombudsman as well as respondent's appeal for the imposition of a lesser
penalty. Just like in Medrano, given the evidentiary nature of respondent's appeal, this
Court deems that justice would be best served to remand the case to the CA for it to
decide the case on the merits.
WHEREFORE, the petition is GRANTED. The assailed Court of Appeals Decision dated
June 7, 2005 and Resolution dated May 2, 2006, in CA-G.R. SP No.
00017, are REVERSED and SET ASIDE. The case is REMANDED to the Court of
Appeals which is directed to decide the case on the merits.
SO ORDERED.
DIOSDADO M. PERALTA
Associate Justice
WE CONCUR:
ANTONIO T. CARPIO
Associate Justice
Chairperson

Section: 4D1-ECE
Reflection Paper on the movie “Miracle Worker”
The best and most beautiful things in the world cannot be seen or even touched.
It must be felt with the heart. – Hellen Adams Keller
From a perspective of a soon to be teacher such as yours truly, I can say that the
movie entitled “Miracle Worker” serves as a inspiration that there are things we believed
to be impossible, but became possible because we exerted sufficient perseverance into
it. I salute the passion and commitment of Annie Sullivan to tutor a deaf, mute and blind
child in the person of Helen Keller. Annie Sullivan is just one out of many teachers out
there who have given their life to become catalyst for well –rounded development of the
differently able children.
Helen Keller was not able to learn any kind of languages because she’s visually
impaired, deaf, and mute. At first, she expresses her feelings through moaning, and when
she’s upset and mad she will just send everything flying with her tantrums. She was
spoiled by her parents, so every time she’s mad and throws a tantrum she receives
a reward instead of a punishment. These impairments made everyone around Helen to
doubt that she’s going to learn even with the aid of Anne. But because Anne Sullivan saw
that Helen is an intelligent child, and has latent ability to learn, she did not quit on her.
Although she’s having a hard time teaching Helen, she did not stop trying until Helen was
able to repeat everything that she taught.
Before I watched the movie, I really asked myself if it is still possible for a person
to learn if he/she has multiple sensory impairments such as the defects of the sight,
hearing and speaking. Hence, after I viewed the movie, I definitely realized that even if
the senses were impaired and not the mind, there would still be a possibility to learn the
same way like those with normal sensory functioning if there is a collaborative support
from the community, home and school which nowadays proposed by DepEd. I realized
through the movie, that children with multiple sensory impairments just ultimately need to
have a language in a most unique way in order to learn since according to Annie Sullivan,
“language is more important to the mind than light is to the eye.”

References
 http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2008/october2008/177580.htm
 https://www.philstar.com/cebu-news/2015/03/04/1429898/abused-during-cviraa-
complaint-filed-vs-teacher-who-sexually-violated-boy
 http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2010/october2010/172635.htm

Case Digest Fin

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Case Digest Fin

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Educ 5 – The Teaching Profession 1

Educ 5 – The Teaching Profession 2

 To improve the ethics of the teaching profession and to protect

students from unethical conduct of a teacher.

 To improve regulation and control of teacher misconduct.

 To promote the professional identity among teacher.

2. Why are the learnings significant to me?

3. Give your own insight and reflection about the topic.

In discussing the Code of Ethics in class, it helps us understand that when

Educ 5 – The Teaching Profession 18

Realism Science, real world, actualities of life, believes in the

Idealism spiritual, values, ideal, perfect, anything on your mind is

Educ 5 – The Teaching Profession 20

Reflection Paper on Philosophies of Education

I believe we are all students as well as teachers. But It is important to know

Educ 5 – The Teaching Profession 22

The National Competency-Based Teachers Standards (NCBTS)*

Educ 5 – The Teaching Profession 24

The seven domains are the following:

1. Social Regard for Learning (SRFL) 5. Planning, Assessing Reporting (PAR)

2. Learning Environment (LE) 6. Community Linkages (CL)

3. Diversity of Learners (DOL) 7. Personal Growth & Professional

4. Curriculum (Curr.) Development (PGPD)

Educ 5 – The Teaching Profession 25

Strands of Desired Teaching Performance Indicators

1.1.1 implements school policies and procedures;

1.1 Teacher’s actions demonstrate 1.1.2 demonstrates punctuality;

1.1.4 is careful about the effect of one’s behavior on students.

Domain 2. Learning Environment (LE)

Strands of Desired Teaching Performance Indicators

2.1.2 provides gender-fair opportunities for learning; and

2.1.3 recognizes that every learner has strengths.

Educ 5 – The Teaching Profession 26

2.3.2 encourages learners to ask questions; and

2.3.3 provides learners with a variety of learning experiences.

2.3.6 guides individual learner requiring development of

2.3.7 communicates school policies and procedures for

Strands of Desired Teaching Performance Indicators

Educ 5 – The Teaching Profession 27

3.1.3 paces lessons appropriate to needs and/or abilities of

3.1.4 provides differentiated activities for learners;

3.1.5 initiates other learning approaches for learners whose needs

Strands of Desired Teaching Performance Indicators

Educ 5 – The Teaching Profession 28

Strands of Desired Teaching Performance

4.15 aligns lesson objectives with the teaching methods, learning

Educ 5 – The Teaching Profession 29

Planning, Assessing & Reporting (PAR)

t of assessment and planning activities. In particular, the PAR

reporting of the learners’ actual achievement and behavior.

Strands of Desired Teaching Performance

Educ 5 – The Teaching Profession 30

5.24 identifies teaching-learning difficulties and their possible

keeps accurate records of grades with performance levels

Domain 6. Community Linkages (CL)

Educ 5 – The Teaching Profession 31

6.14 participates in community activities that promote learning;

6.15 uses community networks to publicize school events and

onal Growth & Professional

ideal that teachers value having a high personal

profession, concern for professional development, and continuous improvement as teachers.

Strands of Desired Teaching Performance Indicators

Educ 5 – The Teaching Profession 32

7.34 uses self-evaluation to recognize and correct weaknesses