Trending One S "Satisfactory" Rating: The Unexpected Roadblock to Promotion
Trending One S "Satisfactory" Rating: The Unexpected Roadblock to Promotion
When we reach for the next rung on the career ladder, we often believe that our years of hard work, dedication, and outstanding performance will be enough. But what happens when a single detail, a seemingly minor blemish on an otherwise stellar record, becomes a roadblock? This is the core of a recent, eye-opening exchange between a dedicated teacher and the Department of Education (DepEd).
A letter from a teacher, shared online, highlights a common question many professionals face: What are the specific criteria for promotion? This particular teacher, a Teacher II with several years of experience, laid out a compelling case. Their record was filled with "Outstanding" ratings on their Individual Performance Commitment and Review Forms (IPCRFs). In their most recent three IPCRFs, they had a staggering 32 "Outstanding" ratings, with only four "Very Satisfactory" and one single "Satisfactory" rating.
The question was direct and heartfelt: Would that one "Satisfactory" rating prevent them from being considered for promotion to a higher position, like Teacher V, despite the overwhelming number of "Outstanding" ratings?
Read Letter:
I would like to inquire about the specific criteria for reclassification to a higher position.
I have been a Teacher II for several years and hope to be considered for promotion. I have consistently received high ratings on my Individual Performance Commitment and Review Forms (IPCRFs), with most of my ratings being "Outstanding." In my most recent three IPCRFs, I have four "Very Satisfactory" ratings and only one "Satisfactory" rating, with all other ratings (32) being "Outstanding."
I would like to know if having one "Satisfactory" rating in an indicator would prevent me from proceeding with the promotion process, e.g., Teacher 5, even with a majority of "Outstanding" ratings.
Thank you for your time and clarification on this matter.
Here is the reply:
Regarding your concern:
Based on the current guidelines as stated in DepEd Order 24, s. 2025, to be considered for reclassification from Teacher II to Teacher V--which is a position HIGHER THAN THE ENTRY POSITION (Teacher IV) in the next career stage--each indicator in your three (3) IPCRFs for the covered years (SY2022-2023, SY2023-2024, SY2024-2025) must be rated at least Very Satisfactory. If there is a rating of Satisfactory in any of the indicators, this unfortunately means you will not be able to proceed with the promotion process at this time.
We hope this provides guidance and clarity.
Thank you.
For Teacher II to qualify for Teacher V, the applicant must have:
• At least 6 Proficient COIs at Outstanding
• At least 4 Proficient NCOIs at Outstanding
• IPCRF from SY 2024-2025 showing 6 Proficient COIs at Outstanding and 5 Proficient NCOIs at Outstanding; and IPCRFs from SY 2023-2024 and SY 2022-2023 showing at least VS rating in ALL PPST indicators.
The reply, based on DepEd Order 24, s. 2025, was just as direct, but likely not what the teacher hoped for. It stated that to be considered for reclassification from Teacher II to Teacher V, every single indicator in the IPCRFs for the covered years must be rated at least "Very Satisfactory."
The reply was clear: that one "Satisfactory" rating, even amidst a sea of "Outstanding" scores, was enough to stop the promotion process. The reason provided is that Teacher V is a position "HIGHER THAN THE ENTRY POSITION (Teacher IV) in the next career stage," implying a stricter set of criteria.
This exchange is a powerful reminder that performance is not always judged by the majority. While it’s natural to focus on the overall trend—and this teacher's trend was undoubtedly upward and impressive—the official guidelines can be rigid and unforgiving of even the smallest deviations.
This scenario isn't unique to the teaching profession. Many careers, particularly those in government or highly structured organizations, have stringent, black-and-white criteria for advancement. A single missing certification, one "Satisfactory" rating, or a missed deadline can sometimes be enough to prevent a promotion, regardless of other achievements.
For all of us, this is a lesson in paying meticulous attention to every single metric, no matter how small. It also highlights the importance of understanding the specific, and sometimes unyielding, rules of the game before you start to play.
Have you ever encountered a similar situation where a single detail impacted your professional goals? Share your thoughts in the comments.
The Hard Truth of the Guidelines
The reply, based on DepEd Order 24, s. 2025, was just as direct, but likely not what the teacher hoped for. It stated that to be considered for reclassification from Teacher II to Teacher V, every single indicator in the IPCRFs for the covered years must be rated at least "Very Satisfactory."
The reply was clear: that one "Satisfactory" rating, even amidst a sea of "Outstanding" scores, was enough to stop the promotion process. The reason provided is that Teacher V is a position "HIGHER THAN THE ENTRY POSITION (Teacher IV) in the next career stage," implying a stricter set of criteria.
The Takeaway for All Professionals
This exchange is a powerful reminder that performance is not always judged by the majority. While it’s natural to focus on the overall trend—and this teacher's trend was undoubtedly upward and impressive—the official guidelines can be rigid and unforgiving of even the smallest deviations.
This scenario isn't unique to the teaching profession. Many careers, particularly those in government or highly structured organizations, have stringent, black-and-white criteria for advancement. A single missing certification, one "Satisfactory" rating, or a missed deadline can sometimes be enough to prevent a promotion, regardless of other achievements.
For all of us, this is a lesson in paying meticulous attention to every single metric, no matter how small. It also highlights the importance of understanding the specific, and sometimes unyielding, rules of the game before you start to play.
Have you ever encountered a similar situation where a single detail impacted your professional goals? Share your thoughts in the comments.
No comments
Post a Comment