The teacher’s Code of Ethics

(Editor’s Note: On the occasion of the opening of the school year, UNESCO Secretary General and STAR columnist Dr. Preciosa Soliven is giving space to noted education lawyer Ulpiano P. Sarmiento III.)

Often times we hear persons addressing certain individuals as "your honor" or referring to them as "honorable." But do they really deserve the title or respect?

As it is defined, the term "honorable" is an adjective showing great respect or self-respect. In the United States "honorable" is a courtesy title applied to persons of distinction in legal or civic life. It refers therefore to a person known of high moral integrity. Considering the definition, I have to admit that there is one person whose profession highly entitles him or her to be addressed "your honor" – the teacher.

Let me prove to you why. The Code of Ethics for Professional Teachers issued by the Board for Professional Teachers through Resolution No. 435 series of 1997, provides in the PREAMBLE that "Teachers are duly licensed professionals who possess dignity and reputation with high moral values as well as technical and professional competence."

Furthermore, the Code dictates that "Every teacher shall merit reasonable social recognition for which purpose he shall behave with honor and dignity at all times and refrain from such activities as gambling, smoking, drunkenness and other excesses, much less illicit relations," and "A teacher shall maintain at all times a dignified personality which could serve as model worthy of emulation by learners, peers, and others."

Hence, the Supreme Court stated in the case of Joseph Santos vs. NLRC, Hagonoy Institute Inc., "As teacher, (one) serves as an example to his/her pupils xxx. Consequently, xxx teachers must adhere to the exacting standards of morality and decency. xxx A teacher both in his official and personal conduct must display exemplary behavior. He must freely and willingly accept restrictions on his conduct that might be viewed irksome xxx the personal behavior of teachers, IN AND OUTSIDE THE CLASSROOM, must be beyond reproach xxx they must observe a high standard of integrity and honesty."

With such high standard of morality and stringent rule of conduct the teacher must observe, not only inside the school but also even outside. It can already be said that indeed they deserve the title honorable. But this is not all. The justification for the "honorable" title the teacher deserves is further established by the fact that existing laws require the teacher, in the exercise of the profession, to play the dual role of an educator and a mother or a father of the student – the most important roles of a person to our children.

As an educator

A teacher as an educator has the duty to ensure that his or her students receive "quality education." The Constitution in Article IV, Sec. 1, provides that "xxx the State shall protect and promote the right of all citizens to quality education at all levels and shall take appropriate steps to make such education accessible to all."

Meaning of quality education

What does quality education mean? Rev. Fr. Joaquin Bernas, S.J., then member of the Constitutional Commission of 1986, explained that quality education means "xxx making sure that basic education is really solid, because if it is not solid, it affects the quality of secondary education. If secondary education is poor, then the person goes to college unprepared for college work. And if he is allowed to graduate again with a poor quality college education, he goes to university professional education even more unprepared." In short, the teachers must ensure that each student acquire at least the minimum learning competencies to enable them to become functionally literate to go through the next higher level in the formal education ladder.

But how can the teacher be sure that the students received quality education? Legally there are two ways: 1) ensure the competence and efficiency of teachers in the performance of their duties; and 2) ensure proper and fair evaluation of student’s academic performance.

Standard of efficiency and competence of teachers

The Code of Ethics for Professional Teachers provided in Article IV, Sec. 2, that "Every teacher shall uphold the highest possible standards of quality education, shall make the best preparation for the career of teaching, and shall be at his best at all times in the practice of his profession." Also, in Batas Pambansa Blg. 232, otherwise known as the Education Act of 1982, Sec. 16 (2) provides that "The teacher shall xxx be accountable for efficient and effective attainment of specified learning objectives xxx."

In other words, a teacher is expected to be efficient and competent in the performance of his academic duties at all times. Otherwise, a teacher who has consistently shown his inability to efficiently perform his duties and responsibilities, within a common performance standard, should no longer be allowed to stay in school. As decided by the Supreme Court in the case of Evelyn Pena vs NLRC "xxx schools can set high standards of efficiency for its teachers since quality education is a mandate of the Constitution xxx security of tenure xxx cannot be used to shield incompetence."

Proper and fair evaluation of academic performance of students

After ascertaining the efficient and competent performance of teachers, one must determine whether or not the students are able to acquire from them the needed competencies to be functionally literate. For, even if a teacher is competent or efficient, the students may have failed to acquire such competencies. To establish therefore the acquired academic competencies of the students, the teachers should evaluate or give grades strictly in accordance with the law.

The Code of Ethics provides that "a teacher has the duty to determine the academic marks and the promotion of learners in the subject they handle. Such determination shall be in accordance with generally accepted procedure of evaluation and measurement." Also, Section 16 (5) of BP 232 mandates that a teacher shall "refrain from making deductions in student’s scholastic ratings for acts that are clearly not manifestations of xxx scholarship." The Manual of Regulations for Private Schools in Section 79 provides that "the grade or rating xxx in a subject should be based SOLELY on his scholastic performance. Any addition or diminution to the grade in a subject for co-curricular activities, attendance or misconduct shall NOT be allowed xxx." The Code of Ethics further provides that "a teacher shall not make deductions from their scholastic ratings as a punishment for acts which are clearly not manifestations of poor scholarship."

Thus, to stress the importance of the legal duty for teachers to properly evaluate the students, the Supreme Court said that a teacher who merely tries to influence a colleague to change a failing grade of a student to one that is passing is already guilty of gross misconduct. The High Court rules in Padilla vs. NLRC, that "the pressure and influence exerted by (a teacher) on his colleague to change a failing grade to passing one constitute serious misconducts which is a valid ground for dismissing an employee."

The academic grade should be based upon actual proficiency demonstrated and not upon other considerations such as conduct or attendance. Thus, it is not a matter of discretion on the part of the teachers in the giving of the students’ grades, but rather it is a clear obligation for the teachers to determine student academic marks solely based on scholastic preference. For a teacher to do otherwise (that is, to give a grade not based on the students’ scholastic performance), would undoubtedly be tantamount to serious academic malpractice or grave misconduct in the performance of his/her duties.

As a parent

By law, a teacher is not only obliged to teach, but is also required to be a mother or a father to the students and is expected to exercise such acceptable parental authority and parental care or responsibility. Article 218 of the Family Code provides "The school, its administrators and teachers xxx engaged in child care shall have special parental authority and responsibility over the minor child while under their supervision, instruction or custody."

The student is in the custody and hence, the responsibility of the school authorities and other school personnel as long as he is under the control and influence of the school and within its premises, whether the semester has not yet begun or has already ended. Even if the student is just relaxing in the campus in the company of his classmates and enjoying the atmosphere of the school, the student is still under the custody and subject to the discipline and responsibility of the school authorities and the school personnel.

Clearly, a teacher or school personnel required to exercise special parental responsibility, but who fails to observe all the diligence of a good father of a family in the custody and care of the pupils and students, shall be held liable for gross neglect of duty.

Conclusion

The teaching profession is no doubt the most honorable. It is even said that because of their enormous responsibility to our children, teachers should be honored more than the parents themselves. For if the parents cause the children to live; the teachers shall cause them to live well. No less than the Supreme Court, through the learned, former Justice Isagani A. Cruz said in the case of Chiang Kai Shek School vs. CA declared that "the Court takes this opportunity to pay a sincere tribute to the grade school teachers, who are always at the forefront in the battle against illiteracy and ignorance. If only because it is they who open the minds of their pupils to an unexplored world awash with the magic of letters and members which is an extraordinary feat indeed, these humble mentors deserve all our respect and appreciation."

Today therefore, as most schools open for the new school year, all teachers, whether in the private or public schools, colleges and universities, should no longer be addressed as mere "sir" or "ma’am" or "miss" but by the title all of them obviously deserve: "Your Honor."

* * *

More discussions on the Code of Ethics for Professional Teachers may be found in the book written by Ulpiano P. Sarmiento III entitled "Education Law and the Private Schools: A Practical Guide for Educational Leaders and Policy Makers" now available at FMSG Building, No. 9 Balete Drive, New Manila, Quezon City, tel. nos. 7220705 or 7277486.

(Erratum: In last week’s column, the dateline Cornwall-on-the-Wall should have been Cornwall-on-the-Hudson.)

(For more information please e-mail at exec@obmontessori.edu.ph)