From Curriculum to Lesson: Unpacking and Budget of Work

A lesson in a Department of Education (DepEd) public school starts from four documents that pass a learning competency from one to the next. The curriculum guide states the standards and the competencies. The budget of work spreads the competencies across the weeks of each term. The teacher unpacks each competency into learning objectives in the lesson plan. Assessment then shows which learners have mastered it and which need remediation, enrichment or the Academic Recovery and Accessible Learning (ARAL) Program. The rules for each step are in DepEd Order No. 010, s. 2024 on the MATATAG Curriculum, DepEd Order No. 009, s. 2026 on the three-term calendar, DepEd Order No. 016, s. 2026 on lesson planning, and DepEd Order No. 015, s. 2026 on classroom assessment.

Each step leaves the teacher room to judge. The budget of work gives weeks, not days, and is only a guide. The lesson plan may cluster competencies or spread one competency over several sessions. Differentiation changes the route for different learners while the standard stays the same. What does not change is the set of competencies itself: DO 010 makes the MATATAG Curriculum the “prescribed minimum standards” for every school offering basic education (item 2 of the order).

The sections below follow a competency from the curriculum guide to the learner who has not yet mastered it, with the rules in force on November 6, 2026, midway through Term 2 of School Year (SY) 2026-2027. Writing the lesson plan itself is covered in the guide to DO 016, s. 2026, adapting lessons to local context in the contextualization guide, and grading in the guide to DO 015, s. 2026.

Key findings

• Teachers unpack competencies; software does not. DO 010 expects teachers to “unpack learning competencies to determine what learners need to know, understand, and be able to do” (item 18.a.ii). DO 016 bars artificial intelligence (AI) from “unpacking competencies” and other core instructional decisions (item 25.a).
• Unpacking, clustering and sequencing are all allowed. Teachers “shall unpack, cluster, or sequence learning competencies into clear, focused, and manageable learning objectives aligned with learner readiness, instructional context, and available learning time” (DO 016, item 7.a.ii).
• The budget of work counts weeks, not days. The three-term budget of work “specifies the recommended number of weeks, rather than a fixed number of days”, is “a guiding reference only”, and regional and division offices are told to “refrain from prescribing a set number of days” (DO 009, s. 2026, item 25).
• “Curriculum fidelity” is not a DepEd term, but the standards are fixed. The curriculum is the “prescribed minimum standards” (DO 010, item 2 of the order), and the three-term calendar aims “to attain mastery and not simply breadth” (DO 009, item 27). Pacing, sequence within a term, strategies and context can flex; the competencies cannot be dropped.
• Differentiation is written into the curriculum. DO 010 calls for a “differentiation approach that utilizes tiered learning tasks and employs varied teaching strategies and techniques to cater to the diverse needs of learners” (item 21.c).
• Learning gaps are handled in layers. Formative checks during the lesson, remediation within the term beginning “as early as Week 5 following the first ST” (DO 015, item 68), then ARAL tutorials for learners who “continue to fall behind” (DepEd Order No. 018, s. 2025, item 25). Learners rated Not Proficient or Low Proficient at the start of the year join ARAL-Mathematics directly (DepEd Memorandum No. 060, s. 2026, Encl. item 7).
• The school head’s job is review and support, not paperwork. School heads “lead qualitative reviews of lesson plans to ensure alignment with curriculum standards and learner needs” (DO 016, item 37.b), and schools may not require “additional or expanded lesson plan templates, supplementary forms, or documentation” (item 21).

The path from curriculum to lesson

Which issuances govern each step

The Most Essential Learning Competencies (MELCs) were an emergency list. DepEd Order No. 012, s. 2020 adopted them “for SY 2020-2021 only” (item 5). DO 010 kept the 2016 curriculum with the MELCs only for grades that had not yet moved to MATATAG (item 35), and by SY 2026-2027 all of Kindergarten to Grade 10 had (item 8).

What unpacking a learning competency means

A competency, in DepEd’s definition, is “a specific skill performed with varying degrees of independence” that “has different degrees of difficulty and performance levels” (DO 010, item 9.b). A competency is usually too large for one lesson. Unpacking turns it into objectives a class can reach in a session or a series of sessions.

DO 010 describes teachers as instructional designers who “unpack learning competencies to determine what learners need to know, understand, and be able to do” (item 18.a.ii). DO 016 puts the same step inside the lesson plan’s first element, Intentions:

• Learning competencies. Teachers identify the competencies a session targets. “Competencies may span several lessons, provided that each session contributes to clear and progressive goals toward learner mastery” (item 7.a.i).
• Learning objectives. Teachers “unpack, cluster, or sequence learning competencies into clear, focused, and manageable learning objectives aligned with learner readiness, instructional context, and available learning time to support meaningful mastery” (item 7.a.ii).

The three verbs do different work:

Unpacking is not new to DepEd. When the MELCs replaced the full curriculum during the pandemic, DO 012, s. 2020 encouraged teachers “to refer to the 2016 Curriculum Guides in unpacking the MELCs”, because a broad competency “calls for unpacking and sub-tasking on the part of the teacher” (Guidelines on the Use of the MELCs, Secs. II and III.C). When classes returned, DepEd Order No. 017, s. 2022 said teachers “shall unpack these competencies to ensure that learners are equipped with prerequisite knowledge and skills before being taught with the targeted competencies” (Sec. VI, item 3 on curriculum). Both orders were written for those years, but the idea carried into DO 010 and DO 016.

How to unpack a competency, step by step

The orders set what unpacking must achieve. The steps below follow from their wording:

1. Start from the standard. Read the content standard and performance standard the competency serves, in the curriculum guide or at the top of the term in the budget of work. An objective is right only if it moves learners toward that standard.
2. Name what learners must know, understand and do. These are the three parts DO 010, item 18.a.ii names.
3. Find the prerequisites. List what learners must already be able to do, and check it against what the class showed in earlier lessons and assessments.
4. Write the objectives. Make them “clear, focused, and manageable”, sized for “learner readiness, instructional context, and available learning time” (DO 016, item 7.a.ii).
5. Decide the evidence. Plan the formative checks that will show whether each objective was reached (DO 016, item 7.c; DO 015, item 14).

A worked example: Grade 4 Mathematics, Term 1

The Grade 4 Mathematics budget of work places this competency in Week 3 of Term 1, after angles (Week 1) and the properties of triangles and quadrilaterals (Week 2):

Classify triangles and quadrilaterals according to sides and angles.

The same week also lists “Differentiate different quadrilaterals”, so the second session clusters the two competencies. A learner who meets an objective such as name the parts of a triangle has not met the competency: an objective that is narrower than the competency lowers its demand, and the class never reaches the standard.

The budget of work under the three-term calendar

A budget of work (BoW) is DepEd’s plan for when each competency is taught. Older orders used the term mainly for multigrade teaching: DepEd Order No. 64, s. 2016 defined it as a resource with competencies, topics, strategies “and time allotment arranged into columns”, to “serve as teacher’s reference in preparing daily and/or weekly lesson plans” (item 6.a).

With the three-term calendar, the BoW became one national set. DO 009, s. 2026 states (item 25):

The Budget of Work (BoW) for Learning Competencies can be accessed through https://tinyurl.com/Three-Term-BoW and is likewise provided in Annex E. The BoW specifies the recommended number of weeks, rather than a fixed number of days for the delivery of various competencies and lessons. This is intended as a guiding reference only for teachers in lesson planning. Teachers are afforded flexibility to manage instructional pacing in accordance with learners’ needs and contextual realities. Regional and Division Offices are advised to refrain from prescribing a set number of days for the accomplishment of learning competencies.

Annex E links one folder per learning area: Kindergarten, Araling Panlipunan, English, EPP/TLE/TechPro, Filipino, GMRC, MAPEH, Mathematics, Science and senior high school. Existing textbooks and other learning resources stay in use, “as these remain aligned with the prescribed learning competencies organized in the BOW” (item 26).

Each grade’s BoW sets out, for each term, the content standard, the performance standard and the competencies by week. The Grade 4 Mathematics BoW, last updated April 17, 2026, spreads Term 1 across Weeks 1 to 10:

How the BoW fits the term

In SY 2026-2027 the Instructional Blocks run 55 days in Term 1, 56 in Term 2 and 57 in Term 3 (DO 009, Figure 3). Term 2 runs from September 16 to December 18, 2026, with the two teacher-made summative tests on October 7 and October 29, the Term 2 Examination on December 3 and 4, and the End-of-Term Block from December 7 (Annex B). Within each term, DO 009 asks for “the coherent sequencing of learning competencies, adequate time for mastery, and deliberate integration of both remediation and enrichment measures to support diverse learner needs” (item 25). The progress report at the end of a term reflects “the competencies covered within the term” (item 28).

The BoW is a guide, not a timetable. DO 009 addresses its warning against prescribing days to regional and division offices; it does not mention school heads, but a school that set a fixed number of days per competency would work against the same flexibility. DO 016 adds a limit of its own: schools may not require “additional or expanded lesson plan templates, supplementary forms, or documentation beyond the simplified standards” of the order (item 21). A pacing checklist attached to every lesson plan would be that kind of supplementary form.

The BoW still matters for accountability. When DepEd Order No. 49, s. 2018 moved the SY 2018-2019 Christmas break a week earlier, it directed regions, divisions and schools “to review the Budget of Work (BOW) on curriculum implementation to ensure that the required competencies are covered” (item 4). That direction was tied to one calendar change, but the use it describes, checking coverage against the BoW, fits the three-term BoW as well, provided days are not prescribed.

Curriculum fidelity: what must be kept and what can flex

DepEd’s issuances do not define “curriculum fidelity”. The nearest term, “implementation fidelity”, appears in DO 015, which has offices monitor “to track implementation fidelity, identify good practices, and address emerging concerns” through classroom observations, reviews of progress reports and portfolios, and analysis of learner data (item 81). Read plainly, fidelity to the curriculum means that learners are taught, and reach, the standards and competencies the curriculum prescribes.

The orders support this line:

The three-term calendar adds a rule about depth: “The aim is to attain mastery and not simply breadth, which necessitates that critical learning competencies be prioritized in assessments” (DO 009, item 27). Mastery first does not mean some competencies may be skipped: nothing in these orders lets a teacher drop a competency. The orders do not say whether a competency a class has not reached may move to the next term. The summative tests and term examination cover “the lessons actually covered” (DO 015, item 26), and the progress report reflects “the competencies covered within the term” (DO 009, item 28). Keeping to the BoW’s term by reteaching, clustering and resequencing leaves the next term’s plan intact.

At the school level, DO 010 makes schools responsible to “Ensure that the MATATAG Curriculum standards and learning competencies are effectively implemented” (Table 2) and has school heads monitor and evaluate the curriculum’s implementation “at least once every quarter”, with results sent to the division (item 52). As of November 6, 2026, no issuance has restated this duty for the three-term calendar.

A school head checking fidelity can look for five things, each tied to a rule above:

1. The competencies in the lesson plan match those the BoW sets for the term.
2. Each objective keeps the demand of its competency.
3. The formative checks and summative tests measure those objectives, following the table of specifications.
4. The teacher’s Ways Forward notes show what will be retaught, and to whom.
5. Any competency of the term not yet taught has a plan agreed with the teacher.

Differentiated instruction in DepEd policy

Differentiation is part of the MATATAG Curriculum’s core instructional principles: a “differentiation approach that utilizes tiered learning tasks and employs varied teaching strategies and techniques to cater to the diverse needs of learners” (DO 010, item 21.c). Learning areas “may utilize differentiated instruction, explicit teaching (direct instruction), experiential learning, culture-based instruction, and technology-enhanced instruction” (item 22), and the instructional design framework lists differentiated instruction among the suggested approaches for Filipino, English, Mathematics, EPP and TLE, and Music and Arts (Annex 5, Table 1).

The PPST defines differentiated teaching as “Teaching-learning processes involving a wide variety of texts, tasks, processes and products suited to the various learning needs of diverse students” (Glossary). Its indicator for proficient teachers, 3.1.2, is to “Use differentiated, developmentally appropriate learning experiences to address learners’ gender, needs, strengths, interests and experiences.”

DO 016 builds differentiation into lesson planning in five places:

Differentiation, accommodation and modification

The three terms are not the same, and the difference decides whether a learner is held to the competency:

For most learners, then, differentiation changes the route and keeps the destination. Changing the objective itself is a modification, which DO 016 places in the inclusive settings it describes, guided for learners with disabilities by the IEP. Assessment follows the same rule: learners with disabilities receive “appropriate assessment accommodations”, such as “adjustments in time, format, setting, and response modes” (DO 015, item 30).

A tiered task for the Grade 4 competency above might look like this:

Learning gaps: how a school finds and closes them

DO 015 gives formative assessment the first job: it “enables teachers to identify learning gaps, provide timely feedback, adjust instruction, and support learner progress” (Rationale, item 2). Evidence of learning “shall consistently inform instructional decisions, including what to teach next, how to teach it, and which learners require additional support or enrichment” (item 14).

The data come from several sources. DO 010 names the Philippine Early Childhood Development Checklist, the Philippine Informal Reading Inventory (Phil-IRI), the Comprehensive Rapid Literacy Assessment (CRLA) and the Rapid Mathematics Assessment (RMA) as tools for identifying “learners in need of additional support” (item 30). Within each term come the formative checks, the two teacher-made summative tests and the term examination (DO 009, item 27).

The response comes in layers, from the lesson to the end of the school year:

The order matters. DO 018 states that “Learners who do not meet lesson objectives may not necessarily become ARAL learners. Instead, they shall first undergo appropriate interventions” in the classroom (item 25), and that ARAL “complements, rather than replaces, daily teaching-learning processes” (item 23). Learners whose beginning-of-year assessment places them below grade level are ARAL beneficiaries from the start: ARAL-Mathematics groups learners rated Not Proficient or Low Proficient on the RMA and tracks each one’s unmastered skills in an Individual Mathematics Intervention Plan (DM 060, Encl. items 6 to 8).

DO 015’s grade descriptors tie each level of performance to a response:

Enrichment belongs in the plan as well: “Enrichment activities may also be provided for learners demonstrating early mastery to deepen learning”, without affecting grades (DO 015, item 71).

A learning gap is a competency, or a prerequisite, that a learner has not mastered. The BoW shows what has been taught, and the assessments show what has been learned; the gap is the difference between the two. A class that scores poorly on a Week 3 competency needs reteaching on that competency, while a learner who cannot yet read at grade level needs the reading intervention that DO 018 is built for. The two call for different responses, and the data tell them apart.

What this means for school heads

1. Get the BoW to every teacher. Download the folder for each learning area from DO 009, Annex E, and check that teachers plan from the current version.
2. Use LAC sessions for unpacking and alignment. DO 016 says learning action cell (LAC) sessions “may serve as primary venues for peer learning, sharing effective practices, aligning competencies, and co-creating lesson plans” (item 37.a). Unpacking a hard competency together saves each teacher the work and keeps the objectives consistent across sections. The LAC guide covers running the sessions.
3. Review lesson plans for alignment, not completeness. Feedback should focus on alignment and coherence, the learning design principles, and “Use of evidence of learning and reflections to improve lesson delivery” (DO 016, item 32). Walkthroughs of 10 to 15 minutes show whether the plan works in class (item 33); see the instructional supervision guide.
4. Check coverage once a term, without prescribing days. Compare what each class has covered with the BoW, and agree with teachers on how to recover lost weeks by reteaching, clustering and resequencing.
5. Read the assessment data with teachers after each summative test. Decide which learners need remediation within the term, which need ARAL, and which are ready for enrichment.
6. Protect the time for intervention. Schedule ARAL sessions within the Instructional Block “for a duration of 30-60 minutes on designated days, two (2) to four (4) times per week” (DO 009, item 13). ARAL-Mathematics may also run as pull-out sessions or outside class hours, up to one hour on weekdays (DM 060, Encl. items 16 and 17). Serving as a tutor “shall not be mandatory” for DepEd teachers, and those who serve are not assigned to tutor their own learners. Tutorial hours count as teaching load (DO 018, item 81), with overload pay beyond six hours of actual teaching and vacation service credits for weekend and vacation sessions (DepEd Memorandum No. 001, s. 2026, as amended by DM 061, s. 2026, Encl. items 6.d and 31.a).
7. Remove what does not help teaching. DO 016 directs school heads to relieve teachers of administrative tasks so they have time to prepare lessons, and to “reduce unnecessary documentation requirements” (item 37.c).

Records to keep: the BoW for each learning area, LAC records of unpacking and alignment, lesson plans with Ways Forward notes (DO 016 recommends a three-year retention, item 37.e), summative test results with their tables of specifications, remediation and ARAL lists, and the results of the school’s evaluation of curriculum implementation submitted to the SDO (DO 010, item 52).

What a school head may not do: add lesson plan templates or forms beyond DO 016 (item 21), let AI unpack competencies or write objectives (item 25.a), allow a competency to be dropped, or send learners to ARAL in place of classroom intervention (DO 018, item 25). Fixing a number of days per competency would also override the pacing flexibility DO 009 gives teachers (item 25), though its bar is addressed to regional and division offices.

These duties serve the Philippine Professional Standards for School Heads (PPSSH), adopted through DepEd Order No. 024, s. 2020: strand 3.1 on “School-based review, contextualization and implementation of learning standards”, strand 3.2 on teaching standards and pedagogies, strand 3.4 on data-based interventions, and strand 3.5 on learning assessment. The guide to Domain 3 explains them.

How the NASH may test this

The items below are original practice items, scored 3 (Relational), 2 (Multistructural), 1 (Unistructural) or 0 (Prestructural). An option that breaks a rule scores 0.

Question 1

Indicator 3.1.1, School-based review, contextualization and implementation of learning standards. Career Stage 1, Conceptual, Moderate.

DepEd’s lesson planning guidelines tell teachers to unpack, cluster or sequence learning competencies into learning objectives. Which statement best explains the purpose of unpacking a competency?

• A. To break the competency into smaller objectives that learners can finish within the time set for each session of the whole term.
• B. To find what the competency asks learners to know, understand and do, so objectives fit their readiness yet keep its demand.
• C. To restate the competency in simpler words so that learners and their parents can understand what the lesson is about.
• D. To pick the competencies that are easy enough for the class and leave the harder ones for the teacher of the next grade.

Answer and explanation

Best answer: B. Points: A = 2, B = 3, C = 1, D = 0.

• A (2 points, Multistructural). Objectives are smaller than the competency and must fit the time available, but the option treats unpacking as cutting the competency into pieces, without asking what learners must know, understand and do or keeping the competency’s demand.
• B (3 points, Relational). It names what unpacking finds, the knowledge, understanding and skills, and ties the resulting objectives both to learner readiness and to the standard the competency serves.
• C (1 point, Unistructural). Clear language helps learners, but rewording a competency does not analyze it or produce objectives for the lesson.
• D (0 points, Prestructural). The curriculum is the prescribed minimum standards; choosing which competencies to teach is not unpacking, and leaving competencies untaught breaks the standards.

Why. This aligns with Career Stage 1 expectations because indicator 3.1.1 asks an aspiring school head to understand how learning standards are reviewed and implemented in the school. DO 010, s. 2024 has teachers “unpack learning competencies to determine what learners need to know, understand, and be able to do” (item 18.a.ii), and DO 016, s. 2026 asks for objectives “aligned with learner readiness, instructional context, and available learning time to support meaningful mastery” (item 7.a.ii). The option about smaller objectives covers time but leaves out what learners must know, understand and do.

Indicator 3.1.1: Demonstrate knowledge and understanding of school-based review, contextualization and implementation of learning standards.

Sources: DepEd Order No. 010, s. 2024, items 2 and 18.a.ii; DepEd Order No. 016, s. 2026, item 7.a.

Question 2

Indicator 3.1.2, School-based review, contextualization and implementation of learning standards. Career Stage 2, Situational, Difficult.

You are the school head of a large junior high school. Midway through Term 2, the Grade 8 Science teachers report that most learners did poorly on the first summative test, on a competency the budget of work set for Week 3, and that their classes are now two weeks behind the budget of work. One teacher proposes skipping two of the term’s remaining competencies so that the classes can finish on time. What is the most appropriate action?

• A. Approve skipping the two competencies, since the term examination can be built only from the competencies the class has covered.
• B. Have the teachers reteach the weak competency and move the two remaining competencies to Term 3, noting the change in their plans.
• C. Have the teachers reteach the weak competency, then cluster related competencies in the remaining weeks so each is still taught.
• D. Tell the teachers to speed up and follow the budget of work week by week from now on so that the classes finish the term on time.

Answer and explanation

Best answer: C. Points: A = 0, B = 2, C = 3, D = 1.

• A (0 points, Prestructural). The competencies are the prescribed minimum standards; dropping two of them leaves learners without required learning, and since the term examination covers only the lessons actually taught, the gap would not even show.
• B (2 points, Multistructural). It reteaches the weak competency and keeps every competency, but it pushes Term 2 content into a term that has its own competencies, instead of resequencing within the term.
• C (3 points, Relational). It closes the gap the test revealed, then uses the clustering that the lesson planning rules allow to teach every remaining competency in the weeks left, using the budget of work’s flexibility as intended and leaving the next term’s plan intact.
• D (1 point, Unistructural). It attends to coverage, but rushing past a competency most learners have not mastered treats the budget of work as a timetable and leaves the gap open.

Why. This aligns with Career Stage 2 expectations because indicator 3.1.2 asks the school head to assist teachers in the implementation of learning standards. DO 009, s. 2026 makes the budget of work “a guiding reference only” and asks for “adequate time for mastery” and “deliberate integration of both remediation and enrichment” (item 25); DO 016, s. 2026 lets teachers “unpack, cluster, or sequence learning competencies” (item 7.a.ii); and DO 010, s. 2024 makes the curriculum the “prescribed minimum standards” (item 2). Moving competencies to Term 3 keeps them but leaves the next term with more than its share.

Indicator 3.1.2: Assist teachers in the review, contextualization and implementation of learning standards to make the curriculum relevant for learners.

Sources: DepEd Order No. 009, s. 2026, items 25, 27 and 28; DepEd Order No. 016, s. 2026, item 7.a.ii; DepEd Order No. 010, s. 2024, item 2.

Question 3

Indicator 3.4.2, Learner achievement and other performance indicators. Career Stage 2, Situational, Moderate.

You are the school head of a rural elementary school. After the first summative test of Term 2, a Grade 5 teacher reports that 12 of the 36 learners in the class scored below expectations on fractions. Four of the 12 were also rated Not Proficient in the beginning-of-year mathematics assessment; the other eight were rated Nearly Proficient or Proficient. ARAL-Mathematics tutors are available two afternoons a week. What is the most appropriate action?

• A. Refer all 12 learners to the ARAL tutors so that the teacher can keep pace with the budget of work for the rest of the term.
• B. Wait for the Term 2 examination to confirm which learners need help, then plan remediation for them in the End-of-Term Block.
• C. Give the 12 learners extra performance tasks with generous scoring so that their term grades reach 75 and they avoid remediation.
• D. Have the teacher start small-group remediation on fractions now, refer the four Not Proficient learners to ARAL, and track them.

Answer and explanation

Best answer: D. Points: A = 2, B = 1, C = 0, D = 3.

• A (2 points, Multistructural). It gets the learners support and uses ARAL, but it skips the classroom interventions that come first and hands the whole class’s gap to tutors.
• B (1 point, Unistructural). It wants firm evidence, but the summative test is already evidence, and waiting until the term ends delays help that should begin within the term.
• C (0 points, Prestructural). Inflating scores to avoid remediation misrepresents learners’ achievement and denies them the support the grading rules require.
• D (3 points, Relational). It starts classroom remediation as soon as the test shows the gap, sends the learners whose beginning-of-year profile already places them below grade level to ARAL, and monitors progress.

Why. This aligns with Career Stage 2 expectations because indicator 3.4.2 asks the school head to use learning outcomes in developing data-based interventions. DO 015, s. 2026 has remediation “begin as early as Week 5 following the first ST”, through classroom interventions, ARAL or other school strategies (item 68). DO 018, s. 2025 has learners “first undergo appropriate interventions” before ARAL referral (item 25), and DepEd Memorandum No. 060, s. 2026 groups learners rated Not Proficient on the mathematics assessment for ARAL-Mathematics (Encl. items 6 to 8). Referring all 12 at once skips the classroom step.

Indicator 3.4.2: Utilize learning outcomes in developing data-based interventions to maintain learner achievement and attain other performance indicators.

Sources: DepEd Order No. 015, s. 2026, items 52 and 68; DepEd Order No. 018, s. 2025, items 23 and 25; DepEd Memorandum No. 060, s. 2026, Encl. items 6 to 8.

Nothing in this guide reproduces or predicts examination content.

Frequently asked questions

Is the budget of work mandatory?

The competencies are; the pacing is not. DO 009, s. 2026 calls the three-term budget of work “a guiding reference only for teachers in lesson planning”, gives teachers “flexibility to manage instructional pacing”, and tells regional and division offices not to prescribe “a set number of days” per competency (item 25). Every competency still has to be taught, since the curriculum sets minimum standards for every school (DO 010, s. 2024, item 2 of the order).

Can a teacher skip a learning competency that the class has no time for?

No. Nothing in DO 010, DO 009 or DO 016 lets a teacher drop a competency. DO 016 allows a teacher to “unpack, cluster, or sequence” competencies (item 7.a.ii), which is how a class that falls behind catches up.

Can teachers use AI to unpack competencies?

No. DO 016, s. 2026 bars AI from “defining learning objectives, unpacking competencies, designing learning experiences and instructional strategies” (item 25.a); the limited uses it allows are summarized in the caution box above.

What is the difference between differentiation and modification?

Differentiation varies texts, tasks, processes and products so that all learners reach the same competency (DO 010, item 21.c; PPST Glossary). A modification adjusts “learning objectives, content, or performance expectations” and is meant for learners with disabilities, learning difficulties or giftedness (DO 016, item 4.i); for learners with disabilities it follows the IEP.

When should remediation start?

Within the term. DO 015, s. 2026 has remedial interventions “begin as early as Week 5 following the first ST” for learners who consistently perform below expectations (item 68). Classroom interventions come first; learners who still fall behind may be referred to ARAL (DO 018, s. 2025, item 25).

Sources

DepEd issuances

• DepEd Order No. 010, s. 2024, Policy Guidelines on the Implementation of the MATATAG Curriculum, July 23, 2024, item 2 of the order; Encl. items 8, 9, 13, 18, 21, 22, 30, 35, 37 and 52; Annex 1, item 1.3; Annex 2, item 1.2; Annex 5.
• DepEd Order No. 009, s. 2026, Guidelines on the Implementation of the Three-Term School Calendar in Basic Education, April 16, 2026, items 8.b, 13, 25 to 28 and 33; Figures 2 and 3; Annex B; Annex E, Three-Term Budget of Work for Learning Competencies in Basic Education (Grade 4 Mathematics, last updated April 17, 2026).
• DepEd Order No. 016, s. 2026, Guidelines on Lesson Planning and Learning Design, June 4, 2026, items 4, 7, 13 to 15, 21, 25, 32, 33, 37 and 43; Table 1.
• DepEd Order No. 015, s. 2026, Revised Guidelines on Classroom Assessment, Grading System, and Awards and Recognition for the K to 12 Basic Education Program, June 4, 2026, Rationale item 2; items 13, 14, 26, 27, 30, 52, 67, 68, 71 and 81.
• DepEd Order No. 018, s. 2025, Implementing Guidelines of the Academic Recovery and Accessible Learning Program, June 13, 2025, items 22 to 25 and 81.
• DepEd Memorandum No. 060, s. 2026, Guidelines on the Implementation of the ARAL Program in Mathematics, September 28, 2026, item 2; Encl. items 6 to 8, 16, 17 and 19.
• DepEd Memorandum No. 064, s. 2025, Implementing Guidelines for the ARAL Program in Reading for Key Stages 1 to 3, August 1, 2025.
• DepEd Order No. 021, s. 2019, Policy Guidelines on the K to 12 Basic Education Program, August 22, 2019.
• DepEd Order No. 012, s. 2020, Adoption of the Basic Education Learning Continuity Plan for School Year 2020-2021, June 19, 2020, item 5 and the Guidelines on the Use of the MELCs, Secs. II and III.C.
• DepEd Order No. 017, s. 2022, Guidelines on the Progressive Expansion of Face-to-Face Classes, 2022, Sec. VI.
• DepEd Order No. 64, s. 2016, Guidelines on the Utilization of the 2015 and 2016 Financial Support for Multigrade Schools, October 4, 2016, item 6.a; DepEd Order No. 049, s. 2018, Amendments to DepEd Order No. 25, s. 2018, November 28, 2018, item 4.
• DepEd Order No. 012, s. 2024 and DepEd Order No. 020, s. 2025, amendments to DO 010, s. 2024.
• DepEd Memorandum No. 001, s. 2026, Guidelines on the Engagement of ARAL Program Tutors and Support Aides, as amended by DepEd Memorandum No. 061, s. 2026, September 29, 2026, Encl. items 6.d and 31.a.
• DepEd Order No. 42, s. 2017, Philippine Professional Standards for Teachers, indicator 3.1.2 and Glossary.
• DepEd Order No. 024, s. 2020, Philippine Professional Standards for School Heads, strands 3.1, 3.2, 3.4 and 3.5.

Written by Mark Anthony Llego for NASH Reviewer. Sources: DepEd Orders No. 010, s. 2024, No. 009, No. 015 and No. 016, s. 2026, and No. 018, s. 2025; DepEd Memoranda No. 064, s. 2025 and No. 001, No. 060 and No. 061, s. 2026; DepEd Orders No. 012, s. 2020, No. 017, s. 2022, No. 64, s. 2016 and No. 49, s. 2018; DepEd Order No. 42, s. 2017 and the PPST; DepEd Order No. 024, s. 2020 and the PPSSH.