January 2015 Monitoring Report

January 20 – 29, 2015
No. of Schools Monitored:
Elementary – 20
Secondary – 19
– 39
37 out of 39 schools visited have a definite
schedule for NAT review, almost all of them
started January, after class hours in the
There are enough review materials in all of
the schools visited. i.e., commercial
previous NAT materials.
Budget of work in the five learning areas
is evident.
Teachers are very much willing to take
part in the review sessions.
School- community partnership is very strong
in 34 schools as evident by the support given
to teachers especially during Saturday review
25 out of 39 schools maximized their Focus
Friday Activities for NAT review.
18 out of 20 elementary schools visited
are well structured and clean.
Learner’s materials in Filipino, Math, ESP,
English, MAPEH and Mother Tongue are
already available.
Test construction of 10 teachers is already
K-PUP designed.
There are enough textbooks in English
and Filipino in 34 out of 39 schools
Lesson Plans and Learning Competencies
of 20 teachers jive and are on time for
the grading period.
37 of the school heads/department
heads regularly checked the LP and the
different forms of their teachers.
Certificate of Rating in the NAT is not fully
utilized by 37 out of the 39 schools visited.
NAT Review does not focus on what the
students/pupils really need because 37 schools
did not do an analysis of their previous NAT
There are still 2 schools in the
elementary that do not have a regular
schedule and there are some who
integrate their review in the regular
class at least five minutes before the
Unified tests are not treated as
periodical tests because some skills
in particular grading period are not
covered, hence, unified tests are
used as reviewer or summative test.
37 teachers do not design their test as to
60%-easy/30%-average/10%-difficult as
specified in DepEd Order No. 33 s.2004.
There are 3 schools with special programs
but the curriculum used is that of the
regular. (sped, headstart)
Attendance is a problem especially in the
secondary schools. 40% of the students do
not attend review classes as reported by
the teachers.
Reading comprehension both in the
elementary and secondary is very low.
High(60%) percentage of pupils who are
non-readers is very evident.
90% of the Grade 6 students do not
know how to write paragraph.
Problem solving skills of teachers in
practical questions is poor.
Attitude of students in taking the test
seems to be a problem in most
schools. They tend to take it for
granted instead of taking it seriously.
Transfer of school heads from time to time
is a factor that affects the performance of
the school.
No clear program regarding NAT in the
early stage of school days.
13 of the 19 classrooms in the secondary
schools are not well structured and
sometimes are not well illuminated and
There are 15 teachers who do not
follow the budget of work,
especially in the secondary. Most of
the time, the whole week of the
Periodical exam is consumed in
review, checking and item analysis
of the test.
90% of the teachers both in the
elementary and secondary level do not
write the number of school days in the
different school forms that they are
accomplishing (Form 137 & Form 138).
School heads do not require them to do
Prepare and administer Mock NAT to all
schools both in the elementary and secondary.
Connect with stakeholders for the free NAT
meal, medical, dental, eye and ear check-up.
Provisions for free transportation may also be
considered for those who are residing in far
places. Look for sponsors for free pencils and
practice sheets (answer sheets) to augment the
There should be constant monitoring of
school heads, supervisors and other
instructional leaders not just on NAT
preparation but more so during instruction.
attendance. Time on task shall be strictly
imposed. Discourage vacation leave/travel
abroad during the opening and closing of
the school year.
Conduct inventory of learner’s
materials and textbooks and change
the obsolete ones.
Moratorium on the conduct of inset,
frequent meetings from January to
March. Focus on instruction. Do not
disturb the teachers.
Provide more reading materials in English and
Filipino to Grade 3 pupils. Give them
communicate using Filipino and English
Proposed for the abolition of the Unified Test
this coming school year.
Start the NAT prayer in every class everyday
so that teachers, students and leaders will
ensure the integrity of the test.
Seek the help of the master
teachers/department heads in the
preparation of test items in the mock
Reiterate the implementation of
School Programs such as: Monthly Oral
Reading Test, Oral and Silent Reading
Everything and Read) and School
Feeding Program.
Encourage the teachers to improve
the use of Daily Lesson Log (DLL) by
including the number of students
w/ and without mastery and
indicating their plan activities for
those students.
Strict compliance to “no read no
Interventions should be done.
Teachers must focus on remedial reading
rather than NAT review in Grade 3 if a lot
of their students have difficulty in reading.
Close monitoring among students who are
always absent. Interventions should be
done to cover the lessons they’ve missed.
Provide modules or tutor the students for
Identify the pupils needing help and focus on
their needs rather than combining them with
the rest of the class during the review
Ask the master teachers to come up with
modules to help those who are always absent
to cope with the lessons they have missed.
Encourage the teachers to conduct home
visitation for regular absentees.
Provide enhancement activities at home
to make sure that all the skills in the 4th
grading will be mastered by the
students/pupils before the NAT.
Evaluate the status of the students who
will take the NAT and brainstorm on the
most applicable and effective plan to
address their needs. This should be done
before scheduling the review.
Team 1:
Jacqueline C. Tuazon
Jeolfa G. Reyes
Team 2:
Ilynne SJ. Samonte
Minerva P. Rillo
Team 3:
Mila D. Calma
Socorro A. Sacdalan
Team 4:
Evelyn V. Mendoza
Elma P. Dizon
Team 5:
Milagros M. Peñaflor
Francisco B. Bautista
Team 6:
Maria Teresa C. Perez
Ronie S. Mendoza
Team 7:
Romeo M. Layug
Modesta B. Abrantes
Team 8:
Jerry B. Diwa
Arlene S. Carlos
Team 9:
Diomedes G. Agrado
Teresita A. Ordiales
Team 10:
Frederick Y. Simbol
Rodger R. De Padua