CSC–COA–DBM Joint Circular No. 1, s. 2025: A Complete Guide for Government Agencies and Public Schools

Assessment Policy Briefer Study Guide

Revised Classroom Assessment, Grading System, and Awards Recognition: What Schools Must Prepare for 2026

A practical school-ready guide for School Heads, teachers, advisers, coordinators, parents, and learners based on the policy briefer last updated April 13, 2026.

Important Source and Implementation Note

This article is based on the uploaded Policy Briefer on the Revised Guidelines on Classroom Assessment, Grading System, and Awards and Recognition for the K to 12 Basic Education Program, marked as last updated April 13, 2026. Because the file is a policy briefer, schools should still verify final details against the complete official issuance, official templates, DepEd forms, digital systems, and implementation instructions before revising gradebooks, report cards, awards programs, or school-level assessment policies.

Why This Briefer Matters

This briefer is not just about changing grade computation. It changes how schools should think about evidence of learning, learner support, teacher feedback, academic recognition, and the meaning of grades. The most important shift is this: assessment should help teachers decide what learners need next.

Direct Answer

The revised assessment briefer shifts classroom assessment from grade collection toward evidence-based learning support. It strengthens daily formative assessment, clarifies summative task requirements, uses descriptive grading in Key Stage 1, pairs numerical grades with descriptors in Key Stages 2 to 4, requires earlier intervention, strengthens grade validation, regulates AI use, and recalibrates academic awards.

Contents Executive Summary What Changed Stop Doing / Start Doing Formative Assessment Summative Assessment Component Weights KS1 Grading KS2–KS4 Grading Intervention Grade Validation AI and Authenticity Awards Parent Guide Checklist Verify FAQs

Executive Summary: The Direction of the Revised Assessment Briefer

The uploaded assessment briefer presents a major reorientation of classroom assessment. The central message is that assessment should not be treated as a mechanical process of collecting scores. It should serve teaching, feedback, learner growth, and timely support.

In practical terms, the briefer moves schools toward a more developmental assessment system. Formative assessment becomes part of daily instruction. Summative assessments are clarified by type, quantity, and weight. Key Stage 1 moves toward descriptive grading to avoid premature competition and labeling. Key Stages 2 to 4 retain numerical grades, but those grades are paired with descriptors that point to the learner’s mastery level and needed instructional response.

For School Heads, the most important responsibility is not merely to announce the changes. The school must prepare the systems that will make the changes workable: assessment plans, gradebooks, intervention tracking, report-card templates, grade validation procedures, AI-use rules, and revised awards and recognition protocols.

Bottom line: The briefer asks schools to treat assessment as a continuous instructional process. Teachers assess not only to compute grades, but to decide what learners need next.

What Changed: The Biggest Shifts Schools Should Notice

Area	Major Shift	Practical Meaning for Schools
Purpose of Assessment	Assessment is framed as a core part of teaching and learning.	Teachers should use assessment evidence to improve instruction, not only to produce grades.
Formative Assessment	It should be embedded in daily instruction.	Teachers should check understanding during lessons and adjust instruction based on learner responses.
Summative Assessment	Tasks are clarified into Written/Oral Works, Product/Performance Tasks, and Summative Tests/Term Examination.	Departments must plan fewer but clearer summative tasks per term.
Key Stage 1	Descriptive grading replaces early emphasis on numerical competition.	Schools must prepare descriptive report-card language and parent orientation materials.
Key Stages 2 to 4	Numerical grades remain, but qualitative descriptors are used alongside them.	Grades should communicate mastery level and needed instructional response.
Intervention	Support should happen early, not only after end-of-year failure.	Teachers must track learners needing support during the term.
Grade Validation	School Heads are expected to validate grades regularly.	Grade computation, records, and supporting evidence must be audit-ready.
AI Use	AI use is tied to assessment authenticity.	Teachers should treat AI as a planning and analysis assistant, not as the direct author of assessment items.
Awards	KS1 has no academic awards; KS2–KS4 awardees are listed alphabetically.	Recognition programs must reduce ranking pressure and early labeling.

Stop Doing / Start Doing: Practical Shift for Schools

The briefer is easier to implement when schools translate the changes into daily professional habits. The table below gives a simple implementation lens for School Heads and teachers.

Stop Doing	Start Doing	Why It Matters
Treating formative assessment as a separate quiz	Embedding formative checks in daily instruction	Teachers can respond immediately to learner needs.
Waiting until year-end remediation	Giving timely intervention during the term	Learners get help before failure becomes final.
Using grades alone	Pairing grades with descriptors and instructional response	Grades become more meaningful for teaching decisions.
Ranking young KS1 learners	Using developmental descriptive feedback	This reduces early labeling and unhealthy competition.
Using one gradebook formula for all subjects	Applying the correct component weights per subject group	Different subjects require different evidence of learning.
Using AI to directly create assessments	Using AI only for assessment design support and analysis	This protects assessment authenticity and teacher accountability.
Posting awardees by rank order	Listing KS2–KS4 awardees alphabetically	This promotes fairness and minimizes competition.

Infographic 1

ESRU Cycle in Daily Teaching

Formative Assessment: From Separate Activity to Daily Instruction

The briefer states that formative assessment should be embedded in daily instruction. This is one of the most important shifts because it changes the role of assessment inside the classroom. Formative assessment is no longer just a quiz, worksheet, or separate check-up activity. It becomes part of how the teacher teaches.

The teacher uses formative assessment evidence to answer three immediate questions:

• What should I teach next?
• How should I teach it?
• Which learners need additional support?

The ESRU Cycle

The briefer highlights the ESRU cycle. In simple classroom terms, the cycle may be understood this way:

ESRU Step	Meaning	Example in Class
E — Teacher Elicits Response	The teacher asks, prompts, or creates a task that reveals learner thinking.	“Explain why this answer is correct.”
S — Student Responds	The learner gives an answer, explanation, performance, or observable response.	A learner solves a problem and explains the process.
R — Teacher Recognizes Student Response	The teacher notices what the response shows about the learner’s understanding.	The teacher identifies a misconception in the learner’s explanation.
U — Teacher Uses Student Response	The teacher adjusts teaching based on the response.	The teacher reteaches, gives guided practice, groups learners, or enriches the task.

Teacher implication: Formative assessment is not mainly for recording grades. It is for improving the next teaching move.

Summative Assessment: What Teachers Must Plan Per Term

Summative assessment evaluates learner achievement at defined points in the curriculum, such as the end of a term. The briefer identifies three major summative components: Written/Oral Works, Product/Performance Tasks, and Summative Tests with Term Examination.

Summative Component	What It Measures	Examples	Required Number Per Term
Written / Oral Works	Mainly written or spoken evidence of learning	Essays, journals, written reports, structured presentations, oral responses	Minimum of 3, maximum of 5
Product / Performance Tasks	Application of learning in meaningful contexts	Projects, portfolios, investigations, demonstrations, outputs	Minimum of 2, maximum of 3
Summative Tests and Term Examination	Achievement at key points in the term	Two summative tests and a term examination	Two STs per term, plus the term exam

The briefer explains that the first summative test covers the first 15 instructional days, while the second covers the next 15 instructional days. The term examination then covers critical points from the summative tests administered earlier.

Operational Interpretation for Teachers

• Summative tasks should be planned at the start of the term.
• Written/Oral Works should not exceed the specified maximum.
• Performance Tasks should focus on application, not mere decoration or output compliance.
• Summative Tests should be aligned with actual instruction covered.
• The Term Examination should connect to critical learning points, not surprise content.

Infographic 2

New Summative Assessment Structure

Complete Component Weight Table for KS2 to KS4

The briefer gives different assessment weights depending on the learning area or subject group. This means schools should not use one generic grading formula for all subjects.

Learning Area / Subject Group	Written / Oral Works	Product / Performance Tasks	Summative Tests – Term Exam
Araling Panlipunan, English, Filipino, Mathematics, Science, GMRC / Values Education	20%	50%	30%
EPP / TLE and MAPEH	20%	60%	20%
SHS Core Subjects and Other SHS Academic Electives	20%	50%	30%
SHS Field Exposure, Arts Apprenticeship, Creative Production and Innovation	15%	70%	15%
SHS Arts, Sports, Health and Wellness Electives	20%	60%	20%
SHS Research Electives and Design and Innovation	40%	60%	Not indicated / none in briefer
SHS TechPro Electives	15%	65%	20%
SHS Work Immersion	20%	80%	Not indicated / none in briefer

Implementation caution: Gradebook templates must match the correct subject group. A wrong weight formula can affect learner grades, awards, promotion decisions, and grade validation.

Key Stage 1 Grading: Descriptive Instead of Competitive

For Key Stage 1, the briefer introduces descriptive grading to reflect developmental progress and support foundational learning. This is a major cultural shift because younger learners are not supposed to be pushed into early academic ranking and labeling.

Critical Verification Point for Schools

The briefer uses two descriptive systems: one for Kindergarten and another for Grades 1 to 3. The Grade 1 to 3 scale appears unusual because it lists C, D, and B rather than a more familiar A–E or A–C sequence. Schools should verify the final official templates before changing report cards, class records, or parent orientation materials.

Kindergarten Descriptive Grading

Letter Grade	English Descriptor	Filipino Descriptor	General Description
A	Advancing	Namumukod-tangi	Demonstrates skills beyond grade-level expectations; performs with confidence, accuracy, and high quality.
B	Benchmarking	Napamamalas	Demonstrates skills at the expected grade level; work is accurate and meets standard expectations.
C	Connecting	Natutungo	Approaching grade-level expectations; demonstrates skills in some tasks but may require guidance in others.
D	Developing	Napauunlad	Skills are emerging and developing; requires continued practice and support to improve performance.
E	Emerging	Nagsisimula	Beginning to demonstrate skills; requires ongoing support and guided instruction to develop proficiency.

Grades 1 to 3 Descriptive Grading

Letter Grade	Descriptor	Filipino Descriptor	General Description
C	Consistent	Palagiang Naipapakita	Consistently demonstrates the expected competency; actively participates in activities; works independently and may exceed expectations in some areas.
D	Developing	Umuusbong	Demonstrates the competency inconsistently; participates with minimal supervision; shows progress with continued practice.
B	Beginning	Nagsisimula	Rarely demonstrates the expected competency; participates with close supervision; requires sustained guidance and support.

Infographic 3

KS1 vs KS2–KS4 Grading

Key Stages 2 to 4: Numerical Grades With Descriptors

For Key Stages 2 to 4, numerical grading remains. However, the briefer states that numerical grades will not stand alone anymore. Qualitative descriptors will be used alongside the numerical grades to make the learner’s level of mastery clearer.

Adjusted Transmutation Table for SY 2026–2027

The briefer states that SY 2026–2027 will use an adjusted transmutation table as a transition to the zero-based grading system to be implemented in the following school year. The table below reproduces the ranges from the briefer for quick study use.

Initial Grade	Transmuted Grade	Initial Grade	Transmuted Grade
99.50–100.00	100	77.00–77.99	79
97.50–99.49	99	76.00–76.99	78
96.00–97.49	98	75.00–75.99	77
95.00–95.99	97	73.00–74.99	76
94.00–94.99	96	70.00–72.99	75
93.00–93.99	95	68.00–69.99	74
92.00–92.99	94	66.00–67.99	73
91.00–91.99	93	64.00–65.99	72
90.00–90.99	92	62.00–63.99	71
89.00–89.99	91	60.00–61.99	70
88.00–88.99	90	58.00–59.99	69
87.00–87.99	89	56.00–57.99	68
86.00–86.99	88	54.00–55.99	67
85.00–85.99	87	52.00–53.99	66
84.00–84.99	86	50.00–51.99	65
83.00–83.99	85	48.00–49.99	64
82.00–82.99	84	46.00–47.99	63
81.00–81.99	83	43.00–45.99	62
80.00–80.99	82	40.00–42.99	61
79.00–79.99	81	25.00–39.99	60
78.00–78.99	80	0.00–24.00	60 default minimum

Descriptors for KS2 to KS4

Numerical Grade	Descriptor	General Description	Instructional Response
90–100	Advancing / Namumukod-tangi	Consistently demonstrates skills and understanding that meet or exceed standards with independence and excellence.	Provide enrichment opportunities; encourage leadership or peer mentoring.
80–89	Benchmarking / Napamamalas	Demonstrates expected grade-level skills and understanding competently and independently.	Encourage deeper application, transfer of learning, and increased independence.
75–79	Connecting / Natutungo	Shows developing competence toward standards but requires minimal guidance.	Provide guided practice to strengthen consistency and mastery.
65–74	Developing / Napauunlad	Demonstrates emerging skills but requires additional support and practice.	Provide targeted remediation and scaffolded instruction.
0–64	Emerging / Nasisimula	Does not yet demonstrate foundational skills and understanding; requires intensive support.	Implement structured and sustained intervention programs.

Why descriptors matter: A grade should tell the teacher what to do next. A learner with a 73 does not only need a number recorded; the learner needs targeted remediation and scaffolded instruction.

Infographic 4

Grade Descriptor and Intervention Ladder

Promotion, Intervention, and Remediation

The briefer emphasizes that learners should receive timely intervention and remediation. Schools should not wait until the end of the school year before helping learners who are already showing signs of difficulty.

This means intervention must be planned during the learning process. Teachers should use formative assessment results, summative assessment evidence, attendance patterns, performance tasks, and learner behavior during instruction to identify who needs help.

Learner Situation	Recommended School Response
Learner is in the Connecting range	Give guided practice and strengthen consistency before the learner falls further behind.
Learner is in the Developing range	Provide targeted remediation, scaffolded instruction, and close monitoring.
Learner is in the Emerging range	Implement structured and sustained intervention; coordinate with parents or guardians when needed.
Learner fails in at most two learning areas	Remedial classes still apply, and the learner should earn a grade of 75 in the remedial class to be promoted.

Practical School Requirement

Each grade level or department should maintain an intervention monitoring process. This may include intervention logs, parent communication records, remediation plans, learner progress notes, and evidence of support given before final grades are submitted.

Grade Validation: A Stronger Responsibility for School Heads

The briefer states that grades will be submitted through official DepEd channels, including forms and digital systems in place. Records must also be kept for validation, review, and auditing. School Heads are expected to conduct regular validation of grades to ensure consistency, accuracy, and integrity.

What School Heads Should Check

Validation Area	Questions to Ask
Correct Weights	Was the correct component weight used for the subject group?
Required Number of Tasks	Were the required minimum and maximum tasks followed?
Alignment	Were assessments aligned with taught competencies and learning objectives?
Evidence	Are scores supported by records, outputs, rubrics, or assessment evidence?
Intervention	Were learners in need of support given timely intervention?
Descriptors	Are numerical grades paired with correct qualitative descriptors?
Data Integrity	Are records consistent across forms, gradebooks, and digital systems?

AI and Assessment Authenticity

The briefer includes rules on AI use to protect assessment authenticity. It notes that AI-use categories are in place to guide teachers on what kinds of assessments may allow learners to use supportive AI technologies.

One of the strongest statements in the briefer is that teachers may use AI in the design and analysis of assessments, but not in the creation of the assessments itself. This should be taken seriously because many teachers may be tempted to generate quizzes, tests, rubrics, or performance tasks directly through AI tools.

Practical rule: Teachers should treat AI as a planning and analysis assistant, not as the direct author of assessment items.

Suggested School-Level AI Guardrails

• Clarify when learners may or may not use AI in assessment tasks.
• Require teachers to review all AI-assisted planning outputs for accuracy, appropriateness, and alignment.
• Avoid using AI-generated test items without teacher authorship and validation.
• Require disclosure when AI support is allowed in learner outputs.
• Design performance tasks that require personal demonstration, oral defense, process evidence, or authentic application.
• Train teachers to detect overreliance on AI without automatically accusing learners.

Awards and Recognition: Less Ranking Pressure, More Fairness

The briefer states that awards and recognition are recalibrated. Key Stage 1 will have no academic rewards conferred to learners, in line with the new descriptive grading system. The stated purpose is to avoid early competition and labeling among young learners.

For Key Stages 2 to 4, awards may still be given depending on the learner’s general average. However, awardees will be listed alphabetically to promote fairness and minimize competition.

Key Stage	Award Direction	School Implication
Key Stage 1	No academic awards	Revise recognition programs to avoid ranking, early labeling, and unhealthy competition.
Key Stages 2 to 4	Awards may still be given based on general average	List awardees alphabetically rather than by rank order.

What Schools May Need to Revise

• recognition program scripts;
• certificate templates;
• posting format for awardees;
• ranking language in programs and announcements;
• parent orientation materials;
• learner recognition practices in Kinder to Grade 3.

Infographic 5

Awards and Recognition Changes

What Parents Should Understand About the New Assessment System

Parents may notice changes in how grades, descriptors, and recognition are explained. Schools should prepare a parent-friendly orientation so the revised system is not misunderstood as lowering standards.

Parent Question	Clear Explanation
Are descriptors less serious than numerical grades?	No. Descriptors help explain what the learner can do and what support is needed. They make grades more meaningful.
Why are there no academic awards in Key Stage 1?	The goal is to reduce early labeling and competition among young learners while focusing on developmental growth.
Does intervention mean my child failed?	No. Intervention means the school is responding early to support learning before difficulty becomes bigger.
Why are awardees listed alphabetically?	Alphabetical listing recognizes achievement while minimizing ranking pressure and unhealthy comparison.
Will teachers still give tests?	Yes. Summative tests remain, but they are part of a broader system that also includes performance tasks, written/oral works, and formative assessment.

School Implementation Checklist

The policy direction is clear, but implementation will depend on school systems. The following checklist can help School Heads and teachers prepare.

Area	What Schools Should Prepare	Lead Person or Group
Assessment Plan	Updated Written/Oral Works, Performance Task, Summative Test, and Term Exam schedule per term	School Head, department heads, teachers
Gradebook	Correct component weights, transmutation table, and descriptors	ICT coordinator, teachers, School Head
KS1 Report Card	Descriptive grading templates and parent-friendly explanations	KS1 teachers, School Head
Intervention	Monitoring and remediation system for learners needing support	Teachers, advisers, guidance personnel
Grade Validation	Checking protocol for accuracy, consistency, and integrity	School Head, academic coordinators
AI Use	School-level AI assessment policy and disclosure rules	School Head, ICT coordinator, department heads
Awards	Revised recognition guidelines, scripts, certificates, and posting format	Awards committee, School Head
Parent Orientation	Explanation of descriptive grading, descriptors, intervention, and awards changes	Advisers, School Head, guidance personnel

Critical Issues to Verify in the Full Policy

Because the uploaded source is a briefer, several operational details should be verified once the full official issuance, templates, or implementation memorandum is available.

Issue to Verify	Why It Matters
Final KS1 descriptor codes and report-card format	The Grade 1 to 3 descriptors in the briefer appear unusual in sequence and should be checked before template revision.
Exact zero-based grading transition details	The briefer mentions a transition year before zero-based grading, but schools need complete operational rules.
Official AI-use categories	Teachers and learners need clear categories for allowed, limited, and prohibited AI assistance.
Official awards thresholds and certificate language	Recognition programs must align with official standards and avoid outdated ranking language.
Digital system changes	School gradebooks and DepEd reporting systems must match the new formulas and descriptors.
Remediation and promotion procedures	Schools need exact timelines, documentation, and reporting requirements for remedial classes.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the biggest change in the revised assessment briefer?

The biggest change is the shift from assessment as grade collection to assessment as evidence for teaching, feedback, learner support, and timely intervention.

Are numerical grades removed?

No. Numerical grading remains for Key Stages 2 to 4, but grades are paired with qualitative descriptors to explain the learner’s mastery level and needed instructional response.

Will Key Stage 1 still have academic awards?

No academic awards are conferred to Key Stage 1 learners according to the briefer. This supports the shift away from early competition and labeling.

What is the ESRU cycle?

ESRU means the teacher elicits a response, the student responds, the teacher recognizes the student response, and the teacher uses the response to adjust instruction.

Can teachers use AI to create assessments?

The briefer says teachers may use AI in the design and analysis of assessments, but not in the creation of the assessments itself. Teachers should remain responsible for assessment authorship and validation.

Does intervention mean a learner already failed?

No. Intervention should happen early. It is a support mechanism that helps learners improve before difficulties become final failures.

Why should awardees be listed alphabetically?

Alphabetical listing recognizes achievement while reducing rank comparison, competition pressure, and public hierarchy among learners.

Human Verdict: What This Means for Schools

In my view, the strongest idea in this briefer is that assessment should become more humane and more useful. A grade should not be the end of the conversation. It should trigger the next instructional decision: enrich, guide, remediate, scaffold, validate, or refer for support.

The most difficult part will be implementation. Teachers will need clearer assessment plans, better gradebook templates, stronger formative assessment routines, and time to provide intervention. School Heads will need to validate grades without turning the process into paperwork overload. Parents will also need orientation, especially on why KS1 no longer uses academic awards and why descriptors matter as much as numbers.

If implemented carefully, the revised approach can reduce unhealthy competition, improve feedback, and make assessment more responsive to learner needs. If implemented poorly, it can become another compliance burden. The difference will depend on how well schools translate the briefer into simple systems that teachers can actually use.