Catholic education leaders said the Philippines may not be ready to shift to a proposed three-term school calendar, citing risks to learning quality and system preparedness.

The Catholic Educational Association of the Philippines and the bishops’ education commission said the reform requires deeper structural changes beyond adjusting academic schedules.

They acknowledged the Education department’s goal to improve learning recovery and efficiency, but said success hinges on system readiness.

“The true measure of this reform lies not in the calendar itself, but in the system’s readiness to redesign teaching, learning, and assessment around it,” the groups said in a statement.

They called the shift from four quarters to three terms “not merely a scheduling adjustment but a systemic transformation” across curriculum, pedagogy, and assessment.

Without proper alignment, they warned, lessons may be rushed, and student mastery and remediation could suffer.

The groups cited classroom realities showing that structural changes without adequate teacher support can compromise teaching quality and student outcomes.

They stressed reforms must include “clear and measurable targets” to protect depth of learning and holistic development.

They also cautioned about “heightened teacher fatigue” under compressed timelines, raising concerns about impacts on teaching quality and student outcomes.

Catholic educators called for “a deliberate, well-paced, and adequately supported transition” to allow curriculum redesign and teacher formation.

“Divergent academic calendars may create challenges in student mobility, college admissions alignment, teacher deployment, and even household planning,” they said.

The statement also warned local dynamics could disrupt implementation, especially where private schools coordinate with community and government activities.

They urged policymakers to adopt “a phased, research-informed approach” that respects institutional diversity and ensures coordination across the education sector.

“Reform must ultimately be judged not by compliance with a new calendar, but by its capacity to improve learning outcomes, strengthen teacher effectiveness, and sustain student well-being,” they said.