This resource presents a recommended 45-day unpacking of the English 9 Term 2 competencies, based on approximately one hour per instructional meeting, four times a week.
This is not an official DepEd-prescribed daily pacing guide. It is a recommended instructional unpacking designed to help teachers translate broader competencies into manageable daily learning objectives.
Teachers may modify the sequence, combine objectives, extend difficult competencies, provide remediation, or introduce enrichment according to learner performance and actual instructional conditions.
English 9 Term 2 Focus
The major text focus for English 9 Term 2 is Argumentative Texts.
Learners are expected to move beyond simply identifying arguments. They examine how argumentative texts are structured, analyze the language and evidence used to develop claims, evaluate assertions and counterclaims, identify persuasive and propaganda techniques, draw sound conclusions, use textual evidence, synthesize information, and eventually compose and publish their own multimodal argumentative texts.
Why Unpack the Competencies?
A curriculum competency may contain several concepts and skills that cannot always be developed meaningfully in a single one-hour lesson.
For example, the competency on supporting evidence includes:
- factual knowledge;
- statistical inferences;
- informed opinion; and
- personal testimony.
Instead of compressing all of these into one session, teachers may unpack the broader competency into smaller objectives while maintaining alignment with the intended curriculum outcome.
Evaluate argumentative texts in spoken, written, visual, and multimedia forms for clarity of meaning, purpose, form, and function.
Examine the structure of argumentative texts for clarity of meaning and purpose.
Examine diction and style as tools for achieving organizational efficiency in argumentative texts.
Examine transition devices as tools for achieving organizational efficiency in argumentative texts.
Examine sentence structure and function as tools for achieving organizational efficiency in argumentative texts.
Analyze the use of discipline-specific words in informational and argumentative texts.
Analyze the use of voice and technical terms in research and explain how they contribute to meaning and precision.
Analyze conceptual and operational definitions of words used in informational texts.
Analyze expanded definitions of words and their function in developing precise meaning.
Extract significant information from argumentative texts.
Analyze factual knowledge as supporting evidence used to validate assertions and counterclaims.
Analyze statistical inferences as supporting evidence used to validate assertions and counterclaims.
Analyze informed opinion as supporting evidence used to validate assertions and counterclaims.
Analyze personal testimony as supporting evidence used to validate assertions and counterclaims.
Evaluate the appropriateness of supporting evidence in validating assertions and counterclaims.
Distinguish facts from claims or opinions using self-evidence.
Distinguish facts from claims or opinions using anecdotal evidence.
Distinguish facts from claims or opinions using argument from authority.
Distinguish facts from claims or opinions using empirical evidence.
Compare the use of self-evidence, anecdotal evidence, argument from authority, and empirical evidence when distinguishing facts from claims or opinions.
Evaluate a claim of fact explicitly or implicitly made in an argumentative text.
Evaluate a claim of value explicitly or implicitly made in an argumentative text.
Evaluate a claim of policy explicitly or implicitly made in an argumentative text.
Distinguish and evaluate claims of fact, value, and policy in argumentative texts.
Analyze name calling versus card stacking as propaganda techniques used in informational texts.
Analyze ad nauseum propaganda versus appeal to justice as propaganda techniques used in informational texts.
Compare how the prescribed propaganda techniques influence the presentation and reception of information.
Analyze ethos as a persuasive technique used to support an argument.
Analyze pathos as a persuasive technique used to support an argument.
Analyze logos as a persuasive technique used to support an argument.
Draw inferences and conclusions based on the author's purpose and meaning to formulate sound judgment.
Draw inferences and conclusions by considering the target audience: hypothetical versus real, experts versus laypeople, and managerial versus rank-and-file.
Analyze quoting as textual evidence used to support an argument or general statement.
Analyze paraphrasing as textual evidence used to support an argument or general statement.
Analyze summarizing as textual evidence used to support an argument or general statement.
Synthesize significant information from informational texts.
Identify the text type appropriate to one's topic, purpose, and target audience.
Organize significant information using appropriate techniques for an argumentative text.
Determine one's thesis as the central idea of the paper.
Compose an argumentative text based on the chosen topic, purpose, thesis, and target audience.
Strengthen the argumentative text by integrating appropriate claims, supporting evidence, assertions, and counterclaims.
Apply multimodal elements appropriate to the chosen text delivery or deliveries.
Revise the argumentative text for coherence.
Revise the text for cohesion through appropriate diction, syntax, and style, and edit the text for textual consistency.
Publish a multimodal argumentative text for one's purpose and target audience.
Suggested 45-Day Progression at a Glance
Some Days Are Instructional Unpacking, Not New Competencies
A useful distinction must be maintained when using this resource.
Some daily objectives—particularly the integrative activities on Days 20, 27, and 41—are recommended instructional applications of competencies already found in the curriculum. They should not be interpreted as additional DepEd competencies.
Their purpose is to provide learners with opportunities to integrate related skills before moving to more complex argumentative reading and writing tasks.
Should Argumentative Writing Begin Only on Day 40?
No. Although the latter portion of the proposed sequence is devoted primarily to composition and publication, shorter writing tasks may be incorporated throughout the term.
For example, learners may:
- formulate a thesis after examining an argumentative text;
- write claims of fact, value, and policy;
- provide evidence for a given assertion;
- construct a counterclaim;
- revise weak evidence;
- rewrite arguments using ethos, pathos, or logos;
- paraphrase or summarize textual evidence; or
- write short argumentative paragraphs.
These smaller applications provide repeated practice before learners complete a more developed multimodal argumentative text.
A Competency Does Not End After One Day
The placement of a competency on a particular day does not mean that the skill should disappear from succeeding lessons.
Argumentative reading and writing are recursive. Learners will need to repeatedly apply claims, evidence, inference, textual support, audience awareness, coherence, and cohesion as they progress through the term.
Why Some Competencies Are Not Included
This recommended sequence intentionally avoids importing competencies assigned to other grade levels or terms.
For example, the Grade 9 Term 2 sequence does not introduce as prescribed competencies the BOW items on:
- visual elements;
- non-linear texts;
- determining the veracity of information;
- assessing the quality of journalistic articles; or
- literature review.
Keeping these distinctions clear helps prevent curriculum overload and preserves the intended progression across grade levels and terms.
Teachers May Adjust the Sequence
The proposed 45 instructional periods may be modified based on:
- learners' reading and writing proficiency;
- formative assessment results;
- difficulty of the texts being used;
- availability of instructional resources;
- school activities and class interruptions;
- actual number of instructional periods available;
- need for remediation or enrichment; and
- local classroom and school context.
A difficult competency may require more than one session, while closely related objectives may be combined when learners demonstrate readiness.
What This Resource Is—and Is Not
- a recommended competency unpacking;
- a teacher planning aid;
- a possible 45-day instructional framework;
- a guide for developing measurable daily objectives;
- a way to organize recursive argumentative skills; and
- adjustable according to learner needs.
- an official DepEd-issued daily BOW;
- a mandatory pacing sequence;
- a replacement for official curriculum documents;
- 45 completely independent competencies;
- a requirement to finish every objective in exactly one hour; or
- a prohibition against revisiting previously taught competencies.
Final Note for Teachers
Effective competency unpacking does not create additional curriculum requirements. It makes broad competencies easier to teach, observe, assess, reinforce, and integrate within the available instructional time.
The goal is not simply to reach Day 45. The more important goal is for learners to develop the ability to construct, evaluate, support, challenge, and communicate arguments responsibly and effectively.
The sequence presented here should therefore serve as a planning framework rather than a fixed prescription.
This English 9 Term 2 45-day competency unpacking is a recommended instructional resource prepared for teacher planning and reference. It is not an official DepEd-issued daily Budget of Work and should not be interpreted as a prescribed pacing sequence.
Teachers may modify the clustering, pacing, instructional activities, assessment schedule, remediation, enrichment, and lesson sequence according to learner needs and school context while maintaining alignment with the prescribed curriculum competencies.
Department of Education. English Three-Term Budget of Work for Learning Competencies . Cross-grade competency matrix for Grades 7–10. Last updated April 23, 2026.
Post a Comment