COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING AND COMPUTER TECHNOLOGY

TRAINEE’S EVALUATION FORM

Name of the Trainee: VILLARICO, JEAN MARIE M. Date: July 30, 2019
Period of Assignment: June 10, 2019– July 19, 2019 Department: Network Field Services
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TO THE ON–SITE SUPERVISOR: Please encircle the appropriate quantitative equivalent corresponding to
your assessment of your On-the-Job Trainee.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. QUALITY OF WORK
5 - Excellent 4 - Above Average 3 - Average 2 - Below Average 1 - Unreliable
B. QUANTITY OF WORK
5 - Exceptionally productive 4 - Very productive 3 - Average productive
2 - Rather slow to produce output 1 - Very slow to produce output
C. RELATION WITH OTHERS
5 - Exceptionally accepted 4 - Works well with others 3 - Gets along satisfactorily
2 - Has some difficulty working with others 1 - Works very poorly with others
D. ATTITUDE TOWARDS WORK
5 - Exceptionally enthusiastic 4 - Shows initiative in his/her work 3 - Average in diligence
2 - Somewhat indifferent 1 - Definitely not interested
E. DEPENDABILITY
5 - Excellent 4 - Above Average 3 - Average 2 - Below Average 1 – Unreliable
F. ABILITY TO LEARN
5 - Exceptionally fast learner 4 - Learns rapidly 3 - Average learner
2 - Rather slow to learn 1 - Very slow to learn
G. ATTENDANCE
5 - Exceptional 4 - Keeps good attendance record 3 - Acceptable working attendance
2 - Needs improvement 1 - Cannot meet working schedule
H. JUDGMENT
5 - Exceptionally matured 4 - Above average in making decision 3 - Usually makes the right decision
2 - Often uses poor judgment 1 - Consistently uses bad judgment

PERFORMANCE AVERAGE: ________

QUALITATIVE EQUIVALENT:
OUTSTANDING: 5.0 - 4.6 | BELOW AVERAGE: 2.0 - 1.5 | ABOVE AVERAGE: 4.5 - 4.0 | AVERAGE: 3.9 - 2.1 | UNSATISFACTORY: 1.4 – 1

I can summarily conclude that the trainee's OVERALL PERFORMANCE is: __________

RECOMMENDATIONS / COMMENTS:
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________

Engr. King Harry C. Motia July 30, 2019

Signature Over Printed Name of the Date
On–Site Supervisor

Conforme:
Jean Marie M. Villarico July 30, 2019
Trainee Date
 COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING AND COMPUTER TECHNOLOGY
TRAINEE’S EVALUATION FORM

Name of the Trainee: PARAS, KEREN CLAIRE E. Date: July 30, 2019
Period of Assignment: June 10, 2019– July 19, 2019 Department: Network Field Services
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TO THE ON–SITE SUPERVISOR: Please encircle the appropriate quantitative equivalent corresponding to
your assessment of your On-the-Job Trainee.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. QUALITY OF WORK
5 - Excellent 4 - Above Average 3 - Average 2 - Below Average 1 - Unreliable
B. QUANTITY OF WORK
5 - Exceptionally productive 4 - Very productive 3 - Average productive
2 - Rather slow to produce output 1 - Very slow to produce output
C. RELATION WITH OTHERS
5 - Exceptionally accepted 4 - Works well with others 3 - Gets along satisfactorily
2 - Has some difficulty working with others 1 - Works very poorly with others
D. ATTITUDE TOWARDS WORK
5 - Exceptionally enthusiastic 4 - Shows initiative in his/her work 3 - Average in diligence
2 - Somewhat indifferent 1 - Definitely not interested
E. DEPENDABILITY
5 - Excellent 4 - Above Average 3 - Average 2 - Below Average 1 – Unreliable
F. ABILITY TO LEARN
5 - Exceptionally fast learner 4 - Learns rapidly 3 - Average learner
2 - Rather slow to learn 1 - Very slow to learn
G. ATTENDANCE
5 - Exceptional 4 - Keeps good attendance record 3 - Acceptable working attendance
2 - Needs improvement 1 - Cannot meet working schedule
H. JUDGMENT
5 - Exceptionally matured 4 - Above average in making decision 3 - Usually makes the right decision
2 - Often uses poor judgment 1 - Consistently uses bad judgment

PERFORMANCE AVERAGE: ________

QUALITATIVE EQUIVALENT:
OUTSTANDING: 5.0 - 4.6 | BELOW AVERAGE: 2.0 - 1.5 | ABOVE AVERAGE: 4.5 - 4.0 | AVERAGE: 3.9 - 2.1 | UNSATISFACTORY: 1.4 – 1

I can summarily conclude that the trainee's OVERALL PERFORMANCE is: __________

RECOMMENDATIONS / COMMENTS:
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________

Engr. King Harry C. Motia July 30, 2019

Signature Over Printed Name of the Date
On–Site Supervisor

Conforme:
Keren Claire E. Paras July 30, 2019
Trainee Date
 COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING AND COMPUTER TECHNOLOGY
TRAINEE’S EVALUATION FORM

Name of the Trainee: PALOMO, POCHOLO VINCE P. Date: July 30, 2019
Period of Assignment: June 10, 2019– July 19, 2019 Department: Network Field Services
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TO THE ON–SITE SUPERVISOR: Please encircle the appropriate quantitative equivalent corresponding to
your assessment of your On-the-Job Trainee.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. QUALITY OF WORK
5 - Excellent 4 - Above Average 3 - Average 2 - Below Average 1 - Unreliable
B. QUANTITY OF WORK
5 - Exceptionally productive 4 - Very productive 3 - Average productive
2 - Rather slow to produce output 1 - Very slow to produce output
C. RELATION WITH OTHERS
5 - Exceptionally accepted 4 - Works well with others 3 - Gets along satisfactorily
2 - Has some difficulty working with others 1 - Works very poorly with others
D. ATTITUDE TOWARDS WORK
5 - Exceptionally enthusiastic 4 - Shows initiative in his/her work 3 - Average in diligence
2 - Somewhat indifferent 1 - Definitely not interested
E. DEPENDABILITY
5 - Excellent 4 - Above Average 3 - Average 2 - Below Average 1 – Unreliable
F. ABILITY TO LEARN
5 - Exceptionally fast learner 4 - Learns rapidly 3 - Average learner
2 - Rather slow to learn 1 - Very slow to learn
G. ATTENDANCE
5 - Exceptional 4 - Keeps good attendance record 3 - Acceptable working attendance
2 - Needs improvement 1 - Cannot meet working schedule
H. JUDGMENT
5 - Exceptionally matured 4 - Above average in making decision 3 - Usually makes the right decision
2 - Often uses poor judgment 1 - Consistently uses bad judgment

PERFORMANCE AVERAGE: ________

QUALITATIVE EQUIVALENT:
OUTSTANDING: 5.0 - 4.6 | BELOW AVERAGE: 2.0 - 1.5 | ABOVE AVERAGE: 4.5 - 4.0 | AVERAGE: 3.9 - 2.1 | UNSATISFACTORY: 1.4 – 1

I can summarily conclude that the trainee's OVERALL PERFORMANCE is: __________

RECOMMENDATIONS / COMMENTS:
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________

Engr. King Harry C. Motia July 30, 2019

Signature Over Printed Name of the Date
On–Site Supervisor

Conforme:
Pocholo Vince P. Palomo July 30, 2019
Trainee Date
 COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING AND COMPUTER TECHNOLOGY
TRAINEE’S EVALUATION FORM

Name of the Trainee: SANTIAGO, RAE CARLO B. Date: July 30, 2019
Period of Assignment: June 10, 2019– July 19, 2019 Department: Network Field Services
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TO THE ON–SITE SUPERVISOR: Please encircle the appropriate quantitative equivalent corresponding to
your assessment of your On-the-Job Trainee.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. QUALITY OF WORK
5 - Excellent 4 - Above Average 3 - Average 2 - Below Average 1 - Unreliable
B. QUANTITY OF WORK
5 - Exceptionally productive 4 - Very productive 3 - Average productive
2 - Rather slow to produce output 1 - Very slow to produce output
C. RELATION WITH OTHERS
5 - Exceptionally accepted 4 - Works well with others 3 - Gets along satisfactorily
2 - Has some difficulty working with others 1 - Works very poorly with others
D. ATTITUDE TOWARDS WORK
5 - Exceptionally enthusiastic 4 - Shows initiative in his/her work 3 - Average in diligence
2 - Somewhat indifferent 1 - Definitely not interested
E. DEPENDABILITY
5 - Excellent 4 - Above Average 3 - Average 2 - Below Average 1 – Unreliable
F. ABILITY TO LEARN
5 - Exceptionally fast learner 4 - Learns rapidly 3 - Average learner
2 - Rather slow to learn 1 - Very slow to learn
G. ATTENDANCE
5 - Exceptional 4 - Keeps good attendance record 3 - Acceptable working attendance
2 - Needs improvement 1 - Cannot meet working schedule
H. JUDGMENT
5 - Exceptionally matured 4 - Above average in making decision 3 - Usually makes the right decision
2 - Often uses poor judgment 1 - Consistently uses bad judgment

PERFORMANCE AVERAGE: ________

QUALITATIVE EQUIVALENT:
OUTSTANDING: 5.0 - 4.6 | BELOW AVERAGE: 2.0 - 1.5 | ABOVE AVERAGE: 4.5 - 4.0 | AVERAGE: 3.9 - 2.1 | UNSATISFACTORY: 1.4 – 1

I can summarily conclude that the trainee's OVERALL PERFORMANCE is: __________

RECOMMENDATIONS / COMMENTS:
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________

Engr. King Harry C. Motia July 30, 2019

Signature Over Printed Name of the Date
On–Site Supervisor

Conforme:
Rae Carlo B. Santiago July 30, 2019
Trainee Date
 COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING AND COMPUTER TECHNOLOGY
TRAINEE’S EVALUATION FORM

Name of the Trainee: ORTIONA, CARLSSON A. Date: July 30, 2019

Period of Assignment: June 10, 2019– July 19, 2019 Department: Network Field Services
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TO THE ON–SITE SUPERVISOR: Please encircle the appropriate quantitative equivalent corresponding to
your assessment of your On-the-Job Trainee.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. QUALITY OF WORK
5 - Excellent 4 - Above Average 3 - Average 2 - Below Average 1 - Unreliable
B. QUANTITY OF WORK
5 - Exceptionally productive 4 - Very productive 3 - Average productive
2 - Rather slow to produce output 1 - Very slow to produce output
C. RELATION WITH OTHERS
5 - Exceptionally accepted 4 - Works well with others 3 - Gets along satisfactorily
2 - Has some difficulty working with others 1 - Works very poorly with others
D. ATTITUDE TOWARDS WORK
5 - Exceptionally enthusiastic 4 - Shows initiative in his/her work 3 - Average in diligence
2 - Somewhat indifferent 1 - Definitely not interested
E. DEPENDABILITY
5 - Excellent 4 - Above Average 3 - Average 2 - Below Average 1 – Unreliable
F. ABILITY TO LEARN
5 - Exceptionally fast learner 4 - Learns rapidly 3 - Average learner
2 - Rather slow to learn 1 - Very slow to learn
G. ATTENDANCE
5 - Exceptional 4 - Keeps good attendance record 3 - Acceptable working attendance
2 - Needs improvement 1 - Cannot meet working schedule
H. JUDGMENT
5 - Exceptionally matured 4 - Above average in making decision 3 - Usually makes the right decision
2 - Often uses poor judgment 1 - Consistently uses bad judgment

PERFORMANCE AVERAGE: ________

QUALITATIVE EQUIVALENT:
OUTSTANDING: 5.0 - 4.6 | BELOW AVERAGE: 2.0 - 1.5 | ABOVE AVERAGE: 4.5 - 4.0 | AVERAGE: 3.9 - 2.1 | UNSATISFACTORY: 1.4 – 1

I can summarily conclude that the trainee's OVERALL PERFORMANCE is: __________

RECOMMENDATIONS / COMMENTS:
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________

Engr. King Harry C. Motia July 30, 2019

Signature Over Printed Name of the Date
On–Site Supervisor

Conforme:
Carlsson A. Ortiona July 30, 2019
Trainee Date
 COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING AND COMPUTER TECHNOLOGY
TRAINEE’S EVALUATION FORM

Name of the Trainee: LUMUTAN, VER H., JR Date: July 30, 2019
Period of Assignment: June 10, 2019– July 19, 2019 Department: Network Field Services
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TO THE ON–SITE SUPERVISOR: Please encircle the appropriate quantitative equivalent corresponding to
your assessment of your On-the-Job Trainee.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. QUALITY OF WORK
5 - Excellent 4 - Above Average 3 - Average 2 - Below Average 1 - Unreliable
B. QUANTITY OF WORK
5 - Exceptionally productive 4 - Very productive 3 - Average productive
2 - Rather slow to produce output 1 - Very slow to produce output
C. RELATION WITH OTHERS
5 - Exceptionally accepted 4 - Works well with others 3 - Gets along satisfactorily
2 - Has some difficulty working with others 1 - Works very poorly with others
D. ATTITUDE TOWARDS WORK
5 - Exceptionally enthusiastic 4 - Shows initiative in his/her work 3 - Average in diligence
2 - Somewhat indifferent 1 - Definitely not interested
E. DEPENDABILITY
5 - Excellent 4 - Above Average 3 - Average 2 - Below Average 1 – Unreliable
F. ABILITY TO LEARN
5 - Exceptionally fast learner 4 - Learns rapidly 3 - Average learner
2 - Rather slow to learn 1 - Very slow to learn
G. ATTENDANCE
5 - Exceptional 4 - Keeps good attendance record 3 - Acceptable working attendance
2 - Needs improvement 1 - Cannot meet working schedule
H. JUDGMENT
5 - Exceptionally matured 4 - Above average in making decision 3 - Usually makes the right decision
2 - Often uses poor judgment 1 - Consistently uses bad judgment

PERFORMANCE AVERAGE: ________

QUALITATIVE EQUIVALENT:
OUTSTANDING: 5.0 - 4.6 | BELOW AVERAGE: 2.0 - 1.5 | ABOVE AVERAGE: 4.5 - 4.0 | AVERAGE: 3.9 - 2.1 | UNSATISFACTORY: 1.4 – 1

I can summarily conclude that the trainee's OVERALL PERFORMANCE is: __________

RECOMMENDATIONS / COMMENTS:
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________

Engr. King Harry C. Motia July 30, 2019

Signature Over Printed Name of the Date
On–Site Supervisor

Conforme:
Ver H. Lumutan, Jr. July 30, 2019
Trainee Date
 COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING AND COMPUTER TECHNOLOGY
TRAINEE’S EVALUATION FORM

Name of the Trainee: NAMBIO, VINCE JILMER C. Date: July 30, 2019
Period of Assignment: June 13, 2019– July 23, 2019 Department: Network Field Services
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TO THE ON–SITE SUPERVISOR: Please encircle the appropriate quantitative equivalent corresponding to
your assessment of your On-the-Job Trainee.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. QUALITY OF WORK
5 - Excellent 4 - Above Average 3 - Average 2 - Below Average 1 - Unreliable
B. QUANTITY OF WORK
5 - Exceptionally productive 4 - Very productive 3 - Average productive
2 - Rather slow to produce output 1 - Very slow to produce output
C. RELATION WITH OTHERS
5 - Exceptionally accepted 4 - Works well with others 3 - Gets along satisfactorily
2 - Has some difficulty working with others 1 - Works very poorly with others
D. ATTITUDE TOWARDS WORK
5 - Exceptionally enthusiastic 4 - Shows initiative in his/her work 3 - Average in diligence
2 - Somewhat indifferent 1 - Definitely not interested
E. DEPENDABILITY
5 - Excellent 4 - Above Average 3 - Average 2 - Below Average 1 – Unreliable
F. ABILITY TO LEARN
5 - Exceptionally fast learner 4 - Learns rapidly 3 - Average learner
2 - Rather slow to learn 1 - Very slow to learn
G. ATTENDANCE
5 - Exceptional 4 - Keeps good attendance record 3 - Acceptable working attendance
2 - Needs improvement 1 - Cannot meet working schedule
H. JUDGMENT
5 - Exceptionally matured 4 - Above average in making decision 3 - Usually makes the right decision
2 - Often uses poor judgment 1 - Consistently uses bad judgment

PERFORMANCE AVERAGE: ________

QUALITATIVE EQUIVALENT:
OUTSTANDING: 5.0 - 4.6 | BELOW AVERAGE: 2.0 - 1.5 | ABOVE AVERAGE: 4.5 - 4.0 | AVERAGE: 3.9 - 2.1 | UNSATISFACTORY: 1.4 – 1

I can summarily conclude that the trainee's OVERALL PERFORMANCE is: __________

RECOMMENDATIONS / COMMENTS:
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________

Engr. King Harry C. Motia July 30, 2019

Signature Over Printed Name of the Date
On–Site Supervisor

Conforme:
Vince Jilmer C. Nambio July 30, 2019
Trainee Date
 COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING AND COMPUTER TECHNOLOGY
TRAINEE’S EVALUATION FORM

Name of the Trainee: SANTIAGO, LLOYD AVERY M. Date: July 30, 2019
Period of Assignment: June 10, 2019– July 19, 2019 Department: Network Field Services
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TO THE ON–SITE SUPERVISOR: Please encircle the appropriate quantitative equivalent corresponding to
your assessment of your On-the-Job Trainee.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. QUALITY OF WORK
5 - Excellent 4 - Above Average 3 - Average 2 - Below Average 1 - Unreliable
B. QUANTITY OF WORK
5 - Exceptionally productive 4 - Very productive 3 - Average productive
2 - Rather slow to produce output 1 - Very slow to produce output
C. RELATION WITH OTHERS
5 - Exceptionally accepted 4 - Works well with others 3 - Gets along satisfactorily
2 - Has some difficulty working with others 1 - Works very poorly with others
D. ATTITUDE TOWARDS WORK
5 - Exceptionally enthusiastic 4 - Shows initiative in his/her work 3 - Average in diligence
2 - Somewhat indifferent 1 - Definitely not interested
E. DEPENDABILITY
5 - Excellent 4 - Above Average 3 - Average 2 - Below Average 1 – Unreliable
F. ABILITY TO LEARN
5 - Exceptionally fast learner 4 - Learns rapidly 3 - Average learner
2 - Rather slow to learn 1 - Very slow to learn
G. ATTENDANCE
5 - Exceptional 4 - Keeps good attendance record 3 - Acceptable working attendance
2 - Needs improvement 1 - Cannot meet working schedule
H. JUDGMENT
5 - Exceptionally matured 4 - Above average in making decision 3 - Usually makes the right decision
2 - Often uses poor judgment 1 - Consistently uses bad judgment

PERFORMANCE AVERAGE: ________

QUALITATIVE EQUIVALENT:
OUTSTANDING: 5.0 - 4.6 | BELOW AVERAGE: 2.0 - 1.5 | ABOVE AVERAGE: 4.5 - 4.0 | AVERAGE: 3.9 - 2.1 | UNSATISFACTORY: 1.4 – 1

I can summarily conclude that the trainee's OVERALL PERFORMANCE is: __________

RECOMMENDATIONS / COMMENTS:
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________

Engr. King Harry C. Motia July 30, 2019

Signature Over Printed Name of the Date
On–Site Supervisor

Conforme:
Lloyd Avery M. Santiago July 30, 2019
Trainee Date