Procedure for Evaluating

Outputs of
Instructional Coaches in
LDM 2 Course
PROCEDURE FOR SUBMITTING
LDM2 EVALUATION FORMS OF INSTRUCTIONAL COACHES

Instructional
National/Regional LDM2 Coach - Evaluator RO LDM PMT - Form Manager
Coaches

Collect all Validate and

Monitor Set the system
required outputs. consolidate all
Submission and deadline Download
Submit the required Provide feedback; Form 4 (ICs)
of Outputs Download of submission Form 4
Module Outputs return to files from
by keeping a Form 3 of Form 3 (ICs)
participant for SDOs using
record of Files.
refinement, if Form 7
submission
necessary.

Refer to Form 3
Rate outputs
to get the link to Submit
using Form 3, Upload Form 4 (ICs) in Prepare for issuance of
the submission Form 3 to
guide questions, the Regional Drive certificates
folder from RO RO LDM
and rubric.
LDM Form PMT.
Manager
I. Roles and Responsibilities
The roles and responsibilities of the concerned personnel in the evaluation of course
outputs are detailed in Table 1 below.

Table 1. Roles and Responsibilities in the Evaluation of Training Outputs

Role Personnel Concerned
Regional Supervisors
Assigned Regional/National CO Specialists
LDM2 Coach through the - NEAP
RFAT - OUCI Bureaus and Offices
Education Forum Partners
Responsibilities
1. Collect outputs of Instructional Coaches
assigned to them
2. Evaluate the outputs following the
evaluation procedures (use of
evaluation rubric, use of electronic
forms, etc.)
3. Submit Form 3: Individual Report of
LDM2 Rating of Instructional Coaches
to the LDM Focal Person in the SDO
4. Assist Instructional coach in the
validation of outputs
5. Provide feedback to LAC members’
outputs.
I. Roles and Responsibilities

Table 1. Roles and Responsibilities in the Evaluation of Training Outputs

Role Personnel Concerned Responsibilities

1. Coordinate with the LDM2 Coaches regarding the
method of submission for Form 3 Files
2. Consolidate Form 3 results by accomplishing Form 4:
Regional LDM Program Regional Summary of LDM2 Completers
Management Team (Instructional Coaches)
3. Validate, if needed, the LDM2 outputs of participants
4. Issue certificate of participation signed by the NEAP
Director
II. Instructions to Evaluators

1. Collect from the participants all the required module outputs from the participants as
summarized in table below. Provide feedback; return to participants for refinement, if
necessary. Electronic submission is preferred due to restrictions in travel and face-
to-face interaction. Deadline for submission maybe set by the Region. It is
recommended that participants keep their own copies of the outputs to be organized into
a portfolio at the end of the training period for future use and reference.
Table 2. Summary of Module Requirements for LDM2 Coaches

Modules Required Outputs Weight

PRE-IMPLEMENTATION (THEORETICAL PART) 100%

No outputs for submission

1 – Course Introduction/
***LAC Profile output requirement has been integrated to LAC
Getting Started
session report of Module 3A
II. Instructions to Evaluators

Modules Required Outputs Weight

PRE-IMPLEMENTATION (THEORETICAL PART) 100%

2 – Planning for the • List of Assigned Schools + LAC Roles Organizers of 5%

Implementation of Teachers
LDM2 for Teachers Guide Questions for Evaluators:
1. Were the information complete and clear?

3A – Lesson Design and • (1) List of targeted learning interventions + Learning 15%
Assessment in the tasks for DL + Assessment Methods in DL
Modalities Guide Questions for Evaluators:
1. Were the possible outcomes considered in coming up with
the learning interventions?
2. Were the learning tasks reasonable for the distance
leaning modality and aligned to the objectives of the
lesson?
3. Were the assessment methods able to measure learners’
progress in the distance learning modality?
II. Instructions to Evaluators

Modules Required Outputs Weight

PRE-IMPLEMENTATION (THEORETICAL PART) 100%

3A – Lesson Design and • (2) Weekly Home Learning Plan for 1 Subject 15%
Assessment in the Guide Questions for Evaluators:
Modalities 1. Was the purpose of the plan clearly identified?
2. Was the identified chosen mode of delivery appropriate
and relevant?
3. Was there a method of communication to parents included
in the plan?
II. Instructions to Evaluators
Modules Required Outputs Weight

PRE-IMPLEMENTATION (THEORETICAL PART) 100%

3A – Lesson Design and • (3) Individual Learning Monitoring Plan for student 15%
Assessment in the behind on learning tasks
Modalities
Guide Questions for Evaluators:
1. Were learners’ needs and intervention strategies clearly
identified?
2. Did the plan have clear procedures for monitoring
progress?
3. Were the allocation of time in developing the plans, as
well as reviewing the progress established?

• ***LAC Profile (5%)

• LAC Engagement Report
• LAC Session Report

(Optional: if LAC was not conducted, use rating in

Assessment Methods in DL)
II. Instructions to Evaluators

Modules Required Outputs Weight

PRE-IMPLEMENTATION (THEORETICAL PART) 100%

3B – Learning Resources • (1) Accomplished LR Concerns of Schools + 10%

Accomplished LR Needs of Schools
Guide Questions for Evaluators:
1. Was the data gathered for all of the schools assigned to
the Instructional Coaches?
2. Did the gathered data reflect the needs and concerns of
the schools?
• (2) LR Assessment with Reflections 10%
Guide Questions for Evaluators:
1. Did the accomplished material accurately assess LRs
based on the requirements that need to be assessed?
2. Did the reflection show understanding of the challenges in
gathering LRs in teaching in the LDMs?
3. Did the reflection show the Coaches’ insights on how to
assist teachers in gathering these LRs?
II. Instructions to Evaluators

Modules Required Outputs Weight

PRE-IMPLEMENTATION (THEORETICAL PART) 100%

4 – Teaching and Coaching • TA Coaching Plan for Effective LDM2 Learning of
in Learning LDMs
25%
Teachers + TA Activities Documents
Guide Questions for Evaluators:
1. Did the coaching plan lay out a reasonable plan of
providing technical assistance to teachers in the LDMs?
2. Did the coaching plan show an understanding of the
various challenges that schools have to face in teaching
in the LDMs?
3. Were the documented activities aligned with the TA
interventions outlined in the coaching plan?
II. Instructions to Evaluators

Modules Required Outputs Weight

LDM IMPLEMENTATION (PRACTICUM PART) 100%

5 – Practicum Module – 1.) List of evidences based on Professional Standards. TBA

Building My Technical
Assistance Provision for
LDM Implementation
Portfolio

Note: The corresponding weight per output is based on the extent, difficulty and importance of the task/ouput, and PPSS
indicators it addresses.
II. Instructions to Evaluators

2. Monitor submission of outputs by keeping a record of submission. You may do this

manually or use an online platform such as Google Classroom where participants can
submit their requirements. The National/Regional LDM2 Coaches may facilitate the
collection of outputs.

3. Download LDM 2 Form 3 through bit.ly/LDM2eval4coaches. A guide on how to use

them is embedded in the form.
Annex 1 : LDM 2 Form 3A – Individual Report of LDM2 Rating for Coaches and
Annex 2 : LDM 2 Form 3B – Summary of LDM 2 Completers for Coaches

4. Evaluate and rate the outputs using the rubric below. Record the ratings in Form 3. If
there are two (2) or more evaluators, they need to confer and arrive at a rating for each
output.
II. Instructions to Evaluators
Table 3. Evaluation Rubric for Coaches’ Outputs
Very
Outstanding Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Poor
Criteria Satisfactory
(5) (3) (2) (1)
(4)
Demonstration The outputs The outputs The outputs The outputs The outputs have
Understanding of demonstrate clear demonstrate clear demonstrate some demonstrate more than 3 serious
and complete understanding of the understanding of the minimal errors that reflect
the LDM Training understanding of the concepts, principles concepts and understanding of the misunderstanding of
Materials/Inputs concepts, principles and tasks. principles with one concepts and the concepts,
and tasks. major principles with 2-3 principles, and
50% The outputs meet misunderstanding of major tasks.
The outputs must
three (3) out of four the concepts, misunderstanding of
also meet the
indicators. principles and tasks. the concepts, None of the
following indicators:
principles and tasks. indicators was met.
a. Convey
The outputs meet
excellent
two (2) of the four The outputs meet
understanding of
indicators. one (1) of the three
key concepts
indicators.
and processes
in each LDM
b. Show integration
of the LDM
inputs through
evidence-based
outputs
II. Instructions to Evaluators
Table 3. Evaluation Rubric for Outputs of LAC Leaders
Very
Outstanding Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Poor
Criteria Satisfactory
(5) (3) (2) (1)
(4)
c. Demonstrate
novel
connections/idea
s/perspectives on
the LDMs
d. The information
required from
each output is
complete and
concisely
presented
II. Instructions to Evaluators
Table 3. Evaluation Rubric for Outputs of LAC Leaders
Very
Outstanding Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Poor
Criteria Satisfactory
(5) (3) (2) (1)
(4)
Demonstration of The outputs The outputs The outputs The outputs The outputs do not
Understanding of demonstrate a clear demonstrate clear demonstrate fair demonstrate fair show any attempts
understanding of understanding of understanding of understanding of to use data, i.e. no
One’s Context school and school and school and school and consultation was
vis-à-vis LDM community context community context community context community context; made to understand
Implementation through careful with reference to with reference to reference to data I the school and
analysis and data in many parts data in some parts also minimal, i.e. community context
30% utilization of data in of the output/s, i.e. of the output, i.e. only teaching and in relation to LDM
most parts of the only teaching & non- only teaching & non- non-teaching implementation.
output, i.e. all teaching personnel, teaching personnel personnel were
stakeholders parents and along with the consulted.
(teaching and non- learners were learners were
teaching personnel, consulted. consulted.
parents, community
learners) were
consulted.
II. Instructions to Evaluators
Table 3. Evaluation Rubric for Outputs of LAC Leaders
Very
Outstanding Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Poor
Criteria Satisfactory
(5) (3) (2) (1)
(4)
Language and The ideas are The ideas are The ideas are The ideas are The ideas are
Overall expressed in clear, expressed in clear expressed well but expressed using rumbled and difficult
coherent and language with very with incoherence in very basic words to understand;
Presentation of appropriately- minimal errors in some areas as well and structure with Errors in structure
the Output worded language structure and/or as a few errors in incoherence in and writing
with no errors in writing conventions. structure and/or many areas and conventions are
15% structures and/or writing conventions. several errors in almost everywhere
writing conventions. structure and/or in the output.
writing conventions.

Timeliness of The output/s is/are The output/s is/are The output/s is/are The output/s is/are The output/s is/are
submitted more than submitted 1 to 2 submitted on the submitted 1-3 days submitted more than
Submission 3 days ahead of days before the deadline. after the deadline. 3 days after the
schedule. schedule. deadline.
5%
II. Instructions to Evaluators

5. To determine the rating of each output, use the following procedure (See example):
a. assign a rating from a scale of 1-5 – with 5 as the highest – for each criterion.
i. If the group opted NOT to conduct a LAC session, use the rating of the
reflection or TA plan to get the rating of the LAC session report.
b. Multiply the rating by the weight of the criterion.
c. Add all the weighted ratings for each of the criteria to get the total rating for the
output.
II. Instructions to Evaluators

Table 4. Sample Computation of Ratings

Language
Understand
Understan and Overall Descriptive
ing of the Rating Weight
Out ding of the Presentatio Timeliness Weighted Rating
LDM per (sample
put Context n of the (5%) Rating (per
Materials Output only)
(30%) Output output)
(50%)
(15%)
Out 4 x 50% = 2.0 4 x 30% = 1.2 5 x 15% = 0.75 5 x 5% = 0.25 4.20 40% 4.20 x 40% Very Sat
put = 1.68
1
Out 4 x 50% = 2.0 5 x 30% = 1.5 4 x 15% = 0.6 5 x 5% = 0.25 4.35 60% 4.35 x 60% Very Sat
put = 2.61
2
FINAL RATING 4.29 Very Sat
II. Instructions to Evaluators

Table 5. Descriptive Rating

Rating Descriptive Rating

4.50 – 5.00 Outstanding

3.50 – 4.499 Very Satisfactory

2.50 – 3.499 Satisfactory

1.50 – 2.499 Unsatisfactory

1.00 – 1.499 Poor

II. Instructions to Evaluators

6. After the evaluation of outputs, provide constructive feedback on the outputs of your
coaches. Depending on their rating and the nature of your feedback, you may return the
output to your participant for refinement, if necessary. The LDM2 Course for Instructional
Coaches is a space to improve the quality of their teaching in the modalities. You may
use the evaluation period as an opportunity to prepare teachers for the coming school
year by providing constructive feedback, correcting misconceptions, and providing for
their specific learning needs based on their individual rating results. You may indicate
your constructive comments to the participants in the “Remarks” portion of their individual
rating sheets.
7. Once all ratings are in, coordinate with your Instructional Coach regarding the deadline
of submission of Form 3.
II. Instructions to Evaluators

8. There will be an additional material that will cover the submission and evaluation of the
LDM implementation portfolio, and the assignment of NEAP PD credit units for each part
of the course. LDM coaches are expected to provide technical assistance to LAC leaders
as they build their LDM implementation portfolio throughout the school year.

Note: All evaluation forms are confidential. NO ENTRY in the LDM2 evaluation forms can be
divulged with anyone except the concerned participant and appropriate authorities for
purposes of evaluation, validation, and issuance of certificates.
III. Instructions to Regional LDM Program Management Team – Evaluation Form
Managers

1. NEAP-R and QAD: Set the system and deadline of submission of Form 3 from SDOs.
Assist LDM 2 Coaches.
2. QAD: Validate and consolidate all LDM 2 Form 6 files/summaries from
Regional/National LDM 2 coaches using Form 4: Regional Summary of LDM 2
Completers (Instructional Coaches) for the issuance of certificates. Conduct
validation in coordination with SDO LDM Program Management Team and other
Instructional Coaches.
3. NEAP-R: Upload all Form 4 files in the regional folder. Organize files into SDO folders.
Links to the SDO folders are in LDM2 Contact Details of LDM Evaluation Form
Managers.
4. NEAP-R: Prepare certificates for issuance based on the validated list from the QAD.
IV. Issuance of Certificate

A. CERTIFICATE OF PARTICIPATION

1. A participant gets a Certificate of Participation when he or she gets an overall

descriptive rating of at least Satisfactory or a final rating equivalent to or higher than
2.500 for Part I / Theoretical Part (Module 1-4).
2. If a participant gets a rating below Satisfactory, the LDM 2 coach assigned to the
participant may conduct a validation. Validation may be done by looking at the outputs
or interviewing the participant and his or her colleagues, as may be deemed necessary.
3. Once validation and agreement have been made by the RO, CO and external partner
coaches, NEAP-R facilitates the issuance of the Certificate of Participation signed by
the Regional Director.
IV. Issuance of Certificate

B. CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION

1. Certificate of Completion is awarded to a participant who gets an overall descriptive

rating of at least Satisfactory or a final rating equivalent to or higher than 2.500 for Part
II / LDM Implementation portfolio (practicum part).
2. If a participant gets a rating below Satisfactory, the LDM 2 coach assigned to the
participant may conduct a validation. Validation may be done by looking at the outputs
or interviewing the participant and his or her colleagues, as may be deemed necessary.
3. Once validation and agreement have been made by the RO, CO and external partner
coaches, NEAP-R facilitates the issuance of the Certificate of Completion signed by the
Regional Director.
Annex 1. LDM2 Form 3A – Individual Report of LDM2 Rating of Coaches
Annex 2. LDM1 Form 3B – Summary of LDM2 Ratings of Coaches
Annex 3. LDM1 Form 4 – Regional Summary of LDM2 Completers (Ins. Coaches)
 LDM2
Individual Report of Ratings of Instructional FORMS used
LDM2 Form 3A Coach by
Provides the partial and final numerical and descriptive ratings an
Instructional Coach-participant gets for the outputs he/she submitted
LDM2
Summary of Ratings of Instructional Coach
LDM2 Form 3B Provides the final numerical and descriptive ratings all Instructional Coach- Coach
participants get for the outputs they submitted
thru
RFTAT

bit.ly/LDM2eval4coaches

Evaluation Procedure
 LDM2
Regional/Division Summary of LDM2 FORMS for
LDM2 Form 4
Completers
Provides the list of participants who have successfully completed the course
and will be receiving certificates of participation and/or completion. LDM2
RO/SDO
Form 4 features 3 kinds of Consolidation forms:
LDM
1. Division Summary of LDM2 Teacher PMTs -
Completers (separated into Districts)
2. Division Summary of LDM2 LAC Leader Form
Completers
3. Regional Summary of Instructional Coach Managers
Completers