This form is to be accomplished by the School LAC leader (MT, HT, or Senior Teacher).

Read this guide before using LDM Forms 3.1AP and 3.2BP.

1. Download this editable form by opening the file and clicking on the down arrow icon. Do not open it as Google Sh

2. Open Form 3.2BP Summary of Ratings of School Heads and enter the required data in the yellow cell. Data

3. Open Form 3.2AP School Head N / 3.2AP SH N, and enter the remaining required data in the Participant's Pro

4. Open/Get your copy of the LDM2 practicum portfolio submitted by school heads. Rate it according to the evalu
Management Team, if necessary.
5a. Input the score for each criterion by clicking the down arrow icon in the yellow cell. You may also directly ent
to white once a value has been assigned. You may add qualitative feedback in the Remarks section to substantiate

5b. To change the score, click on Delete or Backspace, then do 5a again.

6. You may navigate across the different tabs by clicking the Summary of Ratings icon or the School Head Num

8.
7. Once all ratings are in, rename and save this form, then submit it to the SDO LDM Program Management Team. Coordinate
Enter the required data in the yellow cell ONLY. Do not rename the tabs.
Follow this file name format: SDO Name_LDMForm4P_LAC Leader 1_Last Name
This document is confidential. NO ENTRY in the LDM1P evaluation forms can be divulged with anyo
authorities for purposes of evaluation, validation and certification of participation/completion.
 ←Guide

Form 3.2P_LDM Practicum Portfolio - Summary of LDM2 Ratings of Teachers

LAC Leader Dina S. Fernandez
Division Nueva Ecija
Region III
Contact Details 9959816451
LDM Coach Arnold D. DE Castro,PhD.

PART II LDM Implementation/ Practicum Portfolio

SH School Name Name Numerical Rating Descriptive Rating PD Credit Units
'3.2A T 1'!A1 Tibag Elementary SchAlimar E. Aquino 4.30 Very Satisfactory Earned PD
'3.2A T 2'!A1 Tibag Elementary SchGrace Ann N. Antonio 4.30 Very Satisfactory credit units will
'3.2A T 3'!A1 Tibag Elementary SchMerceditha C. Domingo 4.35 Very Satisfactory be subjected to
'3.2A T 4'!A1 Tibag Elementary SchRosanna D. Estrada 4.70 Oustanding the PD credit
units banking
'3.2A T 5'!A1 Tibag Elementary SchDina S. Fernandez 4.70 Oustanding
mechanism of
'3.2A T 6'!A1 0 0 0.00 N/A DepEd NEAP
'3.2A T 7'!A1 0 0 0.00 N/A as stated in DO
'3.2A T 8'!A1 0 0 0.00 N/A 20, s.2020.
'3.2A T 9'!A1 0 0 0.00 N/A
'3.2A TT 10'!A1 0 0 0.00 N/A
'3.2A T 11'!A1 0 0 0.00 N/A
'3.2A T 12'!A1 0 0 0.00 N/A
'3.2A T 13'!A1 0 0 0.00 N/A
'3.2A T 14'!A1 0 0 0.00 N/A
'3.2A T 15'!A1 0 0 0.00 N/A
←Summary of
Ratings Form 3.2AP_LDM2 Practicum Portfolio - Individual Rep
←Guide

PARTICIPANT'S PROFILE
Teacher: Alimar E. Aquino Division:
School: Tibag Elementary School Region:
Email Address: alima.aquino002@deped.gov.ph LAC Leader:
Contact Number: 9637597701 LDM Coach:

PART II - LDM IMPLE

Demonstration of Progress Quality of Reflection
of LDM Implementation
30% 25%
Partial Rating
5 4
5 - Excellent The outputs clearly and Reflection describes the
adequately captured the progress experience in the LDM
4 - Very Satisfactory The
of theoutputs adequately
implementation of captured
the LDM, Reflection describes
implementation, shows thein-depth
the progress
showing of the
innovations implementation
that experience
analysis and in the LDM
synthesis, and
3 - Satisfactory The
of outputs reflect to
the LDMto its smooth a big extent Reflection describes
implementation, shows thesome
contribute
the progress of the LDM excellently
experience relates
and it to the
relates
2 - Marginal The outputs reflect to a limited analysis, and
Reflection describes it to thetoto the
relates the them
implementation professional
professional standards
standards and
and to
extent the progress of the LDM experience
professional
personal inand
thepersonal
developmentimplementation
goals
1 - Unsatisfactory The outputs do not show the
implementation Reflection
professional
of the LDM describes
and
with experience
personal
limited attempt toin
progress of the LDM development
the goals of the
relate it to the professionalLDM
implementation
development goals
implementation with no attempt
standards to relate it to the
and personal
professional
development goalsstandards and
personal development goals
Weighted Rating 1.500 1.000

Final Rating (FR) 4.300

Description of FR Very Satisfactory

Remarks Type feedback here.
(Optional)

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
recog indicators hit 94
total recog indicators 112
PPSH indicators 16
#ERROR!
credit units 13.42857143
- Individual Report of LDM2 Rating of Teachers

PARTICIPANT'S PERFORMANCE
Nueva Ecija Part I Rating (Module-based Outputs)
III Part I Rating Description:
Dina S. Fernandez Part II Rating (Practicum Portfolio)
Arnold D. DE Castro,PhD. Part II Rating Description:

PART II - LDM IMPLEMENTATION / PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO

Demonstration of Language and Overall
Professional Standards Presentation of the Output
20% 15%

4 4
The outputs clearly demonstrate 5 The ideas are expressed in clear,
or more indicators of relevant coherent, and appropriately-
The outputs
strands clearly demonstrate
in professional standards4 The
wordedideas are expressed
language with no in clearin
errors
indicators of relevant strands in language
structure with very minimal errors
The outputs clearly
professional demonstrate 3
standards The
in ideasand/or
structure are writing well but
expressed
and/or writing
indicators of relevant strands in conventions
with incoherence in some areas
The outputs clearly demonstrate conventions
The
professional standards and few errors in structureusing
ideas are expressed and/or
the 2 indicators of relevant strands very
writingbasic words and structure
conventions
The outputs do standards
in professional not demonstrate The ideas are jumbled and
with incoherence in many areas difficult
any indicator in the professional to understand; errors in structure
and several errors in structure
standards and writing
and/or conventions
writing conventions are almost
everywhere in the output

0.800 0.600
 PD Credit Units
4.213 to be determined
Very Satisfactory
4.300 to be determined
Very Satisfactory

Organization of Portfolio Timeliness

5% 5%

5 3
The portfolio is logically organized, The output/s is/are submitted more
is insightful, and offers new than 3 days ahead of the deadline
The portfolioand
perspective is logically
insightsorganized. The output/s is/are submitted 1-2
days before the deadline
The portfolio is generally well- The output/s is/are submitted on
organized with 1-2 items not well the deadline
The portfolio
placed in the has 3-4organization
overall items not The output/s is/are submitted 1-3
well placed in the overall days after the deadline
The portfolio does not follow a
organization The output/s is/are submitted more
logical order than 3 days after the deadline

0.250 0.150
 ←Summary of
Ratings Form 3.2AP_LDM2 Practicum Portfolio - Individual Report of LDM2 Rating of Teacher
←Guide

PARTICIPANT'S PROFILE
Teacher: Grace Ann N. Antonio Division: Nueva Ecija
School: Tibag Elementary School Region: III
Email Address: graceann.antonio@deped.gov.ph LAC Leader: Dina S. Fernandez
Contact Number: 9077532698 LDM Coach: Arnold D. DE Castro,PhD.

PART II - LDM IMPLEMENTATION / PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO

Demonstration of Progress Quality of Reflection Demonstration of
of LDM Implementation Professional Standards
30% 25% 20%
Partial Rating
5 4 4
5 - Excellent The outputs clearly and Reflection describes the The outputs clearly demonstrate 5
adequately captured the progress experience in the LDM or more indicators of relevant
4 - Very Satisfactory The
of theoutputs adequately
implementation of captured
the LDM, Reflection describes
implementation, shows thein-depth The outputs
strands clearly demonstrate
in professional standards4
the progress
showing of the
innovations implementation
that experience
analysis and in the LDM
synthesis, and indicators of relevant strands in
3 - Satisfactory The
of outputs reflect to
the LDMto its smooth a big extent Reflection describes
implementation, shows thesome The outputs clearly
professional demonstrate 3
standards
contribute
the progress of the LDM excellently
experience relates
and it to the
relates
2 - Marginal The outputs reflect to a limited analysis, and
Reflection describes it to thetoto the
relates the them indicators of relevant strands in
The outputs clearly demonstrate
implementation professional
professional standards
standards and
and to professional standards
extent the progress of the LDM experience
professional
personal inand
thepersonal
developmentimplementation
goals the 2 indicators of relevant strands
1 - Unsatisfactory The outputs do not show the
implementation Reflection
professional
of the LDM describes
and
with experience
personal
limited attempt toin The outputs do standards
in professional not demonstrate
progress of the LDM development
the goals of the
relate it to the professionalLDM
implementation
development goals any indicator in the professional
implementation with no attempt
standards to relate it to the
and personal standards
professional
development goalsstandards and
personal development goals
Weighted Rating 1.500 1.000 0.800

Final Rating (FR) 4.300

Description of FR Very Satisfactory

Remarks Type feedback here.
(Optional)
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
recog indicators hit 94
total recog indicators 112
PPSH indicators 16
#ERROR!
credit units 13.42857143
M2 Rating of Teachers

PARTICIPANT'S PERFORMANCE PD Credit Units

Part I Rating (Module-based Outputs) 4.400 to be determined
Part I Rating Description: Very Satisfactory
Part II Rating (Practicum Portfolio) 4.300 to be determined
Part II Rating Description: Very Satisfactory

/ PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO
Language and Overall Organization of Portfolio Timeliness
Presentation of the Output
15% 5% 5%

4 5 3
The ideas are expressed in clear, The portfolio is logically organized, The output/s is/are submitted more
coherent, and appropriately- is insightful, and offers new than 3 days ahead of the deadline
The
wordedideas are expressed
language with no in clearin
errors The portfolioand
perspective is logically
insightsorganized. The output/s is/are submitted 1-2
language
structure with very minimal errors days before the deadline
The
in ideasand/or
structure are writing well but
expressed
and/or writing The portfolio is generally well- The output/s is/are submitted on
conventions
with incoherence in some areas organized with 1-2 items not well the deadline
conventions
The
and few errors in structureusing
ideas are expressed and/or The portfolio
placed in the has 3-4organization
overall items not The output/s is/are submitted 1-3
very
writingbasic words and structure
conventions well placed in the overall days after the deadline
The ideas are jumbled and
with incoherence in many areas difficult The portfolio does not follow a
organization The output/s is/are submitted more
to understand; errors in structure
and several errors in structure logical order than 3 days after the deadline
and writing
and/or conventions
writing conventions are almost
everywhere in the output

0.600 0.250 0.150

 ←Summary of
Ratings Form 3.2AP_LDM2 Practicum Portfolio - Individual Report of LDM2 Rating of Teacher
←Guide

PARTICIPANT'S PROFILE
Teacher: Merceditha C. Domingo Division: Nueva Ecija
School: Tibag Elementary School Region: III
Email Address: merceditha.domingo@deped.gov.ph LAC Leader: Dina S. Fernandez
Contact Number: 977116146 LDM Coach: Arnold D. DE Castro,PhD.

PART II - LDM IMPLEMENTATION / PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO

Demonstration of Progress Quality of Reflection Demonstration of
of LDM Implementation Professional Standards
30% 25% 20%
Partial Rating
5 4 4
5 - Excellent The outputs clearly and Reflection describes the The outputs clearly demonstrate 5
adequately captured the progress experience in the LDM or more indicators of relevant
4 - Very Satisfactory The
of theoutputs adequately
implementation of captured
the LDM, Reflection describes
implementation, shows thein-depth The outputs
strands clearly demonstrate
in professional standards4
the progress
showing of the
innovations implementation
that experience
analysis and in the LDM
synthesis, and indicators of relevant strands in
3 - Satisfactory The
of outputs reflect to
the LDMto its smooth a big extent Reflection describes
implementation, shows thesome The outputs clearly
professional demonstrate 3
standards
contribute
the progress of the LDM excellently
experience relates
and it to the
relates
2 - Marginal The outputs reflect to a limited analysis, and
Reflection describes it to thetoto the
relates the them indicators of relevant strands in
The outputs clearly demonstrate
implementation professional
professional standards
standards and
and to professional standards
extent the progress of the LDM experience
professional
personal inand
thepersonal
developmentimplementation
goals the 2 indicators of relevant strands
1 - Unsatisfactory The outputs do not show the
implementation Reflection
professional
of the LDM describes
and
with experience
personal
limited attempt toin The outputs do standards
in professional not demonstrate
progress of the LDM development
the goals of the
relate it to the professionalLDM
implementation
development goals any indicator in the professional
implementation with no attempt
standards to relate it to the
and personal standards
professional
development goalsstandards and
personal development goals
Weighted Rating 1.500 1.000 0.800

Final Rating (FR) 4.350

Description of FR Very Satisfactory

Remarks Type feedback here.
(Optional)
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
recog indicators hit 94
total recog indicators 112
PPSH indicators 16
#ERROR!
credit units 13.42857143
M2 Rating of Teachers

PARTICIPANT'S PERFORMANCE PD Credit Units

Part I Rating (Module-based Outputs) 4.308 to be determined
Part I Rating Description: Very Satisfactory
Part II Rating (Practicum Portfolio) 4.350 to be determined
Part II Rating Description: Very Satisfactory

/ PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO
Language and Overall Organization of Portfolio Timeliness
Presentation of the Output
15% 5% 5%

4 5 4
The ideas are expressed in clear, The portfolio is logically organized, The output/s is/are submitted more
coherent, and appropriately- is insightful, and offers new than 3 days ahead of the deadline
The
wordedideas are expressed
language with no in clearin
errors The portfolioand
perspective is logically
insightsorganized. The output/s is/are submitted 1-2
language
structure with very minimal errors days before the deadline
The
in ideasand/or
structure are writing well but
expressed
and/or writing The portfolio is generally well- The output/s is/are submitted on
conventions
with incoherence in some areas organized with 1-2 items not well the deadline
conventions
The
and few errors in structureusing
ideas are expressed and/or The portfolio
placed in the has 3-4organization
overall items not The output/s is/are submitted 1-3
very
writingbasic words and structure
conventions well placed in the overall days after the deadline
The ideas are jumbled and
with incoherence in many areas difficult The portfolio does not follow a
organization The output/s is/are submitted more
to understand; errors in structure
and several errors in structure logical order than 3 days after the deadline
and writing
and/or conventions
writing conventions are almost
everywhere in the output

0.600 0.250 0.200

 ←Summary of
Ratings Form 3.2AP_LDM2 Practicum Portfolio - Individual Report of LDM2 Rating of Teacher
←Guide

PARTICIPANT'S PROFILE
Teacher: Rosanna D. Estrada Division: Nueva Ecija
School: Tibag Elementary School Region: III
Email Address: rosanna.dacayo @deped.gov.ph LAC Leader: Dina S. Fernandez
Contact Number: 9061152986 LDM Coach: Arnold D. DE Castro,PhD.

PART II - LDM IMPLEMENTATION / PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO

Demonstration of Progress Quality of Reflection Demonstration of
of LDM Implementation Professional Standards
30% 25% 20%
Partial Rating
5 4 5
5 - Excellent The outputs clearly and Reflection describes the The outputs clearly demonstrate 5
adequately captured the progress experience in the LDM or more indicators of relevant
4 - Very Satisfactory The
of theoutputs adequately
implementation of captured
the LDM, Reflection describes
implementation, shows thein-depth The outputs
strands clearly demonstrate
in professional standards4
the progress
showing of the
innovations implementation
that experience
analysis and in the LDM
synthesis, and indicators of relevant strands in
3 - Satisfactory The
of outputs reflect to
the LDMto its smooth a big extent Reflection describes
implementation, shows thesome The outputs clearly
professional demonstrate 3
standards
contribute
the progress of the LDM excellently
experience relates
and it to the
relates
2 - Marginal The outputs reflect to a limited analysis, and
Reflection describes it to thetoto the
relates the them indicators of relevant strands in
The outputs clearly demonstrate
implementation professional
professional standards
standards and
and to professional standards
extent the progress of the LDM experience
professional
personal inand
thepersonal
developmentimplementation
goals the 2 indicators of relevant strands
1 - Unsatisfactory The outputs do not show the
implementation Reflection
professional
of the LDM describes
and
with experience
personal
limited attempt toin The outputs do standards
in professional not demonstrate
progress of the LDM development
the goals of the
relate it to the professionalLDM
implementation
development goals any indicator in the professional
implementation with no attempt
standards to relate it to the
and personal standards
professional
development goalsstandards and
personal development goals
Weighted Rating 1.500 1.000 1.000

Final Rating (FR) 4.700

Description of FR Oustanding
Remarks Type feedback here.
(Optional)
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
recog indicators hit 94
total recog indicators 112
PPSH indicators 16
#ERROR!
credit units 13.42857143
M2 Rating of Teachers

PARTICIPANT'S PERFORMANCE PD Credit Units

Part I Rating (Module-based Outputs) 4.478 to be determined
Part I Rating Description: Very Satisfactory
Part II Rating (Practicum Portfolio) 4.700 to be determined
Part II Rating Description: Oustanding

/ PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO
Language and Overall Organization of Portfolio Timeliness
Presentation of the Output
15% 5% 5%

5 5 4
The ideas are expressed in clear, The portfolio is logically organized, The output/s is/are submitted more
coherent, and appropriately- is insightful, and offers new than 3 days ahead of the deadline
The
wordedideas are expressed
language with no in clearin
errors The portfolioand
perspective is logically
insightsorganized. The output/s is/are submitted 1-2
language
structure with very minimal errors days before the deadline
The
in ideasand/or
structure are writing well but
expressed
and/or writing The portfolio is generally well- The output/s is/are submitted on
conventions
with incoherence in some areas organized with 1-2 items not well the deadline
conventions
The
and few errors in structureusing
ideas are expressed and/or The portfolio
placed in the has 3-4organization
overall items not The output/s is/are submitted 1-3
very
writingbasic words and structure
conventions well placed in the overall days after the deadline
The ideas are jumbled and
with incoherence in many areas difficult The portfolio does not follow a
organization The output/s is/are submitted more
to understand; errors in structure
and several errors in structure logical order than 3 days after the deadline
and writing
and/or conventions
writing conventions are almost
everywhere in the output

0.750 0.250 0.200

←Summary of
Ratings Form 3.2AP_LDM2 Practicum Portfolio - Individual Report of LDM2 Rating of Teacher
←Guide

PARTICIPANT'S PROFILE
Teacher: Dina S. Fernandez Division: Nueva Ecija
School: Tibag Elementary School Region: III
Email Address: dina.fernandez001@deped.gov.ph LAC Leader: Dina S. Fernandez
Contact Number: 9959816451 LDM Coach: Arnold D. DE Castro,PhD.

PART II - LDM IMPLEMENTATION / PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO

Demonstration of Progress Quality of Reflection Demonstration of
of LDM Implementation Professional Standards
30% 25% 20%
Partial Rating
5 4 5
5 - Excellent The outputs clearly and Reflection describes the The outputs clearly demonstrate 5
adequately captured the progress experience in the LDM or more indicators of relevant
4 - Very Satisfactory The
of theoutputs adequately
implementation of captured
the LDM, Reflection describes
implementation, shows thein-depth The outputs
strands clearly demonstrate
in professional standards4
the progress
showing of the
innovations implementation
that experience
analysis and in the LDM
synthesis, and indicators of relevant strands in
3 - Satisfactory The
of outputs reflect to
the LDMto its smooth a big extent Reflection describes
implementation, shows thesome The outputs clearly
professional demonstrate 3
standards
contribute
the progress of the LDM excellently
experience relates
and it to the
relates
2 - Marginal The outputs reflect to a limited analysis, and
Reflection describes it to thetoto the
relates the them indicators of relevant strands in
The outputs clearly demonstrate
implementation professional
professional standards
standards and
and to professional standards
extent the progress of the LDM experience
professional
personal inand
thepersonal
developmentimplementation
goals the 2 indicators of relevant strands
1 - Unsatisfactory The outputs do not show the
implementation Reflection
professional
of the LDM describes
and
with experience
personal
limited attempt toin The outputs do standards
in professional not demonstrate
progress of the LDM development
the goals of the
relate it to the professionalLDM
implementation
development goals any indicator in the professional
implementation with no attempt
standards to relate it to the
and personal standards
professional
development goalsstandards and
personal development goals
Weighted Rating 1.500 1.000 1.000

Final Rating (FR) 4.700

Description of FR Oustanding
Remarks Type feedback here.
(Optional)
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
recog indicators hit 94
total recog indicators 112
PPSH indicators 16
#ERROR!
credit units 13.42857143
M2 Rating of Teachers

PARTICIPANT'S PERFORMANCE PD Credit Units

Part I Rating (Module-based Outputs) 4.478 to be determined
Part I Rating Description: Very Satisfactory
Part II Rating (Practicum Portfolio) 4.700 to be determined
Part II Rating Description: Oustanding

/ PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO
Language and Overall Organization of Portfolio Timeliness
Presentation of the Output
15% 5% 5%

5 5 4
The ideas are expressed in clear, The portfolio is logically organized, The output/s is/are submitted more
coherent, and appropriately- is insightful, and offers new than 3 days ahead of the deadline
The
wordedideas are expressed
language with no in clearin
errors The portfolioand
perspective is logically
insightsorganized. The output/s is/are submitted 1-2
language
structure with very minimal errors days before the deadline
The
in ideasand/or
structure are writing well but
expressed
and/or writing The portfolio is generally well- The output/s is/are submitted on
conventions
with incoherence in some areas organized with 1-2 items not well the deadline
conventions
The
and few errors in structureusing
ideas are expressed and/or The portfolio
placed in the has 3-4organization
overall items not The output/s is/are submitted 1-3
very
writingbasic words and structure
conventions well placed in the overall days after the deadline
The ideas are jumbled and
with incoherence in many areas difficult The portfolio does not follow a
organization The output/s is/are submitted more
to understand; errors in structure
and several errors in structure logical order than 3 days after the deadline
and writing
and/or conventions
writing conventions are almost
everywhere in the output

0.750 0.250 0.200

 ←Summary of
Ratings
Form 3.2AP_LDM2 Practicum Portfolio - Individual Report of LDM2 Rating of Teacher
←Guide

PARTICIPANT'S PROFILE
Teacher: Division: Nueva Ecija
School: Region: III
Email Address: LAC Leader: Dina S. Fernandez
Contact Number: LDM Coach: Arnold D. DE Castro,PhD.

PART II - LDM IMPLEMENTATION / PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO

Demonstration of Progress Quality of Reflection Demonstration of
of LDM Implementation Professional Standards
30% 25% 20%
Partial Rating

5 - Excellent The outputs clearly and Reflection describes the The outputs clearly demonstrate 5
adequately captured the progress experience in the LDM or more indicators of relevant
4 - Very Satisfactory The
of theoutputs adequately
implementation of captured
the LDM, Reflection describes
implementation, shows thein-depth The outputs
strands clearly demonstrate
in professional standards4
the progress
showing of the
innovations implementation
that experience
analysis and in the LDM
synthesis, and indicators of relevant strands in
3 - Satisfactory The
of outputs reflect to
the LDMto its smooth a big extent Reflection describes
implementation, shows thesome The outputs clearly
professional demonstrate 3
standards
contribute
the progress of the LDM excellently
experience relates
and it to the
relates
2 - Marginal The outputs reflect to a limited analysis, and
Reflection describes it to thetoto the
relates the them indicators of relevant strands in
The outputs clearly demonstrate
implementation professional
professional standards
standards and
and to professional standards
extent the progress of the LDM experience
professional
personal inand
thepersonal
developmentimplementation
goals the 2 indicators of relevant strands
1 - Unsatisfactory The outputs do not show the
implementation Reflection
professional
of the LDM describes
and
with experience
personal
limited attempt toin The outputs do standards
in professional not demonstrate
progress of the LDM development
the goals of the
relate it to the professionalLDM
implementation
development goals any indicator in the professional
implementation with no attempt
standards to relate it to the
and personal standards
professional
development goalsstandards and
personal development goals
Weighted Rating 0.000 0.000 0.000

Final Rating (FR) 0.000

Description of FR N/A
Remarks Type feedback here.
(Optional)
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
recog indicators hit 94
total recog indicators 112
PPSH indicators 16
#ERROR!
credit units 13.42857143
M2 Rating of Teachers

PARTICIPANT'S PERFORMANCE PD Credit Units

Part I Rating (Module-based Outputs) to be determined
Part I Rating Description: N/A
Part II Rating (Practicum Portfolio) 0.000 to be determined
Part II Rating Description: N/A

/ PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO
Language and Overall Organization of Portfolio Timeliness
Presentation of the Output
15% 5% 5%

The ideas are expressed in clear, The portfolio is logically organized, The output/s is/are submitted more
coherent, and appropriately- is insightful, and offers new than 3 days ahead of the deadline
The
wordedideas are expressed
language with no in clearin
errors The portfolioand
perspective is logically
insightsorganized. The output/s is/are submitted 1-2
language
structure with very minimal errors days before the deadline
The
in ideasand/or
structure are writing well but
expressed
and/or writing The portfolio is generally well- The output/s is/are submitted on
conventions
with incoherence in some areas organized with 1-2 items not well the deadline
conventions
The
and few errors in structureusing
ideas are expressed and/or The portfolio
placed in the has 3-4organization
overall items not The output/s is/are submitted 1-3
very
writingbasic words and structure
conventions well placed in the overall days after the deadline
The ideas are jumbled and
with incoherence in many areas difficult The portfolio does not follow a
organization The output/s is/are submitted more
to understand; errors in structure
and several errors in structure logical order than 3 days after the deadline
and writing
and/or conventions
writing conventions are almost
everywhere in the output

0.000 0.000 0.000

←Summary of
Ratings Form 3.2AP_LDM2 Practicum Portfolio - Individual Report of LDM2 Rating of Teacher
←Guide

PARTICIPANT'S PROFILE
Teacher: Division: Nueva Ecija
School: Region: III
Email Address: LAC Leader: Dina S. Fernandez
Contact Number: LDM Coach: Arnold D. DE Castro,PhD.

PART II - LDM IMPLEMENTATION / PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO

Demonstration of Progress Quality of Reflection Demonstration of
of LDM Implementation Professional Standards
30% 25% 20%
Partial Rating

5 - Excellent The outputs clearly and Reflection describes the The outputs clearly demonstrate 5
adequately captured the progress experience in the LDM or more indicators of relevant
4 - Very Satisfactory The
of theoutputs adequately
implementation of captured
the LDM, Reflection describes
implementation, shows thein-depth The outputs
strands clearly demonstrate
in professional standards4
the progress
showing of the
innovations implementation
that experience
analysis and in the LDM
synthesis, and indicators of relevant strands in
3 - Satisfactory The
of outputs reflect to
the LDMto its smooth a big extent Reflection describes
implementation, shows thesome The outputs clearly
professional demonstrate 3
standards
contribute
the progress of the LDM excellently
experience relates
and it to the
relates
2 - Marginal The outputs reflect to a limited analysis, and
Reflection describes it to thetoto the
relates the them indicators of relevant strands in
The outputs clearly demonstrate
implementation professional
professional standards
standards and
and to professional standards
extent the progress of the LDM experience
professional
personal inand
thepersonal
developmentimplementation
goals the 2 indicators of relevant strands
1 - Unsatisfactory The outputs do not show the
implementation Reflection
professional
of the LDM describes
and
with experience
personal
limited attempt toin The outputs do standards
in professional not demonstrate
progress of the LDM development
the goals of the
relate it to the professionalLDM
implementation
development goals any indicator in the professional
implementation with no attempt
standards to relate it to the
and personal standards
professional
development goalsstandards and
personal development goals
Weighted Rating 0.000 0.000 0.000

Final Rating (FR) 0.000

Description of FR N/A
Remarks Type feedback here.
(Optional)
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
recog indicators hit 94
total recog indicators 112
PPSH indicators 16
#ERROR!
credit units 13.42857143
M2 Rating of Teachers

PARTICIPANT'S PERFORMANCE PD Credit Units

Part I Rating (Module-based Outputs) to be determined
Part I Rating Description: N/A
Part II Rating (Practicum Portfolio) 0.000 to be determined
Part II Rating Description: N/A

/ PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO
Language and Overall Organization of Portfolio Timeliness
Presentation of the Output
15% 5% 5%

The ideas are expressed in clear, The portfolio is logically organized, The output/s is/are submitted more
coherent, and appropriately- is insightful, and offers new than 3 days ahead of the deadline
The
wordedideas are expressed
language with no in clearin
errors The portfolioand
perspective is logically
insightsorganized. The output/s is/are submitted 1-2
language
structure with very minimal errors days before the deadline
The
in ideasand/or
structure are writing well but
expressed
and/or writing The portfolio is generally well- The output/s is/are submitted on
conventions
with incoherence in some areas organized with 1-2 items not well the deadline
conventions
The
and few errors in structureusing
ideas are expressed and/or The portfolio
placed in the has 3-4organization
overall items not The output/s is/are submitted 1-3
very
writingbasic words and structure
conventions well placed in the overall days after the deadline
The ideas are jumbled and
with incoherence in many areas difficult The portfolio does not follow a
organization The output/s is/are submitted more
to understand; errors in structure
and several errors in structure logical order than 3 days after the deadline
and writing
and/or conventions
writing conventions are almost
everywhere in the output

0.000 0.000 0.000

←Summary of
Ratings Form 3.2AP_LDM2 Practicum Portfolio - Individual Report of LDM2 Rating of Teacher
←Guide

PARTICIPANT'S PROFILE
Teacher: Division: Nueva Ecija
School: Region: III
Email Address: LAC Leader: Dina S. Fernandez
Contact Number: LDM Coach: Arnold D. DE Castro,PhD.

PART II - LDM IMPLEMENTATION / PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO

Demonstration of Progress Quality of Reflection Demonstration of
of LDM Implementation Professional Standards
30% 25% 20%
Partial Rating

5 - Excellent The outputs clearly and Reflection describes the The outputs clearly demonstrate 5
adequately captured the progress experience in the LDM or more indicators of relevant
4 - Very Satisfactory The
of theoutputs adequately
implementation of captured
the LDM, Reflection describes
implementation, shows thein-depth The outputs
strands clearly demonstrate
in professional standards4
the progress
showing of the
innovations implementation
that experience
analysis and in the LDM
synthesis, and indicators of relevant strands in
3 - Satisfactory The
of outputs reflect to
the LDMto its smooth a big extent Reflection describes
implementation, shows thesome The outputs clearly
professional demonstrate 3
standards
contribute
the progress of the LDM excellently
experience relates
and it to the
relates
2 - Marginal The outputs reflect to a limited analysis, and
Reflection describes it to thetoto the
relates the them indicators of relevant strands in
The outputs clearly demonstrate
implementation professional
professional standards
standards and
and to professional standards
extent the progress of the LDM experience
professional
personal inand
thepersonal
developmentimplementation
goals the 2 indicators of relevant strands
1 - Unsatisfactory The outputs do not show the
implementation Reflection
professional
of the LDM describes
and
with experience
personal
limited attempt toin The outputs do standards
in professional not demonstrate
progress of the LDM development
the goals of the
relate it to the professionalLDM
implementation
development goals any indicator in the professional
implementation with no attempt
standards to relate it to the
and personal standards
professional
development goalsstandards and
personal development goals
Weighted Rating 0.000 0.000 0.000

Final Rating (FR) 0.000

Description of FR N/A
Remarks Type feedback here.
(Optional)
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
recog indicators hit 94
total recog indicators 112
PPSH indicators 16
#ERROR!
credit units 13.42857143
M2 Rating of Teachers

PARTICIPANT'S PERFORMANCE PD Credit Units

Part I Rating (Module-based Outputs) to be determined
Part I Rating Description: N/A
Part II Rating (Practicum Portfolio) 0.000 to be determined
Part II Rating Description: N/A

/ PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO
Language and Overall Organization of Portfolio Timeliness
Presentation of the Output
15% 5% 5%

The ideas are expressed in clear, The portfolio is logically organized, The output/s is/are submitted more
coherent, and appropriately- is insightful, and offers new than 3 days ahead of the deadline
The
wordedideas are expressed
language with no in clearin
errors The portfolioand
perspective is logically
insightsorganized. The output/s is/are submitted 1-2
language
structure with very minimal errors days before the deadline
The
in ideasand/or
structure are writing well but
expressed
and/or writing The portfolio is generally well- The output/s is/are submitted on
conventions
with incoherence in some areas organized with 1-2 items not well the deadline
conventions
The
and few errors in structureusing
ideas are expressed and/or The portfolio
placed in the has 3-4organization
overall items not The output/s is/are submitted 1-3
very
writingbasic words and structure
conventions well placed in the overall days after the deadline
The ideas are jumbled and
with incoherence in many areas difficult The portfolio does not follow a
organization The output/s is/are submitted more
to understand; errors in structure
and several errors in structure logical order than 3 days after the deadline
and writing
and/or conventions
writing conventions are almost
everywhere in the output

0.000 0.000 0.000

←Summary of
Ratings
Form 3.2AP_LDM2 Practicum Portfolio - Individual Report of LDM2 Rating of Teacher
←Guide

PARTICIPANT'S PROFILE
Teacher: Division: Nueva Ecija
School: Region: III
Email Address: LAC Leader: Dina S. Fernandez
Contact Number: LDM Coach: Arnold D. DE Castro,PhD.

PART II - LDM IMPLEMENTATION / PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO

Demonstration of Progress Quality of Reflection Demonstration of
of LDM Implementation Professional Standards
30% 25% 20%
Partial Rating

5 - Excellent The outputs clearly and Reflection describes the The outputs clearly demonstrate 5
adequately captured the progress experience in the LDM or more indicators of relevant
4 - Very Satisfactory The
of theoutputs adequately
implementation of captured
the LDM, Reflection describes
implementation, shows thein-depth The outputs
strands clearly demonstrate
in professional standards4
the progress
showing of the
innovations implementation
that experience
analysis and in the LDM
synthesis, and indicators of relevant strands in
3 - Satisfactory The
of outputs reflect to
the LDMto its smooth a big extent Reflection describes
implementation, shows thesome The outputs clearly
professional demonstrate 3
standards
contribute
the progress of the LDM excellently
experience relates
and it to the
relates
2 - Marginal The outputs reflect to a limited analysis, and
Reflection describes it to thetoto the
relates the them indicators of relevant strands in
The outputs clearly demonstrate
implementation professional
professional standards
standards and
and to professional standards
extent the progress of the LDM experience
professional
personal inand
thepersonal
developmentimplementation
goals the 2 indicators of relevant strands
1 - Unsatisfactory The outputs do not show the
implementation Reflection
professional
of the LDM describes
and
with experience
personal
limited attempt toin The outputs do standards
in professional not demonstrate
progress of the LDM development
the goals of the
relate it to the professionalLDM
implementation
development goals any indicator in the professional
implementation with no attempt
standards to relate it to the
and personal standards
professional
development goalsstandards and
personal development goals
Weighted Rating 0.000 0.000 0.000

Final Rating (FR) 0.000

Description of FR N/A
Remarks Type feedback here.
(Optional)
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
recog indicators hit 94
total recog indicators 112
PPSH indicators 16
#ERROR!
credit units 13.42857143
M2 Rating of Teachers

PARTICIPANT'S PERFORMANCE PD Credit Units

Part I Rating (Module-based Outputs) to be determined
Part I Rating Description: N/A
Part II Rating (Practicum Portfolio) 0.000 to be determined
Part II Rating Description: N/A

/ PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO
Language and Overall Organization of Portfolio Timeliness
Presentation of the Output
15% 5% 5%

The ideas are expressed in clear, The portfolio is logically organized, The output/s is/are submitted more
coherent, and appropriately- is insightful, and offers new than 3 days ahead of the deadline
The
wordedideas are expressed
language with no in clearin
errors The portfolioand
perspective is logically
insightsorganized. The output/s is/are submitted 1-2
language
structure with very minimal errors days before the deadline
The
in ideasand/or
structure are writing well but
expressed
and/or writing The portfolio is generally well- The output/s is/are submitted on
conventions
with incoherence in some areas organized with 1-2 items not well the deadline
conventions
The
and few errors in structureusing
ideas are expressed and/or The portfolio
placed in the has 3-4organization
overall items not The output/s is/are submitted 1-3
very
writingbasic words and structure
conventions well placed in the overall days after the deadline
The ideas are jumbled and
with incoherence in many areas difficult The portfolio does not follow a
organization The output/s is/are submitted more
to understand; errors in structure
and several errors in structure logical order than 3 days after the deadline
and writing
and/or conventions
writing conventions are almost
everywhere in the output

0.000 0.000 0.000

←Summary of
Ratings
Form 3.2AP_LDM2 Practicum Portfolio - Individual Report of LDM2 Rating of Teacher
←Guide

PARTICIPANT'S PROFILE
Teacher: Division: Nueva Ecija
School: Region: III
Email Address: LAC Leader: Dina S. Fernandez
Contact Number: LDM Coach: Arnold D. DE Castro,PhD.

PART II - LDM IMPLEMENTATION / PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO

Demonstration of Progress Quality of Reflection Demonstration of
of LDM Implementation Professional Standards
30% 25% 20%
Partial Rating

5 - Excellent The outputs clearly and Reflection describes the The outputs clearly demonstrate 5
adequately captured the progress experience in the LDM or more indicators of relevant
4 - Very Satisfactory The
of theoutputs adequately
implementation of captured
the LDM, Reflection describes
implementation, shows thein-depth The outputs
strands clearly demonstrate
in professional standards4
the progress
showing of the
innovations implementation
that experience
analysis and in the LDM
synthesis, and indicators of relevant strands in
3 - Satisfactory The
of outputs reflect to
the LDMto its smooth a big extent Reflection describes
implementation, shows thesome The outputs clearly
professional demonstrate 3
standards
contribute
the progress of the LDM excellently
experience relates
and it to the
relates
2 - Marginal The outputs reflect to a limited analysis, and
Reflection describes it to thetoto the
relates the them indicators of relevant strands in
The outputs clearly demonstrate
implementation professional
professional standards
standards and
and to professional standards
extent the progress of the LDM experience
professional
personal inand
thepersonal
developmentimplementation
goals the 2 indicators of relevant strands
1 - Unsatisfactory The outputs do not show the
implementation Reflection
professional
of the LDM describes
and
with experience
personal
limited attempt toin The outputs do standards
in professional not demonstrate
progress of the LDM development
the goals of the
relate it to the professionalLDM
implementation
development goals any indicator in the professional
implementation with no attempt
standards to relate it to the
and personal standards
professional
development goalsstandards and
personal development goals
Weighted Rating 0.000 0.000 0.000

Final Rating (FR) 0.000

Description of FR N/A
Remarks Type feedback here.
(Optional)
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
recog indicators hit 94
total recog indicators 112
PPSH indicators 16
#ERROR!
credit units 13.42857143
M2 Rating of Teachers

PARTICIPANT'S PERFORMANCE PD Credit Units

Part I Rating (Module-based Outputs) to be determined
Part I Rating Description: N/A
Part II Rating (Practicum Portfolio) 0.000 to be determined
Part II Rating Description: N/A

/ PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO
Language and Overall Organization of Portfolio Timeliness
Presentation of the Output
15% 5% 5%

The ideas are expressed in clear, The portfolio is logically organized, The output/s is/are submitted more
coherent, and appropriately- is insightful, and offers new than 3 days ahead of the deadline
The
wordedideas are expressed
language with no in clearin
errors The portfolioand
perspective is logically
insightsorganized. The output/s is/are submitted 1-2
language
structure with very minimal errors days before the deadline
The
in ideasand/or
structure are writing well but
expressed
and/or writing The portfolio is generally well- The output/s is/are submitted on
conventions
with incoherence in some areas organized with 1-2 items not well the deadline
conventions
The
and few errors in structureusing
ideas are expressed and/or The portfolio
placed in the has 3-4organization
overall items not The output/s is/are submitted 1-3
very
writingbasic words and structure
conventions well placed in the overall days after the deadline
The ideas are jumbled and
with incoherence in many areas difficult The portfolio does not follow a
organization The output/s is/are submitted more
to understand; errors in structure
and several errors in structure logical order than 3 days after the deadline
and writing
and/or conventions
writing conventions are almost
everywhere in the output

0.000 0.000 0.000

←Summary of
Ratings Form 3.2AP_LDM2 Practicum Portfolio - Individual Report of LDM2 Rating of Teacher
←Guide

PARTICIPANT'S PROFILE
Teacher: Division: Nueva Ecija
School: Region: III
Email Address: LAC Leader: Dina S. Fernandez
Contact Number: LDM Coach: Arnold D. DE Castro,PhD.

PART II - LDM IMPLEMENTATION / PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO

Demonstration of Progress Quality of Reflection Demonstration of
of LDM Implementation Professional Standards
30% 25% 20%
Partial Rating

5 - Excellent The outputs clearly and Reflection describes the The outputs clearly demonstrate 5
adequately captured the progress experience in the LDM or more indicators of relevant
4 - Very Satisfactory The
of theoutputs adequately
implementation of captured
the LDM, Reflection describes
implementation, shows thein-depth The outputs
strands clearly demonstrate
in professional standards4
the progress
showing of the
innovations implementation
that experience
analysis and in the LDM
synthesis, and indicators of relevant strands in
3 - Satisfactory The
of outputs reflect to
the LDMto its smooth a big extent Reflection describes
implementation, shows thesome The outputs clearly
professional demonstrate 3
standards
contribute
the progress of the LDM excellently
experience relates
and it to the
relates
2 - Marginal The outputs reflect to a limited analysis, and
Reflection describes it to thetoto the
relates the them indicators of relevant strands in
The outputs clearly demonstrate
implementation professional
professional standards
standards and
and to professional standards
extent the progress of the LDM experience
professional
personal inand
thepersonal
developmentimplementation
goals the 2 indicators of relevant strands
1 - Unsatisfactory The outputs do not show the
implementation Reflection
professional
of the LDM describes
and
with experience
personal
limited attempt toin The outputs do standards
in professional not demonstrate
progress of the LDM development
the goals of the
relate it to the professionalLDM
implementation
development goals any indicator in the professional
implementation with no attempt
standards to relate it to the
and personal standards
professional
development goalsstandards and
personal development goals
Weighted Rating 0.000 0.000 0.000

Final Rating (FR) 0.000

Description of FR N/A
Remarks Type feedback here.
(Optional)
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
recog indicators hit 94
total recog indicators 112
PPSH indicators 16
#ERROR!
credit units 13.42857143
M2 Rating of Teachers

PARTICIPANT'S PERFORMANCE PD Credit Units

Part I Rating (Module-based Outputs) to be determined
Part I Rating Description: N/A
Part II Rating (Practicum Portfolio) 0.000 to be determined
Part II Rating Description: N/A

/ PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO
Language and Overall Organization of Portfolio Timeliness
Presentation of the Output
15% 5% 5%

The ideas are expressed in clear, The portfolio is logically organized, The output/s is/are submitted more
coherent, and appropriately- is insightful, and offers new than 3 days ahead of the deadline
The
wordedideas are expressed
language with no in clearin
errors The portfolioand
perspective is logically
insightsorganized. The output/s is/are submitted 1-2
language
structure with very minimal errors days before the deadline
The
in ideasand/or
structure are writing well but
expressed
and/or writing The portfolio is generally well- The output/s is/are submitted on
conventions
with incoherence in some areas organized with 1-2 items not well the deadline
conventions
The
and few errors in structureusing
ideas are expressed and/or The portfolio
placed in the has 3-4organization
overall items not The output/s is/are submitted 1-3
very
writingbasic words and structure
conventions well placed in the overall days after the deadline
The ideas are jumbled and
with incoherence in many areas difficult The portfolio does not follow a
organization The output/s is/are submitted more
to understand; errors in structure
and several errors in structure logical order than 3 days after the deadline
and writing
and/or conventions
writing conventions are almost
everywhere in the output

0.000 0.000 0.000

←Summary of
Ratings
Form 3.2AP_LDM2 Practicum Portfolio - Individual Report of LDM2 Rating of Teacher
←Guide

PARTICIPANT'S PROFILE
Teacher: Division: Nueva Ecija
School: Region: III
Email Address: LAC Leader: Dina S. Fernandez
Contact Number: LDM Coach: Arnold D. DE Castro,PhD.

PART II - LDM IMPLEMENTATION / PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO

Demonstration of Progress Quality of Reflection Demonstration of
of LDM Implementation Professional Standards
30% 25% 20%
Partial Rating

5 - Excellent The outputs clearly and Reflection describes the The outputs clearly demonstrate 5
adequately captured the progress experience in the LDM or more indicators of relevant
4 - Very Satisfactory The
of theoutputs adequately
implementation of captured
the LDM, Reflection describes
implementation, shows thein-depth The outputs
strands clearly demonstrate
in professional standards4
the progress
showing of the
innovations implementation
that experience
analysis and in the LDM
synthesis, and indicators of relevant strands in
3 - Satisfactory The
of outputs reflect to
the LDMto its smooth a big extent Reflection describes
implementation, shows thesome The outputs clearly
professional demonstrate 3
standards
contribute
the progress of the LDM excellently
experience relates
and it to the
relates
2 - Marginal The outputs reflect to a limited analysis, and
Reflection describes it to thetoto the
relates the them indicators of relevant strands in
The outputs clearly demonstrate
implementation professional
professional standards
standards and
and to professional standards
extent the progress of the LDM experience
professional
personal inand
thepersonal
developmentimplementation
goals the 2 indicators of relevant strands
1 - Unsatisfactory The outputs do not show the
implementation Reflection
professional
of the LDM describes
and
with experience
personal
limited attempt toin The outputs do standards
in professional not demonstrate
progress of the LDM development
the goals of the
relate it to the professionalLDM
implementation
development goals any indicator in the professional
implementation with no attempt
standards to relate it to the
and personal standards
professional
development goalsstandards and
personal development goals
Weighted Rating 0.000 0.000 0.000

Final Rating (FR) 0.000

Description of FR N/A
Remarks Type feedback here.
(Optional)
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
recog indicators hit 94
total recog indicators 112
PPSH indicators 16
#ERROR!
credit units 13.42857143
M2 Rating of Teachers

PARTICIPANT'S PERFORMANCE PD Credit Units

Part I Rating (Module-based Outputs) to be determined
Part I Rating Description: N/A
Part II Rating (Practicum Portfolio) 0.000 to be determined
Part II Rating Description: N/A

/ PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO
Language and Overall Organization of Portfolio Timeliness
Presentation of the Output
15% 5% 5%

The ideas are expressed in clear, The portfolio is logically organized, The output/s is/are submitted more
coherent, and appropriately- is insightful, and offers new than 3 days ahead of the deadline
The
wordedideas are expressed
language with no in clearin
errors The portfolioand
perspective is logically
insightsorganized. The output/s is/are submitted 1-2
language
structure with very minimal errors days before the deadline
The
in ideasand/or
structure are writing well but
expressed
and/or writing The portfolio is generally well- The output/s is/are submitted on
conventions
with incoherence in some areas organized with 1-2 items not well the deadline
conventions
The
and few errors in structureusing
ideas are expressed and/or The portfolio
placed in the has 3-4organization
overall items not The output/s is/are submitted 1-3
very
writingbasic words and structure
conventions well placed in the overall days after the deadline
The ideas are jumbled and
with incoherence in many areas difficult The portfolio does not follow a
organization The output/s is/are submitted more
to understand; errors in structure
and several errors in structure logical order than 3 days after the deadline
and writing
and/or conventions
writing conventions are almost
everywhere in the output

0.000 0.000 0.000

←Summary of
Ratings Form 3.2AP_LDM2 Practicum Portfolio - Individual Report of LDM2 Rating of Teacher
←Guide

PARTICIPANT'S PROFILE
Teacher: Division: Nueva Ecija
School: Region: III
Email Address: LAC Leader: Dina S. Fernandez
Contact Number: LDM Coach: Arnold D. DE Castro,PhD.

PART II - LDM IMPLEMENTATION / PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO

Demonstration of Progress Quality of Reflection Demonstration of
of LDM Implementation Professional Standards
30% 25% 20%
Partial Rating

5 - Excellent The outputs clearly and Reflection describes the The outputs clearly demonstrate 5
adequately captured the progress experience in the LDM or more indicators of relevant
4 - Very Satisfactory The
of theoutputs adequately
implementation of captured
the LDM, Reflection describes
implementation, shows thein-depth The outputs
strands clearly demonstrate
in professional standards4
the progress
showing of the
innovations implementation
that experience
analysis and in the LDM
synthesis, and indicators of relevant strands in
3 - Satisfactory The
of outputs reflect to
the LDMto its smooth a big extent Reflection describes
implementation, shows thesome The outputs clearly
professional demonstrate 3
standards
contribute
the progress of the LDM excellently
experience relates
and it to the
relates
2 - Marginal The outputs reflect to a limited analysis, and
Reflection describes it to thetoto the
relates the them indicators of relevant strands in
The outputs clearly demonstrate
implementation professional
professional standards
standards and
and to professional standards
extent the progress of the LDM experience
professional
personal inand
thepersonal
developmentimplementation
goals the 2 indicators of relevant strands
1 - Unsatisfactory The outputs do not show the
implementation Reflection
professional
of the LDM describes
and
with experience
personal
limited attempt toin The outputs do standards
in professional not demonstrate
progress of the LDM development
the goals of the
relate it to the professionalLDM
implementation
development goals any indicator in the professional
implementation with no attempt
standards to relate it to the
and personal standards
professional
development goalsstandards and
personal development goals
Weighted Rating 0.000 0.000 0.000

Final Rating (FR) 0.000

Description of FR N/A
Remarks Type feedback here.
(Optional)
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
recog indicators hit 94
total recog indicators 112
PPSH indicators 16
#ERROR!
credit units 13.42857143
M2 Rating of Teachers

PARTICIPANT'S PERFORMANCE PD Credit Units

Part I Rating (Module-based Outputs) to be determined
Part I Rating Description: N/A
Part II Rating (Practicum Portfolio) 0.000 to be determined
Part II Rating Description: N/A

/ PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO
Language and Overall Organization of Portfolio Timeliness
Presentation of the Output
15% 5% 5%

The ideas are expressed in clear, The portfolio is logically organized, The output/s is/are submitted more
coherent, and appropriately- is insightful, and offers new than 3 days ahead of the deadline
The
wordedideas are expressed
language with no in clearin
errors The portfolioand
perspective is logically
insightsorganized. The output/s is/are submitted 1-2
language
structure with very minimal errors days before the deadline
The
in ideasand/or
structure are writing well but
expressed
and/or writing The portfolio is generally well- The output/s is/are submitted on
conventions
with incoherence in some areas organized with 1-2 items not well the deadline
conventions
The
and few errors in structureusing
ideas are expressed and/or The portfolio
placed in the has 3-4organization
overall items not The output/s is/are submitted 1-3
very
writingbasic words and structure
conventions well placed in the overall days after the deadline
The ideas are jumbled and
with incoherence in many areas difficult The portfolio does not follow a
organization The output/s is/are submitted more
to understand; errors in structure
and several errors in structure logical order than 3 days after the deadline
and writing
and/or conventions
writing conventions are almost
everywhere in the output

0.000 0.000 0.000

←Summary of
Ratings
Form 3.2AP_LDM2 Practicum Portfolio - Individual Report of LDM2 Rating of Teacher
←Guide

PARTICIPANT'S PROFILE
Teacher: Division: Nueva Ecija
School: Region: III
Email Address: LAC Leader: Dina S. Fernandez
Contact Number: LDM Coach: Arnold D. DE Castro,PhD.

PART II - LDM IMPLEMENTATION / PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO

Demonstration of Progress Quality of Reflection Demonstration of
of LDM Implementation Professional Standards
30% 25% 20%
Partial Rating

5 - Excellent The outputs clearly and Reflection describes the The outputs clearly demonstrate 5
adequately captured the progress experience in the LDM or more indicators of relevant
4 - Very Satisfactory The
of theoutputs adequately
implementation of captured
the LDM, Reflection describes
implementation, shows thein-depth The outputs
strands clearly demonstrate
in professional standards4
the progress
showing of the
innovations implementation
that experience
analysis and in the LDM
synthesis, and indicators of relevant strands in
3 - Satisfactory The
of outputs reflect to
the LDMto its smooth a big extent Reflection describes
implementation, shows thesome The outputs clearly
professional demonstrate 3
standards
contribute
the progress of the LDM excellently
experience relates
and it to the
relates
2 - Marginal The outputs reflect to a limited analysis, and
Reflection describes it to thetoto the
relates the them indicators of relevant strands in
The outputs clearly demonstrate
implementation professional
professional standards
standards and
and to professional standards
extent the progress of the LDM experience
professional
personal inand
thepersonal
developmentimplementation
goals the 2 indicators of relevant strands
1 - Unsatisfactory The outputs do not show the
implementation Reflection
professional
of the LDM describes
and
with experience
personal
limited attempt toin The outputs do standards
in professional not demonstrate
progress of the LDM development
the goals of the
relate it to the professionalLDM
implementation
development goals any indicator in the professional
implementation with no attempt
standards to relate it to the
and personal standards
professional
development goalsstandards and
personal development goals
Weighted Rating 0.000 0.000 0.000

Final Rating (FR) 0.000

Description of FR N/A
Remarks Type feedback here.
(Optional)
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
recog indicators hit 94
total recog indicators 112
PPSH indicators 16
#ERROR!
credit units 13.42857143
M2 Rating of Teachers

PARTICIPANT'S PERFORMANCE PD Credit Units

Part I Rating (Module-based Outputs) to be determined
Part I Rating Description: N/A
Part II Rating (Practicum Portfolio) 0.000 to be determined
Part II Rating Description: N/A

/ PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO
Language and Overall Organization of Portfolio Timeliness
Presentation of the Output
15% 5% 5%

The ideas are expressed in clear, The portfolio is logically organized, The output/s is/are submitted more
coherent, and appropriately- is insightful, and offers new than 3 days ahead of the deadline
The
wordedideas are expressed
language with no in clearin
errors The portfolioand
perspective is logically
insightsorganized. The output/s is/are submitted 1-2
language
structure with very minimal errors days before the deadline
The
in ideasand/or
structure are writing well but
expressed
and/or writing The portfolio is generally well- The output/s is/are submitted on
conventions
with incoherence in some areas organized with 1-2 items not well the deadline
conventions
The
and few errors in structureusing
ideas are expressed and/or The portfolio
placed in the has 3-4organization
overall items not The output/s is/are submitted 1-3
very
writingbasic words and structure
conventions well placed in the overall days after the deadline
The ideas are jumbled and
with incoherence in many areas difficult The portfolio does not follow a
organization The output/s is/are submitted more
to understand; errors in structure
and several errors in structure logical order than 3 days after the deadline
and writing
and/or conventions
writing conventions are almost
everywhere in the output

0.000 0.000 0.000

←Summary of
Ratings
Form 3.2AP_LDM2 Practicum Portfolio - Individual Report of LDM2 Rating of Teacher
←Guide

PARTICIPANT'S PROFILE
Teacher: Division: Nueva Ecija
School: Region: III
Email Address: LAC Leader: Dina S. Fernandez
Contact Number: LDM Coach: Arnold D. DE Castro,PhD.

PART II - LDM IMPLEMENTATION / PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO

Demonstration of Progress Quality of Reflection Demonstration of
of LDM Implementation Professional Standards
30% 25% 20%
Partial Rating

5 - Excellent The outputs clearly and Reflection describes the The outputs clearly demonstrate 5
adequately captured the progress experience in the LDM or more indicators of relevant
4 - Very Satisfactory The
of theoutputs adequately
implementation of captured
the LDM, Reflection describes
implementation, shows thein-depth The outputs
strands clearly demonstrate
in professional standards4
the progress
showing of the
innovations implementation
that experience
analysis and in the LDM
synthesis, and indicators of relevant strands in
3 - Satisfactory The
of outputs reflect to
the LDMto its smooth a big extent Reflection describes
implementation, shows thesome The outputs clearly
professional demonstrate 3
standards
contribute
the progress of the LDM excellently
experience relates
and it to the
relates
2 - Marginal The outputs reflect to a limited analysis, and
Reflection describes it to thetoto the
relates the them indicators of relevant strands in
The outputs clearly demonstrate
implementation professional
professional standards
standards and
and to professional standards
extent the progress of the LDM experience
professional
personal inand
thepersonal
developmentimplementation
goals the 2 indicators of relevant strands
1 - Unsatisfactory The outputs do not show the
implementation Reflection
professional
of the LDM describes
and
with experience
personal
limited attempt toin The outputs do standards
in professional not demonstrate
progress of the LDM development
the goals of the
relate it to the professionalLDM
implementation
development goals any indicator in the professional
implementation with no attempt
standards to relate it to the
and personal standards
professional
development goalsstandards and
personal development goals
Weighted Rating 0.000 0.000 0.000

Final Rating (FR) 0.000

Description of FR N/A
Remarks Type feedback here.
(Optional)
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
recog indicators hit 94
total recog indicators 112
PPSH indicators 16
#ERROR!
credit units 13.42857143
M2 Rating of Teachers

PARTICIPANT'S PERFORMANCE PD Credit Units

Part I Rating (Module-based Outputs) to be determined
Part I Rating Description: N/A
Part II Rating (Practicum Portfolio) 0.000 to be determined
Part II Rating Description: N/A

/ PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO
Language and Overall Organization of Portfolio Timeliness
Presentation of the Output
15% 5% 5%

The ideas are expressed in clear, The portfolio is logically organized, The output/s is/are submitted more
coherent, and appropriately- is insightful, and offers new than 3 days ahead of the deadline
The
wordedideas are expressed
language with no in clearin
errors The portfolioand
perspective is logically
insightsorganized. The output/s is/are submitted 1-2
language
structure with very minimal errors days before the deadline
The
in ideasand/or
structure are writing well but
expressed
and/or writing The portfolio is generally well- The output/s is/are submitted on
conventions
with incoherence in some areas organized with 1-2 items not well the deadline
conventions
The
and few errors in structureusing
ideas are expressed and/or The portfolio
placed in the has 3-4organization
overall items not The output/s is/are submitted 1-3
very
writingbasic words and structure
conventions well placed in the overall days after the deadline
The ideas are jumbled and
with incoherence in many areas difficult The portfolio does not follow a
organization The output/s is/are submitted more
to understand; errors in structure
and several errors in structure logical order than 3 days after the deadline
and writing
and/or conventions
writing conventions are almost
everywhere in the output

0.000 0.000 0.000