SDO Nueva Ecija - LDMForm3.2P - LACLeader23 - PARARUAN

You might also like

Download as xlsx, pdf, or txt
Download as xlsx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1of 140

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

7. Enter the required data in the yellow cell ONLY. Do not rename the tabs.
8. Once all ratings are in, rename and save this form, then submit it to the SDO LDM Program Management Team. Coordinate
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 Ratin


LAC Leader Elma C. Pararuan
Division Nueva Ecija
Region III
Contact Details 9654915164
LDM Coach Arnold De Castro

PART II LDM Implementation/ Practicum Por


SH School Name Name Numerical Rating

1 Talugtug National Hig Jhena M. Astelero 4.70


2 Talugtug National Hig Cristy E. Astelero 4.70
3 Talugtug National Hig Benigno R. Barrientos 4.75
4 Talugtug National Hig Lailanie A. Maribbay 4.70
5 Talugtug National Hig Glecy C. Portacio 4.70
6 Talugtug National Hig Rodriguez, Jennifer M. 4.55
7 Talugtug National Hig Cristina S. Garcia 4.00
8 Talugtug National Hig Ana Marose S. Campollo 4.70
9 Talugtug National Hig Jay Ar D. Catabona 4.70
10 Talugtug National Hig Maria Diane A. Dizon 4.75
11 Talugtug National Hig Adrian Bruce Duval C. Pararuan 4.75
12 Talugtug National Hig James Bryan F. Rosquita 4.75
13 0 0 0.00
14 0 0 0.00
15 0 0 0.00
olio - Summary of LDM2 Ratings of Teachers
Pararuan
cija

164
De Castro

ART II LDM Implementation/ Practicum Portfolio


Descriptive Rating PD Credit Units

Oustanding Earned PD credit units will be subjected to the PD credit units banking mechanism of DepEd NEAP
Oustanding
Oustanding
Oustanding
Oustanding
Oustanding
Very Satisfactory
Oustanding
Oustanding
Oustanding
Oustanding
Oustanding
N/A
N/A
N/A
←Summary of Ratings
Form 3.2AP_LDM2 Practicum Portfolio - Individual Rep
←Guide
PARTICIPANT'S PROFILE
Teacher: Jhena M. Astelero Division:
School: Talugtug National High School-Annex Region:
Email Address: jhena.astelero@deped.gov.ph LAC Leader:
Contact Number: 9565579358 LDM Coach:

PART II - LDM IMPLE


Demonstration of Progress Quality of Reflection
of LDM Implementation
30% 25%
Partial Rating
4 5
5 - Excellent The outputs clearly and Reflection describes the
adequately captured the progress experience in the LDM
of the implementation of the LDM, implementation, shows in-depth
showing innovations that analysis and synthesis, and
contribute to its smooth excellently relates it to the
implementation professional standards and to
professional and personal
development goals

4 - Very Satisfactory The outputs adequately captured Reflection describes the


the progress of the implementation experience in the LDM
of the LDM implementation, shows some
analysis, and relates it to the
professional standards and to
professional and personal
development goals

3 - Satisfactory The outputs reflect to a big extent Reflection describes the


the progress of the LDM experience and relates them to the
implementation professional standards and
personal development goals

2 - Marginal The outputs reflect to a limited Reflection describes the


extent the progress of the LDM experience in the implementation
implementation of the LDM with limited attempt to
relate it to the professional
standards and personal
development goals

1 - Unsatisfactory The outputs do not show the Reflection describes experience in


progress of the LDM the implementation of the LDM
implementation with no attempt to relate it to the
professional standards and
personal development goals

Weighted Rating 1.200 1.250

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 13.4285714285714
- Individual Report of LDM2 Rating of Teachers
PARTICIPANT'S PERFORMANCE
Nueva Ecija Part I Rating (Module-based Outputs)
III Part I Rating Description:
Elma C. Pararuan Part II Rating (Practicum Portfolio)
Arnold De Castro Part II Rating Description:

PART II - LDM IMPLEMENTATION / PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO


Demonstration of Language and Overall
Professional Standards Presentation of the Output
20% 15%
5 5
The outputs clearly demonstrate 5 The ideas are expressed in clear,
or more indicators of relevant coherent, and appropriately-
strands in professional standards worded language with no errors in
structure and/or writing
conventions

The outputs clearly demonstrate 4 The ideas are expressed in clear


indicators of relevant strands in language with very minimal errors
professional standards in structure and/or writing
conventions

The outputs clearly demonstrate 3 The ideas are expressed well but
indicators of relevant strands in with incoherence in some areas
professional standards and few errors in structure and/or
writing conventions

The outputs clearly demonstrate The ideas are expressed using


the 2 indicators of relevant strands very basic words and structure
in professional standards with incoherence in many areas
and several errors in structure
and/or writing conventions

The outputs do not demonstrate The ideas are jumbled and difficult
any indicator in the professional to understand; errors in structure
standards and writing conventions are almost
everywhere in the output

1.000 0.750
PD Credit Units
4.023 to be determined
Very Satisfactory
4.700 to be determined
Oustanding

Organization of Portfolio Timeliness

5% 5%
5 5
The portfolio is logically organized, The output/s is/are submitted more
is insightful, and offers new than 3 days ahead of the deadline
perspective and insights

The portfolio is logically organized. 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
placed in the overall organization

The portfolio has 3-4 items not The output/s is/are submitted 1-3
well placed in the overall days after the deadline
organization

The portfolio does not follow a The output/s is/are submitted more
logical order than 3 days after the deadline

0.250 0.250
←Summary of
Ratings Form 3.2AP_LDM2 Practicum Portfolio - Individual Report
←Guide
PARTICIPANT'S PROFILE
Teacher: Cristy E. Astelero Division:
School: Talugtug National High School-Annex Region:
Email Address: cristy.astelero001@deped.gov.ph LAC Leader:
Contact Number: 9562780234 LDM Coach:

PART II - LDM IMPLEME


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
of the implementation of the LDM, implementation, shows in-depth
showing innovations that analysis and synthesis, and
contribute to its smooth excellently relates it to the
implementation professional standards and to
professional and personal
development goals

4 - Very Satisfactory The outputs adequately captured Reflection describes the


the progress of the implementation experience in the LDM
of the LDM implementation, shows some
analysis, and relates it to the
professional standards and to
professional and personal
development goals

3 - Satisfactory The outputs reflect to a big extent Reflection describes the


the progress of the LDM experience and relates them to the
implementation professional standards and
personal development goals

2 - Marginal The outputs reflect to a limited Reflection describes the


extent the progress of the LDM experience in the implementation
implementation of the LDM with limited attempt to
relate it to the professional
standards and personal
development goals

1 - Unsatisfactory The outputs do not show the Reflection describes experience in


progress of the LDM the implementation of the LDM
implementation with no attempt to relate it to the
professional standards and
personal development goals

Weighted Rating 1.500 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 13.4285714285714
- Individual Report of LDM2 Rating of Teachers
PARTICIPANT'S PERFORMANCE
Nueva Ecija Part I Rating (Module-based Outputs) 4.338
III Part I Rating Description: Very Satisfactory
Elma C. Pararuan Part II Rating (Practicum Portfolio) 4.700
Arnold De Castro Part II Rating Description: Oustanding

PART II - LDM IMPLEMENTATION / PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO


Demonstration of Language and Overall Organization of Portfolio
Professional Standards Presentation of the Output
20% 15% 5%
5 5 5
The outputs clearly demonstrate 5 The ideas are expressed in clear, The portfolio is logically organized,
or more indicators of relevant coherent, and appropriately- is insightful, and offers new
strands in professional standards worded language with no errors in perspective and insights
structure and/or writing
conventions

The outputs clearly demonstrate 4 The ideas are expressed in clear The portfolio is logically organized.
indicators of relevant strands in language with very minimal errors
professional standards in structure and/or writing
conventions

The outputs clearly demonstrate 3 The ideas are expressed well but The portfolio is generally well-
indicators of relevant strands in with incoherence in some areas organized with 1-2 items not well
professional standards and few errors in structure and/or placed in the overall organization
writing conventions

The outputs clearly demonstrate The ideas are expressed using The portfolio has 3-4 items not
the 2 indicators of relevant strands very basic words and structure well placed in the overall
in professional standards with incoherence in many areas organization
and several errors in structure
and/or writing conventions

The outputs do not demonstrate The ideas are jumbled and difficult The portfolio does not follow a
any indicator in the professional to understand; errors in structure logical order
standards and writing conventions are almost
everywhere in the output

1.000 0.750 0.250


PD Credit Units
to be determined

to be determined

Timeliness

5%
4
The output/s is/are submitted more
than 3 days ahead of the deadline

The output/s is/are submitted 1-2


days before the deadline

The output/s is/are submitted on


the deadline

The output/s is/are submitted 1-3


days after the deadline

The output/s is/are submitted more


than 3 days after the deadline

0.200
←Summary of
Ratings Form 3.2AP_LDM2 Practicum Portfolio - Individual Report
←Guide
PARTICIPANT'S PROFILE
Teacher: Benigno R. Barrientos Division:
School: Talugtug National High School-Annex Region:
Email Address: benigno.barrientos@deped.gov.ph LAC Leader:
Contact Number: 9756968654 LDM Coach:

PART II - LDM IMPLEME


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
of the implementation of the LDM, implementation, shows in-depth
showing innovations that analysis and synthesis, and
contribute to its smooth excellently relates it to the
implementation professional standards and to
professional and personal
development goals

4 - Very Satisfactory The outputs adequately captured Reflection describes the


the progress of the implementation experience in the LDM
of the LDM implementation, shows some
analysis, and relates it to the
professional standards and to
professional and personal
development goals

3 - Satisfactory The outputs reflect to a big extent Reflection describes the


the progress of the LDM experience and relates them to the
implementation professional standards and
personal development goals

2 - Marginal The outputs reflect to a limited Reflection describes the


extent the progress of the LDM experience in the implementation
implementation of the LDM with limited attempt to
relate it to the professional
standards and personal
development goals

1 - Unsatisfactory The outputs do not show the Reflection describes experience in


progress of the LDM the implementation of the LDM
implementation with no attempt to relate it to the
professional standards and
personal development goals

Weighted Rating 1.500 1.000


Final Rating (FR) 4.750

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 13.4285714285714
- Individual Report of LDM2 Rating of Teachers
PARTICIPANT'S PERFORMANCE
Nueva Ecija Part I Rating (Module-based Outputs) 4.690
III Part I Rating Description: Oustanding
Elma C. Pararuan Part II Rating (Practicum Portfolio) 4.750
Arnold De Castro Part II Rating Description: Oustanding

PART II - LDM IMPLEMENTATION / PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO


Demonstration of Language and Overall Organization of Portfolio
Professional Standards Presentation of the Output
20% 15% 5%
5 5 5
The outputs clearly demonstrate 5 The ideas are expressed in clear, The portfolio is logically organized,
or more indicators of relevant coherent, and appropriately- is insightful, and offers new
strands in professional standards worded language with no errors in perspective and insights
structure and/or writing
conventions

The outputs clearly demonstrate 4 The ideas are expressed in clear The portfolio is logically organized.
indicators of relevant strands in language with very minimal errors
professional standards in structure and/or writing
conventions

The outputs clearly demonstrate 3 The ideas are expressed well but The portfolio is generally well-
indicators of relevant strands in with incoherence in some areas organized with 1-2 items not well
professional standards and few errors in structure and/or placed in the overall organization
writing conventions

The outputs clearly demonstrate The ideas are expressed using The portfolio has 3-4 items not
the 2 indicators of relevant strands very basic words and structure well placed in the overall
in professional standards with incoherence in many areas organization
and several errors in structure
and/or writing conventions

The outputs do not demonstrate The ideas are jumbled and difficult The portfolio does not follow a
any indicator in the professional to understand; errors in structure logical order
standards and writing conventions are almost
everywhere in the output

1.000 0.750 0.250


PD Credit Units
to be determined

to be determined

Timeliness

5%
5
The output/s is/are submitted more
than 3 days ahead of the deadline

The output/s is/are submitted 1-2


days before the deadline

The output/s is/are submitted on


the deadline

The output/s is/are submitted 1-3


days after the deadline

The output/s is/are submitted more


than 3 days after the deadline

0.250
←Summary of
Ratings Form 3.2AP_LDM2 Practicum Portfolio - Individual Report
←Guide
PARTICIPANT'S PROFILE
Teacher: Lailanie A. Maribbay Division:
School: Talugtug National High School-Annex Region:
Email Address: lailanie.maribbay001@deped.gov.ph LAC Leader:
Contact Number: 9058279246 LDM Coach:

PART II - LDM IMPLEME


Demonstration of Progress Quality of Reflection
of LDM Implementation
30% 25%
Partial Rating
4 5
5 - Excellent The outputs clearly and Reflection describes the
adequately captured the progress experience in the LDM
of the implementation of the LDM, implementation, shows in-depth
showing innovations that analysis and synthesis, and
contribute to its smooth excellently relates it to the
implementation professional standards and to
professional and personal
development goals

4 - Very Satisfactory The outputs adequately captured Reflection describes the


the progress of the implementation experience in the LDM
of the LDM implementation, shows some
analysis, and relates it to the
professional standards and to
professional and personal
development goals

3 - Satisfactory The outputs reflect to a big extent Reflection describes the


the progress of the LDM experience and relates them to the
implementation professional standards and
personal development goals

2 - Marginal The outputs reflect to a limited Reflection describes the


extent the progress of the LDM experience in the implementation
implementation of the LDM with limited attempt to
relate it to the professional
standards and personal
development goals

1 - Unsatisfactory The outputs do not show the Reflection describes experience in


progress of the LDM the implementation of the LDM
implementation with no attempt to relate it to the
professional standards and
personal development goals

Weighted Rating 1.200 1.250


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 13.4285714285714
- Individual Report of LDM2 Rating of Teachers
PARTICIPANT'S PERFORMANCE
Nueva Ecija Part I Rating (Module-based Outputs) 4.525
III Part I Rating Description: Oustanding
Elma C. Pararuan Part II Rating (Practicum Portfolio) 4.700
Arnold De Castro Part II Rating Description: Oustanding

PART II - LDM IMPLEMENTATION / PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO


Demonstration of Language and Overall Organization of Portfolio
Professional Standards Presentation of the Output
20% 15% 5%
5 5 5
The outputs clearly demonstrate 5 The ideas are expressed in clear, The portfolio is logically organized,
or more indicators of relevant coherent, and appropriately- is insightful, and offers new
strands in professional standards worded language with no errors in perspective and insights
structure and/or writing
conventions

The outputs clearly demonstrate 4 The ideas are expressed in clear The portfolio is logically organized.
indicators of relevant strands in language with very minimal errors
professional standards in structure and/or writing
conventions

The outputs clearly demonstrate 3 The ideas are expressed well but The portfolio is generally well-
indicators of relevant strands in with incoherence in some areas organized with 1-2 items not well
professional standards and few errors in structure and/or placed in the overall organization
writing conventions

The outputs clearly demonstrate The ideas are expressed using The portfolio has 3-4 items not
the 2 indicators of relevant strands very basic words and structure well placed in the overall
in professional standards with incoherence in many areas organization
and several errors in structure
and/or writing conventions

The outputs do not demonstrate The ideas are jumbled and difficult The portfolio does not follow a
any indicator in the professional to understand; errors in structure logical order
standards and writing conventions are almost
everywhere in the output

1.000 0.750 0.250


PD Credit Units
to be determined

to be determined

Timeliness

5%
5
The output/s is/are submitted more
than 3 days ahead of the deadline

The output/s is/are submitted 1-2


days before the deadline

The output/s is/are submitted on


the deadline

The output/s is/are submitted 1-3


days after the deadline

The output/s is/are submitted more


than 3 days after the deadline

0.250
←Summary of Ratings
Form 3.2AP_LDM2 Practicum Portfolio - Individual Report
←Guide
PARTICIPANT'S PROFILE
Teacher: Glecy C. Portacio Division:
School: Talugtug National High School-Annex Region:
Email Address: glecy.portacio@deped.gov.ph LAC Leader:
Contact Number: 0955194555 LDM Coach:

PART II - LDM IMPLEME


Demonstration of Progress Quality of Reflection
of LDM Implementation
30% 25%
Partial Rating
4 5
5 - Excellent The outputs clearly and Reflection describes the
adequately captured the progress experience in the LDM
of the implementation of the LDM, implementation, shows in-depth
showing innovations that analysis and synthesis, and
contribute to its smooth excellently relates it to the
implementation professional standards and to
professional and personal
development goals

4 - Very Satisfactory The outputs adequately captured Reflection describes the


the progress of the implementation experience in the LDM
of the LDM implementation, shows some
analysis, and relates it to the
professional standards and to
professional and personal
development goals

3 - Satisfactory The outputs reflect to a big extent Reflection describes the


the progress of the LDM experience and relates them to the
implementation professional standards and
personal development goals

2 - Marginal The outputs reflect to a limited Reflection describes the


extent the progress of the LDM experience in the implementation
implementation of the LDM with limited attempt to
relate it to the professional
standards and personal
development goals

1 - Unsatisfactory The outputs do not show the Reflection describes experience in


progress of the LDM the implementation of the LDM
implementation with no attempt to relate it to the
professional standards and
personal development goals

Weighted Rating 1.200 1.250


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 13.4285714285714
- Individual Report of LDM2 Rating of Teachers
PARTICIPANT'S PERFORMANCE
Nueva Ecija Part I Rating (Module-based Outputs) 4.570
III Part I Rating Description: Oustanding
Elma C. Pararuan Part II Rating (Practicum Portfolio) 4.700
Arnold De Castro Part II Rating Description: Oustanding

PART II - LDM IMPLEMENTATION / PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO


Demonstration of Language and Overall Organization of Portfolio
Professional Standards Presentation of the Output
20% 15% 5%
5 5 5
The outputs clearly demonstrate 5 The ideas are expressed in clear, The portfolio is logically organized,
or more indicators of relevant coherent, and appropriately- is insightful, and offers new
strands in professional standards worded language with no errors in perspective and insights
structure and/or writing
conventions

The outputs clearly demonstrate 4 The ideas are expressed in clear The portfolio is logically organized.
indicators of relevant strands in language with very minimal errors
professional standards in structure and/or writing
conventions

The outputs clearly demonstrate 3 The ideas are expressed well but The portfolio is generally well-
indicators of relevant strands in with incoherence in some areas organized with 1-2 items not well
professional standards and few errors in structure and/or placed in the overall organization
writing conventions

The outputs clearly demonstrate The ideas are expressed using The portfolio has 3-4 items not
the 2 indicators of relevant strands very basic words and structure well placed in the overall
in professional standards with incoherence in many areas organization
and several errors in structure
and/or writing conventions

The outputs do not demonstrate The ideas are jumbled and difficult The portfolio does not follow a
any indicator in the professional to understand; errors in structure logical order
standards and writing conventions are almost
everywhere in the output

1.000 0.750 0.250


PD Credit Units
to be determined

to be determined

Timeliness

5%
5
The output/s is/are submitted more
than 3 days ahead of the deadline

The output/s is/are submitted 1-2


days before the deadline

The output/s is/are submitted on


the deadline

The output/s is/are submitted 1-3


days after the deadline

The output/s is/are submitted more


than 3 days after the deadline

0.250
←Summary of
Ratings Form 3.2AP_LDM2 Practicum Portfolio - Individual Report
←Guide
PARTICIPANT'S PROFILE
Teacher: Rodriguez, Jennifer M. Division:
School: Talugtug National High School-Annex Region:
Email Address: LAC Leader:
Contact Number: LDM Coach:

PART II - LDM IMPLEME


Demonstration of Progress Quality of Reflection
of LDM Implementation
30% 25%
Partial Rating
4 5
5 - Excellent The outputs clearly and Reflection describes the
adequately captured the progress experience in the LDM
of the implementation of the LDM, implementation, shows in-depth
showing innovations that analysis and synthesis, and
contribute to its smooth excellently relates it to the
implementation professional standards and to
professional and personal
development goals

4 - Very Satisfactory The outputs adequately captured Reflection describes the


the progress of the implementation experience in the LDM
of the LDM implementation, shows some
analysis, and relates it to the
professional standards and to
professional and personal
development goals

3 - Satisfactory The outputs reflect to a big extent Reflection describes the


the progress of the LDM experience and relates them to the
implementation professional standards and
personal development goals

2 - Marginal The outputs reflect to a limited Reflection describes the


extent the progress of the LDM experience in the implementation
implementation of the LDM with limited attempt to
relate it to the professional
standards and personal
development goals

1 - Unsatisfactory The outputs do not show the Reflection describes experience in


progress of the LDM the implementation of the LDM
implementation with no attempt to relate it to the
professional standards and
personal development goals

Weighted Rating 1.200 1.250


Final Rating (FR) 4.550

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 13.4285714285714
- Individual Report of LDM2 Rating of Teachers
PARTICIPANT'S PERFORMANCE
Nueva Ecija Part I Rating (Module-based Outputs)
III Part I Rating Description: N/A
Elma C. Pararuan Part II Rating (Practicum Portfolio) 4.550
Arnold De Castro Part II Rating Description: Oustanding

PART II - LDM IMPLEMENTATION / PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO


Demonstration of Language and Overall Organization of Portfolio
Professional Standards Presentation of the Output
20% 15% 5%
5 4 5
The outputs clearly demonstrate 5 The ideas are expressed in clear, The portfolio is logically organized,
or more indicators of relevant coherent, and appropriately- is insightful, and offers new
strands in professional standards worded language with no errors in perspective and insights
structure and/or writing
conventions

The outputs clearly demonstrate 4 The ideas are expressed in clear The portfolio is logically organized.
indicators of relevant strands in language with very minimal errors
professional standards in structure and/or writing
conventions

The outputs clearly demonstrate 3 The ideas are expressed well but The portfolio is generally well-
indicators of relevant strands in with incoherence in some areas organized with 1-2 items not well
professional standards and few errors in structure and/or placed in the overall organization
writing conventions

The outputs clearly demonstrate The ideas are expressed using The portfolio has 3-4 items not
the 2 indicators of relevant strands very basic words and structure well placed in the overall
in professional standards with incoherence in many areas organization
and several errors in structure
and/or writing conventions

The outputs do not demonstrate The ideas are jumbled and difficult The portfolio does not follow a
any indicator in the professional to understand; errors in structure logical order
standards and writing conventions are almost
everywhere in the output

1.000 0.600 0.250


PD Credit Units
to be determined

to be determined

Timeliness

5%
5
The output/s is/are submitted more
than 3 days ahead of the deadline

The output/s is/are submitted 1-2


days before the deadline

The output/s is/are submitted on


the deadline

The output/s is/are submitted 1-3


days after the deadline

The output/s is/are submitted more


than 3 days after the deadline

0.250
←Summary of Ratings
Form 3.2AP_LDM2 Practicum Portfolio - Individual Report
←Guide
PARTICIPANT'S PROFILE
Teacher: Cristina S. Garcia Division:
School: Talugtug National High School-Annex Region:
Email Address: cristina.garcia007@deped.gov.ph LAC Leader:
Contact Number: 09453183473 LDM Coach:

PART II - LDM IMPLEME


Demonstration of Progress Quality of Reflection
of LDM Implementation
30% 25%
Partial Rating
4 4
5 - Excellent The outputs clearly and Reflection describes the
adequately captured the progress experience in the LDM
of the implementation of the LDM, implementation, shows in-depth
showing innovations that analysis and synthesis, and
contribute to its smooth excellently relates it to the
implementation professional standards and to
professional and personal
development goals

4 - Very Satisfactory The outputs adequately captured Reflection describes the


the progress of the implementation experience in the LDM
of the LDM implementation, shows some
analysis, and relates it to the
professional standards and to
professional and personal
development goals

3 - Satisfactory The outputs reflect to a big extent Reflection describes the


the progress of the LDM experience and relates them to the
implementation professional standards and
personal development goals

2 - Marginal The outputs reflect to a limited Reflection describes the


extent the progress of the LDM experience in the implementation
implementation of the LDM with limited attempt to
relate it to the professional
standards and personal
development goals

1 - Unsatisfactory The outputs do not show the Reflection describes experience in


progress of the LDM the implementation of the LDM
implementation with no attempt to relate it to the
professional standards and
personal development goals

Weighted Rating 1.200 1.000


Final Rating (FR) 4.000

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 13.4285714285714
- Individual Report of LDM2 Rating of Teachers
PARTICIPANT'S PERFORMANCE
Nueva Ecija Part I Rating (Module-based Outputs) 4.030
III Part I Rating Description: Very Satisfactory
Elma C. Pararuan Part II Rating (Practicum Portfolio) 4.000
Arnold De Castro Part II Rating Description: Very Satisfactory

PART II - LDM IMPLEMENTATION / PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO


Demonstration of Language and Overall Organization of Portfolio
Professional Standards Presentation of the Output
20% 15% 5%
4 4 4
The outputs clearly demonstrate 5 The ideas are expressed in clear, The portfolio is logically organized,
or more indicators of relevant coherent, and appropriately- is insightful, and offers new
strands in professional standards worded language with no errors in perspective and insights
structure and/or writing
conventions

The outputs clearly demonstrate 4 The ideas are expressed in clear The portfolio is logically organized.
indicators of relevant strands in language with very minimal errors
professional standards in structure and/or writing
conventions

The outputs clearly demonstrate 3 The ideas are expressed well but The portfolio is generally well-
indicators of relevant strands in with incoherence in some areas organized with 1-2 items not well
professional standards and few errors in structure and/or placed in the overall organization
writing conventions

The outputs clearly demonstrate The ideas are expressed using The portfolio has 3-4 items not
the 2 indicators of relevant strands very basic words and structure well placed in the overall
in professional standards with incoherence in many areas organization
and several errors in structure
and/or writing conventions

The outputs do not demonstrate The ideas are jumbled and difficult The portfolio does not follow a
any indicator in the professional to understand; errors in structure logical order
standards and writing conventions are almost
everywhere in the output

0.800 0.600 0.200


PD Credit Units
to be determined

to be determined

Timeliness

5%
4
The output/s is/are submitted more
than 3 days ahead of the deadline

The output/s is/are submitted 1-2


days before the deadline

The output/s is/are submitted on


the deadline

The output/s is/are submitted 1-3


days after the deadline

The output/s is/are submitted more


than 3 days after the deadline

0.200
←Summary of Ratings
Form 3.2AP_LDM2 Practicum Portfolio - Individual Report
←Guide
PARTICIPANT'S PROFILE
Teacher: Ana Marose S. Campollo Division:
School: Talugtug National High School-Annex Region:
Email Address: anamarose.campollo@deped.gov.ph LAC Leader:
Contact Number: 9057277838 LDM Coach:

PART II - LDM IMPLEME


Demonstration of Progress Quality of Reflection
of LDM Implementation
30% 25%
Partial Rating
4 5
5 - Excellent The outputs clearly and Reflection describes the
adequately captured the progress experience in the LDM
of the implementation of the LDM, implementation, shows in-depth
showing innovations that analysis and synthesis, and
contribute to its smooth excellently relates it to the
implementation professional standards and to
professional and personal
development goals

4 - Very Satisfactory The outputs adequately captured Reflection describes the


the progress of the implementation experience in the LDM
of the LDM implementation, shows some
analysis, and relates it to the
professional standards and to
professional and personal
development goals

3 - Satisfactory The outputs reflect to a big extent Reflection describes the


the progress of the LDM experience and relates them to the
implementation professional standards and
personal development goals

2 - Marginal The outputs reflect to a limited Reflection describes the


extent the progress of the LDM experience in the implementation
implementation of the LDM with limited attempt to
relate it to the professional
standards and personal
development goals

1 - Unsatisfactory The outputs do not show the Reflection describes experience in


progress of the LDM the implementation of the LDM
implementation with no attempt to relate it to the
professional standards and
personal development goals

Weighted Rating 1.200 1.250


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 13.4285714285714
- Individual Report of LDM2 Rating of Teachers
PARTICIPANT'S PERFORMANCE
Nueva Ecija Part I Rating (Module-based Outputs) 4.105
III Part I Rating Description: Very Satisfactory
Elma C. Pararuan Part II Rating (Practicum Portfolio) 4.700
Arnold De Castro Part II Rating Description: Oustanding

PART II - LDM IMPLEMENTATION / PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO


Demonstration of Language and Overall Organization of Portfolio
Professional Standards Presentation of the Output
20% 15% 5%
5 5 5
The outputs clearly demonstrate 5 The ideas are expressed in clear, The portfolio is logically organized,
or more indicators of relevant coherent, and appropriately- is insightful, and offers new
strands in professional standards worded language with no errors in perspective and insights
structure and/or writing
conventions

The outputs clearly demonstrate 4 The ideas are expressed in clear The portfolio is logically organized.
indicators of relevant strands in language with very minimal errors
professional standards in structure and/or writing
conventions

The outputs clearly demonstrate 3 The ideas are expressed well but The portfolio is generally well-
indicators of relevant strands in with incoherence in some areas organized with 1-2 items not well
professional standards and few errors in structure and/or placed in the overall organization
writing conventions

The outputs clearly demonstrate The ideas are expressed using The portfolio has 3-4 items not
the 2 indicators of relevant strands very basic words and structure well placed in the overall
in professional standards with incoherence in many areas organization
and several errors in structure
and/or writing conventions

The outputs do not demonstrate The ideas are jumbled and difficult The portfolio does not follow a
any indicator in the professional to understand; errors in structure logical order
standards and writing conventions are almost
everywhere in the output

1.000 0.750 0.250


PD Credit Units
to be determined

to be determined

Timeliness

5%
5
The output/s is/are submitted more
than 3 days ahead of the deadline

The output/s is/are submitted 1-2


days before the deadline

The output/s is/are submitted on


the deadline

The output/s is/are submitted 1-3


days after the deadline

The output/s is/are submitted more


than 3 days after the deadline

0.250
←Summary of Ratings
Form 3.2AP_LDM2 Practicum Portfolio - Individual Report
←Guide
PARTICIPANT'S PROFILE
Teacher: Jay Ar D. Catabona Division:
School: Talugtug National High School-Annex Region:
Email Address: jayar.catabona@deped.gov.ph LAC Leader:
Contact Number: 9275433874 LDM Coach:

PART II - LDM IMPLEME


Demonstration of Progress Quality of Reflection
of LDM Implementation
30% 25%
Partial Rating
4 5
5 - Excellent The outputs clearly and Reflection describes the
adequately captured the progress experience in the LDM
of the implementation of the LDM, implementation, shows in-depth
showing innovations that analysis and synthesis, and
contribute to its smooth excellently relates it to the
implementation professional standards and to
professional and personal
development goals

4 - Very Satisfactory The outputs adequately captured Reflection describes the


the progress of the implementation experience in the LDM
of the LDM implementation, shows some
analysis, and relates it to the
professional standards and to
professional and personal
development goals

3 - Satisfactory The outputs reflect to a big extent Reflection describes the


the progress of the LDM experience and relates them to the
implementation professional standards and
personal development goals

2 - Marginal The outputs reflect to a limited Reflection describes the


extent the progress of the LDM experience in the implementation
implementation of the LDM with limited attempt to
relate it to the professional
standards and personal
development goals

1 - Unsatisfactory The outputs do not show the Reflection describes experience in


progress of the LDM the implementation of the LDM
implementation with no attempt to relate it to the
professional standards and
personal development goals

Weighted Rating 1.200 1.250


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 13.4285714285714
- Individual Report of LDM2 Rating of Teachers
PARTICIPANT'S PERFORMANCE
Nueva Ecija Part I Rating (Module-based Outputs) 4.505
III Part I Rating Description: Oustanding
Elma C. Pararuan Part II Rating (Practicum Portfolio) 4.700
Arnold De Castro Part II Rating Description: Oustanding

PART II - LDM IMPLEMENTATION / PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO


Demonstration of Language and Overall Organization of Portfolio
Professional Standards Presentation of the Output
20% 15% 5%
5 5 5
The outputs clearly demonstrate 5 The ideas are expressed in clear, The portfolio is logically organized,
or more indicators of relevant coherent, and appropriately- is insightful, and offers new
strands in professional standards worded language with no errors in perspective and insights
structure and/or writing
conventions

The outputs clearly demonstrate 4 The ideas are expressed in clear The portfolio is logically organized.
indicators of relevant strands in language with very minimal errors
professional standards in structure and/or writing
conventions

The outputs clearly demonstrate 3 The ideas are expressed well but The portfolio is generally well-
indicators of relevant strands in with incoherence in some areas organized with 1-2 items not well
professional standards and few errors in structure and/or placed in the overall organization
writing conventions

The outputs clearly demonstrate The ideas are expressed using The portfolio has 3-4 items not
the 2 indicators of relevant strands very basic words and structure well placed in the overall
in professional standards with incoherence in many areas organization
and several errors in structure
and/or writing conventions

The outputs do not demonstrate The ideas are jumbled and difficult The portfolio does not follow a
any indicator in the professional to understand; errors in structure logical order
standards and writing conventions are almost
everywhere in the output

1.000 0.750 0.250


PD Credit Units
to be determined

to be determined

Timeliness

5%
5
The output/s is/are submitted more
than 3 days ahead of the deadline

The output/s is/are submitted 1-2


days before the deadline

The output/s is/are submitted on


the deadline

The output/s is/are submitted 1-3


days after the deadline

The output/s is/are submitted more


than 3 days after the deadline

0.250
←Summary of Ratings
Form 3.2AP_LDM2 Practicum Portfolio - Individual Report
←Guide
PARTICIPANT'S PROFILE
Teacher: Maria Diane A. Dizon Division:
School: Talugtug National High School-Annex Region:
Email Address: mariadiane.dizon001@deped.gov.ph LAC Leader:
Contact Number: 9175451929 LDM Coach:

PART II - LDM IMPLEME


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
of the implementation of the LDM, implementation, shows in-depth
showing innovations that analysis and synthesis, and
contribute to its smooth excellently relates it to the
implementation professional standards and to
professional and personal
development goals

4 - Very Satisfactory The outputs adequately captured Reflection describes the


the progress of the implementation experience in the LDM
of the LDM implementation, shows some
analysis, and relates it to the
professional standards and to
professional and personal
development goals

3 - Satisfactory The outputs reflect to a big extent Reflection describes the


the progress of the LDM experience and relates them to the
implementation professional standards and
personal development goals

2 - Marginal The outputs reflect to a limited Reflection describes the


extent the progress of the LDM experience in the implementation
implementation of the LDM with limited attempt to
relate it to the professional
standards and personal
development goals

1 - Unsatisfactory The outputs do not show the Reflection describes experience in


progress of the LDM the implementation of the LDM
implementation with no attempt to relate it to the
professional standards and
personal development goals

Weighted Rating 1.500 1.000


Final Rating (FR) 4.750

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 13.4285714285714
- Individual Report of LDM2 Rating of Teachers
PARTICIPANT'S PERFORMANCE
Nueva Ecija Part I Rating (Module-based Outputs) 4.528
III Part I Rating Description: Oustanding
Elma C. Pararuan Part II Rating (Practicum Portfolio) 4.750
Arnold De Castro Part II Rating Description: Oustanding

PART II - LDM IMPLEMENTATION / PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO


Demonstration of Language and Overall Organization of Portfolio
Professional Standards Presentation of the Output
20% 15% 5%
5 5 5
The outputs clearly demonstrate 5 The ideas are expressed in clear, The portfolio is logically organized,
or more indicators of relevant coherent, and appropriately- is insightful, and offers new
strands in professional standards worded language with no errors in perspective and insights
structure and/or writing
conventions

The outputs clearly demonstrate 4 The ideas are expressed in clear The portfolio is logically organized.
indicators of relevant strands in language with very minimal errors
professional standards in structure and/or writing
conventions

The outputs clearly demonstrate 3 The ideas are expressed well but The portfolio is generally well-
indicators of relevant strands in with incoherence in some areas organized with 1-2 items not well
professional standards and few errors in structure and/or placed in the overall organization
writing conventions

The outputs clearly demonstrate The ideas are expressed using The portfolio has 3-4 items not
the 2 indicators of relevant strands very basic words and structure well placed in the overall
in professional standards with incoherence in many areas organization
and several errors in structure
and/or writing conventions

The outputs do not demonstrate The ideas are jumbled and difficult The portfolio does not follow a
any indicator in the professional to understand; errors in structure logical order
standards and writing conventions are almost
everywhere in the output

1.000 0.750 0.250


PD Credit Units
to be determined

to be determined

Timeliness

5%
5
The output/s is/are submitted more
than 3 days ahead of the deadline

The output/s is/are submitted 1-2


days before the deadline

The output/s is/are submitted on


the deadline

The output/s is/are submitted 1-3


days after the deadline

The output/s is/are submitted more


than 3 days after the deadline

0.250
←Summary of Ratings
Form 3.2AP_LDM2 Practicum Portfolio - Individual Report
←Guide
PARTICIPANT'S PROFILE
Teacher: Adrian Bruce Duval C. Pararuan Division:
School: Talugtug National High School-Annex Region:
Email Address: adrianbruceduval.pararuan@deped.gov.ph LAC Leader:
Contact Number: 9551994555 LDM Coach:

PART II - LDM IMPLEME


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
of the implementation of the LDM, implementation, shows in-depth
showing innovations that analysis and synthesis, and
contribute to its smooth excellently relates it to the
implementation professional standards and to
professional and personal
development goals

4 - Very Satisfactory The outputs adequately captured Reflection describes the


the progress of the implementation experience in the LDM
of the LDM implementation, shows some
analysis, and relates it to the
professional standards and to
professional and personal
development goals

3 - Satisfactory The outputs reflect to a big extent Reflection describes the


the progress of the LDM experience and relates them to the
implementation professional standards and
personal development goals

2 - Marginal The outputs reflect to a limited Reflection describes the


extent the progress of the LDM experience in the implementation
implementation of the LDM with limited attempt to
relate it to the professional
standards and personal
development goals

1 - Unsatisfactory The outputs do not show the Reflection describes experience in


progress of the LDM the implementation of the LDM
implementation with no attempt to relate it to the
professional standards and
personal development goals

Weighted Rating 1.500 1.000


Final Rating (FR) 4.750

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 13.4285714285714
- Individual Report of LDM2 Rating of Teachers
PARTICIPANT'S PERFORMANCE
Nueva Ecija Part I Rating (Module-based Outputs) 4.805
III Part I Rating Description: Oustanding
Elma C. Pararuan Part II Rating (Practicum Portfolio) 4.750
Arnold De Castro Part II Rating Description: Oustanding

PART II - LDM IMPLEMENTATION / PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO


Demonstration of Language and Overall Organization of Portfolio
Professional Standards Presentation of the Output
20% 15% 5%
5 5 5
The outputs clearly demonstrate 5 The ideas are expressed in clear, The portfolio is logically organized,
or more indicators of relevant coherent, and appropriately- is insightful, and offers new
strands in professional standards worded language with no errors in perspective and insights
structure and/or writing
conventions

The outputs clearly demonstrate 4 The ideas are expressed in clear The portfolio is logically organized.
indicators of relevant strands in language with very minimal errors
professional standards in structure and/or writing
conventions

The outputs clearly demonstrate 3 The ideas are expressed well but The portfolio is generally well-
indicators of relevant strands in with incoherence in some areas organized with 1-2 items not well
professional standards and few errors in structure and/or placed in the overall organization
writing conventions

The outputs clearly demonstrate The ideas are expressed using The portfolio has 3-4 items not
the 2 indicators of relevant strands very basic words and structure well placed in the overall
in professional standards with incoherence in many areas organization
and several errors in structure
and/or writing conventions

The outputs do not demonstrate The ideas are jumbled and difficult The portfolio does not follow a
any indicator in the professional to understand; errors in structure logical order
standards and writing conventions are almost
everywhere in the output

1.000 0.750 0.250


PD Credit Units
to be determined

to be determined

Timeliness

5%
5
The output/s is/are submitted more
than 3 days ahead of the deadline

The output/s is/are submitted 1-2


days before the deadline

The output/s is/are submitted on


the deadline

The output/s is/are submitted 1-3


days after the deadline

The output/s is/are submitted more


than 3 days after the deadline

0.250
←Summary of Ratings
Form 3.2AP_LDM2 Practicum Portfolio - Individual Report
←Guide
PARTICIPANT'S PROFILE
Teacher: James Bryan F. Rosquita Division:
School: Talugtug National High School-Annex Region:
Email Address: jamesbryan.rosquita@deped.gov.ph LAC Leader:
Contact Number: 9954936232 LDM Coach:

PART II - LDM IMPLEME


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
of the implementation of the LDM, implementation, shows in-depth
showing innovations that analysis and synthesis, and
contribute to its smooth excellently relates it to the
implementation professional standards and to
professional and personal
development goals

4 - Very Satisfactory The outputs adequately captured Reflection describes the


the progress of the implementation experience in the LDM
of the LDM implementation, shows some
analysis, and relates it to the
professional standards and to
professional and personal
development goals

3 - Satisfactory The outputs reflect to a big extent Reflection describes the


the progress of the LDM experience and relates them to the
implementation professional standards and
personal development goals

2 - Marginal The outputs reflect to a limited Reflection describes the


extent the progress of the LDM experience in the implementation
implementation of the LDM with limited attempt to
relate it to the professional
standards and personal
development goals

1 - Unsatisfactory The outputs do not show the Reflection describes experience in


progress of the LDM the implementation of the LDM
implementation with no attempt to relate it to the
professional standards and
personal development goals

Weighted Rating 1.500 1.000


Final Rating (FR) 4.750

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 13.4285714285714
- Individual Report of LDM2 Rating of Teachers
PARTICIPANT'S PERFORMANCE
Nueva Ecija Part I Rating (Module-based Outputs)
III Part I Rating Description: N/A
Elma C. Pararuan Part II Rating (Practicum Portfolio) 4.750
Arnold De Castro Part II Rating Description: Oustanding

PART II - LDM IMPLEMENTATION / PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO


Demonstration of Language and Overall Organization of Portfolio
Professional Standards Presentation of the Output
20% 15% 5%
5 5 5
The outputs clearly demonstrate 5 The ideas are expressed in clear, The portfolio is logically organized,
or more indicators of relevant coherent, and appropriately- is insightful, and offers new
strands in professional standards worded language with no errors in perspective and insights
structure and/or writing
conventions

The outputs clearly demonstrate 4 The ideas are expressed in clear The portfolio is logically organized.
indicators of relevant strands in language with very minimal errors
professional standards in structure and/or writing
conventions

The outputs clearly demonstrate 3 The ideas are expressed well but The portfolio is generally well-
indicators of relevant strands in with incoherence in some areas organized with 1-2 items not well
professional standards and few errors in structure and/or placed in the overall organization
writing conventions

The outputs clearly demonstrate The ideas are expressed using The portfolio has 3-4 items not
the 2 indicators of relevant strands very basic words and structure well placed in the overall
in professional standards with incoherence in many areas organization
and several errors in structure
and/or writing conventions

The outputs do not demonstrate The ideas are jumbled and difficult The portfolio does not follow a
any indicator in the professional to understand; errors in structure logical order
standards and writing conventions are almost
everywhere in the output

1.000 0.750 0.250


PD Credit Units
to be determined

to be determined

Timeliness

5%
5
The output/s is/are submitted more
than 3 days ahead of the deadline

The output/s is/are submitted 1-2


days before the deadline

The output/s is/are submitted on


the deadline

The output/s is/are submitted 1-3


days after the deadline

The output/s is/are submitted more


than 3 days after the deadline

0.250
←Summary of Ratings
Form 3.2AP_LDM2 Practicum Portfolio - Individual Report
←Guide
PARTICIPANT'S PROFILE
Teacher: Division:
School: Region:
Email Address: LAC Leader:
Contact Number: LDM Coach:

PART II - LDM IMPLEME


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

5 - Excellent The outputs clearly and Reflection describes the


adequately captured the progress experience in the LDM
of the implementation of the LDM, implementation, shows in-depth
showing innovations that analysis and synthesis, and
contribute to its smooth excellently relates it to the
implementation professional standards and to
professional and personal
development goals

4 - Very Satisfactory The outputs adequately captured Reflection describes the


the progress of the implementation experience in the LDM
of the LDM implementation, shows some
analysis, and relates it to the
professional standards and to
professional and personal
development goals

3 - Satisfactory The outputs reflect to a big extent Reflection describes the


the progress of the LDM experience and relates them to the
implementation professional standards and
personal development goals

2 - Marginal The outputs reflect to a limited Reflection describes the


extent the progress of the LDM experience in the implementation
implementation of the LDM with limited attempt to
relate it to the professional
standards and personal
development goals

1 - Unsatisfactory The outputs do not show the Reflection describes experience in


progress of the LDM the implementation of the LDM
implementation with no attempt to relate it to the
professional standards and
personal development goals

Weighted Rating 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 13.4285714285714
- Individual Report of LDM2 Rating of Teachers
PARTICIPANT'S PERFORMANCE
Nueva Ecija Part I Rating (Module-based Outputs)
III Part I Rating Description: N/A
Elma C. Pararuan Part II Rating (Practicum Portfolio) 0.000
Arnold De Castro Part II Rating Description: N/A

PART II - LDM IMPLEMENTATION / PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO


Demonstration of Language and Overall Organization of Portfolio
Professional Standards Presentation of the Output
20% 15% 5%

The outputs clearly demonstrate 5 The ideas are expressed in clear, The portfolio is logically organized,
or more indicators of relevant coherent, and appropriately- is insightful, and offers new
strands in professional standards worded language with no errors in perspective and insights
structure and/or writing
conventions

The outputs clearly demonstrate 4 The ideas are expressed in clear The portfolio is logically organized.
indicators of relevant strands in language with very minimal errors
professional standards in structure and/or writing
conventions

The outputs clearly demonstrate 3 The ideas are expressed well but The portfolio is generally well-
indicators of relevant strands in with incoherence in some areas organized with 1-2 items not well
professional standards and few errors in structure and/or placed in the overall organization
writing conventions

The outputs clearly demonstrate The ideas are expressed using The portfolio has 3-4 items not
the 2 indicators of relevant strands very basic words and structure well placed in the overall
in professional standards with incoherence in many areas organization
and several errors in structure
and/or writing conventions

The outputs do not demonstrate The ideas are jumbled and difficult The portfolio does not follow a
any indicator in the professional to understand; errors in structure logical order
standards and writing conventions are almost
everywhere in the output

0.000 0.000 0.000


PD Credit Units
to be determined

to be determined

Timeliness

5%

The output/s is/are submitted more


than 3 days ahead of the deadline

The output/s is/are submitted 1-2


days before the deadline

The output/s is/are submitted on


the deadline

The output/s is/are submitted 1-3


days after the deadline

The output/s is/are submitted more


than 3 days after the deadline

0.000
←Summary of Ratings
Form 3.2AP_LDM2 Practicum Portfolio - Individual Report
←Guide
PARTICIPANT'S PROFILE
Teacher: Division:
School: Region:
Email Address: LAC Leader:
Contact Number: LDM Coach:

PART II - LDM IMPLEME


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

5 - Excellent The outputs clearly and Reflection describes the


adequately captured the progress experience in the LDM
of the implementation of the LDM, implementation, shows in-depth
showing innovations that analysis and synthesis, and
contribute to its smooth excellently relates it to the
implementation professional standards and to
professional and personal
development goals

4 - Very Satisfactory The outputs adequately captured Reflection describes the


the progress of the implementation experience in the LDM
of the LDM implementation, shows some
analysis, and relates it to the
professional standards and to
professional and personal
development goals

3 - Satisfactory The outputs reflect to a big extent Reflection describes the


the progress of the LDM experience and relates them to the
implementation professional standards and
personal development goals

2 - Marginal The outputs reflect to a limited Reflection describes the


extent the progress of the LDM experience in the implementation
implementation of the LDM with limited attempt to
relate it to the professional
standards and personal
development goals

1 - Unsatisfactory The outputs do not show the Reflection describes experience in


progress of the LDM the implementation of the LDM
implementation with no attempt to relate it to the
professional standards and
personal development goals

Weighted Rating 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 13.4285714285714
- Individual Report of LDM2 Rating of Teachers
PARTICIPANT'S PERFORMANCE
Nueva Ecija Part I Rating (Module-based Outputs)
III Part I Rating Description: N/A
Elma C. Pararuan Part II Rating (Practicum Portfolio) 0.000
Arnold De Castro Part II Rating Description: N/A

PART II - LDM IMPLEMENTATION / PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO


Demonstration of Language and Overall Organization of Portfolio
Professional Standards Presentation of the Output
20% 15% 5%

The outputs clearly demonstrate 5 The ideas are expressed in clear, The portfolio is logically organized,
or more indicators of relevant coherent, and appropriately- is insightful, and offers new
strands in professional standards worded language with no errors in perspective and insights
structure and/or writing
conventions

The outputs clearly demonstrate 4 The ideas are expressed in clear The portfolio is logically organized.
indicators of relevant strands in language with very minimal errors
professional standards in structure and/or writing
conventions

The outputs clearly demonstrate 3 The ideas are expressed well but The portfolio is generally well-
indicators of relevant strands in with incoherence in some areas organized with 1-2 items not well
professional standards and few errors in structure and/or placed in the overall organization
writing conventions

The outputs clearly demonstrate The ideas are expressed using The portfolio has 3-4 items not
the 2 indicators of relevant strands very basic words and structure well placed in the overall
in professional standards with incoherence in many areas organization
and several errors in structure
and/or writing conventions

The outputs do not demonstrate The ideas are jumbled and difficult The portfolio does not follow a
any indicator in the professional to understand; errors in structure logical order
standards and writing conventions are almost
everywhere in the output

0.000 0.000 0.000


PD Credit Units
to be determined

to be determined

Timeliness

5%

The output/s is/are submitted more


than 3 days ahead of the deadline

The output/s is/are submitted 1-2


days before the deadline

The output/s is/are submitted on


the deadline

The output/s is/are submitted 1-3


days after the deadline

The output/s is/are submitted more


than 3 days after the deadline

0.000
←Summary of Ratings
Form 3.2AP_LDM2 Practicum Portfolio - Individual Report
←Guide
PARTICIPANT'S PROFILE
Teacher: Division:
School: Region:
Email Address: LAC Leader:
Contact Number: LDM Coach:

PART II - LDM IMPLEME


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

5 - Excellent The outputs clearly and Reflection describes the


adequately captured the progress experience in the LDM
of the implementation of the LDM, implementation, shows in-depth
showing innovations that analysis and synthesis, and
contribute to its smooth excellently relates it to the
implementation professional standards and to
professional and personal
development goals

4 - Very Satisfactory The outputs adequately captured Reflection describes the


the progress of the implementation experience in the LDM
of the LDM implementation, shows some
analysis, and relates it to the
professional standards and to
professional and personal
development goals

3 - Satisfactory The outputs reflect to a big extent Reflection describes the


the progress of the LDM experience and relates them to the
implementation professional standards and
personal development goals

2 - Marginal The outputs reflect to a limited Reflection describes the


extent the progress of the LDM experience in the implementation
implementation of the LDM with limited attempt to
relate it to the professional
standards and personal
development goals

1 - Unsatisfactory The outputs do not show the Reflection describes experience in


progress of the LDM the implementation of the LDM
implementation with no attempt to relate it to the
professional standards and
personal development goals

Weighted Rating 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 13.4285714285714
- Individual Report of LDM2 Rating of Teachers
PARTICIPANT'S PERFORMANCE
Nueva Ecija Part I Rating (Module-based Outputs)
III Part I Rating Description: N/A
Elma C. Pararuan Part II Rating (Practicum Portfolio) 0.000
Arnold De Castro Part II Rating Description: N/A

PART II - LDM IMPLEMENTATION / PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO


Demonstration of Language and Overall Organization of Portfolio
Professional Standards Presentation of the Output
20% 15% 5%

The outputs clearly demonstrate 5 The ideas are expressed in clear, The portfolio is logically organized,
or more indicators of relevant coherent, and appropriately- is insightful, and offers new
strands in professional standards worded language with no errors in perspective and insights
structure and/or writing
conventions

The outputs clearly demonstrate 4 The ideas are expressed in clear The portfolio is logically organized.
indicators of relevant strands in language with very minimal errors
professional standards in structure and/or writing
conventions

The outputs clearly demonstrate 3 The ideas are expressed well but The portfolio is generally well-
indicators of relevant strands in with incoherence in some areas organized with 1-2 items not well
professional standards and few errors in structure and/or placed in the overall organization
writing conventions

The outputs clearly demonstrate The ideas are expressed using The portfolio has 3-4 items not
the 2 indicators of relevant strands very basic words and structure well placed in the overall
in professional standards with incoherence in many areas organization
and several errors in structure
and/or writing conventions

The outputs do not demonstrate The ideas are jumbled and difficult The portfolio does not follow a
any indicator in the professional to understand; errors in structure logical order
standards and writing conventions are almost
everywhere in the output

0.000 0.000 0.000


PD Credit Units
to be determined

to be determined

Timeliness

5%

The output/s is/are submitted more


than 3 days ahead of the deadline

The output/s is/are submitted 1-2


days before the deadline

The output/s is/are submitted on


the deadline

The output/s is/are submitted 1-3


days after the deadline

The output/s is/are submitted more


than 3 days after the deadline

0.000

You might also like