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 RENDENTOR M. SAMBAAN
Division SOUTH COTABATO
Region XII
Contact Details 9097515881
LDM Coach ESTEBAN S. ALVAREZ

PART II LDM Implementation/ Practicum Por

SH School Name Name Numerical Rating

1 PULO SUBONG IS ROTCHEL S. DORDAS 4.45

2 PULO SUBONG IS SAREN G. PEÑOLVO 4.55
3 PULO SUBONG IS KRISTINE JOY T. FAMULAG 4.40
4 PULO SUBONG IS GRACELYN P. FERNANDO 4.40
5 PULO SUBONG IS LEYNIE JEAN E. BAYOS 4.40
6 PULO SUBONG IS MELY C. PEÑAREDONDO 4.40
7 PULO SUBONG IS CHARIE G. BERDIN 4.40
8 PULO SUBONG IS MARITES C. BUCANE 4.55
9 PULO SUBONG IS JONALYN E. PALANOG 4.55
10 PULO SUBONG IS MERL JOY G. GENTEROLA 4.40
11 PULO SUBONG IS CHARMIE ROSE P. LILAGAN 4.40
12 PULO SUBONG IS LEO S. MARAVILLOSO 4.40
13 PULO SUBONG IS JESSA MAE A. CATIGDAY 4.55
14 PULO SUBONG IS AIRYN P. MINSAD 4.40
15 0 0 0.00
 olio - Summary of LDM2 Ratings of Teachers
NTOR M. SAMBAAN
COTABATO

881
N S. ALVAREZ

ART II LDM Implementation/ Practicum Portfolio

Descriptive Rating PD Credit Units

Very Satisfactory Earned PD credit units will be subjected to the PD credit units banking mechanism of DepEd NEAP
Very Satisfactory
Very Satisfactory
Very Satisfactory
Very Satisfactory
Very Satisfactory
Very Satisfactory
Oustanding
Oustanding
Very Satisfactory
Very Satisfactory
Very Satisfactory
Oustanding
Very Satisfactory
N/A
←Summary of Ratings
Form 3.2AP_LDM2 Practicum Portfolio - Individual Report
←Guide
PARTICIPANT'S PROFILE
Teacher: ROTCHEL S. DORDAS
School: PULO SUBONG IS
Email Address: rotchel.dordas@deped.gov.ph
Contact Number: 9169232694
Demonstration of Progress
of LDM Implementation
30%
Partial Rating 5 4
5 - Excellent The outputs clearly and
adequately captured the progress
of the implementation of the LDM,
showing innovations that
contribute to its smooth
implementation
4 - Very Satisfactory The outputs adequately captured
the progress of the implementation
of the LDM
3 - Satisfactory The outputs reflect to a big extent
the progress of the LDM
implementation
2 - Marginal The outputs reflect to a limited
extent the progress of the LDM
implementation
1 - Unsatisfactory The outputs do not show the
progress of the LDM
implementation
Division:
Region:
LAC Leader:
LDM Coach:
PART II - LDM IMPLEME
Quality of Reflection
25%
Reflection describes the
experience in the LDM
implementation, shows in-depth
analysis and synthesis, and
excellently relates it to the
professional standards and to
professional and personal
development goals
Reflection describes the
experience in the LDM
implementation, shows some
analysis, and relates it to the
professional standards and to
professional and personal
development goals
Reflection describes the
experience and relates them to the
professional standards and
personal development goals
Reflection describes the
experience in the implementation
of the LDM with limited attempt to
relate it to the professional
standards and personal
development goals
Reflection describes experience in
the implementation of the LDM
with no attempt to relate it to the
professional standards and
personal development goals
Weighted Rating 1.500 1.000

Final Rating (FR) 4.450

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
SOUTH COTABATO
XII
RENDENTOR M. SAMBAAN
ESTEBAN S. ALVAREZ
PART II - LDM IMPLEMENTATION / PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO
Demonstration of Language and Overall
Professional Standards Presentation of the Output
20%
4 5
The outputs clearly demonstrate 5
or more indicators of relevant
strands in professional standards
The outputs clearly demonstrate 4
indicators of relevant strands in
professional standards
The outputs clearly demonstrate 3
indicators of relevant strands in
professional standards
The outputs clearly demonstrate
the 2 indicators of relevant strands
in professional standards
The outputs do not demonstrate
any indicator in the professional
standards
PARTICIPANT'S PERFORMANCE
Part I Rating (Module-based Outputs)
Part I Rating Description:
Part II Rating (Practicum Portfolio)
Part II Rating Description:
15%
The ideas are expressed in clear,
coherent, and appropriately-
worded language with no errors in
structure and/or writing
conventions
The ideas are expressed in clear
language with very minimal errors
in structure and/or writing
conventions
The ideas are expressed well but
with incoherence in some areas
and few errors in structure and/or
writing conventions
The ideas are expressed using
very basic words and structure
with incoherence in many areas
and several errors in structure
and/or writing conventions
The ideas are jumbled and difficult
to understand; errors in structure
and writing conventions are almost
everywhere in the output
3.900
Very Satisfactory
4.450
Very Satisfactory
Organization of Portfolio
5%
4
The portfolio is logically organized,
is insightful, and offers new
perspective and insights
The portfolio is logically organized.
The portfolio is generally well-
organized with 1-2 items not well
placed in the overall organization
The portfolio has 3-4 items not
well placed in the overall
organization
The portfolio does not follow a
logical order
0.800 0.750 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: SAREN G. PEÑOLVO
School: PULO SUBONG IS
Email Address: saren.penolvo@deped.gov.ph
Contact Number: 9383988526
Demonstration of Progress
of LDM Implementation
30%
Partial Rating 5 4
5 - Excellent The outputs clearly and
adequately captured the progress
of the implementation of the LDM,
showing innovations that
contribute to its smooth
implementation
4 - Very Satisfactory The outputs adequately captured
the progress of the implementation
of the LDM
3 - Satisfactory The outputs reflect to a big extent
the progress of the LDM
implementation
2 - Marginal The outputs reflect to a limited
extent the progress of the LDM
implementation
1 - Unsatisfactory The outputs do not show the
progress of the LDM
implementation
Division:
Region:
LAC Leader:
LDM Coach:
PART II - LDM IMPLEME
Quality of Reflection
25%
Reflection describes the
experience in the LDM
implementation, shows in-depth
analysis and synthesis, and
excellently relates it to the
professional standards and to
professional and personal
development goals
Reflection describes the
experience in the LDM
implementation, shows some
analysis, and relates it to the
professional standards and to
professional and personal
development goals
Reflection describes the
experience and relates them to the
professional standards and
personal development goals
Reflection describes the
experience in the implementation
of the LDM with limited attempt to
relate it to the professional
standards and personal
development goals
Reflection describes experience in
the implementation of the LDM
with no attempt to relate it to the
professional standards and
personal development goals
Weighted Rating 1.500 1.000

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
SOUTH COTABATO
XII
RENDENTOR M. SAMBAAN
ESTEBAN S. ALVAREZ
PART II - LDM IMPLEMENTATION / PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO
Demonstration of Language and Overall
Professional Standards Presentation of the Output
20%
4 5
The outputs clearly demonstrate 5
or more indicators of relevant
strands in professional standards
The outputs clearly demonstrate 4
indicators of relevant strands in
professional standards
The outputs clearly demonstrate 3
indicators of relevant strands in
professional standards
The outputs clearly demonstrate
the 2 indicators of relevant strands
in professional standards
The outputs do not demonstrate
any indicator in the professional
standards
PARTICIPANT'S PERFORMANCE
Part I Rating (Module-based Outputs)
Part I Rating Description:
Part II Rating (Practicum Portfolio)
Part II Rating Description:
15%
The ideas are expressed in clear,
coherent, and appropriately-
worded language with no errors in
structure and/or writing
conventions
The ideas are expressed in clear
language with very minimal errors
in structure and/or writing
conventions
The ideas are expressed well but
with incoherence in some areas
and few errors in structure and/or
writing conventions
The ideas are expressed using
very basic words and structure
with incoherence in many areas
and several errors in structure
and/or writing conventions
The ideas are jumbled and difficult
to understand; errors in structure
and writing conventions are almost
everywhere in the output
3.908
Very Satisfactory
4.550
Oustanding
Organization of Portfolio
5%
5
The portfolio is logically organized,
is insightful, and offers new
perspective and insights
The portfolio is logically organized.
The portfolio is generally well-
organized with 1-2 items not well
placed in the overall organization
The portfolio has 3-4 items not
well placed in the overall
organization
The portfolio does not follow a
logical order
0.800 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: KRISTINE JOY T. FAMULAG
School: PULO SUBONG IS
Email Address: kristinejoy.famulag@deped.gov.ph
Contact Number:
Demonstration of Progress
of LDM Implementation
30%
Partial Rating 5 4
5 - Excellent The outputs clearly and
adequately captured the progress
of the implementation of the LDM,
showing innovations that
contribute to its smooth
implementation
4 - Very Satisfactory The outputs adequately captured
the progress of the implementation
of the LDM
3 - Satisfactory The outputs reflect to a big extent
the progress of the LDM
implementation
2 - Marginal The outputs reflect to a limited
extent the progress of the LDM
implementation
1 - Unsatisfactory The outputs do not show the
progress of the LDM
implementation
Division:
Region:
LAC Leader:
LDM Coach:
PART II - LDM IMPLEME
Quality of Reflection
25%
Reflection describes the
experience in the LDM
implementation, shows in-depth
analysis and synthesis, and
excellently relates it to the
professional standards and to
professional and personal
development goals
Reflection describes the
experience in the LDM
implementation, shows some
analysis, and relates it to the
professional standards and to
professional and personal
development goals
Reflection describes the
experience and relates them to the
professional standards and
personal development goals
Reflection describes the
experience in the implementation
of the LDM with limited attempt to
relate it to the professional
standards and personal
development goals
Reflection describes experience in
the implementation of the LDM
with no attempt to relate it to the
professional standards and
personal development goals
Weighted Rating 1.500 1.000

Final Rating (FR) 4.400

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
SOUTH COTABATO
XII
RENDENTOR M. SAMBAAN
ESTEBAN S. ALVAREZ
PART II - LDM IMPLEMENTATION / PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO
Demonstration of Language and Overall
Professional Standards Presentation of the Output
20%
4 4
The outputs clearly demonstrate 5
or more indicators of relevant
strands in professional standards
The outputs clearly demonstrate 4
indicators of relevant strands in
professional standards
The outputs clearly demonstrate 3
indicators of relevant strands in
professional standards
The outputs clearly demonstrate
the 2 indicators of relevant strands
in professional standards
The outputs do not demonstrate
any indicator in the professional
standards
PARTICIPANT'S PERFORMANCE
Part I Rating (Module-based Outputs)
Part I Rating Description:
Part II Rating (Practicum Portfolio)
Part II Rating Description:
15%
The ideas are expressed in clear,
coherent, and appropriately-
worded language with no errors in
structure and/or writing
conventions
The ideas are expressed in clear
language with very minimal errors
in structure and/or writing
conventions
The ideas are expressed well but
with incoherence in some areas
and few errors in structure and/or
writing conventions
The ideas are expressed using
very basic words and structure
with incoherence in many areas
and several errors in structure
and/or writing conventions
The ideas are jumbled and difficult
to understand; errors in structure
and writing conventions are almost
everywhere in the output
3.848
Very Satisfactory
4.400
Very Satisfactory
Organization of Portfolio
5%
5
The portfolio is logically organized,
is insightful, and offers new
perspective and insights
The portfolio is logically organized.
The portfolio is generally well-
organized with 1-2 items not well
placed in the overall organization
The portfolio has 3-4 items not
well placed in the overall
organization
The portfolio does not follow a
logical order
0.800 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: GRACELYN P. FERNANDO
School: PULO SUBONG IS
Email Address: gracelyn.fernando@deped.gov.ph
Contact Number: 948837041
Demonstration of Progress
of LDM Implementation
30%
Partial Rating 5 4
5 - Excellent The outputs clearly and
adequately captured the progress
of the implementation of the LDM,
showing innovations that
contribute to its smooth
implementation
4 - Very Satisfactory The outputs adequately captured
the progress of the implementation
of the LDM
3 - Satisfactory The outputs reflect to a big extent
the progress of the LDM
implementation
2 - Marginal The outputs reflect to a limited
extent the progress of the LDM
implementation
1 - Unsatisfactory The outputs do not show the
progress of the LDM
implementation
Division:
Region:
LAC Leader:
LDM Coach:
PART II - LDM IMPLEME
Quality of Reflection
25%
Reflection describes the
experience in the LDM
implementation, shows in-depth
analysis and synthesis, and
excellently relates it to the
professional standards and to
professional and personal
development goals
Reflection describes the
experience in the LDM
implementation, shows some
analysis, and relates it to the
professional standards and to
professional and personal
development goals
Reflection describes the
experience and relates them to the
professional standards and
personal development goals
Reflection describes the
experience in the implementation
of the LDM with limited attempt to
relate it to the professional
standards and personal
development goals
Reflection describes experience in
the implementation of the LDM
with no attempt to relate it to the
professional standards and
personal development goals
Weighted Rating 1.500 1.000

Final Rating (FR) 4.400

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
SOUTH COTABATO
XII
RENDENTOR M. SAMBAAN
ESTEBAN S. ALVAREZ
PART II - LDM IMPLEMENTATION / PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO
Demonstration of Language and Overall
Professional Standards Presentation of the Output
20%
4 4
The outputs clearly demonstrate 5
or more indicators of relevant
strands in professional standards
The outputs clearly demonstrate 4
indicators of relevant strands in
professional standards
The outputs clearly demonstrate 3
indicators of relevant strands in
professional standards
The outputs clearly demonstrate
the 2 indicators of relevant strands
in professional standards
The outputs do not demonstrate
any indicator in the professional
standards
PARTICIPANT'S PERFORMANCE
Part I Rating (Module-based Outputs)
Part I Rating Description:
Part II Rating (Practicum Portfolio)
Part II Rating Description:
15%
The ideas are expressed in clear,
coherent, and appropriately-
worded language with no errors in
structure and/or writing
conventions
The ideas are expressed in clear
language with very minimal errors
in structure and/or writing
conventions
The ideas are expressed well but
with incoherence in some areas
and few errors in structure and/or
writing conventions
The ideas are expressed using
very basic words and structure
with incoherence in many areas
and several errors in structure
and/or writing conventions
The ideas are jumbled and difficult
to understand; errors in structure
and writing conventions are almost
everywhere in the output
3.865
Very Satisfactory
4.400
Very Satisfactory
Organization of Portfolio
5%
5
The portfolio is logically organized,
is insightful, and offers new
perspective and insights
The portfolio is logically organized.
The portfolio is generally well-
organized with 1-2 items not well
placed in the overall organization
The portfolio has 3-4 items not
well placed in the overall
organization
The portfolio does not follow a
logical order
0.800 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: LEYNIE JEAN E. BAYOS
School: PULO SUBONG IS
Email Address: leyniejean.bayos@deped.gov.ph
Contact Number: 9366907280
Demonstration of Progress
of LDM Implementation
30%
Partial Rating 5 4
5 - Excellent The outputs clearly and
adequately captured the progress
of the implementation of the LDM,
showing innovations that
contribute to its smooth
implementation
4 - Very Satisfactory The outputs adequately captured
the progress of the implementation
of the LDM
3 - Satisfactory The outputs reflect to a big extent
the progress of the LDM
implementation
2 - Marginal The outputs reflect to a limited
extent the progress of the LDM
implementation
1 - Unsatisfactory The outputs do not show the
progress of the LDM
implementation
Division:
Region:
LAC Leader:
LDM Coach:
PART II - LDM IMPLEME
Quality of Reflection
25%
Reflection describes the
experience in the LDM
implementation, shows in-depth
analysis and synthesis, and
excellently relates it to the
professional standards and to
professional and personal
development goals
Reflection describes the
experience in the LDM
implementation, shows some
analysis, and relates it to the
professional standards and to
professional and personal
development goals
Reflection describes the
experience and relates them to the
professional standards and
personal development goals
Reflection describes the
experience in the implementation
of the LDM with limited attempt to
relate it to the professional
standards and personal
development goals
Reflection describes experience in
the implementation of the LDM
with no attempt to relate it to the
professional standards and
personal development goals
Weighted Rating 1.500 1.000

Final Rating (FR) 4.400

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
SOUTH COTABATO
XII
RENDENTOR M. SAMBAAN
ESTEBAN S. ALVAREZ
PART II - LDM IMPLEMENTATION / PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO
Demonstration of Language and Overall
Professional Standards Presentation of the Output
20%
4 4
The outputs clearly demonstrate 5
or more indicators of relevant
strands in professional standards
The outputs clearly demonstrate 4
indicators of relevant strands in
professional standards
The outputs clearly demonstrate 3
indicators of relevant strands in
professional standards
The outputs clearly demonstrate
the 2 indicators of relevant strands
in professional standards
The outputs do not demonstrate
any indicator in the professional
standards
PARTICIPANT'S PERFORMANCE
Part I Rating (Module-based Outputs)
Part I Rating Description:
Part II Rating (Practicum Portfolio)
Part II Rating Description:
15%
The ideas are expressed in clear,
coherent, and appropriately-
worded language with no errors in
structure and/or writing
conventions
The ideas are expressed in clear
language with very minimal errors
in structure and/or writing
conventions
The ideas are expressed well but
with incoherence in some areas
and few errors in structure and/or
writing conventions
The ideas are expressed using
very basic words and structure
with incoherence in many areas
and several errors in structure
and/or writing conventions
The ideas are jumbled and difficult
to understand; errors in structure
and writing conventions are almost
everywhere in the output
3.818
Very Satisfactory
4.400
Very Satisfactory
Organization of Portfolio
5%
5
The portfolio is logically organized,
is insightful, and offers new
perspective and insights
The portfolio is logically organized.
The portfolio is generally well-
organized with 1-2 items not well
placed in the overall organization
The portfolio has 3-4 items not
well placed in the overall
organization
The portfolio does not follow a
logical order
0.800 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: MELY C. PEÑAREDONDO
School: PULO SUBONG IS
Email Address: mely.penaredodondo@deped.gov.ph
Contact Number: 9205261456
Demonstration of Progress
of LDM Implementation
30%
Partial Rating 5 4
5 - Excellent The outputs clearly and
adequately captured the progress
of the implementation of the LDM,
showing innovations that
contribute to its smooth
implementation
4 - Very Satisfactory The outputs adequately captured
the progress of the implementation
of the LDM
3 - Satisfactory The outputs reflect to a big extent
the progress of the LDM
implementation
2 - Marginal The outputs reflect to a limited
extent the progress of the LDM
implementation
1 - Unsatisfactory The outputs do not show the
progress of the LDM
implementation
Division:
Region:
LAC Leader:
LDM Coach:
PART II - LDM IMPLEME
Quality of Reflection
25%
Reflection describes the
experience in the LDM
implementation, shows in-depth
analysis and synthesis, and
excellently relates it to the
professional standards and to
professional and personal
development goals
Reflection describes the
experience in the LDM
implementation, shows some
analysis, and relates it to the
professional standards and to
professional and personal
development goals
Reflection describes the
experience and relates them to the
professional standards and
personal development goals
Reflection describes the
experience in the implementation
of the LDM with limited attempt to
relate it to the professional
standards and personal
development goals
Reflection describes experience in
the implementation of the LDM
with no attempt to relate it to the
professional standards and
personal development goals
Weighted Rating 1.500 1.000

Final Rating (FR) 4.400

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
SOUTH COTABATO
XII
RENDENTOR M. SAMBAAN
ESTEBAN S. ALVAREZ
PART II - LDM IMPLEMENTATION / PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO
Demonstration of Language and Overall
Professional Standards Presentation of the Output
20%
4 4
The outputs clearly demonstrate 5
or more indicators of relevant
strands in professional standards
The outputs clearly demonstrate 4
indicators of relevant strands in
professional standards
The outputs clearly demonstrate 3
indicators of relevant strands in
professional standards
The outputs clearly demonstrate
the 2 indicators of relevant strands
in professional standards
The outputs do not demonstrate
any indicator in the professional
standards
PARTICIPANT'S PERFORMANCE
Part I Rating (Module-based Outputs)
Part I Rating Description:
Part II Rating (Practicum Portfolio)
Part II Rating Description:
15%
The ideas are expressed in clear,
coherent, and appropriately-
worded language with no errors in
structure and/or writing
conventions
The ideas are expressed in clear
language with very minimal errors
in structure and/or writing
conventions
The ideas are expressed well but
with incoherence in some areas
and few errors in structure and/or
writing conventions
The ideas are expressed using
very basic words and structure
with incoherence in many areas
and several errors in structure
and/or writing conventions
The ideas are jumbled and difficult
to understand; errors in structure
and writing conventions are almost
everywhere in the output
3.918
Very Satisfactory
4.400
Very Satisfactory
Organization of Portfolio
5%
5
The portfolio is logically organized,
is insightful, and offers new
perspective and insights
The portfolio is logically organized.
The portfolio is generally well-
organized with 1-2 items not well
placed in the overall organization
The portfolio has 3-4 items not
well placed in the overall
organization
The portfolio does not follow a
logical order
0.800 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: CHARIE G. BERDIN
School: PULO SUBONG IS
Email Address: charie.gaylan@deped.gov.ph
Contact Number: 9074913903
Demonstration of Progress
of LDM Implementation
30%
Partial Rating 5 4
5 - Excellent The outputs clearly and
adequately captured the progress
of the implementation of the LDM,
showing innovations that
contribute to its smooth
implementation
4 - Very Satisfactory The outputs adequately captured
the progress of the implementation
of the LDM
3 - Satisfactory The outputs reflect to a big extent
the progress of the LDM
implementation
2 - Marginal The outputs reflect to a limited
extent the progress of the LDM
implementation
1 - Unsatisfactory The outputs do not show the
progress of the LDM
implementation
Division:
Region:
LAC Leader:
LDM Coach:
PART II - LDM IMPLEME
Quality of Reflection
25%
Reflection describes the
experience in the LDM
implementation, shows in-depth
analysis and synthesis, and
excellently relates it to the
professional standards and to
professional and personal
development goals
Reflection describes the
experience in the LDM
implementation, shows some
analysis, and relates it to the
professional standards and to
professional and personal
development goals
Reflection describes the
experience and relates them to the
professional standards and
personal development goals
Reflection describes the
experience in the implementation
of the LDM with limited attempt to
relate it to the professional
standards and personal
development goals
Reflection describes experience in
the implementation of the LDM
with no attempt to relate it to the
professional standards and
personal development goals
Weighted Rating 1.500 1.000

Final Rating (FR) 4.400

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
SOUTH COTABATO
XII
RENDENTOR M. SAMBAAN
ESTEBAN S. ALVAREZ
PART II - LDM IMPLEMENTATION / PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO
Demonstration of Language and Overall
Professional Standards Presentation of the Output
20%
4 4
The outputs clearly demonstrate 5
or more indicators of relevant
strands in professional standards
The outputs clearly demonstrate 4
indicators of relevant strands in
professional standards
The outputs clearly demonstrate 3
indicators of relevant strands in
professional standards
The outputs clearly demonstrate
the 2 indicators of relevant strands
in professional standards
The outputs do not demonstrate
any indicator in the professional
standards
PARTICIPANT'S PERFORMANCE
Part I Rating (Module-based Outputs)
Part I Rating Description:
Part II Rating (Practicum Portfolio)
Part II Rating Description:
15%
The ideas are expressed in clear,
coherent, and appropriately-
worded language with no errors in
structure and/or writing
conventions
The ideas are expressed in clear
language with very minimal errors
in structure and/or writing
conventions
The ideas are expressed well but
with incoherence in some areas
and few errors in structure and/or
writing conventions
The ideas are expressed using
very basic words and structure
with incoherence in many areas
and several errors in structure
and/or writing conventions
The ideas are jumbled and difficult
to understand; errors in structure
and writing conventions are almost
everywhere in the output
4.023
Very Satisfactory
4.400
Very Satisfactory
Organization of Portfolio
5%
5
The portfolio is logically organized,
is insightful, and offers new
perspective and insights
The portfolio is logically organized.
The portfolio is generally well-
organized with 1-2 items not well
placed in the overall organization
The portfolio has 3-4 items not
well placed in the overall
organization
The portfolio does not follow a
logical order
0.800 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: MARITES C. BUCANE
School: PULO SUBONG IS
Email Address: marites.bucane@deped.gov.ph
Contact Number: 9122778020
Demonstration of Progress
of LDM Implementation
30%
Partial Rating 5 4
5 - Excellent The outputs clearly and
adequately captured the progress
of the implementation of the LDM,
showing innovations that
contribute to its smooth
implementation
4 - Very Satisfactory The outputs adequately captured
the progress of the implementation
of the LDM
3 - Satisfactory The outputs reflect to a big extent
the progress of the LDM
implementation
2 - Marginal The outputs reflect to a limited
extent the progress of the LDM
implementation
1 - Unsatisfactory The outputs do not show the
progress of the LDM
implementation
Division:
Region:
LAC Leader:
LDM Coach:
PART II - LDM IMPLEME
Quality of Reflection
25%
Reflection describes the
experience in the LDM
implementation, shows in-depth
analysis and synthesis, and
excellently relates it to the
professional standards and to
professional and personal
development goals
Reflection describes the
experience in the LDM
implementation, shows some
analysis, and relates it to the
professional standards and to
professional and personal
development goals
Reflection describes the
experience and relates them to the
professional standards and
personal development goals
Reflection describes the
experience in the implementation
of the LDM with limited attempt to
relate it to the professional
standards and personal
development goals
Reflection describes experience in
the implementation of the LDM
with no attempt to relate it to the
professional standards and
personal development goals
Weighted Rating 1.500 1.000

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
SOUTH COTABATO
XII
RENDENTOR M. SAMBAAN
ESTEBAN S. ALVAREZ
PART II - LDM IMPLEMENTATION / PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO
Demonstration of Language and Overall
Professional Standards Presentation of the Output
20%
4 5
The outputs clearly demonstrate 5
or more indicators of relevant
strands in professional standards
The outputs clearly demonstrate 4
indicators of relevant strands in
professional standards
The outputs clearly demonstrate 3
indicators of relevant strands in
professional standards
The outputs clearly demonstrate
the 2 indicators of relevant strands
in professional standards
The outputs do not demonstrate
any indicator in the professional
standards
PARTICIPANT'S PERFORMANCE
Part I Rating (Module-based Outputs)
Part I Rating Description:
Part II Rating (Practicum Portfolio)
Part II Rating Description:
15%
The ideas are expressed in clear,
coherent, and appropriately-
worded language with no errors in
structure and/or writing
conventions
The ideas are expressed in clear
language with very minimal errors
in structure and/or writing
conventions
The ideas are expressed well but
with incoherence in some areas
and few errors in structure and/or
writing conventions
The ideas are expressed using
very basic words and structure
with incoherence in many areas
and several errors in structure
and/or writing conventions
The ideas are jumbled and difficult
to understand; errors in structure
and writing conventions are almost
everywhere in the output
3.910
Very Satisfactory
4.550
Oustanding
Organization of Portfolio
5%
5
The portfolio is logically organized,
is insightful, and offers new
perspective and insights
The portfolio is logically organized.
The portfolio is generally well-
organized with 1-2 items not well
placed in the overall organization
The portfolio has 3-4 items not
well placed in the overall
organization
The portfolio does not follow a
logical order
0.800 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: JONALYN E. PALANOG
School: PULO SUBONG IS
Email Address: jonalyn.palanog@deped.gov.ph
Contact Number: 9359102811
Demonstration of Progress
of LDM Implementation
30%
Partial Rating 5 4
5 - Excellent The outputs clearly and
adequately captured the progress
of the implementation of the LDM,
showing innovations that
contribute to its smooth
implementation
4 - Very Satisfactory The outputs adequately captured
the progress of the implementation
of the LDM
3 - Satisfactory The outputs reflect to a big extent
the progress of the LDM
implementation
2 - Marginal The outputs reflect to a limited
extent the progress of the LDM
implementation
1 - Unsatisfactory The outputs do not show the
progress of the LDM
implementation
Division:
Region:
LAC Leader:
LDM Coach:
PART II - LDM IMPLEME
Quality of Reflection
25%
Reflection describes the
experience in the LDM
implementation, shows in-depth
analysis and synthesis, and
excellently relates it to the
professional standards and to
professional and personal
development goals
Reflection describes the
experience in the LDM
implementation, shows some
analysis, and relates it to the
professional standards and to
professional and personal
development goals
Reflection describes the
experience and relates them to the
professional standards and
personal development goals
Reflection describes the
experience in the implementation
of the LDM with limited attempt to
relate it to the professional
standards and personal
development goals
Reflection describes experience in
the implementation of the LDM
with no attempt to relate it to the
professional standards and
personal development goals
Weighted Rating 1.500 1.000

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
SOUTH COTABATO
XII
RENDENTOR M. SAMBAAN
ESTEBAN S. ALVAREZ
PART II - LDM IMPLEMENTATION / PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO
Demonstration of Language and Overall
Professional Standards Presentation of the Output
20%
4 5
The outputs clearly demonstrate 5
or more indicators of relevant
strands in professional standards
The outputs clearly demonstrate 4
indicators of relevant strands in
professional standards
The outputs clearly demonstrate 3
indicators of relevant strands in
professional standards
The outputs clearly demonstrate
the 2 indicators of relevant strands
in professional standards
The outputs do not demonstrate
any indicator in the professional
standards
PARTICIPANT'S PERFORMANCE
Part I Rating (Module-based Outputs)
Part I Rating Description:
Part II Rating (Practicum Portfolio)
Part II Rating Description:
15%
The ideas are expressed in clear,
coherent, and appropriately-
worded language with no errors in
structure and/or writing
conventions
The ideas are expressed in clear
language with very minimal errors
in structure and/or writing
conventions
The ideas are expressed well but
with incoherence in some areas
and few errors in structure and/or
writing conventions
The ideas are expressed using
very basic words and structure
with incoherence in many areas
and several errors in structure
and/or writing conventions
The ideas are jumbled and difficult
to understand; errors in structure
and writing conventions are almost
everywhere in the output
4.038
Very Satisfactory
4.550
Oustanding
Organization of Portfolio
5%
5
The portfolio is logically organized,
is insightful, and offers new
perspective and insights
The portfolio is logically organized.
The portfolio is generally well-
organized with 1-2 items not well
placed in the overall organization
The portfolio has 3-4 items not
well placed in the overall
organization
The portfolio does not follow a
logical order
0.800 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: MERL JOY G. GENTEROLA
School: PULO SUBONG IS
Email Address: merljoy.genterola@deped.gov.ph
Contact Number: 9051503415
Demonstration of Progress
of LDM Implementation
30%
Partial Rating 5 4
5 - Excellent The outputs clearly and
adequately captured the progress
of the implementation of the LDM,
showing innovations that
contribute to its smooth
implementation
4 - Very Satisfactory The outputs adequately captured
the progress of the implementation
of the LDM
3 - Satisfactory The outputs reflect to a big extent
the progress of the LDM
implementation
2 - Marginal The outputs reflect to a limited
extent the progress of the LDM
implementation
1 - Unsatisfactory The outputs do not show the
progress of the LDM
implementation
Division:
Region:
LAC Leader:
LDM Coach:
PART II - LDM IMPLEME
Quality of Reflection
25%
Reflection describes the
experience in the LDM
implementation, shows in-depth
analysis and synthesis, and
excellently relates it to the
professional standards and to
professional and personal
development goals
Reflection describes the
experience in the LDM
implementation, shows some
analysis, and relates it to the
professional standards and to
professional and personal
development goals
Reflection describes the
experience and relates them to the
professional standards and
personal development goals
Reflection describes the
experience in the implementation
of the LDM with limited attempt to
relate it to the professional
standards and personal
development goals
Reflection describes experience in
the implementation of the LDM
with no attempt to relate it to the
professional standards and
personal development goals
Weighted Rating 1.500 1.000

Final Rating (FR) 4.400

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
SOUTH COTABATO
XII
RENDENTOR M. SAMBAAN
ESTEBAN S. ALVAREZ
PART II - LDM IMPLEMENTATION / PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO
Demonstration of Language and Overall
Professional Standards Presentation of the Output
20%
4 4
The outputs clearly demonstrate 5
or more indicators of relevant
strands in professional standards
The outputs clearly demonstrate 4
indicators of relevant strands in
professional standards
The outputs clearly demonstrate 3
indicators of relevant strands in
professional standards
The outputs clearly demonstrate
the 2 indicators of relevant strands
in professional standards
The outputs do not demonstrate
any indicator in the professional
standards
PARTICIPANT'S PERFORMANCE
Part I Rating (Module-based Outputs)
Part I Rating Description:
Part II Rating (Practicum Portfolio)
Part II Rating Description:
15%
The ideas are expressed in clear,
coherent, and appropriately-
worded language with no errors in
structure and/or writing
conventions
The ideas are expressed in clear
language with very minimal errors
in structure and/or writing
conventions
The ideas are expressed well but
with incoherence in some areas
and few errors in structure and/or
writing conventions
The ideas are expressed using
very basic words and structure
with incoherence in many areas
and several errors in structure
and/or writing conventions
The ideas are jumbled and difficult
to understand; errors in structure
and writing conventions are almost
everywhere in the output
3.955
Very Satisfactory
4.400
Very Satisfactory
Organization of Portfolio
5%
5
The portfolio is logically organized,
is insightful, and offers new
perspective and insights
The portfolio is logically organized.
The portfolio is generally well-
organized with 1-2 items not well
placed in the overall organization
The portfolio has 3-4 items not
well placed in the overall
organization
The portfolio does not follow a
logical order
0.800 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: CHARMIE ROSE P. LILAGAN
School: PULO SUBONG IS
Email Address: charmierose.lilagan@deped.gov.ph
Contact Number: 90576338600
Demonstration of Progress
of LDM Implementation
30%
Partial Rating 4 4
5 - Excellent The outputs clearly and
adequately captured the progress
of the implementation of the LDM,
showing innovations that
contribute to its smooth
implementation
4 - Very Satisfactory The outputs adequately captured
the progress of the implementation
of the LDM
3 - Satisfactory The outputs reflect to a big extent
the progress of the LDM
implementation
2 - Marginal The outputs reflect to a limited
extent the progress of the LDM
implementation
1 - Unsatisfactory The outputs do not show the
progress of the LDM
implementation
Division:
Region:
LAC Leader:
LDM Coach:
PART II - LDM IMPLEME
Quality of Reflection
25%
Reflection describes the
experience in the LDM
implementation, shows in-depth
analysis and synthesis, and
excellently relates it to the
professional standards and to
professional and personal
development goals
Reflection describes the
experience in the LDM
implementation, shows some
analysis, and relates it to the
professional standards and to
professional and personal
development goals
Reflection describes the
experience and relates them to the
professional standards and
personal development goals
Reflection describes the
experience in the implementation
of the LDM with limited attempt to
relate it to the professional
standards and personal
development goals
Reflection describes experience in
the implementation of the LDM
with no attempt to relate it to the
professional standards and
personal development goals
Weighted Rating 1.200 1.000

Final Rating (FR) 4.400

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
SOUTH COTABATO
XII
RENDENTOR M. SAMBAAN
ESTEBAN S. ALVAREZ
PART II - LDM IMPLEMENTATION / PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO
Demonstration of Language and Overall
Professional Standards Presentation of the Output
20%
5 5
The outputs clearly demonstrate 5
or more indicators of relevant
strands in professional standards
The outputs clearly demonstrate 4
indicators of relevant strands in
professional standards
The outputs clearly demonstrate 3
indicators of relevant strands in
professional standards
The outputs clearly demonstrate
the 2 indicators of relevant strands
in professional standards
The outputs do not demonstrate
any indicator in the professional
standards
PARTICIPANT'S PERFORMANCE
Part I Rating (Module-based Outputs)
Part I Rating Description:
Part II Rating (Practicum Portfolio)
Part II Rating Description:
15%
The ideas are expressed in clear,
coherent, and appropriately-
worded language with no errors in
structure and/or writing
conventions
The ideas are expressed in clear
language with very minimal errors
in structure and/or writing
conventions
The ideas are expressed well but
with incoherence in some areas
and few errors in structure and/or
writing conventions
The ideas are expressed using
very basic words and structure
with incoherence in many areas
and several errors in structure
and/or writing conventions
The ideas are jumbled and difficult
to understand; errors in structure
and writing conventions are almost
everywhere in the output
3.963
Very Satisfactory
4.400
Very Satisfactory
Organization of Portfolio
5%
4
The portfolio is logically organized,
is insightful, and offers new
perspective and insights
The portfolio is logically organized.
The portfolio is generally well-
organized with 1-2 items not well
placed in the overall organization
The portfolio has 3-4 items not
well placed in the overall
organization
The portfolio does not follow a
logical order
1.000 0.750 0.200
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: LEO S. MARAVILLOSO
School: PULO SUBONG IS
Email Address: leo.maravilloso@deped.gov.ph
Contact Number: 9067858908
Demonstration of Progress
of LDM Implementation
30%
Partial Rating 5 4
5 - Excellent The outputs clearly and
adequately captured the progress
of the implementation of the LDM,
showing innovations that
contribute to its smooth
implementation
4 - Very Satisfactory The outputs adequately captured
the progress of the implementation
of the LDM
3 - Satisfactory The outputs reflect to a big extent
the progress of the LDM
implementation
2 - Marginal The outputs reflect to a limited
extent the progress of the LDM
implementation
1 - Unsatisfactory The outputs do not show the
progress of the LDM
implementation
Division:
Region:
LAC Leader:
LDM Coach:
PART II - LDM IMPLEME
Quality of Reflection
25%
Reflection describes the
experience in the LDM
implementation, shows in-depth
analysis and synthesis, and
excellently relates it to the
professional standards and to
professional and personal
development goals
Reflection describes the
experience in the LDM
implementation, shows some
analysis, and relates it to the
professional standards and to
professional and personal
development goals
Reflection describes the
experience and relates them to the
professional standards and
personal development goals
Reflection describes the
experience in the implementation
of the LDM with limited attempt to
relate it to the professional
standards and personal
development goals
Reflection describes experience in
the implementation of the LDM
with no attempt to relate it to the
professional standards and
personal development goals
Weighted Rating 1.500 1.000

Final Rating (FR) 4.400

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
SOUTH COTABATO
XII
RENDENTOR M. SAMBAAN
ESTEBAN S. ALVAREZ
PART II - LDM IMPLEMENTATION / PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO
Demonstration of Language and Overall
Professional Standards Presentation of the Output
20%
4 4
The outputs clearly demonstrate 5
or more indicators of relevant
strands in professional standards
The outputs clearly demonstrate 4
indicators of relevant strands in
professional standards
The outputs clearly demonstrate 3
indicators of relevant strands in
professional standards
The outputs clearly demonstrate
the 2 indicators of relevant strands
in professional standards
The outputs do not demonstrate
any indicator in the professional
standards
PARTICIPANT'S PERFORMANCE
Part I Rating (Module-based Outputs)
Part I Rating Description:
Part II Rating (Practicum Portfolio)
Part II Rating Description:
15%
The ideas are expressed in clear,
coherent, and appropriately-
worded language with no errors in
structure and/or writing
conventions
The ideas are expressed in clear
language with very minimal errors
in structure and/or writing
conventions
The ideas are expressed well but
with incoherence in some areas
and few errors in structure and/or
writing conventions
The ideas are expressed using
very basic words and structure
with incoherence in many areas
and several errors in structure
and/or writing conventions
The ideas are jumbled and difficult
to understand; errors in structure
and writing conventions are almost
everywhere in the output
3.965
Very Satisfactory
4.400
Very Satisfactory
Organization of Portfolio
5%
5
The portfolio is logically organized,
is insightful, and offers new
perspective and insights
The portfolio is logically organized.
The portfolio is generally well-
organized with 1-2 items not well
placed in the overall organization
The portfolio has 3-4 items not
well placed in the overall
organization
The portfolio does not follow a
logical order
0.800 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: JESSA MAE A. CATIGDAY
School: PULO SUBONG IS
Email Address: jessamae.catigdya@deped.gov.ph
Contact Number: 9097449802
Demonstration of Progress
of LDM Implementation
30%
Partial Rating 5 4
5 - Excellent The outputs clearly and
adequately captured the progress
of the implementation of the LDM,
showing innovations that
contribute to its smooth
implementation
4 - Very Satisfactory The outputs adequately captured
the progress of the implementation
of the LDM
3 - Satisfactory The outputs reflect to a big extent
the progress of the LDM
implementation
2 - Marginal The outputs reflect to a limited
extent the progress of the LDM
implementation
1 - Unsatisfactory The outputs do not show the
progress of the LDM
implementation
Division:
Region:
LAC Leader:
LDM Coach:
PART II - LDM IMPLEME
Quality of Reflection
25%
Reflection describes the
experience in the LDM
implementation, shows in-depth
analysis and synthesis, and
excellently relates it to the
professional standards and to
professional and personal
development goals
Reflection describes the
experience in the LDM
implementation, shows some
analysis, and relates it to the
professional standards and to
professional and personal
development goals
Reflection describes the
experience and relates them to the
professional standards and
personal development goals
Reflection describes the
experience in the implementation
of the LDM with limited attempt to
relate it to the professional
standards and personal
development goals
Reflection describes experience in
the implementation of the LDM
with no attempt to relate it to the
professional standards and
personal development goals
Weighted Rating 1.500 1.000

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
SOUTH COTABATO
XII
RENDENTOR M. SAMBAAN
ESTEBAN S. ALVAREZ
PART II - LDM IMPLEMENTATION / PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO
Demonstration of Language and Overall
Professional Standards Presentation of the Output
20%
4 5
The outputs clearly demonstrate 5
or more indicators of relevant
strands in professional standards
The outputs clearly demonstrate 4
indicators of relevant strands in
professional standards
The outputs clearly demonstrate 3
indicators of relevant strands in
professional standards
The outputs clearly demonstrate
the 2 indicators of relevant strands
in professional standards
The outputs do not demonstrate
any indicator in the professional
standards
PARTICIPANT'S PERFORMANCE
Part I Rating (Module-based Outputs)
Part I Rating Description:
Part II Rating (Practicum Portfolio)
Part II Rating Description:
15%
The ideas are expressed in clear,
coherent, and appropriately-
worded language with no errors in
structure and/or writing
conventions
The ideas are expressed in clear
language with very minimal errors
in structure and/or writing
conventions
The ideas are expressed well but
with incoherence in some areas
and few errors in structure and/or
writing conventions
The ideas are expressed using
very basic words and structure
with incoherence in many areas
and several errors in structure
and/or writing conventions
The ideas are jumbled and difficult
to understand; errors in structure
and writing conventions are almost
everywhere in the output
4.058
Very Satisfactory
4.550
Oustanding
Organization of Portfolio
5%
5
The portfolio is logically organized,
is insightful, and offers new
perspective and insights
The portfolio is logically organized.
The portfolio is generally well-
organized with 1-2 items not well
placed in the overall organization
The portfolio has 3-4 items not
well placed in the overall
organization
The portfolio does not follow a
logical order
0.800 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
←Guide
Form 3.2AP_LDM2 Practicum Portfolio - Individual Report
PARTICIPANT'S PROFILE
Teacher: AIRYN P. MINSAD
School: PULO SUBONG IS
Email Address: airyn.minsad@deped.gov.ph
Contact Number: 9167746834
Demonstration of Progress
of LDM Implementation
30%
Partial Rating 5 4
5 - Excellent The outputs clearly and
adequately captured the progress
of the implementation of the LDM,
showing innovations that
contribute to its smooth
implementation
4 - Very Satisfactory The outputs adequately captured
the progress of the implementation
of the LDM
3 - Satisfactory The outputs reflect to a big extent
the progress of the LDM
implementation
2 - Marginal The outputs reflect to a limited
extent the progress of the LDM
implementation
1 - Unsatisfactory The outputs do not show the
progress of the LDM
implementation
Division:
Region:
LAC Leader:
LDM Coach:
PART II - LDM IMPLEME
Quality of Reflection
25%
Reflection describes the
experience in the LDM
implementation, shows in-depth
analysis and synthesis, and
excellently relates it to the
professional standards and to
professional and personal
development goals
Reflection describes the
experience in the LDM
implementation, shows some
analysis, and relates it to the
professional standards and to
professional and personal
development goals
Reflection describes the
experience and relates them to the
professional standards and
personal development goals
Reflection describes the
experience in the implementation
of the LDM with limited attempt to
relate it to the professional
standards and personal
development goals
Reflection describes experience in
the implementation of the LDM
with no attempt to relate it to the
professional standards and
personal development goals
Weighted Rating 1.500 1.000

Final Rating (FR) 4.400

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
SOUTH COTABATO
XII
RENDENTOR M. SAMBAAN
ESTEBAN S. ALVAREZ
PART II - LDM IMPLEMENTATION / PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO
Demonstration of Language and Overall
Professional Standards Presentation of the Output
20%
4 4
The outputs clearly demonstrate 5
or more indicators of relevant
strands in professional standards
The outputs clearly demonstrate 4
indicators of relevant strands in
professional standards
The outputs clearly demonstrate 3
indicators of relevant strands in
professional standards
The outputs clearly demonstrate
the 2 indicators of relevant strands
in professional standards
The outputs do not demonstrate
any indicator in the professional
standards
PARTICIPANT'S PERFORMANCE
Part I Rating (Module-based Outputs)
Part I Rating Description:
Part II Rating (Practicum Portfolio)
Part II Rating Description:
15%
The ideas are expressed in clear,
coherent, and appropriately-
worded language with no errors in
structure and/or writing
conventions
The ideas are expressed in clear
language with very minimal errors
in structure and/or writing
conventions
The ideas are expressed well but
with incoherence in some areas
and few errors in structure and/or
writing conventions
The ideas are expressed using
very basic words and structure
with incoherence in many areas
and several errors in structure
and/or writing conventions
The ideas are jumbled and difficult
to understand; errors in structure
and writing conventions are almost
everywhere in the output
3.958
Very Satisfactory
4.400
Very Satisfactory
Organization of Portfolio
5%
5
The portfolio is logically organized,
is insightful, and offers new
perspective and insights
The portfolio is logically organized.
The portfolio is generally well-
organized with 1-2 items not well
placed in the overall organization
The portfolio has 3-4 items not
well placed in the overall
organization
The portfolio does not follow a
logical order
0.800 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
←Guide
Form 3.2AP_LDM2 Practicum Portfolio - Individual Report
PARTICIPANT'S PROFILE
Teacher:
School:
Email Address:
Contact Number:
Demonstration of Progress
of LDM Implementation
30%
Partial Rating
5 - Excellent The outputs clearly and
adequately captured the progress
of the implementation of the LDM,
showing innovations that
contribute to its smooth
implementation
4 - Very Satisfactory The outputs adequately captured
the progress of the implementation
of the LDM
3 - Satisfactory The outputs reflect to a big extent
the progress of the LDM
implementation
2 - Marginal The outputs reflect to a limited
extent the progress of the LDM
implementation
1 - Unsatisfactory The outputs do not show the
progress of the LDM
implementation
Division:
Region:
LAC Leader:
LDM Coach:
PART II - LDM IMPLEME
Quality of Reflection
25%
Reflection describes the
experience in the LDM
implementation, shows in-depth
analysis and synthesis, and
excellently relates it to the
professional standards and to
professional and personal
development goals
Reflection describes the
experience in the LDM
implementation, shows some
analysis, and relates it to the
professional standards and to
professional and personal
development goals
Reflection describes the
experience and relates them to the
professional standards and
personal development goals
Reflection describes the
experience in the implementation
of the LDM with limited attempt to
relate it to the professional
standards and personal
development goals
Reflection describes experience in
the implementation of the LDM
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
SOUTH COTABATO
XII
RENDENTOR M. SAMBAAN
ESTEBAN S. ALVAREZ
PART II - LDM IMPLEMENTATION / PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO
Demonstration of Language and Overall
Professional Standards Presentation of the Output
20%
The outputs clearly demonstrate 5
or more indicators of relevant
strands in professional standards
The outputs clearly demonstrate 4
indicators of relevant strands in
professional standards
The outputs clearly demonstrate 3
indicators of relevant strands in
professional standards
The outputs clearly demonstrate
the 2 indicators of relevant strands
in professional standards
The outputs do not demonstrate
any indicator in the professional
standards
PARTICIPANT'S PERFORMANCE
Part I Rating (Module-based Outputs)
Part I Rating Description: N/A
Part II Rating (Practicum Portfolio) 0.000
Part II Rating Description: N/A
Organization of Portfolio
15% 5%
The ideas are expressed in clear, The portfolio is logically organized,
coherent, and appropriately- is insightful, and offers new
worded language with no errors in perspective and insights
structure and/or writing
conventions
The ideas are expressed in clear The portfolio is logically organized.
language with very minimal errors
in structure and/or writing
conventions
The ideas are expressed well but The portfolio is generally well-
with incoherence in some areas organized with 1-2 items not well
and few errors in structure and/or placed in the overall organization
writing conventions
The ideas are expressed using The portfolio has 3-4 items not
very basic words and structure well placed in the overall
with incoherence in many areas organization
and several errors in structure
and/or writing conventions
The ideas are jumbled and difficult The portfolio does not follow a
to understand; errors in structure logical order
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