LDM2__

LEARNING DELIVERY MODALITIES COURSE

FOR TEACHERS

PROCEDURE FOR EVALUATING OUTPUTS Of TEACHERS

I. ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

The roles and responsibilities of the concerned personnel in the evaluation of course outputs are detailed in Table 1 below.

Table 1. Roles and Responsibilities in the Evaluation of Teachers’ Outputs

Role Personnel Concerned Responsibilities

LAC Leaders MTs, HTs, or Other senior teachers 1. Collect outputs of Participants in the assigned LAC
2. Evaluate the outputs following the evaluation procedures (use of evaluation
rubric, use of electronic forms, etc.)
3. Submit LDM2 Form 1: Individual Report of LDM2 Rating of Teachers to the
appropriate submission folder
4. Assist Instructional Coach in the validation of outputs
5. Provide feedback to LAC members’ outputs

Instructional Coach Division and District Supervisors 1. Collect from LAC leaders the participants’ outputs
2. Validate, if needed, the LDM2 outputs of teachers
3. Provide LAC Leaders their respective school submission folders for Form 1
files.

SDO LDM Program 1. Consolidate Form 1 results by accomplishing Form 2: Division Summary of
Management Team LDM2 Completers (Teachers)
2. Collect and submit LDM2 Form 4: Division Summary of LDM2 Completers
(Teachers)

1 | LDM1 Procedure for Evaluating Outputs of LAC Leaders

 3. Create Google Drive school submission folders of Form 1 documents
4. Submit Form 4 to RO LDM PMT

Regional LDM Program 1. Coordinate with the SDO LDM Program Management Team regarding
Management Team method of submission for LDM2 evaluation forms
2. Validate, if needed, the LDM2 outputs of participants and LAC leaders
3. Issue certificate of participation signed by NEAP Director

2 | LDM1 Procedure for Evaluating Outputs of LAC Leaders

 II. INSTRUCTIONS TO EVALUATORS (LAC Leaders in Schools)
1. Collect all the required module outputs from the participants as summarized in Table 2. Electronic submission is preferred
due to restrictions in travel and face-to-face interaction. The suggested deadline for submission is three (3) days after the
end of each Module. It is recommended that participants keep their own copies of the outputs to be organized into a portfolio at
the end of the training period for future use and reference.

Table 2. Summary of Required Outputs from Teachers

Modules Required Outputs Weight

PRE-IMPLEMENTATION (THEORETICAL PART) 100%

1 - Course Introduction/ Getting No outputs for submission

Started

2- Planning for the Implementation Individual/LAC Group Presentation on Unpacking of a Sample MELC 15%
of LDM2 for Teachers Guide Questions for Evaluators:
1. Were the logical sequence of learning objectives, and alignment of content and
performance standards considered?

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

Weekly Home Learning Plan for 1 Subject 15%

Guide Questions for Evaluators:
1. Was the purpose of the plan was clearly identified?
2. Was the identified chosen mode of delivery appropriate and relevant?
3. Was there a method of communication to parents included in the plan?

Individual Learning Monitoring Plan for student behind on learning tasks 15%
Guide Questions for Evaluators:
1. Were learners’ needs and intervention strategies clearly identified?

3 | LDM1 Procedure for Evaluating Outputs of LAC Leaders

 2. Does the plan have clear procedures for monitoring progress?
3. Were the allocation of time in developing the plans, as well as reviewing the progress
established?

LAC 3 Teacher Engagement Report (5%)

(Optional: if LAC was not conducted, use rating in Assessment Methods in DL)

3B - Learning Resources
Two (2) accomplished LR Rapid Assessment Tools with reflections 15%
Guide Questions for Evaluators:
1. Was the accomplished material able to meet all the requirements that need to be
assessed?
2. Did the reflection show understanding of the challenges in gathering LRs in teaching in the
LDMs?

4 - PD and LAC Planning Finalized LDM Individual Development Plan (produced after discussion during LAC) 20%
Guide Questions for Evaluators:
1. Were the objectives aligned with the identified interventions?
2. Did the plan clearly state the Developmental Needs of the teacher?

LDM IMPLEMENTATION (PRACTICUM PART) 100%

7- Practicum Module - Building My 1. List of Evidence based on Professional Standards TBA

Technical Assistance Provision for
LDM Implementation Portfolio
Note: The corresponding weight per output is based on the extent, difficulty and importance of the task/output, and PPSS indicators it addresses.

2. Monitor submission of outputs by keeping a record of submission. You may do this manually, or use an online Platform such as
Google Classroom, where participants can submit their requirements. The LAC Leaders in the school will facilitate the collection
of outputs.
3. Download LDM2 Form 1 through bit.ly/LDM2eval4teachers. Form 1 includes sub-forms 1A and 1B. A guide on how to use them
is embedded in the form.
a. LDM2 Form 1A - Individual Report of LDM2 Rating for Teachers
b. LDM2 Form 1B - Summary of LDM2 Rating for Teachers
4. Rate each output using the rubric below. Record the ratings in Form 1.

4 | LDM1 Procedure for Evaluating Outputs of LAC Leaders

 Table 3. Evaluation Rubric for Outputs of Teachers
CRITERIA OUTSTANDING VERY SATISFACTORY SATISFACTORY UNSATISFACTORY POOR
(5) (4) (3) (2) (1)

DEMONSTRATION The outputs demonstrate The outputs The outputs demonstrate The outputs The outputs have more
OF clear and complete demonstrate clear some understanding of demonstrate minimal than 3 serious errors that
UNDERSTANDING understanding of the understanding of the the concepts and understanding of reflect misunderstanding
OF THE LDM
concepts, principles and concepts, principles, principles with one major concepts and principles of the concepts,
TRAINING
tasks. and tasks. misunderstanding of the with 2-3 major principles, and tasks
MATERIALS
/INPUTS concepts, principles and misunderstandings of
The outputs must also meet The outputs meet three tasks. the concepts, principles None of the indicators
the following indicators: out of four indicators. and tasks. was met.
50% a. Convey excellent The outputs meet two of
understanding of key the four indicators. The outputs meet one of
concepts and processes the four indicators.
in each LDM
b. Show integration of the
LDM inputs through
evidence-based outputs
c. Demonstrate novel
connections/ideas/persp
ectives on the LDMs
d. The information required
from each output is
complete and concisely
presented

DEMONSTRATION The outputs demonstrate a
OF clear understanding of
UNDERSTANDING school and community
OF ONE’S
context through careful
CONTEXT VIS-A-
analysis and utilization of
VIS LDM
IMPLEMENTATION data in most parts of the
output, i.e., all stakeholders
(teaching & non-teaching
30% personnel, parents,
community leaders and
learners) were consulted.
The outputs The outputs demonstrate The outputs The outputs do not show
demonstrate clear fair understanding of demonstrate minimal any attempt to use data,
understanding of school school and community understanding of school i.e., no consultation was
and community context context with reference to and community context; made to understand the
with reference to data in data in some parts of the reference to data is also school and community
many parts of the output, i.e., only the minimal, i.e., only context in relation to LDM
output/s, i.e., only teaching & non-teaching teaching and non- implementation.
teaching & non-teaching personnel along with the teaching personnel were
personnel, parents, and learners were consulted. consulted.
learners were
consulted.

5 | LDM1 Procedure for Evaluating Outputs of LAC Leaders

LANGUAGE AND The ideas are expressed in The ideas are The ideas are expressed The ideas are expressed The ideas are rumbled
OVERALL clear, coherent, and expressed in clear well but with using very basic words and difficult to
PRESENTATION OF appropriately- worded language with very incoherence in some and structure with understand; Errors in
THE OUTPUT
language with no errors in minimal errors in areas as well as a few incoherence in many Structure and writing
structure and/or writing structure and/or writing errors in structure and/or areas and several errors conventions are almost
15% conventions. conventions. writing conventions. in structure and/or everywhere in the output.
writing conventions.

TIMELINESS OF The output/s is/are The output/s is/are The output/s is/are The output/s is/are The output/s is/are
SUBMISSION submitted more than 3 days submitted 1-2 days submitted on the submitted 1-3 days after submitted more than 3
ahead of the deadline. before the deadline. deadline. the deadline. days after the deadline.
5%

5. To determine the rating for each output,

a. assign a rating from a scale of 1-5--with 5 as the highest--for each criterion.
i. If the group opted not to conduct a LAC session, use the rating of the reflection paper or TA plan to get the rating
of the LAC session report.
b. The automated form multiplies the indicated rating by the weight of the criterion.
c. The weighted ratings for all criteria are added to get the total rating for the output.
d. In determining the final rating for all outputs, the rating of each output is multiplied to its assigned weight.
e. The weighted ratings for all outputs are added to get the participants’ final rating per part. Refer to Table 4 to see a
sample computation of ratings
f. Refer to Table 5 for the corresponding descriptive ratings.

Table 4. Sample Computation of the Ratings

OUTPUT Understanding Understanding Language and Overall Timeliness Rating Per Weight Weighted Rating Descriptive
of the LDM of the Context Presentation of the (5%) Output (sample Rating
only)
Materials (50%) (30%) Output (15%) (per output)

Output 1 4 x 50% = 2.0 4 x 30% = 1.2 5 x 15% = 0.75 5 x 5% = 0.25 4.20 40% 4.20 x 40% = 1.68 Outstanding

Output 2 4 x 50% = 2.0 5 x 30% = 1.5 4 x 15% = 0.6 5 x 5% = 0.25 4.35 60% 4.35 x 60% = 2.61 Outstanding

6 | LDM1 Procedure for Evaluating Outputs of LAC Leaders

 FINAL RATING 4.29 OUTSTANDING

Table 5. Descriptive Rating

Rating Descriptive Rating

4.50 - 5.00 Outstanding

3.50 - 4.499 Very Satisfactory

2.50 - 3.499 Satisfactory

1.50 - 2.499 Unsatisfactory

1.00 - 1.499 Poor

6. After the evaluation of outputs, provide constructive feedback on the outputs of your LAC members. Depending on their rating
and the nature of your feedback, you may return the output to your participant for refinement, if necessary. The LDM2 Course for
Teachers is a space to improve the quality of their teaching in the modalities. You may use the evaluation period as an
opportunity to prepare teachers for the coming school year by providing constructive feedback, correcting misconceptions, and
providing for their specific learning needs based on their individual rating results. You may indicate your constructive comments
to the participants in the “Remarks” portion of their individual rating sheets.
7. Once all ratings are in, coordinate with your Instructional Coach regarding the method and deadline of submission of Form 1.
8. There will be an additional material that will cover the submission and evaluation of the LDM implementation portfolio, and the
assignment of NEAP PD credit units for each part of the course. LAC leaders are expected to provide technical assistance to
school heads as they build their LDM implementation portfolio throughout the school year.

Note: All evaluation forms are confidential. NO ENTRY in the LDM2 evaluation forms can be divulged with anyone except the
concerned participant and appropriate authorities for purposes of evaluation, validation, and issuance of certificates.

III. INSTRUCTIONS TO INSTRUCTIONAL COACHES

1. Provide technical assistance to LAC Leaders assigned to you during the evaluation.
2. Coordinate with the SDO LDM Program Management Team to provide you the Google Drive link to the submission folder of
LDM2 Form 1 of schools assigned to you. Coordinate with the LDM Evaluation Form Managers in your SDO.
3. Provide your LAC Leaders the link for the submission folder of their respective school. Make sure that they only have access to
their school folder to protect their data privacy.

7 | LDM1 Procedure for Evaluating Outputs of LAC Leaders

 Note: Instructional Coaches do not have access to the main Google Drive links for the SDO. You have to coordinate with the
SDO LDM Program Management Team to gain access to your assigned school folders.

IV. INSTRUCTIONS TO SDO LDM PROGRAM MANAGEMENT TEAM – Evaluation Form Managers
1. SGOD and M&E Unit: Set the deadline and method of submission of LDM2 Form 1 from Instructional Coaches in your SDO, so
they can timely inform their LAC Leaders.
2. SGOD: Organize your Google Drive folder so that each school in your division has a dedicated submission folder for LDM2 Form
1. Give Instructional Coaches access to the Google Drive folder for their respective schools. Links to your main SDO folder can
be found in Contact Details of LDM Evaluation Form Managers of your region (similar to the Form 3 used in LDM1).
3. M&E Unit: Consolidate all Form 1B/summaries of ratings from LAC leaders using LDM2 Form 4 – Division Summary of LDM2
Completers (Teachers). Upload Form 4 files to the appropriate school folder. Coordinate with the regional LDM PMT for the
submission deadline.
V. INSTRUCTIONS TO REGIONAL LDM PROGRAM MANAGEMENT TEAM – Evaluation Form Managers
1. NEAP-R and QAD: Set the system and deadline of submission of Form 4 from SDOs. Assist SDO LDM PMTs.
2. QAD: Validate and consolidate all Form 4 files from SDOs. Conduct validation in coordination with SDO LDM Program
Management Team and Instructional Coaches.
3. NEAP-R: Organize Form 4 files in the SDO folders. Monitor the SDO submissions of LDM2 Form 4 for their respective schools.
Links to the SDO folders are in Contact Details of LDM Evaluation Form Managers (similar to the Form 3 used in LDM1).
4. NEAP-R: Prepare certificates for issuance based on the validated list from QAD.

8 | LDM1 Procedure for Evaluating Outputs of LAC Leaders

VI. ISSUANCE OF CERTIFICATE

A. CERTIFICATE OF PARTICIPATION

1. A participant gets a Certificate of Participation when he or she gets an overall descriptive rating of at least Satisfactory or
a final rating equivalent to or higher than 2.500 for Part I/Theoretical Part (Modules 1-4).
2. If a participant gets a rating below Satisfactory, the Instructional Coach assigned to the LAC may conduct a validation in
coordination with the LAC leader. Validation may be done by looking at the outputs or interviewing the participant and his
or her colleagues, as may be deemed necessary.
3. Once validation and agreement have been made by RO, CO, and external partner coaches, NEAP-R facilitates the
issuance of the Certificate of Participation signed by the Regional Director.

B. CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION

1. Certificate of Completion is awarded to a participant who gets an overall descriptive rating of at least Satisfactory or a
final rating equivalent to or higher than 2.500 for Part II/LDM Implementation portfolio (practicum part).
2. If a participant gets a rating below Satisfactory, the Instructional Coach assigned to the LAC may conduct a validation in
coordination with the LAC Leader. Validation may be done by looking at the outputs or interviewing the participant and/or
his or her colleagues, as may be deemed necessary.
3. Once validation and agreement have been made by RO, CO, and external partner coaches, NEAP-R facilitates the
issuance of the Certificate of Completion signed by the Regional Director.

9 | LDM1 Procedure for Evaluating Outputs of LAC Leaders

10 | LDM1 Procedure for Evaluating Outputs of LAC Leaders
Annex 1: Form 1A

11 | LDM1 Procedure for Evaluating Outputs of LAC Leaders

Annex 2: Form 1B

12 | LDM1 Procedure for Evaluating Outputs of LAC Leaders

Annex 3: Form 4

13 | LDM1 Procedure for Evaluating Outputs of LAC Leaders

Annex 4

14 | LDM1 Procedure for Evaluating Outputs of LAC Leaders

Annex 5

15 | LDM1 Procedure for Evaluating Outputs of LAC Leaders