Procedure for Evaluating

Outputs of
Teachers (LAC Members)
in
LDM 2 Course
PROCEDURE FOR SUBMITTING
LDM2 EVALUATION FORMS OF TEACHERS

Teachers LAC Leaders - Evaluator SDO LDM PMT - Form Manager RO LDM PMT - Form Manager

Collect all
Monitor Create school Receive
required outputs. Set the system Validate and
Submission submission folders Set system and and upload
Provide feedback; and deadline of consolidate all
Submit of Outputs Download in LDM2 Folder of deadline of all Form 1
return to submission of Form 4
Outputs by keeping a Form 1 the SDO. Send links submission of files in the
participant for Form 4 (Teachers) files
record of to Instructional Form 1 files. SDO
refinement, if (Teachers) Files. from SDOs.
submission Coaches concerned. folder.
necessary.

Consolidate
Rate outputs Get the link to
Submit summaries of
using Form 1, the submission Submit Form 4 Organize Form 4 Prepare for
Form 1 to ratings (1B) per
guide questions, folder from (Teachers) to Files in Regional issuance of
SDO LDM school by filling
and rubric. Instructional RO LDM PMT. Folder certificates
PMT. out Form 4
Coach.
(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
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.)
LAC Leaders MTs, HTs, or Senior Teachers 3. Submit LDM 2 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.
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
1. Collect from LAC leaders the
participants’ outputs
2. Validate, if needed, the LDM 2 outputs
Instructional Coach Division and District Supervisors of teachers
3. Provide LAC Leaders their respective
school submission folders for Form 1
files..
I. Roles and Responsibilities

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

Role Personnel Concerned Responsibilities

1. Consolidate Form 1 results by accomplishing Form 2:
Division Summary of LDM2 Completers (Teachers)
2. Collect and submit LDM 2 Form 4: Division Summary
SDO LDM Program
of LDM 2 Completers (Teachers)
Management Team
3. Create Google Drive for school submission folders of
Form 1 documents
4. Submit Form 4 to RO LDM PMT
1. Coordinate with the SDO LDM Program Management
Team regarding method of submission for LDM 2
evaluation forms
Regional LDM Program
2. Validate, if needed, the LDM 2 outputs of participants
Management Team
and LAC Leaders
3. Issue certificate of participation signed by the NEAP
Director
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 of 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/
No outputs for submission
Getting Started
II. Instructions to Evaluators

Table 2. Summary of Required Outputs from LAC Leaders

Modules Required Outputs Weight

PRE-IMPLEMENTATION (THEORETICAL PART) 100%

2 – Planning for the • Individual / LAC Group Presentation on Unpacking of 15%

Implementation of LDM a Sample MELC
2 for Teachers Guide Questions for Evaluators::
1. Were the logical sequence of learning objectives, and
alignment of content and performance standards
considered?
II. Instructions to Evaluators

Table 2. Summary of Required Outputs from LAC Leaders

Modules Required Outputs Weight

PRE-IMPLEMENTATION (THEORETICAL PART) 100%

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

Table 2. Summary of Required Outputs from LAC Leaders

Modules Required Outputs Weight

PRE-IMPLEMENTATION (THEORETICAL PART) 100%

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

Table 2. Summary of Required Outputs from LAC Leaders

Modules Required Outputs Weight

PRE-IMPLEMENTATION (THEORETICAL PART) 100%

3A – Lesson Design and • (3) Individual Learning Monitoring Plan for student 15%
Assessment in the behind on learning tasks
Modalities Guide Questions for Evaluators::
1. Were learners’ needs and intervention strategies clearly
identified?
2. 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)
II. Instructions to Evaluators

Modules Required Outputs Weight

PRE-IMPLEMENTATION (THEORETICAL PART) 100%

3B – Learning Resources • Two (2) accomplished LR Rapid Assessment Tools 15%

with Reflections
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 20%
(produced after discussion during LAC)
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?
II. Instructions to Evaluators

Modules Required Outputs Weight

LDM IMPLEMENTATION (PRACTICUM PART) 100%

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

Building My Technical
Assistance Provision for
LDM Implementation
Portfolio

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

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

manually or use an online platform such as Google Classroom where participants can
submit their requirements. The LAC Leaders in the school will facilitate the collection of
outputs.

3. Download LDM 2 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.
Annex 1 : LDM 2 Form 1A – Individual Report of LDM2 Rating for Teachers and
Annex 2 : LDM 2 Form 1B – Summary of LDM 2 Rating for Teachers

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

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

5. To determine the rating of each output,

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 the sample computation of ratings.
f. Refer to Table 5 for the corresponding descriptive ratings.
II. Instructions to Evaluators

Table 4. Sample Computation of Ratings

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

Table 5. Descriptive Rating

Rating Descriptive Rating

4.50 – 5.00 Outstanding

3.50 – 4.499 Very Satisfactory

2.50 – 3.499 Satisfactory

1.50 – 2.499 Unsatisfactory

1.00 – 1.499 Poor

II. Instructions to Evaluators

6. After the evaluation of outputs, provide constructive feedback on the outputs of 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.
II. Instructions to Evaluators

7. Once the ratings are all 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 LDM 2 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.

Note: Instructional Coaches do not have access to the main Google Drive links for the SDO.
You may 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 LDM 2 Form 1
from Instructional Coaches in your SDO, so that 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 LDM 2 From 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 Form 3 used in LDM 1).
3. M&E Unit: Consolidate all Form 1B/Summaries of Ratings from LAC Leaders using
LDM 2 Form 4: Division Summary of LDM 2 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 5 files from SDOs. Conduct validation in
coordination with SDO LDM Program Management Team and other Instructional
Coaches.
3. NEAP-R: Organize Form 4 files in the SDO folders. Organize the files in SDO folders.
Monitor the SDO submissions of LDM 2 Form 4 for their respective schools. Links to
the SDO folders are in Contact Details of LDM Evaluation Form Managers (similar
to Form 3 used in LDM 1).
4. NEAP-R: Prepare certificates for issuance based on the validated list from the QAD.
 LDM2
FORMS for

Contact Details of
3 RO and SDO LDM Evaluation Form Managers
Provides the contact details of form managers who are given exclusive access to repositories of evaluation RO/SDO
forms. LDM2 will engage the same group of evaluation form managers as LDM1 in your
region/division. If your division has not assigned a form manager yet, you may access the link below to be LDM
added to your respective drives:
PMTs -
bit.ly/ldm1form3
Form
Access this link and update the correct form if you are a designated form manager. Once added as co-editor,
Managers
you are not allowed to add other editors.
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 (Module 1-4).
2. If a participant gets a rating below Satisfactory, the LDM 2 coach assigned to the
participant may conduct a validation. Validation may be done by looking at the outputs
or interviewing the participant and his or her colleagues, as may be deemed necessary.
3. Once validation and agreement have been made by the RO, CO and external partner
coaches, NEAP-R facilitates the issuance of the Certificate of Participation signed by
the Regional Director.
VI. Issuance of Certificate

B. CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION

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

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

Summary of Ratings of Teachers School

LDM2 Form 1B Provides the final numerical and descriptive ratings all teacher-participants
LAC
get for the outputs they submitted

LEADERS
bit.ly/LDM2eval4teachers

Evaluation Procedure
PROCEDURE FOR ORGANIZING
LDM2 DIVISION SUBMISSION FOLDERS (for Form 1 and 2)
RO LDM PMT - Form Manager
Gain access to the regional LDM2
Folder.
Create folders for each of the
following forms (to be submitted by
SDO LDM PMT)
LDM2 Form 4 - Division Summaries
of LDM2 Completers (Teachers)
LDM2 Form 4 - Division Summary of
LDM2 Completers (LAC Leaders)
Assist SDO Form Managers in
getting access to their respective
Division folders.
Instructional Coach LAC Leaders
SDO LDM PMT - Form Manager
Form 2 Evaluator Form 1 Evaluator
Gain access to the LDM2 Submission Folder for Use Form 3 to find the Coordinate with your
your Division. contact details of your SDO instructional Coach to
LDM Form Manager. provide the link to your
school’s submission folder.
Create one submission folder for each school in Coordinate with the SDO
the division. You may divide your division according LDM Program Management Upload LDM2 Form 1 in
to Districts for ease of organization. Each school Team to gain access to the the Google Drive folder
folder must have the following folders: submission folders of provided by your Coach.
schools assigned to you
LDM2 Form 1 - Individual Ratings of Teachers
(submitted by LAC Leaders)
LDM2 Form 2 - Individual Ratings of LAC Leaders
(submitted by Instructional Coaches)
Give each LAC Leader
under your supervision the
Provide each instructional Coach the Google Drive link to their school folder.
link to their respective school folder. Only share This is where they will
links for the schools assigned to them. submit their LDM2 Form 1.