LDM2__

Learning Delivery Modalities Course for Instructional Coaches

PROCEDURE FOR EVALUATING LDM2 OUTPUTS OF INSTRUCTIONAL COACHES

I. ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

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

Table 1: Roles and Responsibilities in the Evaluation of Training Outputs

Role Personnel Concerned Responsibilities

Assigned Regional/National
LDM2 Coach through the
RFTAT
Regional Supervisors
CO Specialists
-NEAP
-OUCi Bureaus and Offices
Educ. Forum Partners
1. Collect outputs of Instructional Coaches Assigned to them
2. Evaluate the outputs following the evaluation procedures (use of evaluation
rubric, use of electronic forms, etc.)
3. Submit Form 3: Individual Report of LDM2 Rating of Instructional Coaches
to the LDM Focal Person in the SDO
4. Assist Instructional Coach in the validation of outputs
5. Provide feedback to LAC members’ outputs

Regional LDM Program 1. Coordinate with the LDM2 Coaches regarding method of submission for
Management Team Form 3 Files
2. Consolidate Form 3 results by accomplishing Form 4: Regional Summary
of LDM2 Completers (Instructional Coaches)
3. Validate, if needed, the LDM2 outputs of participants
4. Issue certificate of participation signed by NEAP Director

1 | Procedure for Evaluating LDM2 Outputs of Coaches

 II. INSTRUCTIONS TO EVALUATORS

1. Collect from the participants all the required module outputs as summarized in the table below. Provide feedback; return to participants
for refinement, if necessary. Electronic submission is preferred due to restrictions in travel and face-to-face interaction. Deadline for
submission may be set by the Region. 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 Module Requirements for LDM 2 Coaches

Modules Required Outputs Weight

PRE-IMPLEMENTATION (THEORETICAL PART) 100%

1 - Course Introduction/ Getting No outputs for submission

Started ***LAC Profile output requirement has been integrated to LAC Session report of Module 3A

2- Planning for the Implementation List of Assigned Schools + LAC Roles Organizers of Teachers 5%
of LDM2 for Teachers Guide Questions for Evaluators:
1. Were the information complete and clear?

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

2 | Procedure for Evaluating LDM2 Outputs of Coaches


3B - Learning Resources
4 – Teaching and Coaching in
Learning LDMs
LDM IMPLEMENTATION (PRACTICUM PART)
7- Practicum Module - 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/output, and PPSS indicators it addresses.
2. Monitor submission of outputs by keeping a record of submission. You may do this manually or you may use an online Platform such as
3 | Procedure for Evaluating LDM2 Outputs of Coaches
established?
***LAC Profile (5%)
LAC Engagement Report
LAC Session report
(Optional: if LAC was not conducted, use rating in Assessment Methods in DL)
Accomplished LR Concerns of Schools + Accomplished LR Needs of Schools 10%
Guide Questions for Evaluators:
1. Was data gathered for all of the schools assigned to the Instructional Coaches?
2. Did the gathered data reflect the needs and concerns of the schools?
LR Assessments with Reflections 10%
Guide Questions for Evaluators:
1. Did the accomplished material accurately assess LRs based on the requirements that need
to be assessed?
2. Did the reflection show understanding of the challenges in gathering LRs in teaching in the
LDMs?
3. Did the reflection show the Coaches’ insights on how to assist teachers in gathering these
LRs?
TA/Coaching Plan for Effective LDM2 Learning of Teachers + TA Activities Documents 25%
Guide Questions for Evaluators:
1. Did the coaching plan lay out a reasonable plan of providing technical assistance to
teachers in the LDMs?
2. Did the coaching plan show an understanding of the various challenges that schools have
to face in teaching in the LDMs?
3. Were the documented activities aligned with the TA interventions outlined in the coaching
plan?
100%
1. List of Evidence based on Professional Standards TBA
 Google Classroom, where participants can submit their requirements. The National/Regional LDM2 Coaches may facilitate the collection
of outputs.
3. Download LDM 2 Form 3 through bit.ly/LDM2eval4coaches. A guide on how to use them is embedded in the forms.
Annex 1: LDM 2 Form 3A – Individual Report of LDM2 Rating for Coaches
Annex 2: LDM 2 Form 3B – Summary of LDM2 Completers for Coaches
4. Evaluate and rate the outputs using the following rubric below. Record the ratings in Form 3. If there are two or more evaluators, they
need to confer and arrive at a rating for each output.

Table 3: Evaluation Rubric for Coaches’ Outputs

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

4 | Procedure for Evaluating LDM2 Outputs of Coaches

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.

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 the output, use the following procedure (See example):
a. Assign a rating from a scale of 1-5 with 5 as the highest for each criterion.
If the group opted not to conduct a LAC Session, use the rating of the reflection paper or Technical Assistance Plan to get the
rating of the LAC Session report.
b. Multiply the rating by the weight of the criterion.
c. Add all the weighted ratings for each of the criteria to get the total rating for the output

Table 4: Sample computation of the ratings

5 | Procedure for Evaluating LDM2 Outputs of Coaches

 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

FINAL RATING 4.29 OUTSTANDING

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 coachees. 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 Instructional Coaches
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 3.
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 REGIONAL LDM PROGRAM MANAGEMENT TEAM – Evaluation Form Managers

6 | Procedure for Evaluating LDM2 Outputs of Coaches

 1. NEAP-R and QAD: Set the system and deadline of submission of Form 3 from SDOs. Assist LDM2 Coaches.
2. QAD: Validate and consolidate all LDM2 Form 6 files/summaries from Regional/National LDM2 Coaches using Form 4: Regional
Summary of LDM2 Completers (Instructional Coaches) for the issuance of certificates. Conduct validation in coordination with
SDO LDM Program Management Team and Instructional Coaches.
3. NEAP-R: Upload all Form 4 files in the regional folder. Organize files into SDO folders. Links to the SDO folders are in LDM2
Contact Details of LDM Evaluation Form Managers.
4. NEAP-R: Prepare certificates for issuance based on the validated list from QAD.

7 | Procedure for Evaluating LDM2 Outputs of Coaches

III. DETERMINATION OF CERTIFICATION
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 LDM2 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 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 LDM2 coach assigned to the participant may conduct a validation. 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.

8 | Procedure for Evaluating LDM2 Outputs of Coaches

Annex 1: Form 3A

9 | Procedure for Evaluating LDM2 Outputs of Coaches

Annex 2: Form 3B

10 | Procedure for Evaluating LDM2 Outputs of Coaches

Annex 3: Form 4

11 | Procedure for Evaluating LDM2 Outputs of Coaches

Annex 4

12 | Procedure for Evaluating LDM2 Outputs of Coaches