Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Read this guide before using LDM1 Forms 2AP and 1BP.
1. Download this editable form by opening the file and clicking on the down arrow icon. Do not open it as Google
2. Open Form 2BP Summary of Ratings of School Heads and enter the required data in the yellow cell. Data
3. Open Form 2AP Supervisor No. / 2AP S#, and enter the remaining required data in the Participant's Profil
4. Open/Get your copy of the LDM practicum portfolio submitted by supervisors. 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
to white once a value has been assigned. You may add qualitative feedback in the Remarks section to substant
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 RO LDM Program Management Team. Coordina
Follow this file name format: SDO Name_LDM Form 2P_LDM Coach_Last Name
This document is confidential. NO ENTRY in the LDM Form 2P can be divulged with anyone exce
purposes of evaluation, validation and certification of participation/completion.
←Guide
1 0 0.00 N/A
2 0 0.00 N/A
3 0 0.00 N/A
4 0 0.00 N/A
5 0 0.00 N/A
6 0 0.00 N/A
7 0 0.00 N/A
8 0 0.00 N/A
9 0 0.00 N/A
10 0 0.00 N/A
11 0 0.00 N/A
12 0 0.00 N/A
13 0 0.00 N/A
14 0 0.00 N/A
15 0 0.00 N/A
LDM1 Ratings of Supervisors
/ Practicum Portfolio
PD Credit Units
Earned PD credit units will be subjected to the PD credit units banking mechanism of DepEd NEAP as stated in DO 20, s.2
Form 2AP_LDM 1&2 Practicum Portfolio - Individual Re
←Summary of Ratings
←Guide
PARTICIPANT'S PROFILE
Supervisor Division:
Position/Designation Region:
Email Address: LDM Coach:
Contact Number:
30% 25%
Partial 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
recog indicators hit 94
total recog indicators 112
PPSH indicators 16
#ERROR!
credit units 13.4285714285714
o - Individual Report of LDM Rating of Supervisors
PARTICIPANT'S PERFORMANCE
0 Part I Rating (Module-based Outputs)
0 Part I Rating Description:
0 Part II Rating (Practicum Portfolio)
Part II Rating Description:
20% 15%
The outputs clearly demonstrate 3 The ideas are expressed well but
indicators of relevant strands in with incoherence in some areas
professional standards and few errors in structure and/or
writing conventions
The outputs do not demonstrate The ideas are jumbled and difficult
any indicator in the professional to understand; errors in structure
standards and writing conventions are almost
everywhere in the output
0.000 0.000
PD Credit Units
to be determined
N/A
0.000 to be determined
N/A
0
Organization of Portfolio Timeliness
5% 5%
The portfolio has 3-4 items not The output/s is/are submitted 1-3
well placed in the overall days after the deadline
organization
The portfolio does not follow a The output/s is/are submitted more
logical order than 3 days after the deadline
0.000 0.000
Form 2AP_LDM 1&2 Practicum Portfolio - Individual Repo
←Summary of Ratings
←Guide
PARTICIPANT'S PROFILE
Supervisor Division:
Position/Designation Region:
Email Address: LDM Coach:
Contact Number:
30% 25%
Partial Rating
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
o - Individual Report of LDM Rating of Supervisors
PARTICIPANT'S PERFORMANCE
0 Part I Rating (Module-based Outputs)
0 Part I Rating Description: N/A
0 Part II Rating (Practicum Portfolio) 0.000
Part II Rating Description: N/A
20% 15% 5%
The outputs clearly demonstrate 5 The ideas are expressed in clear, The portfolio is logically organized,
or more indicators of relevant coherent, and appropriately- is insightful and offers new
strands in professional standards worded language with no errors in perspective and insights
structure and/or writing
conventions
The outputs clearly demonstrate 4 The ideas are expressed in clear The portfolio is logically organized
indicators of relevant strands in language with very minimal errors
professional standards in structure and/or writing
conventions
The outputs clearly demonstrate 3 The ideas are expressed well but The portfolio is generally well-
indicators of relevant strands in with incoherence in some areas organized with 1-2 items not well
professional standards and few errors in structure and/or placed in the overall organization
writing conventions
The outputs clearly demonstrate The ideas are expressed using The portfolio has 3-4 items not
the 2 indicators of relevant strands very basic words and structure well placed in the overall
in professional standards with incoherence in many areas organization
and several errors in structure
and/or writing conventions
The outputs do not demonstrate The ideas are jumbled and difficult The portfolio does not follow a
any indicator in the professional to understand; errors in structure logical order
standards and writing conventions are almost
everywhere in the output
0.000 0.000 0.000
PD Credit Units
to be determined
to be determined
0
Timeliness
5%
PARTICIPANT'S PROFILE
Supervisor Division:
Position/Designation Region:
Email Address: LDM Coach:
Contact Number:
30% 25%
Partial Rating
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
o - Individual Report of LDM Rating of Supervisors
PARTICIPANT'S PERFORMANCE
0 Part I Rating (Module-based Outputs)
0 Part I Rating Description: N/A
0 Part II Rating (Practicum Portfolio) 0.000
Part II Rating Description: N/A
20% 15% 5%
The outputs clearly demonstrate 5 The ideas are expressed in clear, The portfolio is logically organized,
or more indicators of relevant coherent, and appropriately- is insightful and offers new
strands in professional standards worded language with no errors in perspective and insights
structure and/or writing
conventions
The outputs clearly demonstrate 4 The ideas are expressed in clear The portfolio is logically organized
indicators of relevant strands in language with very minimal errors
professional standards in structure and/or writing
conventions
The outputs clearly demonstrate 3 The ideas are expressed well but The portfolio is generally well-
indicators of relevant strands in with incoherence in some areas organized with 1-2 items not well
professional standards and few errors in structure and/or placed in the overall organization
writing conventions
The outputs clearly demonstrate The ideas are expressed using The portfolio has 3-4 items not
the 2 indicators of relevant strands very basic words and structure well placed in the overall
in professional standards with incoherence in many areas organization
and several errors in structure
and/or writing conventions
The outputs do not demonstrate The ideas are jumbled and difficult The portfolio does not follow a
any indicator in the professional to understand; errors in structure logical order
standards and writing conventions are almost
everywhere in the output
0.000 0.000 0.000
PD Credit Units
to be determined
to be determined
0
Timeliness
5%
PARTICIPANT'S PROFILE
Supervisor Division:
Position/Designation Region:
Email Address: LDM Coach:
Contact Number:
30% 25%
Partial Rating
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
o - Individual Report of LDM Rating of Supervisors
PARTICIPANT'S PERFORMANCE
0 Part I Rating (Module-based Outputs)
0 Part I Rating Description: N/A
0 Part II Rating (Practicum Portfolio) 0.000
Part II Rating Description: N/A
20% 15% 5%
The outputs clearly demonstrate 5 The ideas are expressed in clear, The portfolio is logically organized,
or more indicators of relevant coherent, and appropriately- is insightful and offers new
strands in professional standards worded language with no errors in perspective and insights
structure and/or writing
conventions
The outputs clearly demonstrate 4 The ideas are expressed in clear The portfolio is logically organized
indicators of relevant strands in language with very minimal errors
professional standards in structure and/or writing
conventions
The outputs clearly demonstrate 3 The ideas are expressed well but The portfolio is generally well-
indicators of relevant strands in with incoherence in some areas organized with 1-2 items not well
professional standards and few errors in structure and/or placed in the overall organization
writing conventions
The outputs clearly demonstrate The ideas are expressed using The portfolio has 3-4 items not
the 2 indicators of relevant strands very basic words and structure well placed in the overall
in professional standards with incoherence in many areas organization
and several errors in structure
and/or writing conventions
The outputs do not demonstrate The ideas are jumbled and difficult The portfolio does not follow a
any indicator in the professional to understand; errors in structure logical order
standards and writing conventions are almost
everywhere in the output
0.000 0.000 0.000
PD Credit Units
to be determined
to be determined
0
Timeliness
5%
PARTICIPANT'S PROFILE
Supervisor Division:
Position/Designation Region:
Email Address: LDM Coach:
Contact Number:
30% 25%
Partial Rating
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
o - Individual Report of LDM Rating of Supervisors
PARTICIPANT'S PERFORMANCE
0 Part I Rating (Module-based Outputs)
0 Part I Rating Description: N/A
0 Part II Rating (Practicum Portfolio) 0.000
Part II Rating Description: N/A
20% 15% 5%
The outputs clearly demonstrate 5 The ideas are expressed in clear, The portfolio is logically organized,
or more indicators of relevant coherent, and appropriately- is insightful and offers new
strands in professional standards worded language with no errors in perspective and insights
structure and/or writing
conventions
The outputs clearly demonstrate 4 The ideas are expressed in clear The portfolio is logically organized
indicators of relevant strands in language with very minimal errors
professional standards in structure and/or writing
conventions
The outputs clearly demonstrate 3 The ideas are expressed well but The portfolio is generally well-
indicators of relevant strands in with incoherence in some areas organized with 1-2 items not well
professional standards and few errors in structure and/or placed in the overall organization
writing conventions
The outputs clearly demonstrate The ideas are expressed using The portfolio has 3-4 items not
the 2 indicators of relevant strands very basic words and structure well placed in the overall
in professional standards with incoherence in many areas organization
and several errors in structure
and/or writing conventions
The outputs do not demonstrate The ideas are jumbled and difficult The portfolio does not follow a
any indicator in the professional to understand; errors in structure logical order
standards and writing conventions are almost
everywhere in the output
0.000 0.000 0.000
PD Credit Units
to be determined
to be determined
0
Timeliness
5%
PARTICIPANT'S PROFILE
Supervisor Division:
Position/Designation Region:
Email Address: LDM Coach:
Contact Number:
30% 25%
Partial Rating
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
o - Individual Report of LDM Rating of Supervisors
PARTICIPANT'S PERFORMANCE
0 Part I Rating (Module-based Outputs)
0 Part I Rating Description: N/A
0 Part II Rating (Practicum Portfolio) 0.000
Part II Rating Description: N/A
20% 15% 5%
The outputs clearly demonstrate 5 The ideas are expressed in clear, The portfolio is logically organized,
or more indicators of relevant coherent, and appropriately- is insightful and offers new
strands in professional standards worded language with no errors in perspective and insights
structure and/or writing
conventions
The outputs clearly demonstrate 4 The ideas are expressed in clear The portfolio is logically organized
indicators of relevant strands in language with very minimal errors
professional standards in structure and/or writing
conventions
The outputs clearly demonstrate 3 The ideas are expressed well but The portfolio is generally well-
indicators of relevant strands in with incoherence in some areas organized with 1-2 items not well
professional standards and few errors in structure and/or placed in the overall organization
writing conventions
The outputs clearly demonstrate The ideas are expressed using The portfolio has 3-4 items not
the 2 indicators of relevant strands very basic words and structure well placed in the overall
in professional standards with incoherence in many areas organization
and several errors in structure
and/or writing conventions
The outputs do not demonstrate The ideas are jumbled and difficult The portfolio does not follow a
any indicator in the professional to understand; errors in structure logical order
standards and writing conventions are almost
everywhere in the output
0.000 0.000 0.000
PD Credit Units
to be determined
to be determined
0
Timeliness
5%
PARTICIPANT'S PROFILE
Supervisor Division:
Position/Designation Region:
Email Address: LDM Coach:
Contact Number:
30% 25%
Partial Rating
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
o - Individual Report of LDM Rating of Supervisors
PARTICIPANT'S PERFORMANCE
0 Part I Rating (Module-based Outputs)
0 Part I Rating Description: N/A
0 Part II Rating (Practicum Portfolio) 0.000
Part II Rating Description: N/A
20% 15% 5%
The outputs clearly demonstrate 5 The ideas are expressed in clear, The portfolio is logically organized,
or more indicators of relevant coherent, and appropriately- is insightful and offers new
strands in professional standards worded language with no errors in perspective and insights
structure and/or writing
conventions
The outputs clearly demonstrate 4 The ideas are expressed in clear The portfolio is logically organized
indicators of relevant strands in language with very minimal errors
professional standards in structure and/or writing
conventions
The outputs clearly demonstrate 3 The ideas are expressed well but The portfolio is generally well-
indicators of relevant strands in with incoherence in some areas organized with 1-2 items not well
professional standards and few errors in structure and/or placed in the overall organization
writing conventions
The outputs clearly demonstrate The ideas are expressed using The portfolio has 3-4 items not
the 2 indicators of relevant strands very basic words and structure well placed in the overall
in professional standards with incoherence in many areas organization
and several errors in structure
and/or writing conventions
The outputs do not demonstrate The ideas are jumbled and difficult The portfolio does not follow a
any indicator in the professional to understand; errors in structure logical order
standards and writing conventions are almost
everywhere in the output
0.000 0.000 0.000
PD Credit Units
to be determined
to be determined
0
Timeliness
5%
PARTICIPANT'S PROFILE
Supervisor Division:
Position/Designation Region:
Email Address: LDM Coach:
Contact Number:
30% 25%
Partial Rating
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
o - Individual Report of LDM Rating of Supervisors
PARTICIPANT'S PERFORMANCE
0 Part I Rating (Module-based Outputs)
0 Part I Rating Description: N/A
0 Part II Rating (Practicum Portfolio) 0.000
Part II Rating Description: N/A
20% 15% 5%
The outputs clearly demonstrate 5 The ideas are expressed in clear, The portfolio is logically organized,
or more indicators of relevant coherent, and appropriately- is insightful and offers new
strands in professional standards worded language with no errors in perspective and insights
structure and/or writing
conventions
The outputs clearly demonstrate 4 The ideas are expressed in clear The portfolio is logically organized
indicators of relevant strands in language with very minimal errors
professional standards in structure and/or writing
conventions
The outputs clearly demonstrate 3 The ideas are expressed well but The portfolio is generally well-
indicators of relevant strands in with incoherence in some areas organized with 1-2 items not well
professional standards and few errors in structure and/or placed in the overall organization
writing conventions
The outputs clearly demonstrate The ideas are expressed using The portfolio has 3-4 items not
the 2 indicators of relevant strands very basic words and structure well placed in the overall
in professional standards with incoherence in many areas organization
and several errors in structure
and/or writing conventions
The outputs do not demonstrate The ideas are jumbled and difficult The portfolio does not follow a
any indicator in the professional to understand; errors in structure logical order
standards and writing conventions are almost
everywhere in the output
0.000 0.000 0.000
PD Credit Units
to be determined
to be determined
0
Timeliness
5%
PARTICIPANT'S PROFILE
Supervisor Division:
Position/Designation Region:
Email Address: LDM Coach:
Contact Number:
30% 25%
Partial Rating
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
o - Individual Report of LDM Rating of Supervisors
PARTICIPANT'S PERFORMANCE
0 Part I Rating (Module-based Outputs)
0 Part I Rating Description: N/A
0 Part II Rating (Practicum Portfolio) 0.000
Part II Rating Description: N/A
20% 15% 5%
The outputs clearly demonstrate 5 The ideas are expressed in clear, The portfolio is logically organized,
or more indicators of relevant coherent, and appropriately- is insightful and offers new
strands in professional standards worded language with no errors in perspective and insights
structure and/or writing
conventions
The outputs clearly demonstrate 4 The ideas are expressed in clear The portfolio is logically organized
indicators of relevant strands in language with very minimal errors
professional standards in structure and/or writing
conventions
The outputs clearly demonstrate 3 The ideas are expressed well but The portfolio is generally well-
indicators of relevant strands in with incoherence in some areas organized with 1-2 items not well
professional standards and few errors in structure and/or placed in the overall organization
writing conventions
The outputs clearly demonstrate The ideas are expressed using The portfolio has 3-4 items not
the 2 indicators of relevant strands very basic words and structure well placed in the overall
in professional standards with incoherence in many areas organization
and several errors in structure
and/or writing conventions
The outputs do not demonstrate The ideas are jumbled and difficult The portfolio does not follow a
any indicator in the professional to understand; errors in structure logical order
standards and writing conventions are almost
everywhere in the output
0.000 0.000 0.000
PD Credit Units
to be determined
to be determined
0
Timeliness
5%
PARTICIPANT'S PROFILE
Supervisor Division:
Position/Designation Region:
Email Address: LDM Coach:
Contact Number:
30% 25%
Partial Rating
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
o - Individual Report of LDM Rating of Supervisors
PARTICIPANT'S PERFORMANCE
0 Part I Rating (Module-based Outputs)
0 Part I Rating Description: N/A
0 Part II Rating (Practicum Portfolio) 0.000
Part II Rating Description: N/A
20% 15% 5%
The outputs clearly demonstrate 5 The ideas are expressed in clear, The portfolio is logically organized,
or more indicators of relevant coherent, and appropriately- is insightful and offers new
strands in professional standards worded language with no errors in perspective and insights
structure and/or writing
conventions
The outputs clearly demonstrate 4 The ideas are expressed in clear The portfolio is logically organized
indicators of relevant strands in language with very minimal errors
professional standards in structure and/or writing
conventions
The outputs clearly demonstrate 3 The ideas are expressed well but The portfolio is generally well-
indicators of relevant strands in with incoherence in some areas organized with 1-2 items not well
professional standards and few errors in structure and/or placed in the overall organization
writing conventions
The outputs clearly demonstrate The ideas are expressed using The portfolio has 3-4 items not
the 2 indicators of relevant strands very basic words and structure well placed in the overall
in professional standards with incoherence in many areas organization
and several errors in structure
and/or writing conventions
The outputs do not demonstrate The ideas are jumbled and difficult The portfolio does not follow a
any indicator in the professional to understand; errors in structure logical order
standards and writing conventions are almost
everywhere in the output
0.000 0.000 0.000
PD Credit Units
to be determined
to be determined
0
Timeliness
5%
PARTICIPANT'S PROFILE
Supervisor Division:
Position/Designation Region:
Email Address: LDM Coach:
Contact Number:
30% 25%
Partial Rating
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
o - Individual Report of LDM Rating of Supervisors
PARTICIPANT'S PERFORMANCE
0 Part I Rating (Module-based Outputs)
0 Part I Rating Description: N/A
0 Part II Rating (Practicum Portfolio) 0.000
Part II Rating Description: N/A
20% 15% 5%
The outputs clearly demonstrate 5 The ideas are expressed in clear, The portfolio is logically organized,
or more indicators of relevant coherent, and appropriately- is insightful and offers new
strands in professional standards worded language with no errors in perspective and insights
structure and/or writing
conventions
The outputs clearly demonstrate 4 The ideas are expressed in clear The portfolio is logically organized
indicators of relevant strands in language with very minimal errors
professional standards in structure and/or writing
conventions
The outputs clearly demonstrate 3 The ideas are expressed well but The portfolio is generally well-
indicators of relevant strands in with incoherence in some areas organized with 1-2 items not well
professional standards and few errors in structure and/or placed in the overall organization
writing conventions
The outputs clearly demonstrate The ideas are expressed using The portfolio has 3-4 items not
the 2 indicators of relevant strands very basic words and structure well placed in the overall
in professional standards with incoherence in many areas organization
and several errors in structure
and/or writing conventions
The outputs do not demonstrate The ideas are jumbled and difficult The portfolio does not follow a
any indicator in the professional to understand; errors in structure logical order
standards and writing conventions are almost
everywhere in the output
0.000 0.000 0.000
PD Credit Units
to be determined
to be determined
0
Timeliness
5%
PARTICIPANT'S PROFILE
Supervisor Division:
Position/Designation Region:
Email Address: LDM Coach:
Contact Number:
30% 25%
Partial Rating
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
o - Individual Report of LDM Rating of Supervisors
PARTICIPANT'S PERFORMANCE
0 Part I Rating (Module-based Outputs)
0 Part I Rating Description: N/A
0 Part II Rating (Practicum Portfolio) 0.000
Part II Rating Description: N/A
20% 15% 5%
The outputs clearly demonstrate 5 The ideas are expressed in clear, The portfolio is logically organized,
or more indicators of relevant coherent, and appropriately- is insightful and offers new
strands in professional standards worded language with no errors in perspective and insights
structure and/or writing
conventions
The outputs clearly demonstrate 4 The ideas are expressed in clear The portfolio is logically organized
indicators of relevant strands in language with very minimal errors
professional standards in structure and/or writing
conventions
The outputs clearly demonstrate 3 The ideas are expressed well but The portfolio is generally well-
indicators of relevant strands in with incoherence in some areas organized with 1-2 items not well
professional standards and few errors in structure and/or placed in the overall organization
writing conventions
The outputs clearly demonstrate The ideas are expressed using The portfolio has 3-4 items not
the 2 indicators of relevant strands very basic words and structure well placed in the overall
in professional standards with incoherence in many areas organization
and several errors in structure
and/or writing conventions
The outputs do not demonstrate The ideas are jumbled and difficult The portfolio does not follow a
any indicator in the professional to understand; errors in structure logical order
standards and writing conventions are almost
everywhere in the output
0.000 0.000 0.000
PD Credit Units
to be determined
to be determined
0
Timeliness
5%
PARTICIPANT'S PROFILE
Supervisor Division:
Position/Designation Region:
Email Address: LDM Coach:
Contact Number:
30% 25%
Partial Rating
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
o - Individual Report of LDM Rating of Supervisors
PARTICIPANT'S PERFORMANCE
0 Part I Rating (Module-based Outputs)
0 Part I Rating Description: N/A
0 Part II Rating (Practicum Portfolio) 0.000
Part II Rating Description: N/A
20% 15% 5%
The outputs clearly demonstrate 5 The ideas are expressed in clear, The portfolio is logically organized,
or more indicators of relevant coherent, and appropriately- is insightful and offers new
strands in professional standards worded language with no errors in perspective and insights
structure and/or writing
conventions
The outputs clearly demonstrate 4 The ideas are expressed in clear The portfolio is logically organized
indicators of relevant strands in language with very minimal errors
professional standards in structure and/or writing
conventions
The outputs clearly demonstrate 3 The ideas are expressed well but The portfolio is generally well-
indicators of relevant strands in with incoherence in some areas organized with 1-2 items not well
professional standards and few errors in structure and/or placed in the overall organization
writing conventions
The outputs clearly demonstrate The ideas are expressed using The portfolio has 3-4 items not
the 2 indicators of relevant strands very basic words and structure well placed in the overall
in professional standards with incoherence in many areas organization
and several errors in structure
and/or writing conventions
The outputs do not demonstrate The ideas are jumbled and difficult The portfolio does not follow a
any indicator in the professional to understand; errors in structure logical order
standards and writing conventions are almost
everywhere in the output
0.000 0.000 0.000
PD Credit Units
to be determined
to be determined
0
Timeliness
5%
PARTICIPANT'S PROFILE
Supervisor Division:
Position/Designation Region:
Email Address: LDM Coach:
Contact Number:
30% 25%
Partial Rating
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
o - Individual Report of LDM Rating of Supervisors
PARTICIPANT'S PERFORMANCE
0 Part I Rating (Module-based Outputs)
0 Part I Rating Description: N/A
0 Part II Rating (Practicum Portfolio) 0.000
Part II Rating Description: N/A
20% 15% 5%
The outputs clearly demonstrate 5 The ideas are expressed in clear, The portfolio is logically organized,
or more indicators of relevant coherent, and appropriately- is insightful and offers new
strands in professional standards worded language with no errors in perspective and insights
structure and/or writing
conventions
The outputs clearly demonstrate 4 The ideas are expressed in clear The portfolio is logically organized
indicators of relevant strands in language with very minimal errors
professional standards in structure and/or writing
conventions
The outputs clearly demonstrate 3 The ideas are expressed well but The portfolio is generally well-
indicators of relevant strands in with incoherence in some areas organized with 1-2 items not well
professional standards and few errors in structure and/or placed in the overall organization
writing conventions
The outputs clearly demonstrate The ideas are expressed using The portfolio has 3-4 items not
the 2 indicators of relevant strands very basic words and structure well placed in the overall
in professional standards with incoherence in many areas organization
and several errors in structure
and/or writing conventions
The outputs do not demonstrate The ideas are jumbled and difficult The portfolio does not follow a
any indicator in the professional to understand; errors in structure logical order
standards and writing conventions are almost
everywhere in the output
0.000 0.000 0.000
PD Credit Units
to be determined
to be determined
0
Timeliness
5%
PARTICIPANT'S PROFILE
Supervisor Division:
Position/Designation Region:
Email Address: LDM Coach:
Contact Number:
30% 25%
Partial Rating
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
o - Individual Report of LDM Rating of Supervisors
PARTICIPANT'S PERFORMANCE
0 Part I Rating (Module-based Outputs)
0 Part I Rating Description: N/A
0 Part II Rating (Practicum Portfolio) 0.000
Part II Rating Description: N/A
20% 15% 5%
The outputs clearly demonstrate 5 The ideas are expressed in clear, The portfolio is logically organized,
or more indicators of relevant coherent, and appropriately- is insightful and offers new
strands in professional standards worded language with no errors in perspective and insights
structure and/or writing
conventions
The outputs clearly demonstrate 4 The ideas are expressed in clear The portfolio is logically organized
indicators of relevant strands in language with very minimal errors
professional standards in structure and/or writing
conventions
The outputs clearly demonstrate 3 The ideas are expressed well but The portfolio is generally well-
indicators of relevant strands in with incoherence in some areas organized with 1-2 items not well
professional standards and few errors in structure and/or placed in the overall organization
writing conventions
The outputs clearly demonstrate The ideas are expressed using The portfolio has 3-4 items not
the 2 indicators of relevant strands very basic words and structure well placed in the overall
in professional standards with incoherence in many areas organization
and several errors in structure
and/or writing conventions
The outputs do not demonstrate The ideas are jumbled and difficult The portfolio does not follow a
any indicator in the professional to understand; errors in structure logical order
standards and writing conventions are almost
everywhere in the output
0.000 0.000 0.000
PD Credit Units
to be determined
to be determined
0
Timeliness
5%