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

LAC Leader
Division
Region
Contact Details
LDM Coach

SH School Name Name

1 SIBUL NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL JASMINA JEAN S. BULANADI

2 SIBUL NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL ELEONOR D. VIERNES
3 SIBUL NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL MILAGROS G. PAET
4 SIBUL NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL NORALYNN A. CRUZ
5 SIBUL NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL SATURNINO G. LANUZA JR.
6 SIBUL NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL MONALIZA B. CASIMIRO
7 SIBUL NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL NERISSA D. SANTOS
8 SIBUL NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL IVY DALE G. SOLETA
9 SIBUL NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL JENNIELYN C. RAYO
10 SIBUL NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL APRIL JOY M. DE LEON
11 SIBUL NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL CRISTINA V. DE JESUS
12 SIBUL NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL TRISTAN F. MAGTALAPA
13 SIBUL NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL DARIUS E. MENDOZA
14 #REF! #REF!
15 #REF! #REF!
racticum Portfolio - Summary of LDM2 Ratings of Teachers
ARVIE T. BULANADI
NUEVA ECIJA
III
9427272810
ROWENA V. GROSPE

PART II LDM Implementation/ Practicum Portfolio

Numerical Rating Descriptive Rating PD Credit Units

4.60 Oustanding Earned PD credit units will be subjected to the PD credit units banking mecha
4.50 Oustanding
4.55 Oustanding
4.50 Oustanding
4.50 Oustanding
4.55 Oustanding
4.55 Oustanding
4.55 Oustanding
4.60 Oustanding
4.65 Oustanding
4.60 Oustanding
4.75 Oustanding
4.50 Oustanding
#REF! #REF!
#REF! #REF!
←Summary of Ratings
Form 3.2AP_LDM2 Practicum Portfolio - Individual Rep
←Guide
PARTICIPANT'S PROFILE
Teacher: JASMINA JEAN S. BULANADI
School: SIBUL NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL
Email Address: jasminajean.bulanadi@deped.gov.ph
Contact Number: 9427272810
Demonstration of Progress
of LDM Implementation
30%
Partial Rating
4 5
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
Weighted Rating 1.200
Final Rating (FR) 4.600
Description of FR Oustanding
Remarks Type feedback here.
(Optional)
Division:
Region:
LAC Leader:
LDM Coach:
PART II - LDM IMPLE
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
1.250
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
NUEVA ECIJA
III
ARVIE T. BULANADI
ROWENA V. GROSPE
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
1.000
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
0.750
 PD Credit Units
4.540 to be determined
Oustanding
4.600 to be determined
Oustanding

Organization of Portfolio Timeliness

5% 5%
4 4
The portfolio is logically organized, The output/s is/are submitted more
is insightful, and offers new than 3 days ahead of the deadline
perspective and insights

The portfolio is logically organized. The output/s is/are submitted 1-2

days before the deadline

The portfolio is generally well- The output/s is/are submitted on

organized with 1-2 items not well the deadline
placed in the overall organization

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

0.200 0.200
 ←Summary of
Ratings Form 3.2AP_LDM2 Practicum Portfolio - Individual Rep
←Guide
PARTICIPANT'S PROFILE
Teacher: ELEONOR D. VIERNES
School: SIBUL NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL
Email Address: eleonor.viernes001@deped.gov.ph
Contact Number: 9165880090
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
Weighted Rating 1.500
Final Rating (FR) 4.500
Description of FR Oustanding
Remarks Type feedback here.
(Optional)
Division:
Region:
LAC Leader:
LDM Coach:
PART II - LDM IMPLE
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
1.000
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
NUEVA ECIJA
III
ARVIE T. BULANADI
ROWENA V. GROSPE
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
0.800
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
0.750
 PD Credit Units
4.510 to be determined
Oustanding
4.500 to be determined
Oustanding

Organization of Portfolio Timeliness

5% 5%
4 5
The portfolio is logically organized, The output/s is/are submitted more
is insightful, and offers new than 3 days ahead of the deadline
perspective and insights

The portfolio is logically organized. The output/s is/are submitted 1-2

days before the deadline

The portfolio is generally well- The output/s is/are submitted on

organized with 1-2 items not well the deadline
placed in the overall organization

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

0.200 0.250
 ←Summary of
Ratings Form 3.2AP_LDM2 Practicum Portfolio - Individual Report
←Guide
PARTICIPANT'S PROFILE
Teacher: MILAGROS G. PAET
School: SIBUL NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL
Email Address: milagros.paet002@deped.gov.ph
Contact Number: 9232084071
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
Weighted Rating 1.500
Final Rating (FR) 4.550
Description of FR Oustanding
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
1.000
 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
NUEVA ECIJA
III
ARVIE T. BULANADI
ROWENA V. GROSPE
PART II - LDM IMPLEMENTATION / PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO
Demonstration of Language and Overall
Professional Standards Presentation of the Output
20%
5 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
1.000
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
0.600
4.600
Oustanding
4.550
Oustanding
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
0.200
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: NORALYNN A. CRUZ
School: SIBUL NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL
Email Address: noralynn.cruz002@deped.gov.ph
Contact Number: 9171422239
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
Weighted Rating 1.500
Final Rating (FR) 4.500
Description of FR Oustanding
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
1.000
 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
NUEVA ECIJA
III
ARVIE T. BULANADI
ROWENA V. GROSPE
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
0.800
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
0.750
4.550
Oustanding
4.500
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
0.250
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
←Guide
PARTICIPANT'S PROFILE
Teacher: SATURNINO G. LANUZA JR.
School: SIBUL NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL
Email Address: saturnino.lanuza001@deped.gov.ph
Contact Number: 9065474782
Partial Rating
5 - Excellent
4 - Very Satisfactory
3 - Satisfactory
2 - Marginal
1 - Unsatisfactory
Weighted Rating
Final Rating (FR)
Description of FR
Form 3.2AP_LDM2 Practicum Portfolio - Individual Report
Demonstration of Progress
of LDM Implementation
30%
5 4
The outputs clearly and
adequately captured the progress
of the implementation of the LDM,
showing innovations that
contribute to its smooth
implementation
The outputs adequately captured
the progress of the implementation
of the LDM
The outputs reflect to a big extent
the progress of the LDM
implementation
The outputs reflect to a limited
extent the progress of the LDM
implementation
The outputs do not show the
progress of the LDM
implementation
1.500
4.500
Oustanding
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
1.000
 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
NUEVA ECIJA
III
ARVIE T. BULANADI
ROWENA V. GROSPE
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
0.800
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
0.750
4.500
Oustanding
4.500
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
0.250
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: MONALIZA B. CASIMIRO
School: SIBUL NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL
Email Address: monaliza.casimiro003@deped.gov.ph
Contact Number: 9276441062
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
Weighted Rating 1.500
Final Rating (FR) 4.550
Description of FR Oustanding
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
1.000
 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
NUEVA ECIJA
III
ARVIE T. BULANADI
ROWENA V. GROSPE
PART II - LDM IMPLEMENTATION / PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO
Demonstration of Language and Overall
Professional Standards Presentation of the Output
20%
5 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
1.000
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
0.600
4.530
Oustanding
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
0.250
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
←Guide
PARTICIPANT'S PROFILE
Teacher: NERISSA D. SANTOS
School: SIBUL NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL
Email Address: nerissa.santos004@deped.gov.ph
Contact Number: 9232115238
Partial Rating
5 - Excellent
4 - Very Satisfactory
3 - Satisfactory
2 - Marginal
1 - Unsatisfactory
Weighted Rating
Final Rating (FR)
Description of FR
Form 3.2AP_LDM2 Practicum Portfolio - Individual Report
Demonstration of Progress
of LDM Implementation
30%
5 4
The outputs clearly and
adequately captured the progress
of the implementation of the LDM,
showing innovations that
contribute to its smooth
implementation
The outputs adequately captured
the progress of the implementation
of the LDM
The outputs reflect to a big extent
the progress of the LDM
implementation
The outputs reflect to a limited
extent the progress of the LDM
implementation
The outputs do not show the
progress of the LDM
implementation
1.500
4.550
Oustanding
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
1.000
 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
NUEVA ECIJA
III
ARVIE T. BULANADI
ROWENA V. GROSPE
PART II - LDM IMPLEMENTATION / PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO
Demonstration of Language and Overall
Professional Standards Presentation of the Output
20%
5 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
1.000
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
0.600
4.520
Oustanding
4.550
Oustanding
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
0.200
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
←Guide
PARTICIPANT'S PROFILE
Teacher: IVY DALE G. SOLETA
School: SIBUL NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL
Email Address: ivydale.soleta@deped.gov.ph
Contact Number: 9157082708
Partial Rating
5 - Excellent
4 - Very Satisfactory
3 - Satisfactory
2 - Marginal
1 - Unsatisfactory
Weighted Rating
Final Rating (FR)
Description of FR
Form 3.2AP_LDM2 Practicum Portfolio - Individual Report
Demonstration of Progress
of LDM Implementation
30%
5 4
The outputs clearly and
adequately captured the progress
of the implementation of the LDM,
showing innovations that
contribute to its smooth
implementation
The outputs adequately captured
the progress of the implementation
of the LDM
The outputs reflect to a big extent
the progress of the LDM
implementation
The outputs reflect to a limited
extent the progress of the LDM
implementation
The outputs do not show the
progress of the LDM
implementation
1.500
4.550
Oustanding
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
1.000
 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
NUEVA ECIJA
III
ARVIE T. BULANADI
ROWENA V. GROSPE
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
0.800
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
0.750
4.510
Oustanding
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
0.250
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
PARTICIPANT'S PROFILE
Teacher: JENNIELYN C. RAYO
School: SIBUL NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL
Email Address: jennielyn.rayo@deped.gov.ph
Contact Number: 9053880323
Partial Rating
5 - Excellent
4 - Very Satisfactory
3 - Satisfactory
2 - Marginal
1 - Unsatisfactory
Weighted Rating
Final Rating (FR)
Description of FR
Form 3.2AP_LDM2 Practicum Portfolio - Individual Report
Demonstration of Progress
of LDM Implementation
30%
5 4
The outputs clearly and
adequately captured the progress
of the implementation of the LDM,
showing innovations that
contribute to its smooth
implementation
The outputs adequately captured
the progress of the implementation
of the LDM
The outputs reflect to a big extent
the progress of the LDM
implementation
The outputs reflect to a limited
extent the progress of the LDM
implementation
The outputs do not show the
progress of the LDM
implementation
1.500
4.600
Oustanding
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
1.000
 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
NUEVA ECIJA
III
ARVIE T. BULANADI
ROWENA V. GROSPE
PART II - LDM IMPLEMENTATION / PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO
Demonstration of Language and Overall
Professional Standards Presentation of the Output
20%
5 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
1.000
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
0.600
4.540
Oustanding
4.600
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
0.250
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
PARTICIPANT'S PROFILE
Teacher: APRIL JOY M. DE LEON
School: SIBUL NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL
Email Address: apriljoy.miranda@deped.gov.ph
Contact Number: 9069570665
Partial Rating
5 - Excellent
4 - Very Satisfactory
3 - Satisfactory
2 - Marginal
1 - Unsatisfactory
Weighted Rating
Final Rating (FR)
Description of FR
Form 3.2AP_LDM2 Practicum Portfolio - Individual Report
Demonstration of Progress
of LDM Implementation
30%
5 4
The outputs clearly and
adequately captured the progress
of the implementation of the LDM,
showing innovations that
contribute to its smooth
implementation
The outputs adequately captured
the progress of the implementation
of the LDM
The outputs reflect to a big extent
the progress of the LDM
implementation
The outputs reflect to a limited
extent the progress of the LDM
implementation
The outputs do not show the
progress of the LDM
implementation
1.500
4.650
Oustanding
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
1.000
 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
NUEVA ECIJA
III
ARVIE T. BULANADI
ROWENA V. GROSPE
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
1.000
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
0.750
4.510
Oustanding
4.650
Oustanding
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
0.200
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
←Guide
PARTICIPANT'S PROFILE
Teacher: CRISTINA V. DE JESUS
School: SIBUL NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL
Email Address: cristina.dejesus002@deped.gov.ph
Contact Number: 9266518550
Partial Rating
5 - Excellent
4 - Very Satisfactory
3 - Satisfactory
2 - Marginal
1 - Unsatisfactory
Weighted Rating
Final Rating (FR)
Description of FR
Form 3.2AP_LDM2 Practicum Portfolio - Individual Report
Demonstration of Progress
of LDM Implementation
30%
5 4
The outputs clearly and
adequately captured the progress
of the implementation of the LDM,
showing innovations that
contribute to its smooth
implementation
The outputs adequately captured
the progress of the implementation
of the LDM
The outputs reflect to a big extent
the progress of the LDM
implementation
The outputs reflect to a limited
extent the progress of the LDM
implementation
The outputs do not show the
progress of the LDM
implementation
1.500
4.600
Oustanding
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
1.000
 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
NUEVA ECIJA
III
ARVIE T. BULANADI
ROWENA V. GROSPE
PART II - LDM IMPLEMENTATION / PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO
Demonstration of Language and Overall
Professional Standards Presentation of the Output
20%
5 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
1.000
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
0.600
4.520
Oustanding
4.600
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
0.250
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
PARTICIPANT'S PROFILE
Teacher: TRISTAN F. MAGTALAPA
School: SIBUL NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL
Email Address: magtalapatristan@gmail.com
Contact Number: 9171069029
Partial Rating
5 - Excellent
4 - Very Satisfactory
3 - Satisfactory
2 - Marginal
1 - Unsatisfactory
Weighted Rating
Final Rating (FR)
Description of FR
Form 3.2AP_LDM2 Practicum Portfolio - Individual Report
Demonstration of Progress
of LDM Implementation
30%
5 4
The outputs clearly and
adequately captured the progress
of the implementation of the LDM,
showing innovations that
contribute to its smooth
implementation
The outputs adequately captured
the progress of the implementation
of the LDM
The outputs reflect to a big extent
the progress of the LDM
implementation
The outputs reflect to a limited
extent the progress of the LDM
implementation
The outputs do not show the
progress of the LDM
implementation
1.500
4.750
Oustanding
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
1.000
 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
NUEVA ECIJA
III
ARVIE T. BULANADI
ROWENA V. GROSPE
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
1.000
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
0.750
4.640
Oustanding
4.750
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
0.250
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
PARTICIPANT'S PROFILE
Teacher: DARIUS E. MENDOZA
School: SIBUL NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL
Email Address: darius.mendoza001@deped.gov.ph
Contact Number: 9059226654
Partial Rating
5 - Excellent
4 - Very Satisfactory
3 - Satisfactory
2 - Marginal
1 - Unsatisfactory
Weighted Rating
Final Rating (FR)
Description of FR
Form 3.2AP_LDM2 Practicum Portfolio - Individual Report
Demonstration of Progress
of LDM Implementation
30%
5 4
The outputs clearly and
adequately captured the progress
of the implementation of the LDM,
showing innovations that
contribute to its smooth
implementation
The outputs adequately captured
the progress of the implementation
of the LDM
The outputs reflect to a big extent
the progress of the LDM
implementation
The outputs reflect to a limited
extent the progress of the LDM
implementation
The outputs do not show the
progress of the LDM
implementation
1.500
4.500
Oustanding
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
1.000
 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
NUEVA ECIJA
III
ARVIE T.BULANADI
ROWENA V. GROSPE
PART II - LDM IMPLEMENTATION / PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO
Demonstration of Language and Overall
Professional Standards Presentation of the Output
20%
5 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
1.000
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
0.600
4.520
Oustanding
4.500
Oustanding
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
0.200
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