←Guide

Form 1BP_LDM1 Practicum Portfolio - Summary of LDM1 Ratings of School Heads

LAC Leader NORA G. JULVE
Division AGUSAN DEL SUR
Region Caraga
Contact Details nora.julve001@deped.gov.ph
LDM Coach LELANI R. ABUTAY

PART II LDM Implementation/ Practicum Portfolio

SH Name Numerical Rating Descriptive Rating PD Credit
Units
1 LEOPOLDO M. PULIDO 4.70 Oustanding Earned PD
2 FERDINAND C. ELMA 4.60 Oustanding credit units will
be subjected to
3 AGUSTINA R. MANIBOG 4.10 Very Satisfactory the PD credit
4 MARICRIS L. BAJAO 4.05 Very Satisfactory units banking
5 LEMUEL S. DELA VEGA 4.55 Oustanding mechanism of
6 0 0.00 N/A DepEd NEAP
as stated in DO
7 0 0.00 N/A
20, s.2020.
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

←Summary of Ratings
←Guide
PARTICIPANT'S PROFILE
School Head: LEOPOLDO M. PULIDO
School: TRENTO NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL
Email Address:
Contact Number: 9507589484
Partial Rating
5 - Excellent
4 - Very Satisfactory
3 - Satisfactory
2 - Marginal
1 - Unsatisfactory
Weighted Rating
Final Rating (FR)
Description of FR
Form 1AP_LDM1 Practicum Portfolio - Individual Report of L
Demonstration of Progress
of LDM Implementation
30%
5 4
The outputs captured clearly and
adequately the progress of the
implementation of the LDMs
showing innovations that
contribute to the smooth
implementation of the LDMs
The outputs captured adequately
the progress of the
implementation of the LDMs
The outputs reflect to a big extent
the progress of the
implementation of the LDMs
The outputs reflect to a limited
extent the progress of the
implementation of the LDMs
The outputs do not show the
progress of the implementation of
the LDMs
1.500
4.700
Oustanding
Division:
Region:
LAC Leader:
LDM Coach:
PART II - LDM IMPLEMENTA
Quality of Reflection
25%
Reflection describes the
experience in LDM
implementation, shows depth of
analysis and synthesis, and
relates it to the professional
standards and to professional and
personal development goals
Reflection describes the
experience in LDM
implementation, shows some
analysis, and relates it to the
professional standards and to
professional and personal
development goals
Reflection describes the
experience in LDM
implementation and relates it to
the professional standards and
personal development goals
Reflection describes the
experience in LDM
implementation with limited
attempt to relate it to the
professional standards and
personal development goals
Reflection describes experience in
LDM implementation 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 13.42857143
olio - Individual Report of LDM1 Rating of School Heads

PARTICIPANT'S PERFORMANCE
AGUSAN DEL SUR Part I Rating (Module-based Outputs)
Caraga Part I Rating Description:
NORA G. JULVE Part II Rating (Practicum Portfolio)
LELANI R. ABUTAY Part II Rating Description:

PART II - LDM IMPLEMENTATION / PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO

Demonstration of Language and Overall
Professional Standards Presentation of the Output
20% 15%
5 5
The outputs clearly demonstrate 5 The ideas are expressed in clear,
or more indicators of relevant coherent, and appropriately-
strands in professional standards worded language with no errors in
structure and/or writing
conventions

The outputs clearly demonstrate 4 The ideas are expressed in clear

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
indicators of relevant strands in with incoherence in some areas
professional standards and few errors in structure and/or
writing conventions

The outputs clearly demonstrate The ideas are expressed using

the 2 indicators of relevant strands very basic words and structure
in professional standards with incoherence in many areas
and several 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

1.000 0.750
s

PD Credit Units
to be determined
N/A
4.700 to be determined
Oustanding

0
Organization of Portfolio Timeliness

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

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

is insightful and offers new days before the deadline
perspective and insights

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

logical order more than 3 days after the
deadline

0.200 0.250
 Form 1AP_LDM1 Practicum Portfolio - Individual Report o
←Summary of Ratings
←Guide
PARTICIPANT'S PROFILE
School Head: FERDINAND C. ELMA
School: TRENTO NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL
Email Address:
Contact Number: 9500153177
Demonstration of Progress
of LDM Implementation
30%
Partial Rating
5 4
5 - Excellent The outputs captured clearly and
adequately the progress of the
implementation of the LDMs
showing innovations that
contribute to the smooth
implementation of the LDMs
4 - Very Satisfactory The outputs captured adequately
the progress of the
implementation of the LDMs
3 - Satisfactory The outputs reflect to a big extent
the progress of the
implementation of the LDMs
2 - Marginal The outputs reflect to a limited
extent the progress of the
implementation of the LDMs
1 - Unsatisfactory The outputs do not show the
progress of the implementation of
the LDMs
Weighted Rating 1.500
Division:
Region:
LAC Leader:
LDM Coach:
PART II - LDM IMPLEMEN
Quality of Reflection
25%
Reflection describes the
experience in LDM
implementation, shows depth of
analysis and synthesis, and
relates it to the professional
standards and to professional and
personal development goals
Reflection describes the
experience in LDM
implementation, shows some
analysis, and relates it to the
professional standards and to
professional and personal
development goals
Reflection describes the
experience in LDM
implementation and relates it to
the professional standards and
personal development goals
Reflection describes the
experience in LDM
implementation with limited
attempt to relate it to the
professional standards and
personal development goals
Reflection describes experience
in LDM implementation with no
attempt to relate it to the
professional standards and
personal development goals
1.000
Final Rating (FR) 4.600
Description of FR Oustanding
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 13.42857143
Individual Report of LDM1 Rating of School Heads
PARTICIPANT'S PERFORMANCE
AGUSAN DEL SUR Part I Rating (Module-based Outputs)
Caraga Part I Rating Description:
NORA G. JULVE Part II Rating (Practicum Portfolio)
LELANI R. ABUTAY Part II Rating Description:
PART II - LDM IMPLEMENTATION / PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO
Demonstration of Language and Overall
Professional Standards Presentation of the Output
20% 15%
5 4
The outputs clearly demonstrate 5 The ideas are expressed in clear,
or more indicators of relevant coherent, and appropriately-
strands in professional standards worded language with no errors in
structure and/or writing
conventions
The outputs clearly demonstrate 4 The ideas are expressed in clear
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
indicators of relevant strands in with incoherence in some areas
professional standards and few errors in structure and/or
writing conventions
The outputs clearly demonstrate The ideas are expressed using
the 2 indicators of relevant very basic words and structure
strands in professional standards with incoherence in many areas
and several errors in structure
and/or writing conventions
The outputs do not demonstrate The ideas are jumbled and
any indicator in the professional difficult to understand; errors in
standards structure and writing conventions
are almost everywhere in the
output
1.000 0.600
N/A
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, is insightful and offers
new perspective and insights
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

0
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
School Head: AGUSTINA R. MANIBOG
School: GASA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
Email Address:
Contact Number: 9207813628
Demonstration of Progress
of LDM Implementation
30%
Partial Rating
4 4
5 - Excellent The outputs captured clearly and
adequately the progress of the
implementation of the LDMs
showing innovations that
contribute to the smooth
implementation of the LDMs
4 - Very Satisfactory The outputs captured adequately
the progress of the
implementation of the LDMs
3 - Satisfactory The outputs reflect to a big extent
the progress of the
implementation of the LDMs
2 - Marginal The outputs reflect to a limited
extent the progress of the
implementation of the LDMs
1 - Unsatisfactory The outputs do not show the
progress of the implementation of
the LDMs
Weighted Rating 1.200
Form 1AP_LDM1 Practicum Portfolio - Individual Report o
Division:
Region:
LAC Leader:
LDM Coach:
PART II - LDM IMPLEMEN
Quality of Reflection
25%
Reflection describes the
experience in LDM
implementation, shows depth of
analysis and synthesis, and
relates it to the professional
standards and to professional and
personal development goals
Reflection describes the
experience in LDM
implementation, shows some
analysis, and relates it to the
professional standards and to
professional and personal
development goals
Reflection describes the
experience in LDM
implementation and relates it to
the professional standards and
personal development goals
Reflection describes the
experience in LDM
implementation with limited
attempt to relate it to the
professional standards and
personal development goals
Reflection describes experience
in LDM implementation with no
attempt to relate it to the
professional standards and
personal development goals
1.000
Final Rating (FR) 4.100
Description of FR Very Satisfactory
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 13.42857143
Individual Report of LDM1 Rating of School Heads
PARTICIPANT'S PERFORMANCE
AGUSAN DEL SUR Part I Rating (Module-based Outputs)
Caraga Part I Rating Description:
NORA G. JULVE Part II Rating (Practicum Portfolio)
LELANI R. ABUTAY Part II Rating Description:
PART II - LDM IMPLEMENTATION / PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO
Demonstration of Language and Overall
Professional Standards Presentation of the Output
20% 15%
4 4
The outputs clearly demonstrate 5 The ideas are expressed in clear,
or more indicators of relevant coherent, and appropriately-
strands in professional standards worded language with no errors in
structure and/or writing
conventions
The outputs clearly demonstrate 4 The ideas are expressed in clear
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
indicators of relevant strands in with incoherence in some areas
professional standards and few errors in structure and/or
writing conventions
The outputs clearly demonstrate The ideas are expressed using
the 2 indicators of relevant very basic words and structure
strands in professional standards with incoherence in many areas
and several errors in structure
and/or writing conventions
The outputs do not demonstrate The ideas are jumbled and
any indicator in the professional difficult to understand; errors in
standards structure and writing conventions
are almost everywhere in the
output
0.800 0.600
N/A
4.100
Very Satisfactory
Organization of Portfolio
5%
5
The portfolio is logically
organized, is insightful and offers
new perspective and insights
The portfolio is logically
organized, is insightful and offers
new perspective and insights
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

0
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
School Head: MARICRIS L. BAJAO
School: ISDAON ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
Email Address:
Contact Number: 9505650074
Demonstration of Progress
of LDM Implementation
30%
Partial Rating
4 4
5 - Excellent The outputs captured clearly and
adequately the progress of the
implementation of the LDMs
showing innovations that
contribute to the smooth
implementation of the LDMs
4 - Very Satisfactory The outputs captured adequately
the progress of the
implementation of the LDMs
3 - Satisfactory The outputs reflect to a big extent
the progress of the
implementation of the LDMs
2 - Marginal The outputs reflect to a limited
extent the progress of the
implementation of the LDMs
1 - Unsatisfactory The outputs do not show the
progress of the implementation of
the LDMs
Weighted Rating 1.200
Form 1AP_LDM1 Practicum Portfolio - Individual Report o
Division:
Region:
LAC Leader:
LDM Coach:
PART II - LDM IMPLEMEN
Quality of Reflection
25%
Reflection describes the
experience in LDM
implementation, shows depth of
analysis and synthesis, and
relates it to the professional
standards and to professional and
personal development goals
Reflection describes the
experience in LDM
implementation, shows some
analysis, and relates it to the
professional standards and to
professional and personal
development goals
Reflection describes the
experience in LDM
implementation and relates it to
the professional standards and
personal development goals
Reflection describes the
experience in LDM
implementation with limited
attempt to relate it to the
professional standards and
personal development goals
Reflection describes experience
in LDM implementation with no
attempt to relate it to the
professional standards and
personal development goals
1.000
Final Rating (FR) 4.050
Description of FR Very Satisfactory
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 13.42857143
Individual Report of LDM1 Rating of School Heads
PARTICIPANT'S PERFORMANCE
AGUSAN DEL SUR Part I Rating (Module-based Outputs)
Caraga Part I Rating Description:
NORA G. JULVE Part II Rating (Practicum Portfolio)
LELANI R. ABUTAY Part II Rating Description:
PART II - LDM IMPLEMENTATION / PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO
Demonstration of Language and Overall
Professional Standards Presentation of the Output
20% 15%
4 4
The outputs clearly demonstrate 5 The ideas are expressed in clear,
or more indicators of relevant coherent, and appropriately-
strands in professional standards worded language with no errors in
structure and/or writing
conventions
The outputs clearly demonstrate 4 The ideas are expressed in clear
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
indicators of relevant strands in with incoherence in some areas
professional standards and few errors in structure and/or
writing conventions
The outputs clearly demonstrate The ideas are expressed using
the 2 indicators of relevant very basic words and structure
strands in professional standards with incoherence in many areas
and several errors in structure
and/or writing conventions
The outputs do not demonstrate The ideas are jumbled and
any indicator in the professional difficult to understand; errors in
standards structure and writing conventions
are almost everywhere in the
output
0.800 0.600
N/A
4.050
Very Satisfactory
Organization of Portfolio
5%
4
The portfolio is logically
organized, is insightful and offers
new perspective and insights
The portfolio is logically
organized, is insightful and offers
new perspective and insights
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

0
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
School Head: LEMUEL S. DELA VEGA
School: TRENTO CENTRAL ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
Email Address:
Contact Number: 9104010037
Demonstration of Progress
of LDM Implementation
30%
Partial Rating
5 4
5 - Excellent The outputs captured clearly and
adequately the progress of the
implementation of the LDMs
showing innovations that
contribute to the smooth
implementation of the LDMs
4 - Very Satisfactory The outputs captured adequately
the progress of the
implementation of the LDMs
3 - Satisfactory The outputs reflect to a big extent
the progress of the
implementation of the LDMs
2 - Marginal The outputs reflect to a limited
extent the progress of the
implementation of the LDMs
1 - Unsatisfactory The outputs do not show the
progress of the implementation of
the LDMs
Weighted Rating 1.500
Form 1AP_LDM1 Practicum Portfolio - Individual Report o
Division:
Region:
LAC Leader:
LDM Coach:
PART II - LDM IMPLEMEN
Quality of Reflection
25%
Reflection describes the
experience in LDM
implementation, shows depth of
analysis and synthesis, and
relates it to the professional
standards and to professional and
personal development goals
Reflection describes the
experience in LDM
implementation, shows some
analysis, and relates it to the
professional standards and to
professional and personal
development goals
Reflection describes the
experience in LDM
implementation and relates it to
the professional standards and
personal development goals
Reflection describes the
experience in LDM
implementation with limited
attempt to relate it to the
professional standards and
personal development goals
Reflection describes experience
in LDM implementation with no
attempt to relate it to the
professional standards and
personal development goals
1.000
Final Rating (FR) 4.550
Description of FR Oustanding
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 13.42857143
Individual Report of LDM1 Rating of School Heads
PARTICIPANT'S PERFORMANCE
AGUSAN DEL SUR Part I Rating (Module-based Outputs)
Caraga Part I Rating Description:
NORA G. JULVE Part II Rating (Practicum Portfolio)
LELANI R. ABUTAY Part II Rating Description:
PART II - LDM IMPLEMENTATION / PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO
Demonstration of Language and Overall
Professional Standards Presentation of the Output
20% 15%
5 4
The outputs clearly demonstrate 5 The ideas are expressed in clear,
or more indicators of relevant coherent, and appropriately-
strands in professional standards worded language with no errors in
structure and/or writing
conventions
The outputs clearly demonstrate 4 The ideas are expressed in clear
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
indicators of relevant strands in with incoherence in some areas
professional standards and few errors in structure and/or
writing conventions
The outputs clearly demonstrate The ideas are expressed using
the 2 indicators of relevant very basic words and structure
strands in professional standards with incoherence in many areas
and several errors in structure
and/or writing conventions
The outputs do not demonstrate The ideas are jumbled and
any indicator in the professional difficult to understand; errors in
standards structure and writing conventions
are almost everywhere in the
output
1.000 0.600
N/A
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, is insightful and offers
new perspective and insights
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

0
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
School Head:
School:
Email Address:
Contact Number:
Demonstration of Progress
of LDM Implementation
30%
Partial Rating
5 - Excellent The outputs captured clearly and
adequately the progress of the
implementation of the LDMs
showing innovations that
contribute to the smooth
implementation of the LDMs
4 - Very Satisfactory The outputs captured adequately
the progress of the
implementation of the LDMs
3 - Satisfactory The outputs reflect to a big extent
the progress of the
implementation of the LDMs
2 - Marginal The outputs reflect to a limited
extent the progress of the
implementation of the LDMs
1 - Unsatisfactory The outputs do not show the
progress of the implementation of
the LDMs
Weighted Rating 0.000
Form 1AP_LDM1 Practicum Portfolio - Individual Report o
Division:
Region:
LAC Leader:
LDM Coach:
PART II - LDM IMPLEMEN
Quality of Reflection
25%
Reflection describes the
experience in LDM
implementation, shows depth of
analysis and synthesis, and
relates it to the professional
standards and to professional and
personal development goals
Reflection describes the
experience in LDM
implementation, shows some
analysis, and relates it to the
professional standards and to
professional and personal
development goals
Reflection describes the
experience in LDM
implementation and relates it to
the professional standards and
personal development goals
Reflection describes the
experience in LDM
implementation with limited
attempt to relate it to the
professional standards and
personal development goals
Reflection describes experience
in LDM implementation with no
attempt to relate it to the
professional standards and
personal development goals
0.000
Final Rating (FR) 0.000
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 13.42857143
Individual Report of LDM1 Rating of School Heads
AGUSAN DEL SUR
Caraga
NORA G. JULVE
LELANI R. ABUTAY
PART II - LDM IMPLEMENTATION / PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO
Demonstration of Language and Overall
Professional Standards Presentation of the Output
20%
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
0.000
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
0.000
N/A
0.000
N/A
Organization of Portfolio
5%
The portfolio is logically
organized, is insightful and offers
new perspective and insights
The portfolio is logically
organized, is insightful and offers
new perspective and insights
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
0.000
PD Credit Units
to be determined

to be determined

0
Timeliness

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

0.000

←Summary of Ratings
←Guide
PARTICIPANT'S PROFILE
School Head:
School:
Email Address:
Contact Number:
Demonstration of Progress
of LDM Implementation
30%
Partial Rating
5 - Excellent The outputs captured clearly and
adequately the progress of the
implementation of the LDMs
showing innovations that
contribute to the smooth
implementation of the LDMs
4 - Very Satisfactory The outputs captured adequately
the progress of the
implementation of the LDMs
3 - Satisfactory The outputs reflect to a big extent
the progress of the
implementation of the LDMs
2 - Marginal The outputs reflect to a limited
extent the progress of the
implementation of the LDMs
1 - Unsatisfactory The outputs do not show the
progress of the implementation of
the LDMs
Weighted Rating 0.000
Form 1AP_LDM1 Practicum Portfolio - Individual Report o
Division:
Region:
LAC Leader:
LDM Coach:
PART II - LDM IMPLEMEN
Quality of Reflection
25%
Reflection describes the
experience in LDM
implementation, shows depth of
analysis and synthesis, and
relates it to the professional
standards and to professional and
personal development goals
Reflection describes the
experience in LDM
implementation, shows some
analysis, and relates it to the
professional standards and to
professional and personal
development goals
Reflection describes the
experience in LDM
implementation and relates it to
the professional standards and
personal development goals
Reflection describes the
experience in LDM
implementation with limited
attempt to relate it to the
professional standards and
personal development goals
Reflection describes experience
in LDM implementation with no
attempt to relate it to the
professional standards and
personal development goals
0.000
Final Rating (FR) 0.000
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 13.42857143
Individual Report of LDM1 Rating of School Heads
AGUSAN DEL SUR
Caraga
NORA G. JULVE
LELANI R. ABUTAY
PART II - LDM IMPLEMENTATION / PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO
Demonstration of Language and Overall
Professional Standards Presentation of the Output
20%
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
0.000
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
0.000
N/A
0.000
N/A
Organization of Portfolio
5%
The portfolio is logically
organized, is insightful and offers
new perspective and insights
The portfolio is logically
organized, is insightful and offers
new perspective and insights
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
0.000
PD Credit Units
to be determined

to be determined

0
Timeliness

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

0.000

←Summary of Ratings
←Guide
PARTICIPANT'S PROFILE
School Head:
School:
Email Address:
Contact Number:
Demonstration of Progress
of LDM Implementation
30%
Partial Rating
5 - Excellent The outputs captured clearly and
adequately the progress of the
implementation of the LDMs
showing innovations that
contribute to the smooth
implementation of the LDMs
4 - Very Satisfactory The outputs captured adequately
the progress of the
implementation of the LDMs
3 - Satisfactory The outputs reflect to a big extent
the progress of the
implementation of the LDMs
2 - Marginal The outputs reflect to a limited
extent the progress of the
implementation of the LDMs
1 - Unsatisfactory The outputs do not show the
progress of the implementation of
the LDMs
Weighted Rating 0.000
Form 1AP_LDM1 Practicum Portfolio - Individual Report o
Division:
Region:
LAC Leader:
LDM Coach:
PART II - LDM IMPLEMEN
Quality of Reflection
25%
Reflection describes the
experience in LDM
implementation, shows depth of
analysis and synthesis, and
relates it to the professional
standards and to professional and
personal development goals
Reflection describes the
experience in LDM
implementation, shows some
analysis, and relates it to the
professional standards and to
professional and personal
development goals
Reflection describes the
experience in LDM
implementation and relates it to
the professional standards and
personal development goals
Reflection describes the
experience in LDM
implementation with limited
attempt to relate it to the
professional standards and
personal development goals
Reflection describes experience
in LDM implementation with no
attempt to relate it to the
professional standards and
personal development goals
0.000
Final Rating (FR) 0.000
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 13.42857143
Individual Report of LDM1 Rating of School Heads
AGUSAN DEL SUR
Caraga
NORA G. JULVE
LELANI R. ABUTAY
PART II - LDM IMPLEMENTATION / PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO
Demonstration of Language and Overall
Professional Standards Presentation of the Output
20%
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
0.000
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
0.000
N/A
0.000
N/A
Organization of Portfolio
5%
The portfolio is logically
organized, is insightful and offers
new perspective and insights
The portfolio is logically
organized, is insightful and offers
new perspective and insights
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
0.000
PD Credit Units
to be determined

to be determined

0
Timeliness

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

0.000

←Summary of Ratings
←Guide
PARTICIPANT'S PROFILE
School Head:
School:
Email Address:
Contact Number:
Demonstration of Progress
of LDM Implementation
30%
Partial Rating
5 - Excellent The outputs captured clearly and
adequately the progress of the
implementation of the LDMs
showing innovations that
contribute to the smooth
implementation of the LDMs
4 - Very Satisfactory The outputs captured adequately
the progress of the
implementation of the LDMs
3 - Satisfactory The outputs reflect to a big extent
the progress of the
implementation of the LDMs
2 - Marginal The outputs reflect to a limited
extent the progress of the
implementation of the LDMs
1 - Unsatisfactory The outputs do not show the
progress of the implementation of
the LDMs
Weighted Rating 0.000
Form 1AP_LDM1 Practicum Portfolio - Individual Report o
Division:
Region:
LAC Leader:
LDM Coach:
PART II - LDM IMPLEMEN
Quality of Reflection
25%
Reflection describes the
experience in LDM
implementation, shows depth of
analysis and synthesis, and
relates it to the professional
standards and to professional and
personal development goals
Reflection describes the
experience in LDM
implementation, shows some
analysis, and relates it to the
professional standards and to
professional and personal
development goals
Reflection describes the
experience in LDM
implementation and relates it to
the professional standards and
personal development goals
Reflection describes the
experience in LDM
implementation with limited
attempt to relate it to the
professional standards and
personal development goals
Reflection describes experience
in LDM implementation with no
attempt to relate it to the
professional standards and
personal development goals
0.000
Final Rating (FR) 0.000
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 13.42857143
Individual Report of LDM1 Rating of School Heads
AGUSAN DEL SUR
Caraga
NORA G. JULVE
LELANI R. ABUTAY
PART II - LDM IMPLEMENTATION / PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO
Demonstration of Language and Overall
Professional Standards Presentation of the Output
20%
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
0.000
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
0.000
N/A
0.000
N/A
Organization of Portfolio
5%
The portfolio is logically
organized, is insightful and offers
new perspective and insights
The portfolio is logically
organized, is insightful and offers
new perspective and insights
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
0.000
PD Credit Units
to be determined

to be determined

0
Timeliness

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

0.000

←Summary of Ratings
←Guide
PARTICIPANT'S PROFILE
School Head:
School:
Email Address:
Contact Number:
Demonstration of Progress
of LDM Implementation
30%
Partial Rating
5 - Excellent The outputs captured clearly and
adequately the progress of the
implementation of the LDMs
showing innovations that
contribute to the smooth
implementation of the LDMs
4 - Very Satisfactory The outputs captured adequately
the progress of the
implementation of the LDMs
3 - Satisfactory The outputs reflect to a big extent
the progress of the
implementation of the LDMs
2 - Marginal The outputs reflect to a limited
extent the progress of the
implementation of the LDMs
1 - Unsatisfactory The outputs do not show the
progress of the implementation of
the LDMs
Weighted Rating 0.000
Form 1AP_LDM1 Practicum Portfolio - Individual Report o
Division:
Region:
LAC Leader:
LDM Coach:
PART II - LDM IMPLEMEN
Quality of Reflection
25%
Reflection describes the
experience in LDM
implementation, shows depth of
analysis and synthesis, and
relates it to the professional
standards and to professional and
personal development goals
Reflection describes the
experience in LDM
implementation, shows some
analysis, and relates it to the
professional standards and to
professional and personal
development goals
Reflection describes the
experience in LDM
implementation and relates it to
the professional standards and
personal development goals
Reflection describes the
experience in LDM
implementation with limited
attempt to relate it to the
professional standards and
personal development goals
Reflection describes experience
in LDM implementation with no
attempt to relate it to the
professional standards and
personal development goals
0.000
Final Rating (FR) 0.000
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 13.42857143
Individual Report of LDM1 Rating of School Heads
AGUSAN DEL SUR
Caraga
NORA G. JULVE
LELANI R. ABUTAY
PART II - LDM IMPLEMENTATION / PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO
Demonstration of Language and Overall
Professional Standards Presentation of the Output
20%
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
0.000
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
0.000
N/A
0.000
N/A
Organization of Portfolio
5%
The portfolio is logically
organized, is insightful and offers
new perspective and insights
The portfolio is logically
organized, is insightful and offers
new perspective and insights
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
0.000
PD Credit Units
to be determined

to be determined

0
Timeliness

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

0.000

←Summary of Ratings
←Guide
PARTICIPANT'S PROFILE
School Head:
School:
Email Address:
Contact Number:
Demonstration of Progress
of LDM Implementation
30%
Partial Rating
5 - Excellent The outputs captured clearly and
adequately the progress of the
implementation of the LDMs
showing innovations that
contribute to the smooth
implementation of the LDMs
4 - Very Satisfactory The outputs captured adequately
the progress of the
implementation of the LDMs
3 - Satisfactory The outputs reflect to a big extent
the progress of the
implementation of the LDMs
2 - Marginal The outputs reflect to a limited
extent the progress of the
implementation of the LDMs
1 - Unsatisfactory The outputs do not show the
progress of the implementation of
the LDMs
Weighted Rating 0.000
Form 1AP_LDM1 Practicum Portfolio - Individual Report o
Division:
Region:
LAC Leader:
LDM Coach:
PART II - LDM IMPLEMEN
Quality of Reflection
25%
Reflection describes the
experience in LDM
implementation, shows depth of
analysis and synthesis, and
relates it to the professional
standards and to professional and
personal development goals
Reflection describes the
experience in LDM
implementation, shows some
analysis, and relates it to the
professional standards and to
professional and personal
development goals
Reflection describes the
experience in LDM
implementation and relates it to
the professional standards and
personal development goals
Reflection describes the
experience in LDM
implementation with limited
attempt to relate it to the
professional standards and
personal development goals
Reflection describes experience
in LDM implementation with no
attempt to relate it to the
professional standards and
personal development goals
0.000
Final Rating (FR) 0.000
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 13.42857143
Individual Report of LDM1 Rating of School Heads
AGUSAN DEL SUR
Caraga
NORA G. JULVE
LELANI R. ABUTAY
PART II - LDM IMPLEMENTATION / PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO
Demonstration of Language and Overall
Professional Standards Presentation of the Output
20%
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
0.000
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
0.000
N/A
0.000
N/A
Organization of Portfolio
5%
The portfolio is logically
organized, is insightful and offers
new perspective and insights
The portfolio is logically
organized, is insightful and offers
new perspective and insights
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
0.000
PD Credit Units
to be determined

to be determined

0
Timeliness

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

0.000

←Summary of Ratings
←Guide
PARTICIPANT'S PROFILE
School Head:
School:
Email Address:
Contact Number:
Demonstration of Progress
of LDM Implementation
30%
Partial Rating
5 - Excellent The outputs captured clearly and
adequately the progress of the
implementation of the LDMs
showing innovations that
contribute to the smooth
implementation of the LDMs
4 - Very Satisfactory The outputs captured adequately
the progress of the
implementation of the LDMs
3 - Satisfactory The outputs reflect to a big extent
the progress of the
implementation of the LDMs
2 - Marginal The outputs reflect to a limited
extent the progress of the
implementation of the LDMs
1 - Unsatisfactory The outputs do not show the
progress of the implementation of
the LDMs
Weighted Rating 0.000
Form 1AP_LDM1 Practicum Portfolio - Individual Report o
Division:
Region:
LAC Leader:
LDM Coach:
PART II - LDM IMPLEMEN
Quality of Reflection
25%
Reflection describes the
experience in LDM
implementation, shows depth of
analysis and synthesis, and
relates it to the professional
standards and to professional and
personal development goals
Reflection describes the
experience in LDM
implementation, shows some
analysis, and relates it to the
professional standards and to
professional and personal
development goals
Reflection describes the
experience in LDM
implementation and relates it to
the professional standards and
personal development goals
Reflection describes the
experience in LDM
implementation with limited
attempt to relate it to the
professional standards and
personal development goals
Reflection describes experience
in LDM implementation with no
attempt to relate it to the
professional standards and
personal development goals
0.000
Final Rating (FR) 0.000
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 13.42857143
Individual Report of LDM1 Rating of School Heads
AGUSAN DEL SUR
Caraga
NORA G. JULVE
LELANI R. ABUTAY
PART II - LDM IMPLEMENTATION / PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO
Demonstration of Language and Overall
Professional Standards Presentation of the Output
20%
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
0.000
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
0.000
N/A
0.000
N/A
Organization of Portfolio
5%
The portfolio is logically
organized, is insightful and offers
new perspective and insights
The portfolio is logically
organized, is insightful and offers
new perspective and insights
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
0.000
PD Credit Units
to be determined

to be determined

0
Timeliness

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

0.000

←Summary of Ratings
←Guide
PARTICIPANT'S PROFILE
School Head:
School:
Email Address:
Contact Number:
Demonstration of Progress
of LDM Implementation
30%
Partial Rating
5 - Excellent The outputs captured clearly and
adequately the progress of the
implementation of the LDMs
showing innovations that
contribute to the smooth
implementation of the LDMs
4 - Very Satisfactory The outputs captured adequately
the progress of the
implementation of the LDMs
3 - Satisfactory The outputs reflect to a big extent
the progress of the
implementation of the LDMs
2 - Marginal The outputs reflect to a limited
extent the progress of the
implementation of the LDMs
1 - Unsatisfactory The outputs do not show the
progress of the implementation of
the LDMs
Weighted Rating 0.000
Form 1AP_LDM1 Practicum Portfolio - Individual Report o
Division:
Region:
LAC Leader:
LDM Coach:
PART II - LDM IMPLEMEN
Quality of Reflection
25%
Reflection describes the
experience in LDM
implementation, shows depth of
analysis and synthesis, and
relates it to the professional
standards and to professional and
personal development goals
Reflection describes the
experience in LDM
implementation, shows some
analysis, and relates it to the
professional standards and to
professional and personal
development goals
Reflection describes the
experience in LDM
implementation and relates it to
the professional standards and
personal development goals
Reflection describes the
experience in LDM
implementation with limited
attempt to relate it to the
professional standards and
personal development goals
Reflection describes experience
in LDM implementation with no
attempt to relate it to the
professional standards and
personal development goals
0.000
Final Rating (FR) 0.000
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 13.42857143
Individual Report of LDM1 Rating of School Heads
AGUSAN DEL SUR
Caraga
NORA G. JULVE
LELANI R. ABUTAY
PART II - LDM IMPLEMENTATION / PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO
Demonstration of Language and Overall
Professional Standards Presentation of the Output
20%
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
0.000
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
0.000
N/A
0.000
N/A
Organization of Portfolio
5%
The portfolio is logically
organized, is insightful and offers
new perspective and insights
The portfolio is logically
organized, is insightful and offers
new perspective and insights
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
0.000
PD Credit Units
to be determined

to be determined

0
Timeliness

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

0.000

←Summary of Ratings
←Guide
PARTICIPANT'S PROFILE
School Head:
School:
Email Address:
Contact Number:
Demonstration of Progress
of LDM Implementation
30%
Partial Rating
5 - Excellent The outputs captured clearly and
adequately the progress of the
implementation of the LDMs
showing innovations that
contribute to the smooth
implementation of the LDMs
4 - Very Satisfactory The outputs captured adequately
the progress of the
implementation of the LDMs
3 - Satisfactory The outputs reflect to a big extent
the progress of the
implementation of the LDMs
2 - Marginal The outputs reflect to a limited
extent the progress of the
implementation of the LDMs
1 - Unsatisfactory The outputs do not show the
progress of the implementation of
the LDMs
Weighted Rating 0.000
Form 1AP_LDM1 Practicum Portfolio - Individual Report o
Division:
Region:
LAC Leader:
LDM Coach:
PART II - LDM IMPLEMEN
Quality of Reflection
25%
Reflection describes the
experience in LDM
implementation, shows depth of
analysis and synthesis, and
relates it to the professional
standards and to professional and
personal development goals
Reflection describes the
experience in LDM
implementation, shows some
analysis, and relates it to the
professional standards and to
professional and personal
development goals
Reflection describes the
experience in LDM
implementation and relates it to
the professional standards and
personal development goals
Reflection describes the
experience in LDM
implementation with limited
attempt to relate it to the
professional standards and
personal development goals
Reflection describes experience
in LDM implementation with no
attempt to relate it to the
professional standards and
personal development goals
0.000
Final Rating (FR) 0.000
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 13.42857143
Individual Report of LDM1 Rating of School Heads
AGUSAN DEL SUR
Caraga
NORA G. JULVE
LELANI R. ABUTAY
PART II - LDM IMPLEMENTATION / PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO
Demonstration of Language and Overall
Professional Standards Presentation of the Output
20%
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
0.000
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
0.000
N/A
0.000
N/A
Organization of Portfolio
5%
The portfolio is logically
organized, is insightful and offers
new perspective and insights
The portfolio is logically
organized, is insightful and offers
new perspective and insights
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
0.000
PD Credit Units
to be determined

to be determined

0
Timeliness

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

0.000

←Summary of Ratings
←Guide
PARTICIPANT'S PROFILE
School Head:
School:
Email Address:
Contact Number:
Demonstration of Progress
of LDM Implementation
30%
Partial Rating
5 - Excellent The outputs captured clearly and
adequately the progress of the
implementation of the LDMs
showing innovations that
contribute to the smooth
implementation of the LDMs
4 - Very Satisfactory The outputs captured adequately
the progress of the
implementation of the LDMs
3 - Satisfactory The outputs reflect to a big extent
the progress of the
implementation of the LDMs
2 - Marginal The outputs reflect to a limited
extent the progress of the
implementation of the LDMs
1 - Unsatisfactory The outputs do not show the
progress of the implementation of
the LDMs
Weighted Rating 0.000
Form 1AP_LDM1 Practicum Portfolio - Individual Report o
Division:
Region:
LAC Leader:
LDM Coach:
PART II - LDM IMPLEMEN
Quality of Reflection
25%
Reflection describes the
experience in LDM
implementation, shows depth of
analysis and synthesis, and
relates it to the professional
standards and to professional and
personal development goals
Reflection describes the
experience in LDM
implementation, shows some
analysis, and relates it to the
professional standards and to
professional and personal
development goals
Reflection describes the
experience in LDM
implementation and relates it to
the professional standards and
personal development goals
Reflection describes the
experience in LDM
implementation with limited
attempt to relate it to the
professional standards and
personal development goals
Reflection describes experience
in LDM implementation with no
attempt to relate it to the
professional standards and
personal development goals
0.000
Final Rating (FR) 0.000
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 13.42857143
Individual Report of LDM1 Rating of School Heads
AGUSAN DEL SUR
Caraga
NORA G. JULVE
LELANI R. ABUTAY
PART II - LDM IMPLEMENTATION / PRACTICUM PORTFOLIO
Demonstration of Language and Overall
Professional Standards Presentation of the Output
20%
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
0.000
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
0.000
N/A
0.000
N/A
Organization of Portfolio
5%
The portfolio is logically
organized, is insightful and offers
new perspective and insights
The portfolio is logically
organized, is insightful and offers
new perspective and insights
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
0.000
PD Credit Units
to be determined

to be determined

0
Timeliness

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

0.000