Republic of the Philippines

Department of Education

National Educators Academy of the Philippines

Professional Development (PD) Program Design Quality Assurance Tool

Professional Development (PD)

Program Title

PD Program Provider

Application Receipt

General instructions:
The evaluator shall be guided with the following instructions for determining the compliance of the proposed PD program elements to the quality standards:
a. Highlight the box under the column Not Evident if all the requirements of the quality standards are not exhibited in the PD program element (relevant
section).
b. Highlight the box under column Partially Evident if one or more requirements of the quality standards is/are not exhibited in the PD program element
(relevant section).
c. Highlight the box under column Fully Evident if all the requirements of the quality standards are exhibited in the PD program element (relevant section).
d. For Partially Evident and Not Evident evaluations, input in the Remarks column your clearly articulated findings/comments/suggestions.
 Partially
PD Program Components and Quality Standards Fully Evident Not Evident Remarks
Evident

A. Rationale for the Proposed PD Program

1. The rationale clearly presents the context of the

proposed PD program and why it is important to X☐ ☐ ☐
be implemented for the target participants.
2. The proposed PD program is based on the results
of competency-based professional development
needs assessments (i.e., through individual ☐ X☐ ☐
development plans (IDPs), DepEd priorities across
levels, learners’ learning outcomes, etc.)
3. The rationale cites theoretical underpinning and
recent literature that support the identified
☐ x☐ ☐
competency gaps and proposed PD program
content areas and/or methodologies.
4. The rationale cites DepEd issuances/other legal
bases for the proposed PD program being offered
(if there’s any). X☐ ☐ ☐

B. Alignment to the Professional Standards

1. The proposed PD program responds to at least
one PPST/PPSSH/PPSS domain, strand, and
X☐ ☐ ☐
indicator, and/or other emerging needs of the
Department.
2. The target PPST/PPSSH/PPSS domain, strand,
X☐ ☐ ☐
and indicator in each session is indicated.

C. Target Participants Profile

1. The proposed PD program identifies the career
stage/s and profile (teacher/school
☐ x☐ ☐
head/supervisor, position, subject, and/or
grade/year level taught) of the target participants.
2. The target number of participants is specified. ☐ x☐ ☐
3. If the proposed PD program is to be implemented
in batches, the number of participants and
☐ x☐ ☐
batches are specified and are within the
prescribed absorptive capacity of the program.

D. Articulation of Learning Objectives

1. The proposed PD program’s application, terminal,

enabling, and session objectives are articulated
X☐ ☐ ☐
according to the SMART principles and follow the
Audience-Behavior-Condition-Degree method.
2. The proposed PD program’s result, application,
terminal, enabling, and session objectives are
X☐ ☐ ☐
aligned with the target professional standard
(domain, strand. and indicator) for development.
3. The application objective is relevant and sufficient
to contribute towards attaining the results X☐ ☐ ☐
objective.
4. The terminal objective is relevant and sufficient to
contribute towards attaining the application X☐ ☐ ☐
objective.
5. The enabling objectives are relevant and sufficient
to contribute towards attaining the terminal X☐ ☐ ☐
objective.
6. The session objectives are relevant and X☐ ☐ ☐
sufficiently cover a learning unit/episode to
contribute towards attaining the enabling and
 terminal objectives.

E. Session Contents
1. Contents are appropriate to support the
attainment of the learning objectives and X☐ ☐ ☐
producing the outputs.
3. Contents adequately identify the knowledge,
X☐ ☐ ☐
skills, and attitude for development.
4. Contents are accurate and based on credible
X☐ ☐ ☐
sources of information.
5. For subject content-based PD programs, contents
X☐ ☐ ☐
align with the curriculum standards.
6. Contents are organized according to the most
X☐ ☐ ☐
appropriate sequence and structure.

F. Program Methodology
1. The methodologies (e.g. active learning,
experiential learning or collaborative learning,
etc.) employ adult learning principles with X☐ ☐ ☐
opportunities to be active, experiential, social,
self-directed and goal oriented.
2. The methodologies describe in detail or step-by-
step process how the assigned resource speaker X☐ ☐ ☐
will deliver content and engage participants.
3. The methodologies indicate the relevant learning
resources that the resource speaker and
X☐ ☐ ☐
participants will use to support the attainment of
the session objectives.
4. The methodologies incorporate the use of varied
formative assessments such as multiple checks
X☐ ☐ ☐
for understanding, guided practice, independent
practice, etc.
5. The methodologies use recognized best learning X☐ ☐ ☐
 practices such as motivational/mood-setting
activities, modeling, etc.

G. Assessment Strategies and Tools

1. The formative and summative assessment
strategies are varied and sufficient to assess
X☐ ☐ ☐
learner’s progress and proficiency in the target
competencies for development.
2. Appropriate assessment tools are identified and
provided. Rubrics are available for X☐ ☐ ☐
performance/demonstration-based assessment.

H. Session Outputs
1. The session outputs are concrete, e.g., reflection
journal, TA Plan, lesson exemplar, rubrics, X☐ ☐ ☐
worksheets.
2. The session outputs are relevant to the session
objectives and can be realistically produced by X☐ ☐ ☐
participants within set time.

I. Workplace Application
1. The proposed PD program provides opportunities
for application of newly acquired competencies:
☐ x☐ ☐
crafting and implementation of Workplace
Application Plan (WAP).
2. The WAP is clearly aligned with Level 3:
X☐ ☐ ☐
Application Objectives.
3. The WAP can be realistically completed within 6
months (exclusive of school breaks for teachers) X☐ ☐ ☐
using available resources in the workplace.
4. The WAP is to be signed and approved by the
X☐ ☐ ☐
head of office where participants are based.
5. The rubric for the evaluation of WAP X☐ ☐ ☐
implementation is appropriate to measure the
 participant’s proficiency in the application of
learning.

J. Time Requirement
1. The indicative dates of implementation of the
proposed PD program do not interfere with the
conduct of school-based instructionally relevant X☐ ☐ ☐
activities, especially the actual classroom teaching
of teachers.
2. Schedule of activities is appropriately sequenced
X☐ ☐ ☐
and adequately timed.
3. The time allotted per session provides adequate
opportunity for the learning objectives to be X☐ ☐ ☐
attained.

K. Learning Resource Materials

1. All relevant learning resource materials (i.e.,
session guides, slide decks, modules, worksheets,
audiovisual presentation, etc.) that will support X☐ ☐ ☐
the delivery of learning sessions are identified and
provided.

L. On Resource Speaker/Subject-Matter Expert

1. The Resource Speakers/Subject-Matter Experts'
CVs reflect expertise relevant to the
PPST/PPSSH/PPSS domain/s, strand/s and X☐ ☐ ☐
indicator/s covered in the Speaker's/Subject-
Matter Expert’s session/s.

M. Gender Equality, Disability and Social Inclusion

1. Proposed PD program elements (i.e. participants
selection criteria, activities, learning resource
materials, resource speakers, and monitoring and
X☐ ☐ ☐
evaluation, etc.) promote maximum engagement
of participants from all backgrounds (disability,
age, gender, religious and ethnic backgrounds).
N. Monitoring and Evaluation Plan
1. The proposed PD Program M&E plan is anchored
on the PD program results, application, and X☐ ☐ ☐
terminal objectives.
2. The proposed PD Program M&E plan reflects the
four levels of evaluation according to Kirkpatrick’s
X☐ ☐ ☐
Model (Level 1: Reaction; Level 2: Learning; Level
3: Behavior; and Level 4: Result).
3. For Level 1, daily evaluation tool to measure how
participants find the PD program favorable,
X☐ ☐ ☐
engaging, and relevant to their jobs is indicated
and submitted.
4. For Level 2, formative and summative assessment
tools to measure participants’ acquired
knowledge, skills, attitude, confidence, and X☐ ☐ ☐
commitment based on their participation in the
PD program are indicated and submitted.
5. For Level 3, the WAP template detailing how
participants will apply what they learned from the
☒ ☐ ☐
PD program when they are back on the job is
indicated and submitted.

O. Budget Requirements
1. Proposed budget per participant is within the
allowable limits according to government
☒ ☐ ☐
budgeting, accounting, and auditing rules and
regulations.
2. The attached itemized expenditure reflects the
cost of the proposed PD program vis-à-vis the ☒ ☐ ☐
allowable expenses.

P. Program Management Team

1. PD Program Management Team members for X☐ ☐ ☐
program delivery are identified and are sufficient
 in number.
a. Program Manager
b. Learning Manager
c. Resource Speaker/Subject-Matter
Expert
d. M&E Coordinator
e. Documenter
f. Secretariat
g. Welfare Officer
h. Logistics Officer
i. Finance Officer

General Remarks:

RECOMMENDATION
Process and issue Quality Assurance
Yes
Certification

Are all quality Return to PD Program Provider

standards FULLY
EVIDENT? No
For compliance with the recommendations

For provision of technical assistance

Quality Assured by:

Evaluator
 Signature

Date

Evaluator

Signature

Date

Evaluator

Signature

Date

This Form is not valid if not signed.