MID-YEAR REVIEW FORM (MRF) for Master Teacher I-IV (S.Y.

2022 – 2023)
Name of Employee: PETER B. PAMA, JR. Name of Rater: JANONE A. CIBAL
Position: MASTER TEACHER - I Position: HEAD TEACHER - I
Bureau/Center/Service/Division: AGUSAN DEL SUR Date of Review: FEBRUARY 6 -7, 2023
Rating Period: AUGUST 2022 - JANUARY 2023

Mid-year Review/Rating
Weight Mid-year Review
MFOs KRAs Objectives Timeline Means of Verification Performance Rater (Teacher) Rater (Principal)
per KRA Results
Target Rating Remarks Rating Remarks

Basic 1. Content 1. Modeled effective 22.5 1. Classroom observation tool (COT) rating Quality
Education Knowledge and applications of content % sheet and/or inter-observer agreement form
Services Pedagogy knowledge within and about effective applications of content
knowledge within and across curriculum No CO No CO
across curriculum teaching
teaching areas has yet has yet
areas. CO is scheduled on the
2. Lesson plans/modified DLLs used in conducted conducted
Q3 & Q4
demonstration teaching highlighting During the During the Q1
integration of content knowledge within and Q1 & Q2 & Q2
across subject areas
3. Instructional materials developed
highlighting effective application of content
knowledge within and across subject areas Efficiency
4. Performance tasks/test material(s) used in No CO No CO
demonstration teaching highlighting has yet has yet
integration of content knowledge within and CO is scheduled on the
conducted conducted
across subject areas Q3 & Q4
During the During the Q1
5. Results of assessment used in Q1 & Q2 & Q2
demonstration teaching highlighting mastery
of lessons learned
6. Others (Please specify and provide Timeliness
annotations)
Basic 2. Collaborated with 1. Copy of the research proposal focused on Quality
Education colleagues in the conduct enriching knowledge of content and
Services and application of research pedagogy
to enrich knowledge of 2. Proof of participation and/or contribution to a
content and pedagogy. collaborative research (e.g. e-mail, actual Efficiency
output submitted, terms of reference, etc.)
3. Certified completed collaborative research
focused on enriching knowledge of content
and pedagogy
4. Proof of dissemination of research findings Timeliness
with colleagues
5. Proof of utilization of research findings
 Mid-year Review/Rating
Weight Mid-year Review
MFOs KRAs Objectives Timeline Means of Verification Performance Rater (Teacher) Rater (Principal)
per KRA Results
Target Rating Remarks Rating Remarks

6. Others (Please specify and provide

annotations)
Basic 3. Developed and applied 1. Classroom observation tool (COT) rating Quality
Education effective teaching strategies sheet and/or inter-observer agreement form
Services to promote critical and about using effective teaching strategies to No CO No CO
promote critical and creative teaching, as has yet has yet
creative thinking, as well as CO is scheduled on the
well as other higher-order thinking skills conducted conducted
other higher-order thinking Q3 & Q4
2. Lesson plans/modified DLLs used in During the During the Q1
skills. Q1 & Q2 & Q2
demonstration teaching highlighting different
teaching strategies that develop critical and
creative thinking and/or other HOTS
Efficiency
3. Instructional materials highlighting different
teaching strategies that develop critical and No CO No CO
creative thinking, and/or other HOTS has yet has yet
CO is scheduled on the
4. Performance tasks/test material(s) used in conducted conducted
Q3 & Q4
demonstration teaching During the During the Q1
5. Results of assessment used in the Q1 & Q2 & Q2
demonstration teaching
6. Others (Please specify and provide Timeliness
annotations)
Basic 2. Learning 4. Worked with colleagues 22.5 1. Classroom observation tool (COT) rating Quality
% sheet and/or inter-observer agreement form No CO No CO
Education Environment and to model and share
about sharing effective techniques in the has yet has yet
Services Diversity of effective techniques in the CO is scheduled on the
management of classroom structure conducted conducted
Learners management of classroom Q3 only.
2. Lesson plans/modified DLLs used in During the During the Q1
structure to engage Q1 & Q2. & Q2.
learners, individually or in demonstration teaching highlighting effective
classroom management strategies that Efficiency
groups, in meaningful
engage learners in activities/tasks in
exploration, discovery and No CO No CO
different physical learning environments
hands-on activities within a 3. Minutes of LAC highlighting the sharing on has yet has yet
range of physical learning CO is scheduled on the
effective classroom management techniques conducted conducted
Q3 only.
environments. 4. Instructional materials used in During the During the Q1
demonstration teaching Q1 & Q2. & Q2.
5. Others (Please specify and provide
annotations) Timeliness
 Mid-year Review/Rating
Weight Mid-year Review
MFOs KRAs Objectives Timeline Means of Verification Performance Rater (Teacher) Rater (Principal)
per KRA Results
Target Rating Remarks Rating Remarks

Basic 5. Exhibited effective and Classroom observation tool (COT) rating sheet Quality
Education constructive behavior and/or inter-observer agreement form about No CO No CO
Services management skills by effective teacher management of learner has yet has yet
applying positive and non- behavior using the following strategies: CO is scheduled on the
conducted conducted
1. Providing motivation Q3 only.
violent discipline to ensure During the During the Q1
learning-focused 2. Praising the learners/Giving positive Q1 & Q2. & Q2.
feedback
environments.
3. Setting house rules/guidelines
4. Ensuring learners’ active participation Efficiency
5. Allowing learners to express their
ideas/opinions No CO No CO
6. Giving equal opportunities to learners has yet has yet
7. Encouraging learners to ask questions CO is scheduled on the
conducted conducted
Others (Please specify and provide annotations) Q3 only.
During the During the Q1
Q1 & Q2. & Q2.

Timeliness
Basic 6. Worked with colleagues 1. Minutes of LAC session/s, highlighting one’s Quality
Education to share differentiated, sharing of strategies on differentiated and
Services developmentally developmentally appropriate opportunities to
appropriate opportunities to address learners’ differences
address learners’ 2. Lesson plans/modified DLLs highlighting
differences in gender, strategies on differentiated and
developmentally-appropriate opportunities to
needs, strengths, interests
address learners’ differences
and experiences.
3. Corresponding instructional materials
Efficiency
showing differentiated and developmentally-
appropriate opportunities to address
learners’ differences
4. Others (e.g. testimonial, write-up from
colleagues of the lessons/insights gained
from the Master Teacher's sharing)
Timeliness
 Mid-year Review/Rating
Weight Mid-year Review
MFOs KRAs Objectives Timeline Means of Verification Performance Rater (Teacher) Rater (Principal)
per KRA Results
Target Rating Remarks Rating Remarks

Basic 3. Curriculum and 7. Developed and applied 22.5 1. Classroom observation tool (COT) rating Quality
Education Planning effective strategies in the % sheet and/or inter-observer agreement form No CO No CO
Services planning and management about using effective strategies in has yet has yet
of developmentally implementing developmentally sequenced CO is scheduled on the
conducted conducted
teaching and learning process Q4 only.
sequenced teaching and During the During the Q1
learning processes to meet 2. Results of learners’ assessment during the Q1 & Q2. & Q2.
actual teaching
curriculum requirements
3. Lesson plans/modified DLLs used in
and varied teaching Efficiency
demonstration teaching highlighting
contexts. developmentally sequenced teaching-
learning process No CO No CO
4. Instructional materials showing effective has yet has yet
CO is scheduled on the
strategies in developmentally sequenced conducted conducted
Q4 only.
teaching and learning process During the During the Q1
5. Performance tasks/test material(s) used in Q1 & Q2. & Q2.
demonstration teaching
6. Others (Please specify and provide
annotations) Timeliness
8. Reviewed with 1. Implemented LAC/FGD Plan Quality
colleagues, teacher and 2. Minutes of LAC/FGD sessions on use of
learner feedback to plan, teacher and learner feedback to enrich
facilitate and enrich teaching practice with proof of attendance
teaching practice. 3. Others (Please specify and provide
annotations) Efficiency

Timeliness
Basic 9. Advised and guided 1. colleagues and critiqued on their alignment Quality
Education colleagues in the selection, to learning goals
Services organization, development 2. Lesson plans by colleagues critiqued in
and use of appropriate terms of the alignment of the teaching and
teaching and learning learning resources to the indicated learning
resources, including ICT, to goals and appropriateness to the target Efficiency
learners
address specific learning
3. Others (Please specify and provide
goals.
annotations)

Timeliness
 Mid-year Review/Rating
Weight Mid-year Review
MFOs KRAs Objectives Timeline Means of Verification Performance Rater (Teacher) Rater (Principal)
per KRA Results
Target Rating Remarks Rating Remarks

Basic 4. Assessment 10. Worked collaboratively 1. Any proof of collaborative review if the test is Quality
Education and Reporting with colleagues to review designed based on its purpose (e.g.
Services the design, selection, diagnostic, formative and summative)
organization and use of a 2. Any proof of collaborative review of the
range of effective alignment of the test with the curriculum
diagnostic, formative and 2.1. formative test attached to a lesson plan Efficiency
2.2. summative assessment with TOS
summative assessment
2.3. diagnostic test with its TOS
strategies consistent with
3. Others (Please specify and provide
curriculum requirements.
annotations)
Timeliness
Basic 11. Interpreted 22.5 1. Collaborative interpretation of the index of Quality
Education collaboratively monitoring % mastery obtained from 1 class
Services and evaluation strategies of 2. Collaborative interpretation of item analysis
attainment data to support of quarterly examinations
learner progress and 3. Collaborative interpretation of results of
achievement. performance assessment Efficiency
4. Others (Please specify and provide
annotations)

Timeliness
Basic 12. Applied skills in the 1. Sample agreement for learners at risk Quality
Education effective communication of signed by parents and corresponding
Services learner needs, progress and evidence of improvement
achievement to key 2. Record of dialogue and/or parent-teacher
 Mid-year Review/Rating
Weight Mid-year Review
MFOs KRAs Objectives Timeline Means of Verification Performance Rater (Teacher) Rater (Principal)
per KRA Results
Target Rating Remarks Rating Remarks

stakeholders, including conferences and corresponding evidence of Efficiency

parents/guardians. improvement
3. Anecdotal record communicated to and
signed by the learners and/or parents with
corresponding evidence of improvement
4. Sample of learners' test results signed by
parents and corresponding evidence of
improvement
5. Sample of accomplished rubrics given for
performance task and corresponding
evidence of improvement
6. Attendance sheet/minutes of parent-teacher
conference
7. Signed report cards of students at risk with
corresponding evidence of improvement
8. Correspondence notebook/letters/proof of
communication using other modalities (e.g.
e-mail, SMS, etc.) and corresponding
evidence of improvement
9. Learners’ performance record
10. Others (Please specify and provide
annotations) Timeliness
5. Personal 13. Manifest a learner 1. Sample lesson plans of colleague/s with Quality
Growth and centered teaching annotations about enhancing their
Professional philosophy in various learner-centered teaching philosophy
Development aspects of practice and
support colleagues in 2. Minutes of LAC session/s about
enhancing their own enhancing teachers’ learner-centered
learner-centered teaching teaching philosophy through lesson
philosophy. planning

3. LAC plan (refer to Annex 1 of DO 35, s.

2016) that details supporting teachers in
enhancing their learner-centered
teaching philosophy through lesson
planning

4. Lesson plan exemplar used during a

Learning Action Cell (LAC) session
 Mid-year Review/Rating
Weight Mid-year Review
MFOs KRAs Objectives Timeline Means of Verification Performance Rater (Teacher) Rater (Principal)
per KRA Results
Target Rating Remarks Rating Remarks

14. Reflect on the Philippine 1. Updated IPCRF-DP from Phase II Quality

Professional Standards for
Teachers to plan personal 2. Mid-year Review Form (MRF)
professional development
goals and assist colleagues 3. Performance Monitoring and Coaching
in planning and achieving Form (PMCF)
their own goals.
4. IPCRF-DP

5. Certification from the ICT Coordinator /

School Head / Focal Person in charge of
e- SAT and IPCRF-DP

Basic 6.. Plus Factor 15. Performed various 10% 1. Served as reliever of classes in the absence Quality
Education related works/activities that of teachers
Services contribute to the teaching- 2. Served as OIC in the absence of the
learning process. principal
3. Represented the principal in meetings and
conferences
4. Observed classes of Teachers I-III
5. Assisted the school selection committee in
the evaluation of credentials when hiring or
promoting teachers
6. Certificate of Recognition or Participation
7. Certificate of Training Efficiency
8. Certificate of Speakership
9. Committee involvement
10. Advisorship of Co-curricular activities
11. Book or Journal
Authorship/Co-authorship/Contributorship
12. Coordinatorship/Chairpersonship
13. Coaching and mentoring learners in
competitions
14. Mentoring pre-service/in-service teachers
15. Others (Please specify and provide
Timeliness
annotations)

JANONE A. CIBAL, HT – I PETER B. PAMA, JR. DR. HECTOR DM. MACALALAG, ASDS

Rater Ratee Approving Authority