NBC No.

461 QCE Form 01A

QUALITATIVE CONTRIBUTION EVALUATION (QCE)

INSTRUMENT OF EVALUATION
OF TEACHING EFFECTIVENESS

Ratee: ____________________________________ College/unit : _______________________

Position: ___________________________________ Evaluation/Term: ____________________

Instructions:

This instrument shall be used by the faculty concerned for self evaluation, and evaluation by his
peers, his supervisor and his student beneficiaries to evaluate his teaching effectiveness.

Each area of assessment has three (3)/ four (4) criteria. The total raw points for the four (4)
areas is 70. The raw points garnered in each of the four (4) assessment areas is multiplied by the
corresponding weight (0.20 or 0.30). The highest total of weighted average for each rater is 25 or a total
weighted average of 100 for 4 raters (self, peers, supervisor and students).

In using the criteria, the scale of 1 to 5 is used with 5 as the highest. The equivalents are as
follows:

5 – Outstanding 2 – Fair
4 – Very Satisfactory 1 – Poor
3 – Satisfactory

I.COMMITMENT (WEIGHT = 0.20)

1. Demonstrates sensitivity to students’ ability to attend and absorb 5 4 3 2 1
content information.
2. Integrates sensitivity his learning objectives with those of the students 5 4 3 2 1
in a 5 collaborative process.
3. Makes self available to students beyond official time slots. 5 4 3 2 1
Total
Weighted Average
II.KNOWLEDGE OF SUBJECT (WEIGHT = 0.20)
1. Demonstrates mastery of the subject matter. 5 4 3 2 1
2. Draws and shares information on the state of the art theory and practice 5 4 3 2 1
in his/her discipline.
3. Integrates subjects to practical circumstances and learning 5 4 3 2 1
Intents/Purposes of students.
Total
Weighted Average
III.TEACHING FOR INDEPENDENT LEARNING (WEIGHT = 0.30)
1. Creates teaching strategies that allow students to practice using 5 4 3 2 1
concepts they need to understand (interactive discussion).
2. Enhances student’s self esteem 5 4 3 2 1
3. Allows students to create their own course with objectives and 5 4 3 2 1
realistically defined student-professor rules and make them accountable
for their performance.
4. Allow students to think independently and make their own decisions 5 4 3 2 1
largely on their success in executing decisions.
Total
Weighted Average
IV.MANAGEMENT OF LEARNING (WEIGHT = 0.30)
1. Creates opportunities for extensive contribution of students (e.g. breaks 5 4 3 2 1
class into dyads , triads or buzz/task groups)
2. Assumes roles as facilitator, resource, coach, inquisitor, integrator, 5 4 3 2 1
referee in drawing students to contribute to knowledge and
understanding of the concepts at hand.
3. Designs and implements learning conditions and experience that 5 4 3 2 1
promote healthy exchange and/or confrontations.
4. Structures-restructures learning and teaching-learning context to 5 4 3 2 1
enhance attainment of collective learning objectives.
Total
Weighted Average

Rater (Optional): ____________________________

NBC NO. 461 QCE FORM 02A

SECTORAL FREQUENCY OF RATING PER AREA

FOR INSTRUCTOR AND ASSISTANT PROFESSSOR
SECTORAL EVALUATOR _______________________

I. COMMITMENT

AVERAGE
CRITERIA RATING SCALE (1 = LOWEST, 5 = HIGEST)
RATING
NUMBER
1 2 2 2 5
1
2
3
4
5
TOTAL AREA RATING:

II. KNOWLEDGE OF SUBJECT

1
2
3
4
5
TOTAL AREA RATING:

III. TEACHING FOR INDEPENDENT LEARNING

1
2
3
4
5
TOTAL AREA RATING:

IV. MANAGEMENT OF LEARNING

1
2
3
4
5
TOTAL AREA RATING:
 ____________________
Supervisor/Dean

NBC NO. 461 QCE FORM 02B

SECTORAL FREQUENCY OF RATING PER AREA

FOR ASSOCIATE PROFESSSORS AND FULL PROFESSORS
SECTORAL EVALUATOR _______________________

I. CLIENTELE STAISFACTION (To be rated by clientele)

AVERAGE
CRITERIA RATING SCALE (1 = LOWEST, 5 = HIGEST)
RATING
NUMBER
1 2 3 4 5
1
2
3
4
5
TOTAL AREA RATING:

II. LEADERSHIP (To be rated by the immediate Supervisor)

AVERAGE
CRITERIA RATING SCALE (1 = LOWEST, 5 = HIGEST)
RATING
NUMBER
1 2 3 4 5
1
2
3
4
5
TOTAL AREA RATING:

III. PARTNERSHIP (To be rated by the Stakeholders)

AVERAGE
CRITERIA RATING SCALE (1 = LOWEST, 5 = HIGEST)
RATING
NUMBER
1 2 3 4 5
1
2
3
4
5
TOTAL AREA RATING:

IV. COMMUNITY RESPONSIBILITY

AVERAGE
CRITERIA RATING SCALE (1 = LOWEST, 5 = HIGEST)
RATING
NUMBER
1 2 3 4 5
1
2
3
4
5
TOTAL AREA RATING:
 NBC NO.461 QCE FORM No. 03

Republic of the Philippines

Bicol University

NBC NO. 461 Evaluation

INDIVIDUAL PERFORMANCE RATING
Rating Period July 1, 2005 to June 30, 2007

NAME OF FACULTY:_________________________ Rank _______________Department __________

CROSS RATING Summary

Average Weight of
INSTRUCTION Weight
Se Pe Su St Rating Rating Weighted
Rating
1. Commitment 0.20
2. Knowledge of Subject 0.20
3. Teaching for Individual Learning 0.30
4. Management of Learning 0.30
AREA TOTAL
SUB-TOTAL x

CROSS RATING Average Weight

AREA: RESEARCH Weight
Cl Su Sh Com Rating Rating
1. Client Satisfaction 0.25
2. Leadership 0.25
3. Partnership in Development 0.25
4. Community Responsibility 0.25
AREA TOTAL
SUB-TOTAL x
CROSS RATING Average Weight
AREA: EXTENSION Weight
Cl Su Sh Com Rating Rating
1. Client Satisfaction 0.25
2. Leadership 0.25
3. Partnership in Development 0.25
4. Community Responsibility 0.25
AREA TOTAL
SUB-TOTAL x
CROSS RATING Average Weight
AREA: PRODUCTION Weight
Cl Su Sh Com Rating Rating
1. Client Satisfaction 0.25
2. Leadership 0.25
3. Partnership in Development 0.25
4. Community Responsibility 0.25
AREA TOTAL
SUB-TOTAL
TOTAL QCE POINTS

Legend:
Se – Self Su – Supervisor Cl – Clientele Sh – Stakeholder
Pe – Peers St – Students Su – Supervisor Com – Community

LOCAL QCE EVALUATION COMMITTEE

___________________________________ MARISSA N. ESTRELLA

Department Chairman Assistant Dean

LUIS O. AMANO
Dean
 Legazpi City

Rating Sheet on Creative Work

(Published Articles and Literary Items)

Name of Faculty: _________________________________________________________

Title: ___________________________________________________________________

CRITERIA Rater 1 Rater 2 Rater 3

1. Originality 25%
2. Acceptability and Recognition 25%
3. Relevance and value 25%
4. Documentation and evidence of Dissemination 25%
Total Points

Average Rating: ____________

Note: The scale of 1-7 is distributed on the basis of competitiveness, thus –

International -7
National -5
Institutional -2

EVALUATORS:

__________________________
Chairman

__________________________
Member

__________________________
Member

Bicol University
 Legazpi City

Rating Sheet on Innovation

(Improved/Modifications Made on Existing Design, Process or Product)

Name of Faculty: _________________________________________________________

Title: ___________________________________________________________________

CRITERIA Rater 1 Rater 2 Rater 3

1. Use of Indigenous Materials 20%
2. Relevance and Value of Education Science and
Technology 20%
3. Cost/Time/Energy/Saving 20%
4. Acceptability of Peers 20%
5. Dissemination/Documentation 20%
Total Points

Average Rating: ____________

Note: The scale of 1-7 is distributed on the basis of competitiveness, thus –

International -7
National -5
Institutional -2

EVALUATORS:

__________________________
Chairman

__________________________
Member

__________________________
Member

NBC No. 461 QCE Form 01A

 QUALITATIVE CONTRIBUTION EVALUATION (QCE)
INSTRUMENT OF EVALUATION
OF TEACHING EFFECTIVENESS

Ratee: ____________________________________ College/unit : _______________________

Position: ___________________________________ Evaluation/Term: ____________________

Instructions:

This instrument shall be used by the faculty concerned for self evaluation, and evaluation by his
peers, his supervisor and his student beneficiaries to evaluate his teaching effectiveness.

Each area of assessment has three (3)/ four (4) criteria. The total raw points for the four (4)
areas is 70. The raw points garnered in each of the four (4) assessment areas is multiplied by the
corresponding weight (0.20 or 0.30). The highest total of weighted average for each rater is 25 or a total
weighted average of 100 for 4 raters (self, peers, supervisor and students).

In using the criteria, the scale of 1 to 5 is used with 5 as the highest. The equivalents are as
follows:

5 – Outstanding 2 – Fair
4 – Very Satisfactory 1 – Poor
3 – Satisfactory

V.COMMITMENT (WEIGHT = 0.20)

4. Demonstrates sensitivity to students’ ability to attend and absorb 5 4 3 2 1
content information.
5. Integrates sensitivity his learning objectives with those of the students 5 4 3 2 1
in a 5 collaborative process.
6. Makes self available to students beyond official time slots. 5 4 3 2 1
Total
Weighted Average
VI.KNOWLEDGE OF SUBJECT (WEIGHT = 0.20)
4. Demonstrates mastery of the subject matter. 5 4 3 2 1
5. Draws and shares information on the state of the art theory and practice 5 4 3 2 1
in his/her discipline.
6. Integrates subjects to practical circumstances and learning 5 4 3 2 1
Intents/Purposes of students.
Total
Weighted Average
VII.TEACHING FOR INDEPENDENT LEARNING (WEIGHT = 0.30)
5. Creates teaching strategies that allow students to practice using 5 4 3 2 1
concepts they need to understand (interactive discussion).
6. Enhances student’s self esteem 5 4 3 2 1
7. Allows students to create their own course with objectives and 5 4 3 2 1
realistically defined student-professor rules and make them accountable
for their performance.
8. Allow students to think independently and make their own decisions 5 4 3 2 1
largely on their success in executing decisions.
Total
Weighted Average
VIII.MANAGEMENT OF LEARNING (WEIGHT = 0.30)
5. Creates opportunities for extensive contribution of students (e.g. breaks 5 4 3 2 1
class into dyads , triads or buzz/task groups)
6. Assumes roles as facilitator, resource, coach, inquisitor, integrator, 5 4 3 2 1
referee in drawing students to contribute to knowledge and
understanding of the concepts at hand.
7. Designs and implements learning conditions and experience that 5 4 3 2 1
promote healthy exchange and/or confrontations.
8. Structures-restructures learning and teaching-learning context to 5 4 3 2 1
enhance attainment of collective learning objectives.
Total
Weighted Average

Rater (Optional): ____________________________

Position (Please encircle) Peer/Supervisor/Student/Self)