Team Evaluation	Evaluator Name:__________________

Evaluate yourself and your fellow team members.  For each team member write the basis for evaluation.  For example, worked together on detailed design and web server evaluation OR worked together on test planning and QA.  Be as specific as possible in the space allotted.  Write legibly.

Evaluations should be delivered to Dr. Janzen by Monday, December 7 at 10:10am.  

Self evaluation:  
1.	List each of your MAJOR personal accomplishments/jobs this quarter. You may describe [some of] them in detail if you feel it's appropriate or useful. 

	

	

	

	

	

	

2.	In what specific ways could/should you have contributed more to your team project? Explain without making excuses. 

	

	

	

	

3.	Assign yourself a project grade (choices are: A, B, C, F) for your TEAM PROJECT ONLY.  Explain the rationale for the grade and justify it with specific details. Note: do not consider reading and homework assignments; this grade is just for your contributions to the team project. Do not repeat material from the first page.

Grade:___ Rationale:	

	

	

	

	

Self evaluation:  Circle one entry in each line
	Strongly Disagree	Disagree	Neither agree nor disagree	Agree	Strongly Agree	Don't know	
I have a good understanding of our project as a whole. 	1	2	3	4	5	Na	
I understood what was expected of me during this project.	1	2	3	4	5	Na	
I understood what my teammates were doing during this project.	1	2	3	4	5	Na	
I made significant contributions to our project.	1	2	3	4	5	Na	
Others were aware of my tasks and task status.	1	2	3	4	5	Na	
Others were aware of my perspective and opinions.	1	2	3	4	5	Na	
I produced high quality project artifacts.	1	2	3	4	5	Na	
I was a reliable and responsible team member.	1	2	3	4	5	Na	
Each member of my team contributed equally to the project. 	1	2	3	4	5	Na	
I understand the requirements of our customer.	1	2	3	4	5	Na	
Our requirements match our customer's needs. 	1	2	3	4	5	Na	
Our architecture matches the project’s requirements.	1	2	3	4	5	Na	
Our system accurately demonstrates the viability of our architecture.	1	2	3	4	5	Na	
I understand the technologies used in our system.	1	2	3	4	5	Na	
The things I learned will be useful to me when I leave Cal Poly. 	1	2	3	4	5	Na	
Our team used tools or technologies that were not familiar to me. 	1	2	3	4	5	Na	
I felt comfortable learning new tools and technology.	1	2	3	4	5	Na	
I enjoyed working on this project.	1	2	3	4	5	Na	
I would like to continue working on this project.	1	2	3	4	5	Na	

Peer evaluations:  Complete for each project team member.  Circle one entry in each line

Name:
	poor	Below average	average	Above average	Great	Na	
communication - participation in group meetings, keeping group members up to date on work status	1	2	3	4	5	Na	
reliability - does tasks on time	1	2	3	4	5	Na	
quality of work product	1	2	3	4	5	Na	
willingness to do fair share (or more) of the work	1	2	3	4	5	Na	
team player - able to compromise and think win-win	1	2	3	4	5	Na	
technical contribution	1	2	3	4	5	Na	
Overall grade relative to the rest of the team	1	2	3	4	5	Na	
Comments, special issues both good and bad:	

Basis for evaluation:	

Name:
	poor	Below average	average	Above average	Great	Na	
communication - participation in group meetings, keeping group members up to date on work status	1	2	3	4	5	Na	
reliability - does tasks on time	1	2	3	4	5	Na	
quality of work product	1	2	3	4	5	Na	
willingness to do fair share (or more) of the work	1	2	3	4	5	Na	
team player - able to compromise and think win-win	1	2	3	4	5	Na	
technical contribution	1	2	3	4	5	Na	
Overall grade relative to the rest of the team	1	2	3	4	5	Na	
Comments, special issues both good and bad:	

Basis for evaluation:	

Name:
	poor	Below average	average	Above average	Great	Na	
communication - participation in group meetings, keeping group members up to date on work status	1	2	3	4	5	Na	
reliability - does tasks on time	1	2	3	4	5	Na	
quality of work product	1	2	3	4	5	Na	
willingness to do fair share (or more) of the work	1	2	3	4	5	Na	
team player - able to compromise and think win-win	1	2	3	4	5	Na	
technical contribution	1	2	3	4	5	Na	
Overall grade relative to the rest of the team	1	2	3	4	5	Na	
Comments, special issues both good and bad:	

Basis for evaluation:	

Name:
	poor	Below average	average	Above average	Great	Na	
communication - participation in group meetings, keeping group members up to date on work status	1	2	3	4	5	Na	
reliability - does tasks on time	1	2	3	4	5	Na	
quality of work product	1	2	3	4	5	Na	
willingness to do fair share (or more) of the work	1	2	3	4	5	Na	
team player - able to compromise and think win-win	1	2	3	4	5	Na	
technical contribution	1	2	3	4	5	Na	
Overall grade relative to the rest of the team	1	2	3	4	5	Na	
Comments, special issues both good and bad:	

Basis for evaluation:	

Comments about team interactions, team leadership etc:	

	

	

Overall evaluation of team (you have bonus money to give out, $1000) how much would you give to each team member including possibly yourself?  The most you can give to any team member is $500.  Include an appropriate bonus for yourself.  The bonus should be based on overall contribution including both the quality and quantity of work and how essential they were to the team's success.  For example, an excellent manager or technical person may not have worked on a lot of visible work but their contribution in planning the project, encouraging team work, or coming up with a great design may have been crucial to its success.
NAME: 	BONUS
__________________	$___________
__________________	$___________
__________________	$___________
__________________	$___________
__________________	$___________
__________________	$___________