CPE/CSC 484 User-Centered Design and Development Winter 2007      
Mutual Team Member Evaluation  
Team Name & Number Evaluation performed by:  
           
           
Instructions: On this sheet, you perform an evaluation of your team members (including yourself). This peer evaluation contributes 10% to the overall project score. For each team member, check the respective number, and provide and justification for your choice. If you don't give a justification, I will not count the respective category. The overall grade score should be assigned relative to the rest of the team; if all team members evaluate each other as excellent, I will adjust this in the calculation of the project score.  
 
Bonus Distribution      
Instructions: Assuming that your team was awarded a success bonus of $1,000 for good work, how would you distribute it among the team members (including yourself)? You may give up to $500 to one individual team member. Please consider all aspects of the team's performance for the bonus, not only the highly visible contributions.  
 
Name Bonus   Justification    
  $        
  $        
  $        
  $        
  $        
  $        
  $        
   
Self-Evaluation     Score  
Communication Justification:       (0 É 10)
group meetings, planning, updates on work done            
Reliability Justification:        
tasks performed on time            
Quality of Work Justification:        
results are of high quality            
Work Load Justification:        
willingness to do at least their share of work            
Team Player Justification:        
able to compromise, comes up with win-win strategies            
Technical Contributions Justification:        
contributes valuable expertise to the team (computer science, programming, application domain)            
Overall Grade Justification:        
relative to the rest of the team            
   
Name Team Member 1:   Score  
Communication Justification:       (0 É 10)
group meetings, planning, updates on work done            
Reliability Justification:        
tasks performed on time            
Quality of Work Justification:        
results are of high quality            
Work Load Justification:        
willingness to do at least their share of work            
Team Player Justification:        
able to compromise, comes up with win-win strategies            
Technical Contributions Justification:        
contributes valuable expertise to the team (computer science, programming, application domain)            
Overall Grade Justification:        
relative to the rest of the team            
   
Name Team Member 2:   Score  
Communication Justification:       (0 É 10)
group meetings, planning, updates on work done            
Reliability Justification:        
tasks performed on time            
Quality of Work Justification:        
results are of high quality            
Work Load Justification:        
willingness to do at least their share of work            
Team Player Justification:        
able to compromise, comes up with win-win strategies            
Technical Contributions Justification:        
contributes valuable expertise to the team (computer science, programming, application domain)            
Overall Grade Justification:        
relative to the rest of the team            
   
Name Team Member 3:   Score  
Communication Justification:       (0 É 10)
group meetings, planning, updates on work done            
Reliability Justification:        
tasks performed on time            
Quality of Work Justification:        
results are of high quality            
Work Load Justification:        
willingness to do at least their share of work            
Team Player Justification:        
able to compromise, comes up with win-win strategies            
Technical Contributions Justification:        
contributes valuable expertise to the team (computer science, programming, application domain)            
Overall Grade Justification:        
relative to the rest of the team            
   
Name Team Member 4:   Score  
Communication Justification:       (0 É 10)
group meetings, planning, updates on work done            
Reliability Justification:        
tasks performed on time            
Quality of Work Justification:        
results are of high quality            
Work Load Justification:        
willingness to do at least their share of work            
Team Player Justification:        
able to compromise, comes up with win-win strategies            
Technical Contributions Justification:        
contributes valuable expertise to the team (computer science, programming, application domain)            
Overall Grade Justification:        
relative to the rest of the team            
   
Name Team Member 5:   Score  
Communication Justification:       (0 É 10)
group meetings, planning, updates on work done            
Reliability Justification:        
tasks performed on time            
Quality of Work Justification:        
results are of high quality            
Work Load Justification:        
willingness to do at least their share of work            
Team Player Justification:        
able to compromise, comes up with win-win strategies            
Technical Contributions Justification:        
contributes valuable expertise to the team (computer science, programming, application domain)            
Overall Grade Justification:        
relative to the rest of the team            
   
Name Team Member 6:   Score  
Communication Justification:       (0 É 10)
group meetings, planning, updates on work done            
Reliability Justification:        
tasks performed on time            
Quality of Work Justification:        
results are of high quality            
Work Load Justification:        
willingness to do at least their share of work            
Team Player Justification:        
able to compromise, comes up with win-win strategies            
Technical Contributions Justification:        
contributes valuable expertise to the team (computer science, programming, application domain)            
Overall Grade Justification:        
relative to the rest of the team