| CPE/CSC 484 | User-Centered Design | Winter 2010 | |||||
| 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 | |||||||