|
CSC 481 |
Knowledge-Based Systems |
|
|
|
|
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 … 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 … 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 … 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 … 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 … 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 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|