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