Peer Evaluations. Attendance- Does the team member attend group meetings? Is advance warning of non-attendance given? Is the member late to meetings?

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Bus 411 DAY 21. ETS testing ETS Field Test in Business for Wednesday, April 23, in Nadeau 109. the morning; 9:00 a.m. afternoon 1:00 PM Juniors and Seniors.
Advertisements

Customer Success is Our Mission MILCOM 2008 Reviewer Guidelines Rev B 8 July 2008.
Foundations of Team Leadership 1 Bushfire Feedback.
1 Clemson ECE Laboratories Pre-Labs for ECE 212 Created by Manas Tonapi on 02/16/2013 Last Updated: 02/23/2013.
Present Levels of Academic Achievement and Functional Performance
Ensure Vendor/Engineer of Choice Product Quality
Where Are You Living? A Simple Guide to Promoting Student Success.
What cooperative learning is Students working together to achieve shared goals to maximize their own and each other’s learning, promote positive social.
Bus 411 DAY 27. Timeline (tick-tock) May 1  Take home final available  Due May 3PM May 5  Team 2 Case 22 Yellow Roadway Corp.  Round four case.
Bus 411 DAY 20. Agenda Kroger Case Study  PowerPoint Before Class (at least one hour) Grades and feedback are posted  Performance should improve.
Bus 411 DAY 15. Agenda Assignment 5 Corrected  1 A, 4 B’s, 1 C & 2 D’s  Problem with BCG, All data was available in the Google 2004 annual report Mid.
Formal Cooperative Learning: Text Comprehension/Interpretation Karl A. Smith Laura Apol.
WATAUGA COUNTY SCHOOLS MIDDLE GRADES PRE-MATH 1 & MATH 1 PLACEMENT Advanced Math Placement Procedure.
Annual Review Process Georgi Lowe UWSA Office of Human Resources & Workforce Diversity.
2010 Performance Evaluation Process Information Session for Staff
Assisting Students with Special Needs. Not all special needs are the same! Learning Disability: Students have a difficulty in a particular educational.
TEAM MORALE Team Assignment 12 SOFTWARE MEASUREMENT & ANALYSIS K15T2-Team 21.
Dr. Michael Flicek Education Consultant October 8, 2013 Wyoming School Performance Rating Model Report to: Wyoming State Board of Education.
Leadership Conference With your teachers: Mrs. Casey Mr. Zhu Mr. Sutcliffe And Administrator:
 Each student is required to participate in the Science Fair this school year.  You may work in groups of no more than 3 students in your group.  A.
Year 13 Tutor Training – Reports Reports for Y13 are issued on 11 th February. This training is about your role in helping to ensure that the process is.
DMS Leadership Team Meeting September 23, :00 a.m. – 11:30 a.m.
School-wide PBIS Tiered Fidelity Inventory
1 Project Information and Acceptance Testing Integrating Your Code Final Code Submission Acceptance Testing Other Advice and Reminders.
Let’s Look at... Assessing Group Performance 1. Performance Groups Material for this section largely adapted from: “Assessing group work” © Copyright.
ITIS 2110 Lab #13.  Work on Project  Turn in by end of this lab: ▪ Cover sheet ▪ Brief status ▪ May resubmit Project Proposal with updates for status.
Styles of Leadership LET II. Introduction Leadership styles are the pattern of behaviors that one uses to influence others. You can influence others in.
Team Software Process (TSPi) CS4320 Fall TSP Strategy Provide a simple process framework based on the PSP. Use modest, well-defined problems. Develop.
Available at: – Compete on a Competitive VEX Team Compete on a Competitive VEX Team.
The Case Against Zero. Our grades are based on point scale.  There are 10 ways to get an A: 90, 91, 93…100  There are 10 ways to get a B: 85, 86,… 89.
Working in Teams, Unit 4 Individual Roles and Team Mission Working in Teams/Unit 41 Health IT Workforce Curriculum Version 1.0/Fall 2010.
Design a new menu item that can be sold in the school canteen. Your design will need to be tested and the top product will be made by the canteen To be.
PRESENTED AT: THE ISU SUMMER DIRECTOR WORKSHOPS, JULY 10, 2012 DAVID W. SNYDER MAKING THE GRADE: QUALITY ASSESSMENT FOR INSTRUMENTAL GROUPS.
Bus 411 DAY 24. Agenda Jet Blue Airways Student choose Last Case Send of 1 St and 2 nd choice Only received one teams I will choose if I do not.
Mock Data Retreat Pam Lange TIE/ESA 7. 2 Agenda  Based on school’s need  May be ½ day/ full day/ two days  Work with district to determine needs –
Strategic ManagementPFS work session1 Session 11 PFS work session Reminder: individual credit for team work depends on…(see syllabus) Reminder: …on-time.
Insert Title of Presentation Introduction Seminar for New Faculty at DIS – day 2.
Practical exercise -Appraisal Manage people performance.
English Writing 1 Class Policies. Important to note Writing classes meet twice a week, therefore this class is worth twice as much as other SII classes.
ECE791 Senior Design Experience Project Requirements and Timeline.
Functional Behavioral Assessment Data Analysis. Acknowledgements Beth Marshall Susan Hollinger Dawn Frenette Joan Wood Kirksey McIntosh Elizabeth Cameron.
Bus 411 DAY 25. Agenda Course Evaluations AirTran Airways Student choice of Last Case  Team 1 Home Depot  Team 2 Harrah's T  Team 3 Liz Claiborne Team.
1 Getting Up to Speed on Value-Added - An Accountability Perspective Presentation by the Ohio Department of Education.
Bus 411 DAY 25. Agenda USA Truck Student choice of Last Case  Team 1 Home Depot  Team 2 Harrah's T  Team 3 Liz Claiborne Team work Send me your presentation.
1 540f07reviews9sep25 Pert and Reviews Reviews S&G Chapter 5.
Wheel Thrown Series 1.Students will be required to complete a series of four identical wheel bowls. The minimum height and diameter is four inches. The.
Team Rewards The Peer Evaluation Process. Your rewards Assessed by instructor Assessed by your team peers.
Bus 411 DAY 27. Agenda Grades for 3 rd case  3 B’s  Feed back on next slide Home Depot Peer Evaluations sent  Due Friday, May 9:30 AM Team work.
Checklists EDUC 307. What is an Observation Checklist?  The observation checklist is a strategy to monitor specific skills, behaviors, or dispositions.
ITIS 2110 Lab #13.  Presentations  4/26: L02, L04  4/28: L05  5/2: L01, L03.
CS 575 Spring 2012 Lecture Bapa Rao.
Using Rubrics for Assessing Individual and/or Group Participation Marie Krbavac June 4, 2015.
PRG 420 Week 2 Learning Team Quality Control Sheet To purchase this material click below link Week-2-Learning-Team-Quality-Control-Sheet.
Getting Prepared for the Webinar
Bus 411 Day 23 Copyright 2005 Prentice Hall.
New Approach to Teammate Evaluation Rationale #8 Week 9
Standards- based grading for parents- grades k-2
NUR 518 Enthusiastic Studysnaptutorial.com
Robert W. Lingard California State University, Northridge
Professional Writing Introduction.
Robert W. Lingard California State University, Northridge
Performance Evaluation
Bus 411 Day 22 Copyright 2005 Prentice Hall.
New Approach to Teammate Evaluation Rationale #7 Week 11
Group Member Evaluation Form
Assessment of Learning in Student-Centered Courses
Bus 411 DAY 21.
Mean.
How to write and facilitate an IEP
Seminar on Modern Debates
Presentation transcript:

Peer Evaluations

Attendance- Does the team member attend group meetings? Is advance warning of non-attendance given? Is the member late to meetings? Contribution - Does the member actively participation in the team? Is the member completing the tasks assigned to him/her? Is he/she willing to help the team in his/her own expertise? Does the member verbally contribute to team meetings. Task Completion: Are tasks completed on time?. Is all research and information understandable and complete? Attitude: Does team member perform task with a good attitude? When interacting in class and team meetings does the team member seem optimistic? Does the member support the ideas of others? Does the member add to the ideas of others and share their ideas? Quality of Work: Is work complete and of an acceptable standard

Team Member #1:____________________ Performance Criteria Excellent Good Average Poor Unacceptable Attendance Contribution Task Completion Attitude Quality of work Total Score /25 Comments_________________________________________________ Complete for yourself and each team member

Ratings of TomDickJaneMary Tom Dick Jane 22 Mary Totals Made by Each member’s scores from all peer evaluations are summed and an average calculated. Total Score: ( ) = 342 Average Score 342/4 = 85.5

Percent of Average: Tom (92/85.5) = 108% Dick (84/85.5) = 98% Jane (78/85.5) = 92% Mary (88/85.5) = 103% For instance, the majority of the team feels that "Tom" was the high performer and he would receive 108% of the team project score. The team also feels as a whole that "Jane" is the low performer. She would receive 90% of the team project score. This scale reacts to a preponderance of opinion within a team and a team without clear-cut rating patterns will generally see minimal changes. Typically, those individuals that perform above or below average will see an impact on their grade. The maximum amount a person’s score to be increased is 110%. The maximum amount a person’s score to be decreased is 80%. If either of these limits are exceeded, the instructor will make appropriate adjustments The individual % of average becomes the peer-adjustment factor and impacts the ultimate score an individual receives on the team project.

For example if the final grade for the report is 85 out of 100. The individual marks would be: Tom 85 x 1.08 = 92 Dick 85 x.98 = 83 Jane 85 x.92 = 78 Mary 85 x 1.03 = 88 Group Member Evaluations can significantly impact individual team project scores. As such, they must be given responsibly. Significantly low peer evaluation scores must never come "out of the blue" or as a surprise to the impacted individual. Teams must bring problem behaviors to the attention of the instructor and must document the actions the team took to try and resolve the problem prior to providing peer evaluations. At a minimum, this documentation must include a record of the problem and team responses. The Instructor reserves the right to intervene as mediator to resolve disputes over the peer evaluation scores, and to make any adjustments deemed necessary.