1. GT VIP Software & Tools Hanna Ai Jaison George

2. Vip software is specifically designed to track students’ records over multiple semesters. Each semester, advisors can create custom evaluations for both midterm and final. Timeline: Student Peer Evaluation : A formative assessment that is completely anonymous, will not directly factor into student grades, but will help students learn how to give constructive feedbacks. An aid for advisors to determine the individual effort or improving team performance. VIP Notebook Evaluation: Feedback on student’s documented work. Input student grades. Introduction

3. VIP Advisor Tools Advisor dashboard (summary of the team’s history, returned members, grades, etc). Peer evaluation results. Grading (input comments, grades).

4. Student Peer Evaluation Tool Fill in answers for multiple students at once. More efficient and. convenient. Students don’t have to evaluate the members with they didn’t work with.

5. Student Peer Evaluation Tool Progress bar and quality of answer. Next button is disabled until all answers are submitted. Answers are auto-saved.

6. Advisor Tools - Peer Evaluation Result

8. Advisor Tools Display student information. Links to midterm / final peer evaluation results, wiki, and grading sheet. Release student grades.

9. Advisor Tools Historical record of the team. Track returning members. Review team performance over the multiple semesters.

10. Peer Evaluations: Analysis Supporting Program Management Julie Sonnenberg-Klein Academic Program Manager Vertically Integrated Projects Program

11. Very Briefly Analysis goals Initial analysis: Team management ability Digging deeper: Results by gender Looking ahead

12. Vertically Integrated Projects Program Analysis Goals Identify trends across the program New teams, old teams Consider results for subgroups Women Underserved minorities International students

13. Vertically Integrated Projects Program Initial Analysis: Team Management Ability Less skewing (fewer high ratings) Used Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) to compare groups. Grouped teams by age: 1 st semester 2 nd semester 3 rd -4 th semesters 5 th and higher semester

14. Vertically Integrated Projects Program Differences by Team Age: Statistically Significant Team age has a medium-large effect on team management ability scores Higher ratings on new teams Lower ratings on 2 nd semester teams Older teams had ratings between the two Two older age groups didn’t differ from each other

15. Vertically Integrated Projects Program What does this tell us? Students on new teams were easier on each other Likely had few team management opportunities Students on second semester teams may be struggling with peer mentoring New students have to get up to speed Returning students haven’t had mentoring modeled for them Returning students expected to take on more responsibility Need to consider support for students and/or faculty Near end of 1 st semester Start of 2 nd semester

16. Vertically Integrated Projects Program Digging Deeper – Men vs. Women Compared results for men and women, taking team age into account Used two-way Analysis of Variance No statistical difference by gender

17. Vertically Integrated Projects Program Looking Ahead More questions, more subgroups Program improvement Equity Longitudinal (midterm vs. final; semester to semester) If other sites adopt the peer eval tool Site level analysis Consortium-wide analysis Delve into social network analysis Julia Melkers did an in-depth study 2010-2011 Found strong peer-to-peer mentoring

18. Randal Abler

19. Vertically Integrated Projects Program Peer Evaluation Questions Evaluations ask questions on: Social network How often interactGive help/adviceReceive help/advice Teamwork ParticipationCommunicationTeam management Contributions Quality of workDocumentationDependability Learning Reaction to obstaclesIndependent learning Overall performance