Unlock document.
This document is partially blurred.
Unlock all pages and 1 million more documents.
Get Access
© 2019 by McGraw-Hill Education. This is proprietary material solely for authorized instructor use. Not authorized for sale or
GROUP PROCESS EVALUATION FORM:
TASK FUNCTIONS
Student’s Name:
Please circle the appropriate number for each item below, in response to the question: How well
did our group accomplish this step?
Rate each item on a scale of 1 to 5, where:
1 = Our group did not do this.
2 = Our group partially did this.
3 = Our group did this, with acceptable results.
Write the number in the last column, in response to the question:
Was the Step Accomplished?
I. Prepare Your Team Contract:
1.1
Teammates exchanged contact information (e-mail and phone).
1.2
The team agreed on at least three relational norms that all members agreed to abide
by.
1.3
The team set at least task norms that helped us achieve effective results.
1.4
The team assigned at least one relational role and one task role to each team
member.
1.5
Every member clearly understood the assignment.
II. Define the Problem:
2.1
We focused the problem to a small-scale, realistic, manageable scope.
2.2
We stated the problem as an open-ended question.
2.3
We stated the problem-question in such a way that the solution was not already
embedded within the question.
2.4
The problem-question was worded in a way that encourages creative thinking.
2.5
Every member clearly understood the problem-question.
III. Analyze the Problem:
3.1
The group identified observable features and characteristics of the problem.
3.2
The group determined who the stakeholders are (who is affected by the problem) and
how each group of stakeholders is affected.
3.3
The group researched the history of the problem: how it began and what others have
already tried to do to manage the problem.
© 2019 by McGraw-Hill Education. This is proprietary material solely for authorized instructor use. Not authorized for sale or
3.4
The group investigated whether there are any laws, policies, regulations, or politics,
or ethical considerations that would impact possible solutions.
3.5
The group investigates whether there are any laws, policies, regulations, or politics,
or ethical considerations that would impact possible solutions.
3.6
The group consulted adequate and varied sources of information.
3.7
Each group member brought relevant information to meetings.
3.8
Background information was adequately discussed.
3.9
The group kept track of the sources of all information, to be cited later in the list of
references.
IV. Establish Criteria:
4.1
The group reviewed the definition of a criterion and the role that criteria play in the
reflective problem-solving process, so that each group member clearly understood the
purpose of this step and the process to be used during this step.
4.2
The group outlined a general goal that the solution should accomplish.
4.3
The group defined at least seven specific criteria for evaluating possible solutions.
4.4
The list of criteria included a deadline and a maximum budget.
4.5
The group reviewed the list of criteria one by one to verify that each item was indeed
a criterion (measurement tool) and no solutions had been accidentally included in the
list.
V. Generate Possible Solutions:
5.1
Our group reviewed the rules of brainstorming so each member understood the
process to be used during this step.
5.2
At least ten possible solutions were generated by the group.
5.3
The group did not discuss the pros and cons of any solutions during this
brainstorming step.
5.4
The group thinks outside the box enough to generate at least two playful, creative,
outlandish solutions.
5.5
After the list of ideas had been completed, the group reviewed each potential solution
in detail, seeking additional clarification and explanation if necessary.
VI. Decide on a Solution:
6.1
The transition was clearly signposted when our group moved from generating ideas
to evaluating ideas.
6.2
The group weeded out any solutions that were clearly not feasible.
6.3
The group took the time necessary to combine (and possibly modify) similar items
on the list to avoid unnecessary duplication.
6.4
At this point, the group possessed a list of several clearly stated, feasible alternative
solutions to the stated problem.
6.5
The group rated how well each remaining solution would be able to achieve each of
the criteria the group had established earlier.
6.6
The group further evaluates each solution in terms of the potential cost and possible
problems that could arise.
© 2019 by McGraw-Hill Education. This is proprietary material solely for authorized instructor use. Not authorized for sale or
6.7
The group was able to reach a decision (by consensus, majority vote, etc.)
concerning the solution they would recommend.
6.8
The chosen solution appeared to satisfactorily solve the group’s stated problem.
6.9.1
The group held a “last-chance” discussion in which each member played the devil’s
advocate role, raising one possible unforeseen event that could impede the success
of the final solution.
6.9.2
Our group developed a contingency plan for dealing with these unforeseen
circumstances.
VII. Implementation:
7.1
After deciding on a recommended solution, the group generated a chronological list
of steps for implementing the solution.
7.2
The group generated a realistic timetable for completing the steps.
7.3
The group spent time discussing any variables that might hinder or assist in the
implementation of the solution and how to manage these variables.
7.4
The group clearly identified all needed resources for the accomplishment or
implementation of the solution generated.
7.5
The group assigned members to oversee the accomplishment of each step.
VIII. Follow Up
8.1
The group determined a process for reviewing the desired solution outcomes.
8.2
A date was established for re-evaluating how well the solution will have worked over
time.
8.3
Responsibilities were clearly assigned for the collection of follow-up evaluation data.
IX. Writing the Report
9.1
The group reviewed the assignment specifications so that each member understood
what materials must be submitted for a grade.
9.2
Tasks were assigned for preparing the final report.
9.3
All group members participate fully and equally in preparing the final report.
Your Rating
225-250
Excellent
200-224
Good
175-199
Acceptable
Compute Points
# of 1s (X) 1 =
# of 2s (X) 2 =
# of 3s (X) 3 =
# of 4s (X) 4 =
© 2019 by McGraw-Hill Education. This is proprietary material solely for authorized instructor use. Not authorized for sale or
GROUP PROCESS EVALUATION FORM:
RELATIONAL FUNCTIONS
Student’s Name:
Please circle the appropriate number for each item below, in response to the question:
How well did our group accomplish this step?
Rate each item a scale of 1 to 5, where:
1 = Our group did not do this.
2 = Our group occasionally did this.
3 = Our group usually did this, but with inconsistent results.
1
The group created an atmosphere that encouraged openness
and sharing.
1
2
3
4
5
2
Communication channels in the group were open and used
by all members.
1
2
3
4
5
3
Differences of opinion were considered and worked
through to mutual satisfaction.
1
2
3
4
5
4
All group members were encouraged to offer information.
1
2
3
4
5
5
Group members did not allow one or two persons to impose
their ideas on the group.
1
2
3
4
5
6
Each group member was consulted to check his/her
understanding of each step.
1
2
3
4
5
7
Group members stayed on task.
1
2
3
4
5
8
During the group process, individual members discussed
how well the group was functioning.
1
2
3
4
5
Compute Points
# of 1s (X) 1 =
# of 2s (X) 2 =
# of 3s (X) 3 =
Total:
Your Rating
36-40
Excellent
32-35
Good
28-31
Acceptable
8-23
Unacceptable
© 2019 by McGraw-Hill Education. This is proprietary material solely for authorized instructor use. Not authorized for sale or
WORKING AS A TEAM – OBSERVATION*
Name: Date:
List all team members:
Answer thoroughly the following questions about your teamwork. Think about how
individuals contributed to your group presentation. Be aware of what worked and what
did not.
TEAM ROLES
1. Did one or more of the team members become leader? If so, how did this happen?
2. Describe each member’s contribution to the completion of the assignment. Be specific,
and use descriptive, not evaluative language.
4. Who was most productive in churning out ideas? Who was especially creative? What
did these people do?
5. How well did members critique one another’s ideas? Were the critiques constructive
or destructive? Explain.
TEAM PROCESS
6. Did your team establish from the beginning an overall plan for completing the
assignment? If so, who suggested it?
8. How did you determine who would write which sections? Did each member complete
the assigned topics?
9. When there was disagreement, how did members resolve it?
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS
10. Please add your own brief narrative, providing any additional comments about your
Adapted from Lana Wolverton, Alta High School
© 2019 by McGraw-Hill Education. This is proprietary material solely for authorized instructor use. Not authorized for sale or
GROUP PRESENTATION EVALUATION
Title of Group Presentation:
Names of Group Members:
Rating scale: 5 = Excellent, 4 = Above Average, 3 = Average, 2 = Below Average, 1 = Poor
Instructor’s Evaluation of Group
Content
Rating
Comments
1.
Meaningful Presentation (Substantive,
informative)
2.
Theoretically Consistent (Group members did
not contradict one another)
3.
Well Executed (Well prepared and delivered)
4.
5.
6.
Creative (Ingenuity of physical and
theoretical design)
Showed Group Effort (Hard work)
Introduction and Statement of Problem Shows
Clarity and Thorough Understanding
7.
Presentation Was Interesting and Dynamic
Delivery added to Overall Effect
Organization
8.
Main Points Were Clear, Introduction &
Conclusions Achieved Purpose
9.
Transitions Contributed to Clarity, Order of
Speakers Contributed to Continuity of Group
Research
10.
Support (visual and verbal) Followed
Logically to Support the Argument Made
© 2019 by McGraw-Hill Education. This is proprietary material solely for authorized instructor use. Not authorized for sale or
TEAM PARTICIPATION EVALUATION
Team # ________
Your group will have a total of _______ points to distribute among your members (10 x
number of group members). Your task is to decide, as a group, how to equitably
apportion the points among members. The decision is to be made by the group as a whole
(that is, by all members who are present on the appointed day).
When determining points for each member, consider the following items:
-attendance: Did this person attend most in-class as well as out-of-class
meetings?
-discussion: With what quality and quantity did this participant contribute to the
team dialogue?
-follow through on assigned tasks: Did this individual carry through with his or
-general interest in the project and the team: Was this member on time for
meetings? Did s/he seem interested?
At the end of the allotted time, your team must submit to me one page that includes the
following information:
1. an alphabetized list of all team members (last name, first name)
2. the number of points awarded to each member
3. a brief paragraph about each individual justifying the number of points awarded
to that person
© 2019 by McGraw-Hill Education. This is proprietary material solely for authorized instructor use. Not authorized for sale or
RATING OF OTHER GROUP MEMBERS*
Name: ___________________________________Subject: __________________________________
THESE RATINGS ARE CONFIDENTIAL. They are for instructor use only. Rate every group member
(except yourself) with a score from 0 to 100. Whatever score you give, you must justify it, or it will not be
considered.
For scoring use the following scale:
Below 60 = Poor 70 = Average 80 = Good 90 = Very Good 100 = Excellent
Name of Group Member:
Category
Rating
Justification
Commitment
Participation
Cooperativeness
Contribution
Name of Group Member:
Category
Rating
Justification
Commitment
Participation
Cooperativeness
Contribution
Name of Group Member:
Category
Rating
Justification
Commitment
Participation
Cooperativeness
Contribution
Name of Group Member:
Category
Rating
Justification
Commitment
Participation
Cooperativeness
Contribution
(You may make additional comments on the back of this sheet.)
© 2019 by McGraw-Hill Education. This is proprietary material solely for authorized instructor use. Not authorized for sale or
GROUP REPORT: PEER ASSESSMENT
In addition to your instructor’s evaluation, your peers will assess you on your class presentation,
using the following form:
For each category, indicate your observation of the group by circling the appropriate number.
Add comments to explain your number choice.
1=inadequate or not done 3=adequate 5=outstanding, fantastic, far more than adequate
1 2 3 4 5 Content: Did you learn something from it? Did it give you new information?
Did it appear that the group sought and found information?
1 2 3 4 5 Interest level: Was it interesting enough to keep your attention? Did the group
think about you, the audience, present to you, and keep you interested?
1 2 3 4 5 Coordination: Did the group appear to work together? Did each member connect
to the others and appear as a group? Were they coordinated?
TOTAL NUMBER OF POINTS GROUP TOPIC:
© 2019 by McGraw-Hill Education. This is proprietary material solely for authorized instructor use. Not authorized for sale or
TEAM MEMBER EVALUATION FORM*
This form is confidential. Your instructor will use the information you provide to help determine
how the points for your team project will be divided among the members of your team.
Follow these steps to arrive at your ratings:
1. Determine the value of each member’s contribution by completing the rating forms
2. After evaluating each member, use the area on the last page to determine the distribution
of points that you think is most fair.
YOUR NAME
1. Value to the team on the task level: Provides/asks for important information, initiates discussion,
gives instructions, tests reality, clarifies, summarizes, diagnoses, etc.
Poor 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Outstanding
2. Value to the team in promoting effective relationships: Harmonizes interaction, relieves tension,
offers praise, listens empathetically, gives praise when appropriate, etc.
Poor 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Outstanding
3. Ready and willing to work hard on the project: Well prepared, committed to the team’s goal, keeps
in touch, attends meetings.
Poor 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Outstanding
TEAM MEMBER’S NAME
1. Value to the team on the task level: Provides/asks for important information, initiates discussion,
gives instructions, tests reality, clarifies, summarizes, diagnoses, etc.
Poor 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Outstanding
2. Value to the team in promoting effective relationships: Harmonizes interaction, relieves tension,
offers praise, listens empathetically, gives praise when appropriate, etc.
Poor 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Outstanding
3. Ready and willing to work hard on the project: Well prepared, committed to the team’s goal, keeps
in touch, attends meetings.
Poor 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Outstanding
© 2019 by McGraw-Hill Education. This is proprietary material solely for authorized instructor use. Not authorized for sale or
TEAM MEMBER’S NAME
1. Value to the team on the task level: Provides/asks for important information, initiates discussion,
gives instructions, tests reality, clarifies, summarizes, diagnoses, etc.
2. Value to the team in promoting effective relationships: Harmonizes interaction, relieves tension,
offers praise, listens empathetically, gives praise when appropriate, etc.
3. Ready and willing to work hard on the project: Well prepared, committed to the team’s goal, keeps
in touch, attends meetings.
Poor 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Outstanding
TEAM MEMBER’S NAME
1. Value to the team on the task level: Provides/asks for important information, initiates discussion,
gives instructions, tests reality, clarifies, summarizes, diagnoses, etc.
2. Value to the team in promoting effective relationships: Harmonizes interaction, relieves tension,
offers praise, listens empathetically, gives praise when appropriate, etc.
3. Ready and willing to work hard on the project: Well prepared, committed to the team’s goal, keeps
in touch, attends meetings.
Poor 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Outstanding
TEAM MEMBER’S NAME
1. Value to the team on the task level: Provides/asks for important information, initiates discussion,
gives instructions, tests reality, clarifies, summarizes, diagnoses, etc.
2. Value to the team in promoting effective relationships: Harmonizes interaction, relieves tension,
offers praise, listens empathetically, gives praise when appropriate, etc.
3. Ready and willing to work hard on the project: Well prepared, committed to the team’s goal, keeps
in touch, attends meetings.
Poor 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Outstanding
© 2019 by McGraw-Hill Education. This is proprietary material solely for authorized instructor use. Not authorized for sale or
TEAM MEMBER’S NAME
1. Value to the team on the task level: Provides/asks for important information, initiates discussion,
gives instructions, tests reality, clarifies, summarizes, diagnoses, etc.
2. Value to the team in promoting effective relationships: Harmonizes interaction, relieves tension,
offers praise, listens empathetically, gives praise when appropriate, etc.
3. Ready and willing to work hard on the project: Well prepared, committed to the team’s goal, keeps
in touch, attends meetings.
Poor 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Outstanding
SUMMARY OF POINT ALLOCATION
Your name: _______________ deserves _____% of team grade
Member’s name: _______________ deserves _____% of team grade
Member’s name: _______________ deserves _____% of team grade
Member’s name: _______________ deserves _____% of team grade
Member’s name: _______________ deserves _____% of team grade
Note: Total of all members’ contributions above should equal 100 %
*This form was contributed by Ron Adler
© 2019 by McGraw-Hill Education. This is proprietary material solely for authorized instructor use. Not authorized for sale or
SELF-CRITIQUE OF SPEECH
1. Overall impression: As I watched myself on video, my first comments and reactions
were:
2. Delivery: When I watch myself without sound, I notice the following about my:
• Eye contact
• Hands/gestures
3. Organization:
Strengths of my organization are:
4. Content:
Strengths of my content are:
5. After watching, I think my presentation would be better and clearer for the audience if
6. The best aspect of my presentation was:
