Q Directions On Sunday, by 11:59 p.m. (CT), each team member will be expected to complete a peer review for each teammate using the “team member rubric.” This rubric was designed to assess the team member’s advance preparation for the meetings, ability to work with others, contributions, time management, quality of work, and adaptability and flexibility. Peer Review Rubric Click on the links below to download the rubric: Team Member RubricDownload Team Member Rubric Project Manager RubricDownload Project Manager Rubric The rubrics are also located in Files in the Student View folder. Rubric Team Project- Peer Review Team Project- Peer Review Criteria Ratings Pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAdvance Preparation 7 to >6.3 pts Exceeds Expectations Properly prepared by completing assigned tasks on time. 6.3 to >5.6 pts Meets Expectations Somewhat prepared by completing most of the assigned tasks on time. 5.6 to >0 pts Does Not Meet Expectations Did not complete most of the assigned tasks on time and forced group to make last-minute adjustments or changes to accommodate missing work. 7 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWorking With Others 7 to >6.3 pts Exceeds Expectations Consistently listened to, shared with, and supported the efforts of others and made every effort to keep teammates working well together. Treated others respectfully and shared the workload fairly. 6.3 to >5.6 pts Meets Expectations Mostly listened to, shared with, and supported the efforts of teammates and avoided becoming a divisive force during the meeting. Usually treated others respectfully and shared the workload fairly. 5.6 to >0 pts Does Not Meet Expectations Seldom listened to, shared with, or supported the efforts of teammates and had a tendency to function as an individual making little effort to assimilate within the group. Sometimes treated others disrespectfully or did not share the workload fairly. 7 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeContributions 7 to >6.3 pts Exceeds Expectations Consistently provided useful ideas and suggestions while providing a healthy degree of push back to avoid the “groupthink” phenomenon during the meeting. Welcomed and receptive to constructive criticism from others and adjusted performance accordingly. Consistently demonstrated willingness to compromise for the greater good, but not to the point of jeopardizing outcomes. 6.3 to >5.6 pts Meets Expectations Mostly provided useful ideas and suggestions during the meeting. Mostly receptive to constructive criticism from others and adjusted performance accordingly. Occasionally willing to make compromises for the greater good, but not to the point of jeopardizing outcomes. 5.6 to >0 pts Does Not Meet Expectations Seldom provided useful ideas and suggestions during the meeting. Unreceptive to constructive criticism, engaging in “defensive posturing” and lashing out behaviors. Reluctant to make compromises for the greater good even though it may jeopardize outcomes. 7 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeTime Management 7 to >5.6 pts Exceeds Expectations Consistently used time wisely, thereby avoiding the need to extend time or adjust work responsibilities. Made specific plans for further work schedule to ensure that deadlines are met. 5.6 pts Does Not Meet Expectations The quality of work was not at the level expected of a graduate student and industry professional. 5.6 to >0 pts Meets Expectations Mostly provided work that reflected the quality expected of a graduate student and industry professional. 7 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAdaptability and Flexibility 7 to >5.6 pts Exceeds Expectations Consistently demonstrated confidence when faced with multiple demands, shifting priorities, rapid change and showed resilience when presented with constraints, frustrations, or adversity. 5.6 pts Does Not Meet Expectations Lacked confidence when faced with multiple demands, shifting priorities, rapid change and showed little resilience when presented with constraints, frustrations, and adversity. 5.6 to >0 pts Meets Expectations Mostly demonstrated confidence when faced with multiple demands, shifting priorities, rapid change and showed resilience when presented with constraints, frustrations, and adversity. 7 pts This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeQuality of Work 7 pts Exceeds Expectations Consistently provided work that reflected the quality expected of a graduate student and industry professional. 5.6 pts Does Not Meet Expectations The quality of work was not at the level expected of a graduate student and industry professional. 5.6 pts Meets Expectations Mostly provided work that reflected the quality expected of a graduate student and industry professional. 7 pts Total Points: 42 PreviousNext