INF387C
Team Member Evaluation C
INF 387C #81660
Team Member Evaluation
Group #
Member evaluated name
Participation
Please use the following ranking scale
1=Strongly disagree 2=Disagree 3=Neither agree nor disagree 4=Agree 5=Strongly agree
1. Group member was an active and consistent participant member in our
group’s work.
2. Group member offered useful feedback when it was requested.
3. Group member made substantive contributions to Blackboard forums and
other group discussions.
4. Group member communicated with the rest of the group through the
agreed-upon channels (i.e. Blackboard, e-mail, etc.).
5. Group member was reliable, and could be trusted to contribute at least as
much as they are asked to do.
6. Group member exhibited respect for other group members’ contributions
and ideas.
Product
1=Strongly disagree 2=Disagree 3=Neither agree nor disagree 4=Agree 5=Strongly agree
7. Group member made an important contribution to the group’s work
products.
8. Group member completed an equitable portion of group work.
9. Group member met deadlines imposed by the instructor.
10. Group member met deadlines agreed upon within the group for their
contribution(s).
11. Group member’s quality of work products met or exceeded expectations.
Overall Contribution
1=Negligible
2=Erratic
3=Minimum expected
4=Strong
5=Excellent
12. Group member’s contribution to our team’s working and learning.
Comments (optional):
INF387C
Team Member Evaluation C
INF 387C #81660
Team Member Evaluation
Group #
Member evaluated name
Participation
Please use the following ranking scale
1=Strongly disagree 2=Disagree 3=Neither agree nor disagree 4=Agree 5=Strongly agree
1. Group member was an active and consistent participant member in our
group’s work.
2. Group member offered useful feedback when it was requested.
3. Group member made substantive contributions to Blackboard forums and
other group discussions.
4. Group member communicated with the rest of the group through the
agreed-upon channels (i.e. Blackboard, e-mail, etc.).
5. Group member was reliable, and could be trusted to contribute at least as
much as they are asked to do.
6. Group member exhibited respect for other group members’ contributions
and ideas.
Product
1=Strongly disagree 2=Disagree 3=Neither agree nor disagree 4=Agree 5=Strongly agree
7. Group member made an important contribution to the group’s work
products.
8. Group member completed an equitable portion of group work.
9. Group member met deadlines imposed by the instructor.
10. Group member met deadlines agreed upon within the group for their
contribution(s).
11. Group member’s quality of work products met or exceeded expectations.
Overall Contribution
1=Negligible
2=Erratic
3=Minimum expected
4=Strong
5=Excellent
12. Group member’s contribution to our team’s working and learning.
Comments (optional):
INF387C
Team Member Evaluation C
INF 387C #81660
Team Member Evaluation
Group #
Member evaluated name
Participation
Please use the following ranking scale
1=Strongly disagree 2=Disagree 3=Neither agree nor disagree 4=Agree 5=Strongly agree
1. Group member was an active and consistent participant member in our
group’s work.
2. Group member offered useful feedback when it was requested.
3. Group member made substantive contributions to Blackboard forums and
other group discussions.
4. Group member communicated with the rest of the group through the
agreed-upon channels (i.e. Blackboard, e-mail, etc.).
5. Group member was reliable, and could be trusted to contribute at least as
much as they are asked to do.
6. Group member exhibited respect for other group members’ contributions
and ideas.
Product
1=Strongly disagree 2=Disagree 3=Neither agree nor disagree 4=Agree 5=Strongly agree
7. Group member made an important contribution to the group’s work
products.
8. Group member completed an equitable portion of group work.
9. Group member met deadlines imposed by the instructor.
10. Group member met deadlines agreed upon within the group for their
contribution(s).
11. Group member’s quality of work products met or exceeded expectations.
Overall Contribution
1=Negligible
2=Erratic
3=Minimum expected
4=Strong
5=Excellent
12. Group member’s contribution to our team’s working and learning.
Comments (optional):
INF387C
Team Member Evaluation C
INF 387C #81660
Team Member Evaluation
Group #
Member evaluated name
Participation
Please use the following ranking scale
1=Strongly disagree 2=Disagree 3=Neither agree nor disagree 4=Agree 5=Strongly agree
1. Group member was an active and consistent participant member in our
group’s work.
2. Group member offered useful feedback when it was requested.
3. Group member made substantive contributions to Blackboard forums and
other group discussions.
4. Group member communicated with the rest of the group through the
agreed-upon channels (i.e. Blackboard, e-mail, etc.).
5. Group member was reliable, and could be trusted to contribute at least as
much as they are asked to do.
6. Group member exhibited respect for other group members’ contributions
and ideas.
Product
1=Strongly disagree 2=Disagree 3=Neither agree nor disagree 4=Agree 5=Strongly agree
7. Group member made an important contribution to the group’s work
products.
8. Group member completed an equitable portion of group work.
9. Group member met deadlines imposed by the instructor.
10. Group member met deadlines agreed upon within the group for their
contribution(s).
11. Group member’s quality of work products met or exceeded expectations.
Overall Contribution
1=Negligible
2=Erratic
3=Minimum expected
4=Strong
5=Excellent
12. Group member’s contribution to our team’s working and learning.
Comments (optional):
INF387C
Team Member Evaluation C
INF 387C #81660
Team Member Evaluation
Group #
Member evaluated name
Participation
Please use the following ranking scale
1=Strongly disagree 2=Disagree 3=Neither agree nor disagree 4=Agree 5=Strongly agree
1. Group member was an active and consistent participant member in our
group’s work.
2. Group member offered useful feedback when it was requested.
3. Group member made substantive contributions to Blackboard forums and
other group discussions.
4. Group member communicated with the rest of the group through the
agreed-upon channels (i.e. Blackboard, e-mail, etc.).
5. Group member was reliable, and could be trusted to contribute at least as
much as they are asked to do.
6. Group member exhibited respect for other group members’ contributions
and ideas.
Product
1=Strongly disagree 2=Disagree 3=Neither agree nor disagree 4=Agree 5=Strongly agree
7. Group member made an important contribution to the group’s work
products.
8. Group member completed an equitable portion of group work.
9. Group member met deadlines imposed by the instructor.
10. Group member met deadlines agreed upon within the group for their
contribution(s).
11. Group member’s quality of work products met or exceeded expectations.
Overall Contribution
1=Negligible
2=Erratic
3=Minimum expected
4=Strong
5=Excellent
12. Group member’s contribution to our team’s working and learning.
Comments (optional):
INF387C
Team Member Evaluation C
INF 387C #81660
Team Member Evaluation
Group #
Member evaluated name
Participation
Please use the following ranking scale
1=Strongly disagree 2=Disagree 3=Neither agree nor disagree 4=Agree 5=Strongly agree
1. Group member was an active and consistent participant member in our
group’s work.
2. Group member offered useful feedback when it was requested.
3. Group member made substantive contributions to Blackboard forums and
other group discussions.
4. Group member communicated with the rest of the group through the
agreed-upon channels (i.e. Blackboard, e-mail, etc.).
5. Group member was reliable, and could be trusted to contribute at least as
much as they are asked to do.
6. Group member exhibited respect for other group members’ contributions
and ideas.
Product
1=Strongly disagree 2=Disagree 3=Neither agree nor disagree 4=Agree 5=Strongly agree
7. Group member made an important contribution to the group’s work
products.
8. Group member completed an equitable portion of group work.
9. Group member met deadlines imposed by the instructor.
10. Group member met deadlines agreed upon within the group for their
contribution(s).
11. Group member’s quality of work products met or exceeded expectations.
Overall Contribution
1=Negligible
2=Erratic
3=Minimum expected
4=Strong
5=Excellent
12. Group member’s contribution to our team’s working and learning.
Comments (optional):