Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 66 views

    Gerald Fernandez - Peer Evaluation Form - Technopreneurship 101 Class

    Uploaded by

    Gerald Fernandez
    This peer evaluation document summarizes the performance of four group members on a project. It rates each member on collaboration, participation, preparation, quality of input, and communication using a scale of 1-4. The document shows that three members received scores of 4 for collaboration and participation, indicating they listened well, contributed ideas, and actively participated. One member received a 3 for quality of input and communication. Overall scores were 20, 20, 17, and 18 out of 20. A comment noted some members faced limitations like living far from the city with no internet connection.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Gerald Fernandez - Peer Evaluation Form - Technopreneurship 101 Class

    Uploaded by

    Gerald Fernandez
    66 views6 pages
    This peer evaluation document summarizes the performance of four group members on a project. It rates each member on collaboration, participation, preparation, quality of input, and communication using a scale of 1-4. The document shows that three members received scores of 4 for collaboration and participation, indicating they listened well, contributed ideas, and actively participated. One member received a 3 for quality of input and communication. Overall scores were 20, 20, 17, and 18 out of 20. A comment noted some members faced limitations like living far from the city with no internet connection.

    Original Title

    Gerald Fernandez - Peer Evaluation Form_Technopreneurship 101 class

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This peer evaluation document summarizes the performance of four group members on a project. It rates each member on collaboration, participation, preparation, quality of input, and communication using a scale of 1-4. The document shows that three members received scores of 4 for collaboration and participation, indicating they listened well, contributed ideas, and actively participated. One member received a 3 for quality of input and communication. Overall scores were 20, 20, 17, and 18 out of 20. A comment noted some members faced limitations like living far from the city with no internet connection.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    66 views6 pages

    Gerald Fernandez - Peer Evaluation Form - Technopreneurship 101 Class

    Uploaded by

    Gerald Fernandez
    This peer evaluation document summarizes the performance of four group members on a project. It rates each member on collaboration, participation, preparation, quality of input, and communication using a scale of 1-4. The document shows that three members received scores of 4 for collaboration and participation, indicating they listened well, contributed ideas, and actively participated. One member received a 3 for quality of input and communication. Overall scores were 20, 20, 17, and 18 out of 20. A comment noted some members faced limitations like living far from the city with no internet connection.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 6

    PEER EVALUATION- TECHNOPRENEURSHIP 101

    TEAM NAME: 1. My Name 2. Member’s Name: 3. Member’s Name: 4. Member’s Name:


    Sadboi Carlo Lumentac, Carlo S.
    Block: ​BSCE-3D Fernandez, Gerald S. Dagaraga, Emmanuel Vildosola, Eleomer Elles
    M.
    Collaboration

    When our group was collaborating


    4 4 4 3
    together, this person:

    4- Listens to other’s ideas. Gives broad


    ideas and expands on them or
    encourages others to do so. Builds on
    contributions of others.

    3- Listens well. Contributes ideas but


    the ideas do not deepen the discussion
    rather maintain it at current level.

    2- Listens fairly well but interrupts at


    times. Rarely deepens the discussion.

    1- Overbearing. Interrupts. Doesn’t


    allow discussion of ideas other than
    own and/or does not listen or contribute.
    Participation

    The way in which this person


    4 4 4 4
    participated was:
    4- Contributes ideas. Actively speaks
    up. Brainstorms.

    3- Contributes some ideas but is mainly


    passive.

    2- Sits passively.

    1- Does nothing.
    Preparation

    This person was prepared in the


    4 4 3 4
    following way:

    4- Does more than required.

    3- Does what committed to do.

    2- Does some of what committed to


    do.

    1- Does nothing
    Quality of Input

    The typical quality of input this person


    4 4 3 3
    provided was:

    4- Provides extensive accurate


    information to group members.

    3- Information is usually accurate and is


    an adequate amount.

    2- Mostly misinforms group or provides


    little information.

    1- Provides group with no useful


    accurate information.
    Communication

    They way in which this person


    4 4 3 4
    communicated was:

    4- Reliably communicates progress to


    group. Reachable and regularly checks
    messages/email. Talks with others in
    group.

    3- Stays in fairly good touch with the


    group, but is occasionally difficult to
    contact.

    2- Is unreachable but initiates


    communication with others
    occasionally.

    1- Is unreachable and does not


    communicate with group members
    about the project.
    TOTAL SCORE out of 20
    20 20 17 18
    Comments about group members or the dynamics of the group:
    Groupmates are willing to contribute, but some are limited due to circumstances such as Living far from the city, No internet connection

    You might also like