Peer Review Rubric

Each team member will be evaluated and given a score 1 through 5 by his / her
teammates in each of the seven criteria (see below) based on his / her participation
and performance in the team. These scores will be averaged for each member.
Individual project scores will be the average score converted into a percentage
multiplied by the total number of points for the team. For example, if the team score
for this project is, 160 points, an individual with a peer review average score of 80%
will receive 80 x 160 = 128 points). Team reports must include a peer evaluation form
filled out by each member. Each peer evaluation form must be sealed in a separate
envelope.
Please write below and in the back of this form one (minimum) or more paragraphs
about the work of each member of your team, including your own. These narratives
should amplify the ratings you gave in the table, by (a) identifying the strengths and
weaknesses of each individual and (b) suggesting ways in which his / her work can be
more effective. Also, evaluate the team as a whole. Feel free to attach additional
pages.

Peer Evaluation Form

Criteria

Filled out by: Hirenkumar

Thummar
Member 2 Member 3 Member 4 Self

Quality of Technical Work: Work is

correct, clear, complete, and relevant to the
1
5
5
5
problem. Equations, graphs, and notes are
clear and intelligible.
Commitment to Team / Project: Attends
all meetings. Arrives on time or early.
2
5
5
5
Prepared. Ready to work. Dependable,
faithful, reliable.
Leadership: Takes initiative, makes
suggestions, provides focus.
3
Creative?Energetic? Brings energy and
5
5
5
excitement to the team. Has a can do
attitude. Sparks creativity in others.
Responsibility: Gladly accepts work and
4
5
5
5
gets it done. Spirit of excellence.
Has abilities the team needs. Makes the most
5
of these abilities. Gives fully, doesnt hold
5
5
5
back.
Communication: Communicates clearly
6
when he/she speaks and when she/he writes. 4
4
4
Understands the teams direction.
Personality. Positive attitudes, encourages
others. Seeks consensus. Fun to deal with.
7
5
5
5
Brings out best in others. Peacemaker. Pours
water, not gasoline on fires.
Average grade
34
34
34
Grading scale:
5 Always, 4 Most of the time, 3 Sometimes, 2 Rarely, 1 Never
Keep in mind that if you award high scores to everyone, regardless of their contribution,
team members who have worked unduly hard or provided extraordinary leadership will
go unrecognized, as will those at the other end of the scale who need your corrective
feedback.

We had some problem in communication lately because we used to communicate using an email
and also at the same time, I lost my mobile phone. Other than that I don't think we had any
problem. For this experiment, we were not able to meet outside the classroom because Sarah was
not able to do that.
The thing I would like to change is a method of communication and also try to schedule meeting
outside the classroom so we can research, study, and write a better report. And I would like to be
a leader of my team (SuperCritical).
I believe that I didn't perform well in this experiment. Because I had very bad last few weeks.
First, I sliced my finger when I was working in the Lab and I had to spend few days in the bad
and then after a week I got a high fever because of that sliced finger and I spend another 3 days
in the bed. But I was still working at very slow pace.I assured my teammates that I will do the
extra credit but I couldn't. Still, I tried to do on Saturday that but we don't have Flow Simulation
toolbox on the school computer. So I just have a 3-D model of a delta wing.
Other than that we had to perform an experiment with another group because Sarah was running
late. But I think that was beneficial because we got videos of the delta wing from every possible
angle. Yeah, we had poor communication. And I will try to find other better way to communicate
and also try to schedule at least 2-3 group meeting.