Teammate Evaluation
Explore the evolution of teammate evaluation criteria, from considering team contributions to focusing on individual aspects. Discover how the rubric has changed over the years and the impact on team dynamics and review scores.
Download Presentation
Please find below an Image/Link to download the presentation.
The content on the website is provided AS IS for your information and personal use only. It may not be sold, licensed, or shared on other websites without obtaining consent from the author. If you encounter any issues during the download, it is possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.
You are allowed to download the files provided on this website for personal or commercial use, subject to the condition that they are used lawfully. All files are the property of their respective owners.
The content on the website is provided AS IS for your information and personal use only. It may not be sold, licensed, or shared on other websites without obtaining consent from the author.
E N D
Presentation Transcript
Teammate Evaluation Rationale #4
Should contributions to your team count? Should strong contributors score better than weak contributors? Then everyone can t get the same score!
But they used to Average teammate review score before we changed the rubric Spring 2016 96.2% Fall 2015 97.9% Spring 2015 97.0%
Teammate Review Issue And the median teammate review score? Avg. Spring 2016 96.2% Fall 2015 97.9% Spring 2015 97.0% So team contributions don t count! Median 99.0% 99.0% 99.0%
Ideas for new rubric More quantitative data Automatically collected data
Teammate Review Scores 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 S'15 F'15 S'16 F'16 S'17 F'17 S'18 F'18 S'19 F'19 S'20 F'20 S'21 F'21 S'22 F'22 S'23 Avg. Median
Teammate Review Scores 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 S'15 F'15 S'16 F'16 S'17 F'17 S'18 F'18 S'19 F'19 S'20 F'20 S'21 F'21 S'22 F'22 S'23 Avg. Median
Current rubric Question How many times was this person late to meetings? How many times did this person fail to show up? What fraction of the work assigned to this person did (s)he do? (0% to 20%) 0 to 5 (80% to 100%) Did this person do assigned work on time? How much initiative did this person take on this project? (Total deadbeat) 0 to 5 (A whole lot) Did this person shirk any task necessary for completing the project? (Absolutely) 0 to 5 (Not at all) Did you need to clean up any of the code written by this team member? (Always) 0 to 5 (Never) Did this person make any unneeded modifications that did not benefit the project, but may have increased their score on the Github metrics? Did this person exhibit behaviors that could cause dissension on the team? (Yes, many) 0 to 5 (No) What fraction of the documentation did this person write? (Note: Contribution of all team members should not add up to more than 100%) How important was this person to the team? (Almost always) 0 to 5 (Almost never) (Almost always) 0 to 5 (Almost never) Score Range (Never) 0 to 5 (Always) (Yes, many) 0 to 5 (Not at all) (0% to 20%) 0 to 5 (80% to 100%) (Redundant) 0 to 5 (Indispensable) Github metrics are included
