TEAM # 8 GEUSELF- A63D

Evaluator’s FULL NAME: BRITANICO, Jeanne Nicole Date Submitted: March 7, 2023

TEAM EVALUATION for MODULE ONE

This is the RUBRIC that my team and I agreed to use for assessing the performance of our members:

SKILLS 4 Excellent - 3 Satisfactory 2 Needs 1 Unsatisfactory

Exceeds - Meets Improvement - does not meet
expectations expectations - does not expectations
fully meet
expectations

Actively Contributed Contributed Barely

contributed many ideas to some ideas to contributed or
useful ideas to the group the group; a did not
the group; all during and handful of contribute any
ideas were after planning; ideas ideas to the
Contribution and
evident in the Many ideas appeared in group at all; no
Ideas
final output. were seen in the final suggested
the final output. concepts were
output. evident in the
final output.
Frequently Communicated Coordinated Very limited
coordinated with the team with the team communication
with the team members most members with the team
members; of the time; during the members; did
usually displayed a meetings; not/barely
Communication
displayed a positive displayed a displayed a
and Attitude
positive attitude and good attitude positive attitude
attitude and is can be and is and is
very approachable. somewhat unapproachable.
approachable. approachable.
Quality of Work The member The member The member The member gave
created created good created some defective
 exemplary contributions satisfactory contributions to
contributions to the final contributions the final output.
to the final output. Little to the final The given
output. No corrections or output. Many contribution had
corrections or improvements corrections or to be revised as it
improvements were done. improvements had many errors.
done. were done.
Efficiency Complied by Finished their Accomplished Finished the
accomplishing assigned task their task given task late;
the given task just in time barely in did not
ahead of time, before the time/almost accomplish the
before the set deadline. before the task.
deadline. deadline.
Accuracy Consistently Produces work Produces work Consistently
produces work that meets that falls short produces work
that meets or established of established that is
exceeds the standards of standards of significantly
highest accuracy, accuracy, below established
standards of precision, and precision, and standards of
accuracy, attention to attention to accuracy,
precision, and detail. detail. May precision, and
attention to Generally require attention to
detail. error-free and significant detail. May
Demonstrating consistent with feedback and demonstrate a
a deep established correction to lack of
understanding guidelines and meet expected understanding of
of the work procedures. standards. the work or fail to
and ensures May require May struggle follow
that it is error- occasional to understand established
free and feedback or and follow guidelines and
consistent correction to established procedures. May
with ensure that guidelines and require significant
established work meets procedures. intervention or
guidelines and expected support to
procedures. standards. improve
performance.
 Participation and Produced Produced Needs Needs significant
Team-role high-quality quality work improvement improvement as
Fulfillment work while and manages as it may be it is noticed that
being sure to to participate seen that participation is
actively consistently participation is rare to never
contribute by and contribute inconsistent being existent
going above to the team's and may not which does not
and beyond to efforts. always contribute to the
achieve the support the team's efforts.
team’s goals. team's efforts.

Total Points ___24 POINTS___

Breakdown for each team MEMBER (with a description and rating)

(listed alphabetically, make sure you highlight what members are tasked to do, what they have actually
DONE and how the rate according to your rubric. Here, my team members are fictional; descriptions are
just an EXAMPLE.):

1. Manauat, Natividad Dominique (MYSELF) – I was elected by the team to “lead” in terms of
compiling all notes, in setting dates and coordinating members during Async sessions and team
meetings. I am present in all the meetings and am most excellent at brainstorming sessions and
pitched the idea of a BLANK as our centerpiece in the concept mapping stage. While I can not
claim that I did more work than others, I have consistently tried to cheer on the team despite
several spells of having low morale. I figured out how to make a Canva presentation to get the
team started. I wrote the script and drafted the storyboard. Though I am not the most organized
person, I like a bit of spontaneity, there are some typographical errors that I could not spot right
away but I complete them on time. Self-rating: 23
2. Orange, Naranja – This member is always cheerful and pleasant, she always volunteers to write
the minutes of our meeting (perfect attendance) and does it well in an accurate manner.
Although she is always participative and has some ideas, she is always waiting to be told what to
do. Her notes for X discipline was the first to be completed but could not find a way to fit it on
the map unless prodded by the prof. However she was able to deliver adequately and with a
cheery disposition. Rating: 22.
3. Red, Rojo – This member only attended 2 out of the 6 meetings we scheduled. They never
offered any ideas, useful or otherwise. The work that they handed in that was expected on sept
29 was delivered October 5. They caused us a lot of anxious moments as we waited for our
notes to be completed. They had zero contribution to the concept map. In the video, their part
was done in subpar quality audio, one of our members stepped up to provide SUBTITLES so that
our complete work would be acceptable. He did more disruption to our team rather than
 provide a smooth flow. Because our original rubric has no ZERO column, I am forced to give him
one point per skill. Rating: 6
4. Yellow, Amarillo – Although this member attended all the meeting and is not disruptive at all,
their presence is hardly felt. While they do the work assigned and on time, the output is very
basic and mediocre. Despite repeated encouragement to be more detailed (with the map) and
to enunciate, do better voice acting, this member does the bare minimum. Though we can count
on this person to do the job, it is a job that is just NOT excellent. The most neutral (a
euphemism) worker that I have ever worked with. Rating: 21
5. (We have one member who dropped the course or gone MIA)