Docstoc

Evaluations

Document Sample
Evaluations Powered By Docstoc
					CSC 581 Knowledge Management and Usability Spring 2007
                 This file contains a number of spreadsheets used for feedback on various aspects of this class. In
                 MS Excel, there is a bar at the bottom of the window to switch betwee these sheets.
                 Please return a printout of your sheets to me during the last week of class. You can print them out
Overview
                 and write in your answers, or enter your answers on the computer, and then print them out.


                 Each team member is asked to evaluate his or her own performance and that of the other team
Mutual Team      members in the project. If you do not turn in your "Mutual Team Evaluation", you may lose those
Evaluations      points. In case you feel that you have a strong reason not to submit one, you need to discuss this
                 with me in advance.
                 The "Class Feedback" is voluntary and anonymous. I appreciate your opinion, and I have used
Class Feedback   such feedback to make some changes, especially in the project, homeworks and labs.

                 In some of my classes, participation counts for up to 10% of the overall score. Since it is difficult for
                 me to keep track of all the individual participations in the different forms, I'd like to hear from you
Class
                 how you participated in class. While I understand that you'd like to present your participation in the
Participation
                 best light, some of this is easily verifiable, and there shouldn't be major discrepancies between your
                 version and the verifiable evidence.
                 Each team as a whole is asked to evaluate the intermediate and final presentations of the other
                 teams. Ideally, your team should come to an agreement about the performance of the other teams.
Team
                 It is also ok with me if different team members take turns with the evaluations of the other teams.
Presentation
                 Your opinion may influence my scores for the team presentations, but I do not have a fixed formula
Feedback
                 to incorporate them into my score. The template is the same as for the individual AI/KM Nugget
                 presentations.

                 This is an example of a sheet that I use to collect the feedback from teams about other teams. I
                 use one of these for milestones, deliverables, and project presentations. Depending on the class,
Team Matrix      some of the feedback will be done only by specific evaluation teams, not by all teams in the class.
                 This is only for your information; you don't need to do anything with it.

Evaluation       These are the criteria I am using both for team and individual presentations. It also contains
Criteria         instructions for doing the team evaluations.


Spring 2007      Handins

     06/08/07    A3/A4 Usability Evaluation                                                      Individual/Team
     06/08/07    Final Version Paper                                                             Individual/Pair
     06/13/07    Reviews Final Version Paper                                                     Individual/
     06/08/07    Final Project Presentation                                                      Team
     06/08/07    Final Project Documentation                                                     Team
     06/13/07    Team Presentation Feedback                                                      Team
     06/13/07    Class Feedback                                                                  Individual
     06/13/07    Mutual Team Member evaluation                                                   Individual
     06/13/07    Class Participation Justification                                               Individual
                                                            Spring 2007
                                  CSC 581 Knowledge Management and Usability
Mutual Team Member Evaluation
Team Name & Number                                                Evaluation performed by:



Instructions: On this sheet, you perform an evaluation of your team members (including yourself).
This peer evaluation contributes 10% to the overall project score. For each team member, check the
respective number, and provide and justification for your choice. If you don't give a justification, I will
not count the respective category. The overall grade score should be assigned relative to the rest of the
team; if all team members evaluate each other as excellent, I will adjust this in the calculation of the
project score.

Bonus Distribution

Instructions: Assuming that your team was awarded a success bonus of $1,000 for good work, how
would you distribute it among the team members (including yourself)? You may give up to $500 to one
individual team member. Please consider all aspects of the team's performance for the bonus, not only
the highly visible contributions.

         Name                      Bonus                           Justification
                              $

                              $

                              $

                              $

                              $

                              $

                              $



Self-Evaluation                                                                                               Score
Communication                 Justification:                                                                  (0 … 10)
group meetings, planning,
updates on work done


Reliability                   Justification:
tasks performed on time



Quality of Work               Justification:
results are of high quality



Work Load                     Justification:
willingness to do at least
their share of work


Team Player                   Justification:
able to compromise,
comes up with win-win
strategies

                  Justification:
Technical Contributions
contributes valuable
expertise to the team
(computer science,
programming, application
Overall Grade                 Justification:
relative to the rest of the
team
Name Team Member 1:                            Score
Communication                 Justification:   (0 … 10)
group meetings, planning,
updates on work done


Reliability                   Justification:
tasks performed on time



Quality of Work               Justification:
results are of high quality



Work Load                     Justification:
willingness to do at least
their share of work


Team Player                   Justification:
able to compromise,
comes up with win-win
strategies

                  Justification:
Technical Contributions
contributes valuable
expertise to the team
(computer science,
programming, application
Overall Grade                 Justification:
relative to the rest of the
team




Name Team Member 2:                            Score
Communication                 Justification:   (0 … 10)
group meetings, planning,
updates on work done


Reliability                   Justification:
tasks performed on time



Quality of Work               Justification:
results are of high quality



Work Load                     Justification:
willingness to do at least
their share of work


Team Player                   Justification:
able to compromise,
comes up with win-win
strategies

                  Justification:
Technical Contributions
contributes valuable
expertise to the team
(computer science,
programming, application
Overall Grade                 Justification:
relative to the rest of the
team
Name Team Member 3:                            Score
Communication                 Justification:   (0 … 10)
group meetings, planning,
updates on work done


Reliability                   Justification:
tasks performed on time



Quality of Work               Justification:
results are of high quality



Work Load                     Justification:
willingness to do at least
their share of work


Team Player                   Justification:
able to compromise,
comes up with win-win
strategies

                  Justification:
Technical Contributions
contributes valuable
expertise to the team
(computer science,
programming, application
Overall Grade                 Justification:
relative to the rest of the
team




Name Team Member 4:                            Score
Communication                 Justification:   (0 … 10)
group meetings, planning,
updates on work done


Reliability                   Justification:
tasks performed on time



Quality of Work               Justification:
results are of high quality



Work Load                     Justification:
willingness to do at least
their share of work


Team Player                   Justification:
able to compromise,
comes up with win-win
strategies

                  Justification:
Technical Contributions
contributes valuable
expertise to the team
(computer science,
programming, application
Overall Grade                 Justification:
relative to the rest of the
team
Name Team Member 5:                            Score
Communication                 Justification:   (0 … 10)
group meetings, planning,
updates on work done


Reliability                   Justification:
tasks performed on time



Quality of Work               Justification:
results are of high quality



Work Load                     Justification:
willingness to do at least
their share of work


Team Player                   Justification:
able to compromise,
comes up with win-win
strategies

                  Justification:
Technical Contributions
contributes valuable
expertise to the team
(computer science,
programming, application
Overall Grade                 Justification:
relative to the rest of the
team




Name Team Member 6:                            Score
Communication                 Justification:   (0 … 10)
group meetings, planning,
updates on work done


Reliability                   Justification:
tasks performed on time



Quality of Work               Justification:
results are of high quality



Work Load                     Justification:
willingness to do at least
their share of work


Team Player                   Justification:
able to compromise,
comes up with win-win
strategies

                  Justification:
Technical Contributions
contributes valuable
expertise to the team
(computer science,
programming, application
Overall Grade                 Justification:
relative to the rest of the
team
CSC 581                       Knowledge Management and Usability                   Spring 2007




                                                             go ent
                                                                  ll



                                                                  o




                                                                         l
                                                                od




                                                                         fu
                                                                ce
                                                                              Comments




                                                               -s

                                                                d
                                                                       aw
                                                             ba
                                                             ex



                                                             so
WeekTopic             Speaker
  1 Introduction
  2 Knowledge Acquisition, Representation and Manipulation
  3 Knowledge Organization
  4 Knowledge Retrieval
  5 Knowledge Presentation
  6 Knowledge Exchange
  7 Usage of Knowledge
  8 User Interaction
  9 Constrained Access
 10 Ethical and Social Dimensions
Assignments
   1 KM Tools Evaluation
       Relevance of the Topic
       Amount of Work
       Degree of Difficulty
   2 KM Body of Knowledge
       Relevance of the Topic
       Amount of Work
       Degree of Difficulty
   3 Knowledge Presentation and Visualization
       Relevance of the Topic
       Amount of Work
       Degree of Difficulty
   4 Knowledge Usability / Intimate Transaction Evaluation
       Relevance of the Topic
       Amount of Work
       Degree of Difficulty
Presentation and Paper
   1 Paper
       Meaningful Activity
       Amount of Work
       Degree of Difficulty
   2 Presentation
       Meaningful Activity
       Amount of Work
       Degree of Difficulty
Team Project
   1   Milestone Week 2
   2   Milestone Week 4
   3   Milestone Week 6
   4   Milestone Week 8
   5   Final Version
   6   Team Presentation
Team Collaboration
       Fair Amount of Work Done by Team Members
       Quality of Work Done by Team Members
       Background and Skills of Team Members
       Mutual Support and Team Spirit
Use of Course Support Tools (Blackboard, ConfTool, Assignment Submission)
   1 Blackboard
       Grades
       Discussion Boards
       Assignment Submission
   2 ConfTool
       Design
       Implementation
       Usability
   3 Assignment Submission Web Site
       Design
       Implementation
  Usability
4 PolyForge Project Repository
  Design
  Implementation
  Usability
Additional Activities
    Guest Presentations
      John Keller: Mars Sonification, NOAA Large Astronomical Data Sets
      Adam Gray: Ontological Mapping
      Michael Miller: Library as Knowledge Repository
      Hisham Assal, Shan Pan: Knowledge Management at CDM Technologies
      David Gillette, Keith Armstrong: Intimate Transactions
      Nathan Schurr: Intelligent Agents and Human-Agent Interaction
Material Covered
For you, what are the most relevant topics covered in class?
Is there any material that you feel is not relevant to the class?
Anything missing?
Does the organization of the material make sense?




Suggestions for Lectures
What can I do to make the lectures more interesting, easier to follow, more "memorable", etc.?
What kinds of topics or class activities would you like to see in a class like this?




Suggestions for Project and Homework Topics
Do you have any ideas for assignments or project topics that you would find useful and interesting?




Other Suggestions
Is there anything else I can do to make this class better for students?
                                                                                    Class Participation
                                        Spring
    CSC 581 Knowledge Management and Usability 2007
Class Participation                                             Student Name


   Criterion                              Note                             Score                          Remarks
                                                                           (0-10)
                    How often did you attend class?
                    Please indicate the percentage (100% = 10).




Attendance
Lecture




                    How often did you attend lab?
                    Please indicate the percentage (100% = 10).




Attendance Lab




                    How often did you contribute to class?
                    During every session = 10, never = 0.




Class
Contributions




                    How many of the assigned reviews did you do?
                    You can also include presentation feedback that
                    you posted on Blackboard, but then don't include
                    those in the "Blackboard Contributions" row.
                    All reviews = 10, none = 0.

ConfTool
Reviews




                    How many messages of general interest did you
                    post on Blackboard? This should not include
                    administrative postings related to the
                    assignments (such as topics, team members,
                    documents), but it may include questions about
                    other teams' assignments.
Blackboard
Contributions




                    Did you make other contributions that you
                    believe were beneficial to the class? This includes
                    participation in Open House activities, activities
                    related to the Intimate Transactions project, or
                    the presentation of additional posters at the
                    poster session. Please explain how these
Other               activities relate to the class!
Contributions




                    In total, what do you believe is the score that
                    you deserve for your participation in this class? If
                    it is significantly different from the trend in the
                    numbers above, you need to explain that.



Overall
Evaluation




           Franz J. Kurfess                                                              Page 17                    8/13/2012
                                              Spring
          CSC 581 Knowledge Management and Usability 2007
      Presenter(s)                                                                              Evaluation performed by
Team Name & Number

                 Topic                                                                          Date           Time        Star t     End


                                                                                    Evaluatio
         Criterion                                Note                                                                      Remarks
                                                                                        n
                                                                                      (0-10)
                           Did the presentation appear to be delivered by a
                           team or individuals that are experts on the topic?
                           Are you convinced that they know what they are
    Knowledge of           talking about?
    subject



                           Does the topic fit within the material covered in
                           the course?
                           Does the content of the exercise address the
    Appropriateness        selected topic?
    of subject



                           In your opinion, how difficult is it to deal with this
                           topic, in contrast to others?
                           Did the team address the more difficult aspects
    Difficulty of the      of the topic, or did they stick to the easier ones?
    Topic



                           Is the information arranged and presented in
                           such a way that it is easy to follow?
                           Are critical concepts and terms explained?
    Structure and
    Organization



                           Are the claims made in the presentation
                           supported by evidence?
                           Were the sources for statements and material
    Evidence and           identified?
    Accuracy               Are any of the statements questionable or
                           inaccurate?
                           If so, indicate which ones.

                           Within the defined limits of the assignment or
                           project, did the team address the key points of
                           the topic?
                           If important aspects were not covered, indicate
    Coverage
                           those.
                           Also point out issues that were covered in too
                           much detail

                           Did the team members deliver their parts and
                           perform their roles with enthusiasm?
                           Did they maintain eye contact with the audience?
                           Did they speak in whole sentences, not only
    Delivery
                           phrases?
                           Was their appearance and behavior professsional
                           Did they try to make the audience feel at ease?

                           Did the audience appear interested in the
                           presentation, or did it seem like they just sat
                           through it?
    Audience               Were there questions or other interactions during
    Interest               or after the presentation?



                           Was the timing of the presentation and the
                           length of the respective documentation within the
                           specified range? Was it appropriate for the topic
                           and material presented?
    Timing & Length



                           Was there too much information on the slides?
                           Was the font size too small?
                           Were diagrams and figures too small?
                           Did they speak too softly?
    To avoid
                           Did they avoid eye contact with the audience?
                           Were there problems with the equipment or
                           software?

                           What is your overall impression?
                           Do you have suggestions for improvements?
                           Would you invite the presenters to present this
    Overall                topic in a workshop or to a group of interested
    Evaluation             people?




    Acknowledgement: Developed by a group in Prof. Stearns Fall 97 CSC 300 class, with some modifications by Prof. Dana.

    Adopted with further modifications by Franz J. Kurfess2003-2007.
                                                                                                                                                      Team Matrix




            K
      CSC 581 nowledge Management and Usability                                                      Evaluation Teams                                                      FJK

                                                                                                                                                                  Av       Prese Docu
 #     Name          Team Members                      Topic                 Final Presentation       1    2     3      4   5   6   7   8   9   10 11 12 13 14 15 era      ntati ment    FJK
                                                                                                                                                                            on   ation
                                                                                                                                                                  ge
             Harry Bui
             Khang Duong
    HaterTot Adam Dukovic                                                    Friday Poster Session
  1
    s        Ryan Guest
                                      CourseBook                                                                                                                    0.00                 0.00
             Christine Le
             Ngan Phan
             Dustin Anderson
             Alex Herold
                                                                             Friday Poster Session
  2 TRON     Erik Kitson              Emergency Response System Sahana                                                                                              0.00                 0.00
             Jeff LaBarge
             Kate Razina
                                                                             Friday Poster Session
  3                 Justin Anderson   Database Semantic Mapper                                                                                                      0.00                 0.00
                    Steven Eberling
  4                 Andrew Tsui       Artificial Neural Network Syndicates   Thu Lecture                                                                            0.00                 0.00
                    Cory White
                    Huy Duong
                    Ryan Murphy
  5 Orion
                    Ryan Reck
                                      Handling Astronomic Images             Thu Lab                                                                                0.00                 0.00
                    John Vu
                    Mike Cook
                    Jeff Goldian      Silenus - Graduation Progress
  6
                    Caleb Troughton   Tracker
                                                                             Thu Lecture or Lab                                                                     0.00                 0.00
                    Daniel Wang
                    Jonathan Davis
                                                                             Friday Poster Session
  7                 Clay Schenkel     K20 Initiative                                                                                                                0.00                 0.00
                    Scott Griffin
                    Neil Hayek
                    Jimmy Hua
                                                                             Friday Poster Session
  8                 Benjamin Koonce   PolyForge                                                                                                                     0.00                 0.00
                    Ryan MacConnell
                    Ben Woskow
    Bohemia
    n       Brett Bojduj                                                     Friday Poster Session
  9
    Rhapsod Dennis Taylor
                                      IMT Agent                                                                                                                     0.00                 0.00
    y
            Phil Choi
    Team                              Evaluating and Prototyping new
            Huy Duong
 10 Dennis                            Knowledge Presentation methods for                                                                                            0.00                 0.00
            Justin Glaeser
    Taylor                            websites
            Craig Maas
 11                                                                                                                                                                 0.00                 0.00
 12                                                                                                                                                                 0.00                 0.00
 13                                                                                                                                                                 0.00                 0.00
 14                                                                                                                                                                 0.00                 0.00
 15                                                                                                                                                                 0.00                 0.00
                                                       Average
           Total:             1




Franz J. Kurfess                                                                                                                                        Page 19                                 8/13/2012
CSC 581 Knowledge Management and Usability                                                               Spring 2007
   Evaluation Instructions
                 Overview                   In many of my classes I use student presentations to provide additional
                                            information to the class. This can be done through individual
                                            presentations, such as AI/HCI Nuggets, or team presentations. Since
                                            the intended outcome of these presentations depends on how well they
                                            work for the students in class, I am also collecting peer feedback from
                                            you. In some cases, I sort the feedback, and make it available to the
                                            presenters in order to give them an impression of how their
                                            presentation is perceived by the audience. Please help me make this a
                                            meaningful activity by following the guidelines below.

                 Administrivia              Usually I hand out single sheets, or a little booklet with an overview
                                            sheet containing the teams and topics, and one sheet per team or
                                            individual to be evaluated. You can use the overview sheet to keep
                                            track of who is presenting, and which team member is evaluating which
                                            team. Please make sure that at least the information about the
                                            presenters and their topic is provided in the evaluation sheets;
                                            additional information like the reviewers (team or individual), and the
                                            date/time (begin and end) is appreciated. If you take apart the booklet,
                                            please re-assemble it in the numerical or alphabetical order of the
                                            presenters; this makes it much easier for me to sort it by presentation
                                            teams later. Return the evaluations as soon as possible to me, ideally
                                            immediately after the presentation, or at the next opportunity.

                 Meaningful                 It is important for me and the presenters to get meaningful, honest and
                 Feedback                   reasonably objective feedback reflecting your impressions of the
                                            presentation. While you do not have to provide detailed comments for
                                            all the categories, such information about specific aspects is usually
                                            much more valuable than simply a score. Feedback sheets that contain
                                            perfect scores without explanations for all aspects of all of the
                                            presentations evaluated by one team are pretty much useless.

                 Constructive               One of the main deficiencies that our Industrial Advisory Board points
                 Criticism                  our on a regular basis is the presentation and communication skills of
                                            our graduates. You can help each other by using this opportunity to
                                            offer suggestions for improvement, and by pointing out problematic
                                            aspects. Please phrase this in a positive manner; if it is potentially
                                            hurtful to the recipient, check it with your team mates or with me.




Evaluation Criteria

                        Verbal
    Score                                                                  Remarks
                      Description
                                            demonstrates far more than the required skills and knowledge
      10         outstanding                exceeds the expectations in all aspects considerably                            A

                                            demonstrates more than the required skills and knowledge
       9         excellent                  exceeds expectations in all aspects                                             A

                                            demonstrates a very good command of the required skills and
       8         very good                  knowledge                                                                       B

                                            demonstrates a good in most aspects
                                            exceeds expectations command of the required skills and
       7         good                       knowledge                                                                       B
                                            meets expectations in most, and exceeds in some aspects
                                            demonstrates a sufficient command of the required skills and
       6         sufficient                 knowledge                                                                       C
                                            meets expectations in most important aspects
                                            demonstrates a sufficient command of most of the required skills
       5         mediocre                   and knowledge                                                                   C
                                            meets expectations in some important aspects, but lacks in
                                            lacks sufficient command in several important skills and
       4         inferior                                                                                                   D
                                            knowledge
                                            lacks sufficient command in many important skills and knowledge
       3         poor                                                                                                       D
                                            does not meet expectations in most important aspects
                                            lacks sufficient command of some elementary skills and
       2         very poor                                                                                                   F
                                            knowledge
                                            lacks sufficient command of most elementary skills and
       1         extremely poor                                                                                              F
                                            knowledge
       0         no work done               does not demonstrate any skills or knowledge                                     F

Note: This is a working definition of the evaluation criteria I am using to assign numeric scores. It is subject to modifications.

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:17
posted:8/14/2012
language:English
pages:20