Peer Review:9-Oct-2014: Difference between revisions

From Control Systems Technology Group
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
 
(6 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 25: Line 25:
| 1. Quality of Work delivered
| 1. Quality of Work delivered
| F, T
| F, T
| K
| K,L
|
|
|
|
| K,F,T
| K,F,T,L
|
|
| T
| T
| K,F
| K,F,L
|
|
| K,F,T
| K,F,T,L
|
|
|
|
Line 39: Line 39:
| 2. Ability to consult in a focused and structured way
| 2. Ability to consult in a focused and structured way
|  
|  
| K,F,T
| K,F,T,L
|
|
|
|
| K
| K,L
| F,T
| F,T
| K, T
| K, T
| F
| F,L
|
|
| K, F, T
| K, F, T,L
|
|
|
|
Line 53: Line 53:
| 3.  Giving and Receiving feedback
| 3.  Giving and Receiving feedback
|  
|  
| K, F,T
| K, F,T,L
|
|
|
|
| K, F, T
| K, F, T,L
|
|
|
|
| K, F, T
| K, F, T,L
|
|
|
|
| K, F, T
| K, F, T,L
|
|
|- valign="top"
|- valign="top"
|  4. Exectution of team role
|  4. Exectution of team role
|  
|  
| K, T
| K, T,L
|  
|  
|
|
| K, T
| K, T,L
| K
| K
|
|
| K, T
| K, T,L
| K
| K
| T
| T,L
| K
| K
|
|
Line 81: Line 81:
|  5. Communication with fellow students
|  5. Communication with fellow students
| F, T
| F, T
| K
| K,L
|
|
|
|
| K, F, T
| K, F, T,L
|
|
|T
|T,L
| K, F
| K, F
|
|
|T
|T,L
| K, F
| K, F
|
|
Line 95: Line 95:
| 6.  Honoring Agreements
| 6.  Honoring Agreements
|F, T
|F, T
|K
|K,L
|
|
|F, T
|F, T
| K
| K,L
|
|
|F, T
|F, T
| K
| K,L
|
|
|F, T
|F, T,L
| K
| K
|
|
|}
|}
=== Overall Comments: ===


=== Luc ===
=== Luc ===
Positives:
Positives:
*
* Things you make are good, but it can always be better.
*
* Is focussed during meetings, has good ideas
* Does what is  asked and knows what he has to do.
* Want to know what going on.
Improvement Points:
Improvement Points:
*
* during meetings a little more active participation
*
* Reading everything on the wiki (pieces of others)
* More structure in parts put on the wiki.
* Sometimes doing extra thing without being asked to do it.
 
=== Tim ===
=== Tim ===
Positives:
Positives:
*
* Quality is good, short but powerful
*
* The input during meetings is good. more input can be given.
* very flexible with planning, good and fast communication.
* Does what is asked, always on time
* Always on time and prepared for meetings
Improvement Points:
Improvement Points:
*
* show more of what is done on the wiki.
*
* More depth like other sources etc. also to create more depth in one subject. (verder ingaan op een onderwerp)
* More participation during a meeting because your ideas are good!
* putting a little more time in the project
 
=== Frederique ===
=== Frederique ===
Positives:
Positives:
*
* Enough sources on the wiki, knows the core of her own part.
*
* Taking responsibility/chores like printing the wiki.
* Is prepared for meetings, keeps the group on track during a meeting.
* Is clear about when there are problems like when a week she can't spent a lot of time on the project.
* Does what is told to do
Improvement Points:
Improvement Points:
*
* Making the wiki understandable for outsiders
*
* making the wiki more structured.
* Reading everything the rest has done to be updated about what the rest has done.
 
=== Karen ===
=== Karen ===
Positives:
Positives:
*
* Good quality of work
*
* has taken the role of leader, also on the wiki.
* has a lot of structure in how she works
Improvement Points:
Improvement Points:
*
* Make sure you are not going to do to much. letting go a bit more
*
* be careful with working ahead. try to do one step back sometimes to let others keep up.
* try to give other people more speaking room (when in the role of the leader)
 
=== Overall Comments ===
* giving and receiving feedback has not really been done, so this is the same for everybody.
* There are no strict deadlines, so we can't comment if they are being kept to.
* within the whole group there is a good communication.

Latest revision as of 12:09, 11 October 2014

Back to Peer Review & Reflection.

Peer Review Table

Luc Tim Frederique Karen
++ + - ++ + - ++ + - ++ + -
1. Quality of Work delivered F, T K,L K,F,T,L T K,F,L K,F,T,L
2. Ability to consult in a focused and structured way K,F,T,L K,L F,T K, T F,L K, F, T,L
3. Giving and Receiving feedback K, F,T,L K, F, T,L K, F, T,L K, F, T,L
4. Exectution of team role K, T,L K, T,L K K, T,L K T,L K
5. Communication with fellow students F, T K,L K, F, T,L T,L K, F T,L K, F
6. Honoring Agreements F, T K,L F, T K,L F, T K,L F, T,L K

Luc

Positives:

  • Things you make are good, but it can always be better.
  • Is focussed during meetings, has good ideas
  • Does what is asked and knows what he has to do.
  • Want to know what going on.

Improvement Points:

  • during meetings a little more active participation
  • Reading everything on the wiki (pieces of others)
  • More structure in parts put on the wiki.
  • Sometimes doing extra thing without being asked to do it.

Tim

Positives:

  • Quality is good, short but powerful
  • The input during meetings is good. more input can be given.
  • very flexible with planning, good and fast communication.
  • Does what is asked, always on time
  • Always on time and prepared for meetings

Improvement Points:

  • show more of what is done on the wiki.
  • More depth like other sources etc. also to create more depth in one subject. (verder ingaan op een onderwerp)
  • More participation during a meeting because your ideas are good!
  • putting a little more time in the project

Frederique

Positives:

  • Enough sources on the wiki, knows the core of her own part.
  • Taking responsibility/chores like printing the wiki.
  • Is prepared for meetings, keeps the group on track during a meeting.
  • Is clear about when there are problems like when a week she can't spent a lot of time on the project.
  • Does what is told to do

Improvement Points:

  • Making the wiki understandable for outsiders
  • making the wiki more structured.
  • Reading everything the rest has done to be updated about what the rest has done.

Karen

Positives:

  • Good quality of work
  • has taken the role of leader, also on the wiki.
  • has a lot of structure in how she works

Improvement Points:

  • Make sure you are not going to do to much. letting go a bit more
  • be careful with working ahead. try to do one step back sometimes to let others keep up.
  • try to give other people more speaking room (when in the role of the leader)

Overall Comments

  • giving and receiving feedback has not really been done, so this is the same for everybody.
  • There are no strict deadlines, so we can't comment if they are being kept to.
  • within the whole group there is a good communication.