Peer Evaluation for IMRAD Research Proposal
PART I: Title and Introduction Instructions:
- Evaluate all your group members based on the criteria below. Be objective, fair, and
just when assigning scores.
- Each group member must complete and print one copy of this peer evaluation.
- After printing, submit the completed evaluation to your group leader. The leader will
then collect and submit all evaluations to the professor.
Perfect
Evaluation Criteria
Score
1. Attendance - Attended group meetings regularly and arrives on time. __/5
2. Contribution - Contributed meaningfully to group discussions and outputs. __/10
3. Punctuality - Completed group assignments on time. __/5
4. Organization - Prepared work in a quality manner. __/10
5. Cooperation - Demonstrated a cooperative and supportive attitude. __/10
6. Consistency - Contributed significantly to the success of the project. __/10
GROUP #: 5
Name of Members Att Con Punc Org Coop Cons Total
1.Suson, Jastynne Chloe S. 5/5 10/10 5/5 10/10 10/10 10/10 50/50
2. Tagle, Maryrose C. 5/5 10/10 5/5 10/10 10/10 10/10 50/50
3. Gonzales, John Kyle C. 5/5 10/10 5/5 10/10 10/10 10/10 50/50
4. Urbano,Samuel J. 5/5 10/10 5/5 10/10 10/10 10/10 50/50
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
Comments/Feedback for Members: Everyone submitted their suggested research titles and
shared their own ideas.
PART II: Literature Review and Methodology
Instructions:
- Evaluate all your group members based on the criteria below. Be objective, fair, and
just when assigning scores.
- Each group member must complete and print one copy of this peer evaluation.
- After printing, submit the completed evaluation to your group leader. The leader will
then collect and submit all evaluations to the professor.
Perfect
Evaluation Criteria
Score
1. Attendance - Attended group meetings regularly and arrives on time. __/5
2. Contribution - Contributed meaningfully to group discussions and outputs. __/10
3. Punctuality - Completed group assignments on time. __/5
4. Organization - Prepared work in a quality manner. __/10
5. Cooperation - Demonstrated a cooperative and supportive attitude. __/10
6. Consistency - Contributed significantly to the success of the project. __/10
GROUP #: _____
Name of Members Att Con Punc Org Coop Cons Total
(Surname, First Name M.I)
1.Suson, Jastynne Chloe S. 5/5 10/10 5/5 10/10 10/10 10/10 50/50
2. Tagle, Maryrose C. 3/5 6/10 3/5 5/10 7/10 6/10 30/50
3. Gonzales, John Kyle C. 5/5 10/10 5/5 10/10 9/10 10/10 49/50
4. Urbano,Samuel J. 2/5 5/10 3/5 5/10 6/10 5/10 26/50
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
Comments/Feedback for Members: As you can see, two of my group members got low scores
because they submitted their work very late. I had to repeatedly remind them in the group
chat to submit their RRL, and even then, some of what they submitted was not relevant to our
research title.
PART III: Actual Research Defense Proposal Instructions:
- Evaluate all your group members based on the criteria below. Be objective, fair, and
just when assigning scores.
- Each group member must complete and print one copy of this peer evaluation.
- After printing, submit the completed evaluation to your group leader. The leader will
then collect and submit all evaluations to the professor.
Perfect
Evaluation Criteria
Score
1. Attendance - Attended group meetings regularly and arrives on time. __/5
2. Contribution - Contributed meaningfully to group discussions and outputs. __/10
3. Punctuality - Completed group assignments on time. __/5
4. Organization - Prepared work in a quality manner. __/10
5. Cooperation - Demonstrated a cooperative and supportive attitude. __/10
6. Consistency - Contributed significantly to the success of the project. __/10
GROUP #: _____
Name of Members Att Con Punc Org Coop Cons Total
(Surname, First Name M.I)
1.Suson, Jastynne Chloe S. 5/5 10/10 5/5 10/10 10/10 10/10 50/50
2. Tagle, Maryrose C. 2/5 5/10 2/5 5/10 5/10 6/10 25/50
3. Gonzales, John Kyle C. 5/5 10/10 5/5 10/10 10/10 10/10 50/50
4. Urbano,Samuel J. 2/5 5/10 2/5 5/10 5/10 6/10 25/50
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
Comments/Feedback for Members: Actually, we rushed our research paper and completed it
overnight. Only the three of us worked on it. As you can see from the low scores, the others
did not contribute anything on the day of the defense except for paying for the panelists'
tokens and submitting the research paper early. Overall, only the three of us did the entire
research paper, and we struggled to study it because we were the only ones working on it.
