scholarly journals Team Projects And Peer Evaluations

2011 ◽  
Vol 4 (5) ◽  
pp. 21 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Kevin Doyle ◽  
Ralph D. Meeker
Keyword(s):  
Computer Science ◽  
Student Learning ◽  
Team Performance ◽  
Evaluation Process ◽  
Peer Evaluation ◽  
Team Size ◽  
Peer Evaluations ◽  
Statistical Measures ◽  
Team Projects ◽  
And Performance

The authors assign semester- or quarter-long team-based projects in several Computer Science and Finance courses. This paper reports on our experience in designing, managing, and evaluating such projects. In particular, we discuss the effects of team size and of various peer evaluation schemes on team performance and student learning. We report statistical measures of the students peer evaluations do they always rate each other strongly or weakly? What are the means and ranges? More importantly, we discuss why we introduced these peer evaluations, and what effect they have had on student commitment and performance. We discuss a small number of cases where student participation was poor, and relate this to the peer evaluation process.

The impact of peer evaluation on team effort, productivity, motivation and performance in global virtual teams

2019 ◽  
Vol 25 (5/6) ◽  
pp. 334-347
Author(s):  
Ernesto Tavoletti ◽  
Robert D. Stephens ◽  
Longzhu Dong
Keyword(s):  
Virtual Teams ◽  
Team Performance ◽  
Performance Outcomes ◽  
Peer Evaluation ◽  
Global Virtual Teams ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Team Members ◽  
Peer Evaluations ◽  
And Performance ◽  
The Impact

Purpose This study aims to assess the effect of peer evaluations on team-level effort, productivity, motivation and overall team performance. Design/methodology/approach This study explores the impact of a peer evaluation system on 895 multicultural and transnational global virtual teams (GVTs) composed of 5,852 university students from 130 different countries. The study uses a quasi-experiment in which the group project is implemented under two conditions over two sequential iterations. In the first condition, team members do not receive peer evaluation feedback during the project. In the second condition, participants completed detailed peer evaluations of their team members and received feedback weekly for eight consecutive weeks. Findings Results suggest that when peer evaluations are used in GVTs during the project, teams show: higher levels of group effort; lower levels of average productivity and motivation; and no clear evidence of improved team performance. Results cast doubts on the benefits of peer evaluation within GVTs as the practice fails to reach its main objective of improving team performance and generates some negative internal dynamics. Practical implications The major implication of the study for managers and educators using GVTs is that the use of peer evaluations during the course of a project does not appear to improve objective team performance and reduces team motivation and perception of productivity despite increases in teams’ perceptions of effort and performance. Originality/value This study contributes to the scanty literature regarding the impact of peer evaluation systems on group-level dynamics and performance outcomes.

Panther Peer: A Web-Based Tool for Peer and Self Evaluation

2011 ◽  
Author(s):  
Venkatesh Venkataramanujam ◽  
Pierre Larochelle
Keyword(s):  
Team Performance ◽  
Peer Evaluation ◽  
Web Based ◽  
Self Evaluation ◽  
Peer Evaluations ◽  
Highly Efficient ◽  
Design Projects ◽  
Automated Process ◽  
Institute Of Technology ◽  
Primary Advantage

Panther Peer is a novel web based tool for peer evaluation. It has been developed at the Florida Institute of Technology to enable students (specifically those involved in capstone design projects) to give one another anonymous feedback on their team performance. Panther Peer is simple to implement and completely automated. Panther Peer automates the process of peer evaluation and minimizes the workload for both instructors and students. With the benefits of automation students can gain feedback more quickly. Moreover, the reduction in workload for course instructors enables them to encourage peer evaluations. The primary advantage of this system is the feedback students receive from their peers which helps them identify their weaknesses and focus on their strengths. The automated process means that the collection and dissemination of information is highly efficient. From the peer evaluations by students, instructors can have a fair idea about the teams progress and intervene where deemed necessary.

Quality Management of Student-Student Evaluations

1997 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 199-215 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tom Henderson ◽  
Roy Rada ◽  
Chaomei Chen
Keyword(s):  
Collaborative Work ◽  
Evaluation Process ◽  
Peer Evaluation ◽  
State University ◽  
Work Skills ◽  
Traditional Grading ◽  
Washington State University ◽  
Peer Evaluations ◽  
Course Work ◽  
Timely Feedback

Classes delivered via the World Wide Web (WWW) have the ability to access large amounts of hypermedia. They can also be designed to present course work in small, orderly steps. Many learning theorists hypothesize that it is important to provide timely feedback which acts as a reinforcer if answers are good and as a corrective measure if answers are inadequate. However, it may not be practical for an instructor to give timely feedback on each submission done by all students in the class. One possible solution is to combine peer-peer evaluations with timely computer generated reports to help the instructor manage such a course. The peer evaluations may replace some or all of the traditional “grading” done by the professor. This process can contribute to higher developmental levels of understanding and students collaborative work skills may be honed by the requirements of the course. We hypothesize that instructors can adopt graphical methods of data presentation and quality improvement to help monitor the peer evaluation process in a timely and adequate fashion. Three such methods were applied to a class at Washington State University. Pseudo R-charts were used to track when comment scores by peers varied widely on an exercise submission. Pseudo X-bar charts helped identify exercise answers with unusually low average comment scores. Finally, relative frequency histograms were used to compare the frequency of questions asked to the frequency of questions answered when categorized using Bloom's taxonomy. Such tools were used during the class and were valuable input to the instructor.

scholarly journals Trust and performance in business teams: a meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 26 (5/6) ◽  
pp. 287-300 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amy M. Morrissette ◽  
Jennifer L. Kisamore
Keyword(s):  
Team Performance ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Performance Criteria ◽  
Team Size ◽  
Criterion Measure ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Content Type ◽  
And Performance ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Team Trust

Purpose The purpose of this study is two-fold. First, the nature of the relationship between team trust and team performance in the business context is determined. Second, both team design (team size and team type) and methodological moderators (source of criterion measure and study date) of the relationship are assessed. Design/methodology/approach A random-effects meta-analysis was performed on published and unpublished empirical studies. Subgroup moderator analyses were conducted using Cochran’s Q. Continuous moderator analyses were conducted using meta-regression. Findings Data from 55 independent studies (3,671 teams) were pooled. Results indicated a large, positive relationship between team trust and team performance in real business teams. Further analyses indicated that the relationship was significantly moderated by business team type, team size and source of criterion measure. Research limitations/implications Results indicate that different team types, sizes and performance criteria should not be treated as equivalent. Results are based on cross-sectional research and can only be generalized to business teams. Practical implications Managers should be attentive to trust issues in work teams, as they may portend future performance problems or mirror other organizational issues that affect team performance. Team function and size predict how team trust is related to team performance. Originality/value The present study answers a call by Costa et al. (2018) for additional investigation of moderators of the trust-performance relationship in teams using a quantitative review of studies.

Exploring the Relationship Between Mode of Operation and Performance of Support Teams in Telecommunication Companies

2014 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 44-63
Author(s):  
Oussama Saafein
Keyword(s):  
Virtual Teams ◽  
Team Performance ◽  
Team Size ◽  
Face To Face ◽  
Linear Relationships ◽  
Mode Of Operation ◽  
Telecommunication Companies ◽  
Support Team ◽  
And Performance ◽  
The Relationship

Whereas previous studies have attempted to investigate the correlation between mode of operation (virtual versus face-to-face) and team performance, these studies have been primarily focused on project management and distance learning. However, few studies, if any, have addressed the performance of virtual teams carrying complex technical support tasks in telecommunication companies. The primary proposition of the study that there is a relationship between team performance (comprised of three factors, namely, goals achievement, customer satisfaction, and team health) and the mode of operation was tested. A secondary proposition that team size has a significant effect on the relationship between the mode of operation and support team performance was tested also. One hundred twenty support professionals working for telecommunication companies based in California's Silicon Valley completed web-based surveys, which offered data on support operations in virtual and face-to-face settings and assessment of teams' performance in each setting. Whereas the findings indicated correlations between the mode of operation and the three factors of support team, further analysis indicated weak linear relationships among the variables. In addition, data analysis failed to support a significant effect of team size on the relationships between mode of operation and the three measures of support team performance.

Team Learning Behaviors and Performance: A Meta-Analysis of Direct Effects and Moderators

2021 ◽  
pp. 105960112110169
Author(s):  
Christopher W. Wiese ◽  
C. Shawn Burke ◽  
Yichen Tang ◽  
Claudia Hernandez ◽  
Ryan Howell
Keyword(s):  
Team Performance ◽  
Team Learning ◽  
Task Complexity ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Sample Type ◽  
Learning Behaviors ◽  
Learning Teams ◽  
And Performance ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Team Familiarity

Under what conditions do team learning behaviors best predict team performance? The current meta-analytic efforts synthesize results from 113 effect sizes and 7758 teams to investigate how different conceptualizations (fundamental, intrateam, and interteam), team characteristics (team size and team familiarity), task characteristics (interdependence, complexity, and type), and methodological characteristics (students vs. nonstudents and measurement choice) affect the relationship between team learning behaviors and team performance. Our results suggest that while different conceptualizations of team learning behaviors independently predict performance, only intrateam learning behaviors uniquely predict performance. A more in-depth investigation into the moderating conditions contradicts the familiar adage of “it depends.” The strength of the relationship between intrateam learning behaviors and team performance did not depend on team familiarity, task complexity, or sample type. However, our results suggested this relationship was stronger in larger teams, teams with moderate task interdependence, teams performing project/action tasks, and studies that use measures that capture a wider breadth of the team learning behavior construct space. These efforts suggest that common boundary conditions do not moderate this relationship. Scholars can leverage these results to develop more comprehensive theories addressing the different conceptualizations of team learning behaviors as well as providing clarity on the scenarios where team learning behaviors are most needed. Further, practitioners can use our results to develop more guided team-based policies that can overcome some of the challenges of forming and developing learning teams.

Leader–follower narcissism and subgroup formation in teams: a conceptual model

2019 ◽  
Vol 34 (6) ◽  
pp. 429-442 ◽  
Author(s):  
Manuel London
Keyword(s):  
Team Performance ◽  
Team Identification ◽  
Goal Congruence ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Team Outcomes ◽  
Performance Pressure ◽  
Proposed Model ◽  
Leaders And Followers ◽  
Trait Activation ◽  
And Performance

Purpose Drawing on existing theory, a model is developed to illustrate how the interaction between leaders and followers similarity in narcissism and goal congruence may influence subgroup formation in teams, and how this interaction influences team identification and team performance. Design/methodology/approach The proposed model draws on dominance complementary, similarity attraction, faultline formation and trait activation theories. Findings Leader–follower similarity in narcissism and goal congruence may stimulate subgroup formation, possibly resulting in conformers, conspirators, outsiders and victims, especially when performance pressure on a team is high. Followers who are low in narcissism and share goals with a leader who is narcissistic are likely to become conformers. Followers who are high in narcissism and share goals with a narcissistic leader are likely to become confederates. Followers who do not share goals with a narcissistic leader will be treated by the leader and other members as outsiders if they are high in narcissism, and victimized if they are low in narcissism. In addition, the emergence of these subgroups leads to reduced team identification and lower team performance. Practical implications Higher level managers, coaches and human resource professions can assess and, if necessary, counteract low team identification and performance resulting from the narcissistic personality characteristics of leaders and followers. Originality/value The model addresses how and under what conditions narcissistic leaders and followers may influence subgroup formation and team outcomes.

Development of Team Coordination and Performance Measures in a Trauma Setting

2007 ◽  
Vol 51 (11) ◽  
pp. 717-721 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stuart Marshall ◽  
Anne Miller ◽  
Yan Xiao
Keyword(s):  
Team Performance ◽  
Decision Support Tool ◽  
Stage Model ◽  
Trauma Resuscitation ◽  
Team Coordination ◽  
Support Tool ◽  
University Of Maryland ◽  
Performance Metric ◽  
And Performance ◽  
The University

The paucity of reliable measures of team coordination and performance significantly obstructs the assessment of the effects of any technology on teams to improve decision making in health care. A pilot study was conducted to determine if measures of coordination and performance could be developed for teams involved in trauma resuscitation. A video assisted review of cases enabled evaluation of the use of the tools. Descriptors of coordination were derived from Klein's five-stage model of team coordination. A scoring system of team performance was developed from the University of Maryland Team Observable Performance Metric (UMTOP). After some modification both coordination and performance could be described. However, four defined stages of resuscitation were observed which greatly improved coding. More rigorous assessments of these tools will be required before firm conclusions can be drawn about the effects of a decision support tool recently introduced into the environment.

Differentiatie door coaches binnen amateursportteams: terecht of onterecht?

2007 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Wim van Breukelen ◽  
Wendy Wesselius
Keyword(s):  
Team Performance ◽  
Differential Treatment ◽  
Working Relationships ◽  
Leader Member Exchange ◽  
Sports Teams ◽  
Team Members ◽  
Lmx Theory ◽  
Member Exchange ◽  
Relevant Topic ◽  
And Performance

Differential treatment by coaches of amateur sports teams: right or wrong? Differential treatment by coaches of amateur sports teams: right or wrong? J.W.M. van Breukelen & W. Wesselius, Gedrag & Organisatie, volume 20, November 2007, nr. 4, pp. 427-444 A central assumption in the Leader-Member Exchange (LMX) theory is that leaders do not adopt a single style towards all members of their work unit, but treat the various team members differently. This may result in different kinds of working relationships between the leader and the various members ranging from formal to intense. The effects of these different LMX relationships are visible in important outcome variables such as job satisfaction and performance. Not only in working organizations but also in the context of sports differential treatment by the coach seems a relevant topic. In this article we describe the results of a field study among the players (N = 218) of 21 amateur sports teams. Firstly, we investigated on which aspects the coaches of these teams differentiated between the various team members and how these incidents of differential treatment were experienced by the players in terms of justice and fairness. In addition, we analyzed whether the frequency and evaluation of differential treatment was related to the players' enthusiasm and to team atmosphere and team performance. Social differentiation was appreciated less than task differentiation. Especially task differentiation proved to be important for team performance.

scholarly journals The composition and formation of effective teams: computer science meets organizational psychology

2018 ◽  
Vol 33 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ewa Andrejczuk ◽  
Rita Berger ◽  
Juan A. Rodriguez-Aguilar ◽  
Carles Sierra ◽  
Víctor Marín-Puchades
Keyword(s):  
Computer Science ◽  
Team Performance ◽  
Organizational Psychology ◽  
Team Formation ◽  
Science Literature ◽  
Effective Teams ◽  
Human Agent ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Psychology Literature ◽  
Cross Fertilization

AbstractNowadays the composition and formation of effective teams is highly important for both companies to assure their competitiveness and for a wide range of emerging applications exploiting multiagent collaboration (e.g. crowdsourcing, human-agent collaborations). The aim of this article is to provide an integrative perspective on team composition, team formation, and their relationship with team performance. Thus, we review the contributions in both the computer science literature and the organizational psychology literature dealing with these topics. Our purpose is twofold. First, we aim at identifying the strengths and weaknesses of the contributions made by these two diverse bodies of research. Second, we aim at identifying cross-fertilization opportunities that help both disciplines benefit from one another. Given the volume of existing literature, our review is not intended to be exhaustive. Instead, we have preferred to focus on the most significant contributions in both fields together with recent contributions that break new ground to spur innovative research.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document