GROUP PROJECT PEER REVIEW FORM

Purpose:
With group projects, peers often are the better sources of performance feedback. In addition, working well
with others is a prerequisite for success in the increasingly team-oriented work environment. Therefore, a
portion (10%) of your project grade will be determined by these peer reviews.

Each group member will receive a mean score for each dimension listed below. The mean scores will
then be combined into a grand mean. This grand mean will be used to determine the grade received by
the group member for the peer review portion of the project. All peer reviews will remain confidential.
Group members will only see means, not individual rating sheets.

Instructions:
Use one (1) peer review form for rating each group member. For example, if your group has 5
members, you would need to complete 4 review forms (1 for each of your peers).
Complete your forms on your own. Do not grade-fix with other group members. Orchestrating high
reviews for each other will not benefit you if you have done much of the work.
Rate each members contributions to the project by circling the rating (1 to 5) which corresponds best
to the persons performance.
Be honest. Accurate ratings will help differentiate the grades received in accordance with each
persons contribution. Giving everyone the same rating probably is unrealistic and will not help reward
the better performers for their efforts.
Your peer review forms are due along with the group project.

Your Name: ___________________________________________________________

Group Member You Are Rating: ___________________________________________

Disagree

Disagree
Strongly

Strongly
Neutral
Performance Dimensions & Definitions

Agree

Agree
Attendance: Group member was present for group meetings,
conference calls, Internet chats, or other scheduled 1 2 3 4 5
meetings/conversations for working on the project.
Punctuality: Group member arrived at scheduled meetings on time; 1 2 3 4 5
met project deadlines.
Quality of Work: Group members assigned pieces were complete,
thorough, covered the topic well, and were accurate in terms of content
1 2 3 4 5
(e.g., work did not need multiple revisions or rewrites to improve the
quality)
Quantity of Work: Group member took responsibility for completing
integral portions of the project (which may have required more time to
1 2 3 4 5
complete or consisted of a greater percentage of the total project
relative to other group members)
Interpersonal Relations: Group member positively contributed to
group performance (e.g., helped group move ahead, constructively 1 2 3 4 5
resolved conflicts, was not destructive to group functioning, etc.)

Additional comments about the group process: