.

VOLTES 5
Guidelines
1 Score for each criterion is within 1 to 10. The highest score is 10. NO Decimal Point
1-5 Poor, 6-7 Satisfactory, 8-9 Very Good, 10 Outstanding
2 No member can have exactly the same score correspondingly for all items with any other member of the team.
3 Every GRAY CELLS must be filled out.
4 ALL members should be able to fill out TIGS.
5 Make sure the black and white part in the right side remains blank, else, you have to repeat rating because there are students with the same score.
6 if only 5 members, leave the last 2 rows and last 2 columns for the 6th empty.
7 Instead of rating per column on one part (horizontally), you are going to rate your classmate VERTICALLY based on your assigned column/color.
8 This is a new IGS format. If you have questions, please don't be afraid to ask.

TEAM MEMBERS Code PSA

%
(Write your complete names in alphabetical order) Contribution

Mahilum, Katherine Khaye D. 9.50 100.0%

Maneja, Fatima Jean I. 9.47 99.6%
Maureal, Arnold L. 9.33 98.2%
Mendoza, Bea Mae R. 9.20 96.8%
Yerro, Jan Ronjie C. 9.13 96.1%

WEEK # ACTIVITY 1 GROUPINGS and FOLLOWING

.
Item Criteria Mahilum, K
1 Attendance of meetings 10 8 10
2 Quality of presentation for meetings 9 9 10
3 Active participation during discussions 10 9 9
4 Respect for team members' opinions 10 8 10
5 Ability to meet deadlines for work in progress & submissions 9 10 9
6 Contribution to project execution & achievement 10 10 10
7 Contribution to report writing 10 8 9
8 Leadership / initiative 9 10 9
 9 Creative approach 8 9 10
10 Knowledge and understanding of project 9 9 9

Item Criteria Maneja,

1 Attendance of meetings 10 10 10
2 Quality of presentation for meetings 9 9 10
3 Active participation during discussions 9 9 9
4 Respect for team members' opinions 10 10 10
5 Ability to meet deadlines for work in progress & submissions 10 9 10
6 Contribution to project execution & achievement 9 9 10
7 Contribution to report writing 8 8 9
8 Leadership / initiative 8 9 10
9 Creative approach 9 9 9
10 Knowledge and understanding of project 10 8 10

Item Criteria Maure

1 Attendance of meetings 10 10 10
2 Quality of presentation for meetings 9 8 10
3 Active participation during discussions 10 8 9
4 Respect for team members' opinions 10 10 10
5 Ability to meet deadlines for work in progress & submissions 9 9 10
6 Contribution to project execution & achievement 10 9 10
7 Contribution to report writing 7 8 9
8 Leadership / initiative 8 8 9
9 Creative approach 8 8 9
10 Knowledge and understanding of project 9 8 10

Item Criteria Mendoz

1 Attendance of meetings 10 10 10
2 Quality of presentation for meetings 8 9 10
3 Active participation during discussions 8 8 9
4 Respect for team members' opinions 10 10 10
5 Ability to meet deadlines for work in progress & submissions 9 9 10
6 Contribution to project execution & achievement 8 8 10
7 Contribution to report writing 7 8 9
 8 Leadership / initiative 7 8 9
9 Creative approach 8 9 9
10 Knowledge and understanding of project 9 8 10

Item Criteria Yerro, J

1 Attendance of meetings 10 10 10
2 Quality of presentation for meetings 8 9 10
3 Active participation during discussions 8 9 9
4 Respect for team members' opinions 9 10 10
5 Ability to meet deadlines for work in progress & submissions 8 9 10
6 Contribution to project execution & achievement 7 9 10
7 Contribution to report writing 7 9 9
8 Leadership / initiative 8 8 9
9 Creative approach 8 9 9
10 Knowledge and understanding of project 10 9 10
LTES 5

s with the same score.

gned column/color.

PINGS and FOLLOWING INSTRUCTION WEEK 1

. OVERALL AVERAGE 9.50

Mahilum, Katherine Khaye D. MAX MIN SUM AVERAGE
10 10 10 8 48 10.00
10 10 10 9 48 9.67
10 9 10 9 47 9.33
9 10 10 8 47 9.67
9 9 10 9 46 9.00
10 9 10 9 49 10.00
9 10 10 8 46 9.33
10 10 10 9 48 9.67
8 10 10 8 45 9.00
10 10 10 9 47 9.33
OVERALL AVERAGE 9.47
Maneja, Fatima Jean I. MAX MIN SUM AVERAGE
10 10 10 10 50 10.00
9 9 10 9 46 9.00
9 10 10 9 46 9.00
10 10 10 10 50 10.00
10 9 10 9 48 9.67
10 10 10 9 48 9.67
9 9 9 8 43 8.67
10 10 10 8 47 9.67
9 9 9 9 45 9.00
10 10 10 8 48 10.00
OVERALL AVERAGE 9.33
Maureal, Arnold L. MAX MIN SUM AVERAGE
10 10 10 10 50 10.00
10 10 10 8 47 9.67
9 9 10 8 45 9.00
9 10 10 9 49 10.00
10 9 10 9 47 9.33
10 10 10 9 49 10.00
9 10 10 7 43 8.67
8 9 9 8 42 8.33
9 9 9 8 43 8.67
10 10 10 8 47 9.67
OVERALL AVERAGE 9.20
Mendoza, Bea Mae R. MAX MIN SUM AVERAGE
10 10 10 10 50 10.00
10 9 10 8 46 9.33
9 10 10 8 44 8.67
9 9 10 9 48 9.67
10 10 10 9 48 9.67
10 9 10 8 45 9.00
9 10 10 7 43 8.67
10 10 10 7 44 9.00
8 9 9 8 43 8.67
10 9 10 8 46 9.33
OVERALL AVERAGE 9.13
Yerro, Jan Ronjie C. MAX MIN SUM AVERAGE
10 10 10 10 50 10.00
9 10 10 8 46 9.33
9 9 9 8 44 9.00
10 9 10 9 48 9.67
8 9 10 8 44 8.67
8 10 10 7 44 9.00
8 10 10 7 43 8.67
9 9 9 8 43 8.67
8 10 10 8 44 8.67
10 9 10 9 48 9.67
INDIVIDUAL GRADING SHEET (IGS)
Basic Principle: IE Department believes in the value of meritocracy. Fairness is upheld to motivate students to do their best in contributing to excellent o
Description:
TIGS is the mechanism of IE Department to provide equity to each member's effort to produce the research and/or project.
This peer- and self-assessment tool is integrated in the computation of the per-chapter grade of each student as a multiplying factor to the corresponding

GENERAL GUIDELINES
1 Score for each criterion is within 1 to 10. The highest score is 10.
2 No member can have exactly the same score correspondingly for all items with any other member of the team.
3 Every gray cell should be filled out.
4 ALL members should be able to fill out IGS.

DEFINITION OF TERMS
PSA Peer & Self Assessment
% Cont % Contribution = PSA / Max PSA
in contributing to excellent output.

g factor to the corresponding team grade given by the INSTRUCTOR.