Values and Norms
- It is necessary and important for all members to attend and participate in group design work when a meeting is planned. If a group member is unable to attend a meeting due to unforeseen issues it is the member's responsibility to inform the team.
- Team members will follow a planning timeline and have work completed in a timely fashion. Team members will also attend and be prepared for team meetings. Team members will attend meetings with an attitude willing to work towards the completion of the MSD project.
- Team members will follow the RIT code of ethics in doing his or her work.
- Each team member gives credit where credit is due. All work completed includes citations to appropriate literature, or sources of assistance. If a team member has gotten assistance from a publication or individual, then that assistance or guidance is fully documented in the reports prepared. Each team member is honest and trustworthy in their dealings with their peers. Since the project is designed to simulate how to work in groups, professionalism will be maintained during team meetings and in communication efforts between members.
- Members keep the team apprised of their availability. Team members make every effort to maintain communication on project goals between meetings. E-mail inquiries between members should be answered within 24-hours, text or voice mail within 8-hours. Members will meet set deadlines, or give ample warning if it becomes apparent deadlines are unpractical or subject to extenuating circumstances.
- Decisions will be made by a majority rule of the project group.
- Team members will document any and all ideas. Share all formal documentation on the EDGE site. All work will include citation and references when applicable.
Team Norms: Weekly Peer Assessment Rubric
Every team member will conduct a peer assessment of their team-mates. The rubric below indicates how each team member will assess their peers. These 'Norms' reflect how each team member expects their peers to meet the team 'Values'.
|Value||Unsatisfactory||Needs Improvement||Meets Expectations||Exceeds Expectations|
|Attendance||The team member has had one or more unexcused absences or tardy arrivals to a scheduled team activity. The team member is not notifying others of conflicts with meeting times, or has allowed other commitments to impede the member's duties to this team. The team member is detracting from the performance of the entire team.||The team member has had one or more unexcused absences or tardy arrivals. The individual could and should have done a better job at notifying (in advance) a peer of the absence or tardiness. At the current time, the problem has not caused significant harm to the team, but this behavior needs to improve. It is not unusual for a team member to receive this rating a couple of times during the project.||The team member was prompt and present at every team event this week, or any absences were excused in advance. If there was an unexcused absence or tardiness, then the team-mates agreed that the reason disclosed after the fact was indeed unavoidable. For example, a member is in a fender bender on the way to campus, and was unable to contact a team-mate about being late. The absent member caught up with a peer as soon as practical, and informed them of the problem.||Not only is the team member always prompt and present, but the member clearly plans ahead for excused absences (such as job trips) and insures that the absence will not adversely affect the team's performance. The member notifies the team of heavy loads and external conflicts (such as exams in other classes) that COULD have an adverse impact on the team, and works with the peers on this team to make sure that the information flow from the member to and from the peers is smooth even in such cases.|
|Performance||The team member has not completed the task assigned, or has submitted a response that is clearly insufficient. The work will need to be re-done by another team member in order for the team to move forward. Some of the work may have been done, but it was incomplete. The team member is detracting from the performance of the entire team.||The team member made some progress towards the task assigned, but not as much progress as should have been accomplished. The work may be done, but the other team member's have no way of checking the results, because the supporting documentation is incomplete. The team member is getting behind on the tasks that need to be completed. The team member needs to make up the missed work during the next evaluation period.||The team member has made solid progress towards the task assigned. The task is complete, and is well done, though it may need some additional work and refinement to be fully complete. The assignment may be incomplete, but the team member has clearly made a good effort towards getting the task done. In retrospect, this task may have been too much for the member to do in the time allocated, so the fact that the task is not done yet is not due to lack of effort by the member.||The task has been completed fully, and is in essentially finished form. The other team members can readily check the work submitted since the documentation is so clear. Not only is the work done, but everyone on the team recognizes that the task is complete with little or no need for additional effort.|
|Professionalism||The work completed by the team member is unacceptable and does not meet the basic standards of engineering work. Engineering principles were not applied, or were grossly mis-applied. Basic elements of the engineering task were overlooked. The work completed must be re-done completely.||The work completed by the member contains many errors that must be corrected. While the basic approach to problem solving may be ok, the actual work completed needs to be largely re-done in order to be useful to the team. Some things were not done by the team member, that should have been obvious to complete.||The work completed by the member contains a few errors that must be corrected. The basic approach to problem solving is good, and the errors are relatively minor and could be readily corrected through normal peer review and checking. The work was corrected through consultation with the team members or faculty guide.||The team member completed the task with virtually no errors or omissions. The work was accurate, and can be easily scaled to other applications or tasks that the team may encounter.|
|Ethical||The team member has committed plagiarism, falsified data, ignored their responsibility as an engineer. The team member may have behaved inappropriately at a team event, or in a manner that reflects adversely on the team. The members' actions may cause the entire team to fail.||The team member has overlooked some references or consistently fails to cite sources and conduct individual tasks. The team member may have made some off-color remarks or been offensive to a team-mate or other individual. The team member needs to clean up his/her act.||The team member behaves responsibly and fully documents sources and collaborators on all work.||The team member is a role model for others, and behaves in a professional and ethical fashion even under very trying and difficult circumstances.|
|Reliable||The team member is consistently unresponsive to team communications and late to deadlines.||The team member is erratically responsive to team communications and occasionally misses deadlines without warning.||The team member is reliable in responding to team communication and at meeting deadlines is satisfactory.||The team member is prompt at responding to team member communications and does not miss deadlines without reasonable reason.|
|Committed||The team member is a burden to the rest of the team.||The team member is carrying less than their fair share of the work load.||The team member is carrying their fair share of the workload.||The team member is carrying more than their fair share of the workload.|