Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!iuvax!sadlerl
From: sadlerl@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu (LoriLee M Sadler)
Newsgroups: comp.edu
Subject: Re: Group projects
Message-ID: <51651@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu>
Date: 21 Jul 90 14:58:25 GMT
References: <1990Jul19.215334.28746@nmt.edu> <51556@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu> <5556@uceng.UC.EDU>
Organization: Indiana University, Bloomington
Lines: 35

In article <5556@uceng.UC.EDU> dsims@uceng.UC.EDU (david l sims) writes:
>sadlerl@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu (LoriLee M Sadler) writes:
>
>>For the peer review, each student is asked to divide 100
>>points among group memebers, including him/herself.  The students are able 
>>to freely distribute points as they see fit.  I total the points for each
>>person and then divide by the number of members in the group.
>

I apologize for the confusion here, which is totally my fault.  My
procedure should have read:  I total the points for each person and then
multiply those points by the weight given to the peer review component.  

So, if a group received 90/100 points on their final product, which is
weighted at 80% of the total project grade, they would have 72 
percentage points for their product portion.  Then I consider the 
peer reviews:

MaryBeth	Steven		Bob
50		25		25
50		25		25
40		30		30
--		--		--
140		80		80
*.2		*.2		*.2
---		---		---
.28		.16		.16	<---	weighted peer review
+		+		+
.72		.72		.72     <---	product percentage
---		---		---
100%		88%		88%	<---	final project grade	

-LoriLee