FAQ's: click or scroll down

*Rationale for this activity

*End result

*Procedure: what you will need / what you will do / what you will hand in

*A Checklist to ensure you don’t forget what to hand in

*A sample submission from a past group [BE SURE TO READ THIS ITEM!!]



SEE  YOUR  COURSE  CALENDAR   FOR  THIS SEMESTER’S SUBMISSION  DUE  DATE -  [ Submission = one hard-copy of the 1-2-3 document per group] ( usually due within approx. 2 weeks of the presentation) [link to cal.  currently = S17 ]




Rationale for this activity:

      This is an opportunity for you & your group members to recommend a grade for your recent presentation. Since each presentation has been videorecorded, you will be able to base your recommendation on critical thinking & hard evidence (just as you would for all argumentation) - rather than on subjective impressions and intentions.

       F.Y.I.: Being expected to assess one's own performance is becoming more and more prevalent in the contemporary world of work (especially in corporate & non-profit organizations).




End Result:   

Each group will submit a 3-part document (containing items 1 & 2 & 3 below).  

If the group’s argumentation for the desired grade is “solid”, it will receive that grade for the presentation. As always, your professor reserves the right to place individuals’ grades slightly higher/lower than the group grade.  







Steps in devising this self-assessment + grade recommendation

 For this project,  you are expected to  evaluate, grade, rank, and create a credible document supporting your group's self-assessment. There are several materials involved in completing this project. Some of these items already exist. Some items the group creates for itself.  


already existing items that you will need to access in order to complete this group assignment:

a> the presentation’s assignment sheet located online via course calendar & shortcut on Professor's main webpage
b> the slide show on Decision Making shown in class / a back up version is also available in Blackboard [within the Course Information section: Slide Shows folder]  
c> the text’s explanation of Decision Making  within Chapter 9 [6ed & 4ed]/ 10 [5ed]  
d> the Professor’s list of grading/ranking criteria available via the left side  column of Professor's main webpage
e> the video-recording of the presentation disytibuted TBD (different procedures for different semesters: via Flashdrive OR DVD OR folder within Blackboard [within the Course Information  section: Presentation Videos  folder] .

{{I recommend that the group view & discuss the videorecording together at least once AS WELL
AS having each person view it individually.}}

 f> selected evaluation sheets as completed by your classmates available via your Professor


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -  


 informal items the group will create for itself before preparing the 3-part,grade- recommendation document (i.e. argumentation in-action).

g> An honest, non-opinionated, written document specifying the group’s PERFORMANCE EXPECTATIONS for the decision making presentation.

                [i.e. What did you intend to accomplish?  How did you intend to accomplish it? What level of quality did you expect to achieve?  What specific, concrete  indications would  signify whether or not this level of quality was achieved?[][ This is written as  an objective Postmortem--using the perspective of what the AUDIENCE actually saw/heard]    [2-3 paragraphs]

               {One person compiles the document to be submitted BUT everyone agrees on the content}


h> A written, document specifying the group’s grading/ranking criteria

     [How are you defining  “A” work? “B” work? “C” work? “D” work?

      You already know about Professor's criteria (via the document linked in left column of  Professor's main webpage)






What each group will be handing in :

        One(1) three-part document ( TYPED, approx 1-2 pages)


           Document will contain the following 3 items---

1-      THE GRADE: The specific grade that your group proposes it should be awarded for its Decision Making presentation. [i.e. what is your claim?]


              2 - THE GRADE DEFINITION: A "thesaurus"- like explanation of how your group defines that particular grade/rank [with specific reference to your group’s grading/ranking criteria statement mentioned above in item <h>][Definition statement should use same style as on Professor's criteria page]


          3 - THE REASONS: A list containing at least 5 specific reasons that support your reasoning for the grade your group is recommending. [i.e. what is your argumentation?]

Each reason should serve as evidence that your group’s performance corresponded to specific items mentioned in your grading/ranking criteria [your item <h>]

Each reason should be connected to an observable/perceptible item in the videorecording of the presentation. Feel free to use "time stamps."

For greater insight into how to support a claim, you may find the text's guidelines on "argumentation" helpful for developing your list of reasons. (Chap  11 [5ed] / 10 [4ed & 6ed], Engleberg)


 [Before submitting your document, scroll down & refer to the Checklist  ]





What will happen with your submitted document:

     The group’s recommendation document (i.e. items 1 & 2 & 3 above) will be reviewed for the  quality of the evidence & reasoning.

     No reasonable offer will be refused. In other words, If your argumentation is solid, you will get the grade that you recommend.

     Eventually, each group will receive back a packet containing: (1) a summary of the comments from the Professor & from the remaining peer evaluations AND (2) the response to the 1-2-3 document --including the  official grade.











~ GRADE-YOUR-OWN Submission Checklist ~

Your submitted document should contain:





The recommendation for the Grade


The  Explanation  (explicitly linked to your Criteria list) of what that grade designation means to you  (i.e.  If  the group is recommending  a "B", the document should  then explain that "B" level work demonstrates certain qualities, such as ..."


The specific Evidence demonstrating how your group's performance corresponded to the grading criteria. You need at least five (5) such supports/reasons/evidence. You should cite specific behaviors and/or occurrences that were visible/audio in the videoclip.

____1st support / ____2nd support /____3rd support /____4th support /____5th support /____6th  /____7th  /____8th 









EXCERPT: SAMPLE SUBMISSION (from a group in a past class--used by permission/names changed)


The XXXXX group believes they deserve a "B+" on their Decision Making Presentation about cohabitation before marriage. They first considered the fact that a "C" represents good, average work that 'gets the job done'. However, "C" level work leaves a lot of room for improvement and only shows a basic understanding of the material. They then discussed how an "A" reflects excellent and outstanding work. In other words, an "A" shows mastery and perfection; the work could not  have been any better. An "A" is earned when students "go above and beyond'; it is the best students are able to do. "A" level work also demonstrated an individual or group's ability to recall the subject matter with ease and confidence.

Despite clearly putting in a great amount of work into the presentation, and doing a good job overall, our presentation did not reflect the group members' best individual efforts. For example, had it been the best, Sam would not have stumbled so much while speaking during the symposium and would really have known his stuff instead of just reading off information. The group members would have been more confident and appear more "together" if they had put more effort into research, put more thought into what they were going to say, and cared more in general. Putting it this way--nobody came off as masters of the subject, and mastery would represent "A" level work...

Had the team gone above and beyond, it would have used a round table set-up , which clearly is the best seating arrangement for a group discussion involving deliberation. Had the team really done their best, they would have all dressed professionally like George always does. Because of this lack of mastery and doing their best,  The XXXXX realize they are unable to get an "A" level grade on this presentation. They do believe, however, that they did a lot of things very well, and thus deserve a "B+".

The group did use Dr. Plummer's criteria for giving letter grades in this course, The first bullet point stated that in order to get an "A", we needed a "genuinely unique approach." We believe our topic provided just that.  We believe that 5 guys talking about relationships amongst each other was also a rarity, and thus a unique way to approach the decision making process since the audience--especially women-- would be quite curious as to what  we had to say. The XXXXX believe it was their natural curiosity of this topic.... that led to such a better group performance than the first presentation.

The second bullet department explained we needed to be flexible, natural, and adaptable, which.........

The third bullet point indicated the need for mastery, ....

Other than that, we were passionate about this project, which was demonstrated through...

The group did everything listed on the assignment sheet. Most importantly we all did  "B" level research...  We showed we were quite familiar with the material during the decision making part , but some of us had trouble during the symposium.... We had an excellent discussion question, and despite struggling to form criteria, we clearly followed the decision making process as verified by Dr. Plummer at the end of the presentation. .....

In conclusion, we feel that we did a great job overall, but didn't go above and beyond to get the 'A' or 'A-". Therefore, the XXXXX feel they should get a 'B+' for the Group Decision Making Presentation.








updated 1/4/17