Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- patterns:rating:rating_system:rating_of_the_team_result [2020/10/01 10:44]
editor
+++ patterns:rating:rating_system:rating_of_the_team_result [2022/09/19 10:08] (current)
@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
+==== Rating of the Team Result ====
 ^**Problem** |The final result of the team (//e.g. solving a case study//) in a VCL project shall be rated as fair as possible.|
 ^**Framework** |More than one lecturer available; more than one university involved; performing of a case study; different team sizes; participants with heterogeneous previous knowledge; participants bear different roles in the framework of the VCL project (//e.g. Project Manager, Editor, Researcher//)|
-^**Solution** | \\ At the beginning of the VCL project the **[[:patterns:rating:rating_system:patterns:rating:rating_criteria|rating criteria**]]** has to be established and made transparent. Hereby the **approach**, the **quality** of suggested **solutions** as well as the **style of documentation** should have an influence on the final grade. \\  \\ 1. To evaluate the team’s work as objectively as possible, two lecturers from different universities should rate it. Thus, different criteria and demands of participating universities can be considered. The average of both ratings will be the final result for the team. In case of a highly differing assessment both lecturers should re-evaluate their evaluation. \\ 2. Additionally the different team sizes have to be considered. A team of fewer participants achieves less than a team with more participants. This is also valid for different numbers of assigned roles within the team (e.g. the quality of the documentation is supposed to be better in a team with several editors than in a team with one or no editor). \\ The assessment of the team's result also should consider the different previous knowledge of the participants. \\  \\ The lecturers will rate the result of the team with a scoring scale from 0 to 100 points, for individual converting at each of the respective universities.|
+^**Solution** | \\ At the beginning of the VCL project the **[[:patterns:rating:rating_criteria|rating criteria]]** has to be established and made transparent. Hereby the **approach**, the **quality** of suggested **solutions** as well as the **style of documentation** should have an influence on the final grade. \\  \\ 1. To evaluate the team’s work as objectively as possible, two lecturers from different universities should rate it. Thus, different criteria and demands of participating universities can be considered. The average of both ratings will be the final result for the team. In case of a highly differing assessment both lecturers should re-evaluate their evaluation. \\ 2. Additionally the different team sizes have to be considered. A team of fewer participants achieves less than a team with more participants. This is also valid for different numbers of assigned roles within the team (e.g. the quality of the documentation is supposed to be better in a team with several editors than in a team with one or no editor). \\ The assessment of the team's result also should consider the different previous knowledge of the participants. \\  \\ The lecturers will rate the result of the team with a scoring scale from 0 to 100 points, for individual converting at each of the respective universities.|
-^**References** | \\ [[:patterns:rating:rating_system|Rating Scheme ]] \\   \\  [[:patterns:rating:rating_system|Rating Criteria ]] \\   \\  [[:patterns:rating:rating_system|Acknowledgement of the Rating Results ]] \\   \\  [[:patterns:rating:rating_system|Educational Objectives of the VCL Project ]] \\   \\  |
+^**References** |[[:patterns:rating:rating_scheme|]] \\  [[:patterns:rating:rating_criteria|]] \\  [[:patterns:rating:acknowledgement_of_the_rating_results|Acknowledgement of the Rating Results ]] \\  [[:patterns:rating:rating_system|Educational Objectives of the VCL Project ]]|

VCL Didactical Design Patterns

User Tools

Site Tools

Differences

Page Tools