.

Group 7 (V2C2)
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 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 & 7th, 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 % Cont AA IG

(Write your complete names in alphabetical order)
JESS ERL DELGADO 96.18 96.59% 0.00
CHRISTIAN IAN LAGMAN 96.92 97.33% 0.00
IVAN LOUIE LAZANA 96.38 96.79% 0.00
GIL JUNE MONTERDE 90.54 90.93% 0.00
ELJIM NAVALES 97.56 97.98% 0.00
JHUDIEL ORTEGA 97.85 98.27% 0.00
CEDRIC JANREY PITOC 99.57 100.00% 0.00
#DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0!

WEEK #6 FINAL PROJECT

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

Item Criteria CHRISTIAN IAN LAGMAN

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

Item Criteria IVAN LOUIE LAZANA

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

Item Criteria GIL JUNE MONTERDE

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

Item Criteria ELJIM NAVALES

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

Item Criteria JHUDIEL ORTEGA

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

Item Criteria CEDRIC JANREY PITOC

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

Item Criteria N/A

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

nts with the same score.

signed column/color.

This is good for groups

having 8 MEMBERS.

OVERALL AVERAGE 96.18

DELGADO MAX MIN SUM AVERAGE
10 10 10 9 68 95.20
10 10 10 9 67 91.89
10 10 10 9 68 95.20
10 10 10 10 70 100.00
10 10 10 10 70 100.00
9 10 10 8 66 90.51
10 10 10 9 68 95.20
9 10 10 9 68 95.20
9 10 10 9 69 98.57
 10 10 10 10 70 100.00
OVERALL AVERAGE 96.91714286
AN LAGMAN MAX MIN SUM AVERAGE
10 10 10 10 70 100.00
10 10 10 10 70 100.00
10 10 10 8 65 87.29
10 10 10 9 69 98.57
10 10 10 9 69 98.57
10 10 10 8 68 97.14
9 10 10 9 67 91.89
10 10 10 9 69 98.57
9 10 10 9 69 98.57
10 10 10 9 69 98.57
OVERALL AVERAGE 96.37714286
IE LAZANA MAX MIN SUM AVERAGE
10 10 10 8 68 97.14
10 10 10 8 67 93.80
10 8 10 8 68 97.14
10 10 10 8 68 97.14
10 10 10 9 69 98.57
10 10 10 9 69 98.57
10 10 10 9 67 91.89
8 10 10 8 67 93.80
10 10 10 9 69 98.57
10 10 10 8 68 97.14
OVERALL AVERAGE 90.54
MONTERDE MAX MIN SUM AVERAGE
8 10 10 8 63 81.00
9 10 10 9 66 88.63
10 10 10 9 67 91.89
10 10 10 9 67 91.89
10 10 10 10 70 100.00
9 10 10 8 64 84.11
9 10 10 9 67 91.89
8 10 10 8 64 84.11
 9 10 10 9 67 91.89
10 10 10 10 70 100.00
OVERALL AVERAGE 97.56285714
AVALES MAX MIN SUM AVERAGE
10 10 10 9 69 98.57
9 10 10 9 68 95.20
10 10 10 9 69 98.57
10 10 10 8 67 93.80
10 10 10 9 69 98.57
9 10 10 9 68 95.20
10 10 10 8 68 97.14
9 10 10 9 69 98.57
10 10 10 10 70 100.00
10 10 10 10 70 100.00
OVERALL AVERAGE 97.84571429
ORTEGA MAX MIN SUM AVERAGE
10 10 10 10 70 100.00
10 9 10 9 68 95.20
10 9 10 9 69 98.57
10 10 10 10 70 100.00
10 10 10 9 69 98.57
9 10 10 9 69 98.57
9 9 10 9 68 95.20
9 10 10 9 68 95.20
10 10 10 9 69 98.57
9 10 10 9 69 98.57
OVERALL AVERAGE 99.57142857
NREY PITOC MAX MIN SUM AVERAGE
10 9 10 9 69 98.57
10 10 10 10 70 100.00
10 10 10 10 70 100.00
10 10 10 10 70 100.00
10 9 10 9 69 98.57
 10 10 10 10 70 100.00
10 10 10 10 70 100.00
10 10 10 10 70 100.00
10 10 10 10 70 100.00
10 9 10 9 69 98.57
OVERALL AVERAGE #DIV/0!
/A MAX MIN SUM AVERAGE
0 0 0 #DIV/0!
0 0 0 #DIV/0!
0 0 0 #DIV/0!
0 0 0 #DIV/0!
0 0 0 #DIV/0!
0 0 0 #DIV/0!
0 0 0 #DIV/0!
0 0 0 #DIV/0!
0 0 0 #DIV/0!
0 0 0 #DIV/0!
THESIS INDIVIDUAL GRADING SHEET (TIGS)
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 TIGS.

DEFINITION OF TERMS
PSA Peer & Self Assessment
% Cont % Contribution = PSA / Max PSA
AA Adviser Assessment of Team Output
IG Individual Grade
in contributing to excellent output.

g factor to the corresponding team grade given by the Research Adviser.