{[ promptMessage ]}

Bookmark it

{[ promptMessage ]}

MAN 3600 Syllabus Summer 13 ver 5-13-13 (6)

That you read the casearticle before the class and be

Info iconThis preview shows pages 3–5. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
that you read the case/article before the class and be prepared to present your point of view regarding the topic introduced by the case. These group discussions will be developed in two stages: first, within the groups and then, among the groups. In the first stage the groups will have 10 minutes to assemble and decide about the position they want to adopt during the all-class discussions and question answering. Then, we will have the discussion among the groups. This first 10 minutes that the groups will have to convene will be not be enough to read the case/article and therefore, reading the case before the class is essential to the success of the discussions. Finally, during the first stage it is important that each group reaches consensus before the discussion among the groups – I would prefer not having diverging points of view coming from the same group. The grade on this topic will be worth 18% of the course grade; there will be just one grade for each group, but each student will get individual grade based on peer evaluations and my input - see next item of the syllabus. 3
Background image of page 3

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Peer Evaluations. Frequently in groups some students work more and some work less. If this is the case in your group, you may want to reward the colleagues who worked more than you. Each person will evaluate the other members of her/his group and this evaluation will be done during the last week of classes on a special form available in Blackboard. The penalty of not sending back the Peer Evaluation Form will jeopardize 40% of your individual Group Discussion grade. You will evaluate all group members, including yourself, on a quasi-percent scale: the evaluations must average to 100 across group members. For example, in a five-member group, if everyone contributed equally you would assign each person 100 points. If, by any chance, one member is given 110 points, 390 points would then remain to be divided among the other four members. Evaluations over 150 for any individual or evaluations under 50 will require that the group meets with the professor. I reserve the option to omit peer evaluations from people who do not attend class regularly, or who provide evaluations that show evidence of not being done in good faith. I ordinarily use the peer evaluations provided, but will also modify them when I have other evidence of the relative contribution by different members of a group. After the grade for the group is calculated, I analyze the peer evaluations. If I find the peer evaluation fair, I calculate the individual grades by multiplying the group grade by the peer evaluation. For example, if your group’s grade was 90, and the peer evaluation of your work is 90 points, your grade would be 0.90 X 90 = 81 points. If your peer evaluation were 110 points, your grade would be 1.10 X 90 = 99 points. If I find peer evaluation unfair, I may increase or decrease this 110 score.
Background image of page 4
Image of page 5
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

{[ snackBarMessage ]}