Academic Year and Semester AY 2023/24 Semester 1 and 2

Course Coordinators Edson Kieu, Le Chencheng

Course Code CC0006
Course Title Sustainability: Society, Economy, and Environment
Pre-requisites NIL
No of AUs 3
Contact Hours 39 hours [1 (online) + 2 (in class) contact hours per week]

Course Aims
The course aims to inspire a long-lasting mindset of awareness, critical thinking, curiosity, and collaboration across disciplines
through the lens of current sustainability challenges. You will learn to analyze sustainability issues from different perspectives
(social, economic, and environmental) and on different scales (individual, organizational, Singaporean, and global). You will
then use these skills to discuss and propose solutions for sustainability challenges facing Singapore and the world. By the end
of the course, you would have developed an awareness for, and a system thinking approach to, sustainability, which you can
continue to develop no matter which discipline or career path you choose to embark on.

Intended Learning Outcomes (ILO)

Upon the successful completion of this course, you (as a student) will be able to:

1. Explain the multidimensional systemic nature of sustainability.

2. Analyze sustainability challenges from social, economic, and environmental perspectives.
3. Identify and present possible solutions for a sustainable world on different scales for the individual, organizations,
Singapore, and globally.
4. Critically discuss sustainability issues in small and large group settings.
5. Collaborate effectively on sustainability issues in cross-disciplinary teams.
6. Evaluate the work of peers on sustainability.

Course Content

See also planned weekly schedule below.

Topics to be covered in the course:

• Every topic covered is analyzed from each of the three systems: Society, Economy, and Environment, and
emphasizes how sustainable development needs to include all three systems.
• Introduction - why each discipline should know about sustainability, UN SDGs, Singapore Green Plan.
• Poverty and equality - how to measure it, how widespread it is, how to eradicate it.
• Food systems - sustainability and global food security.
• Water – availability and sustainable management of water resources.
• Energy and Climate Change - sustainable and reliable sources, mitigation of climate change and policy instruments.
• Responsible consumption and production - waste reduction.
• Pollution – air, plastics, light, noise*
• Sustainable cities – the role of big cities in sustainability development. What is a sustainable city?
• Planetary boundaries, Earth system feedbacks and tipping points – staying in control of our planet and its systems.

1
Assessment (Continuous and Summative Assessments)

Component Course LO Related Graduate Weightage Team/Individual Assessment rubrics

Tested Attributes
Weekly quizzes (Incorporated 1, 2 Competence, 5% Individual Point based
into pre-recorded lecture Character, marking
videos watched by student in Cognitive Agility
their own time)
Class Participation 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Competence, 15% Individual See Appendix 1
Character,
Cognitive Agility
End of Sem Quiz (online) in 1, 2 Competence, 30% Individual Point based
week 12 Character, marking
Cognitive Agility See Appendix 4
Group Project part 1: Project 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Competence, 25% Team^ See Appendix 2
written report. Due in mid of Cognitive Agility
week 8.
Group Project part 2: Video 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Competence, 25% Team^ See Appendix 3
presentation, which submit in Character,
week 10 and presentation Cognitive Agility
Q&A through Zoom conduct
in week 11
Total 100%
Students are required to complete all the assignments to pass the course.
^ Adjusted for evaluation of team members’ contribution to teamwork according to Appendix 5.

Formative Feedback

In a flipped classroom model, recorded lectures and other content (videos, articles etc.) are provided for the students
to prepare for their in-person tutorials. The lectures are pre-recorded and made available to students on NTU Learn
to watch on their own time (asynchronous). Weekly pre-tutorial quizzes provide immediate individual feedback to
students on their knowledge and preparedness for the tutorial. The tutorial activities will include a variety of team
learning activities and direct interaction with instructors/facilitators.

There will be one (synchronous) online term quiz conducted at the end of the semester to assess student’s
understanding of the lecture content. Students are expected to work on a group project that is based on a written
report and a final presentation accounting for 50% of the entire course. Students will receive qualitative feedback
from their respective instructors for the written report and will be expected to make improvements and adjustments
for their final presentation. Class discussions and exercises are an opportunity to develop, compare and test ideas
before submitting assignments that will be assessed.

*The instructors and coordinators reserves the right to determine the final grade for each assessment component.

Learning and Teaching Approach

Approach How does this approach support students in achieving the learning outcomes?

Flipped classroom We use a flipped classroom model where students are required to prepare for
model class, followed by tutorial where the students are actively participating in learning
activities, which facilitates their engagement and learning. LO: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6.

Reflective learning Many of the learning activities (discussions, presentations) in the course

2
 emphasize reflective learning. Rather than memorizing facts or learning the ‘right
answers’, the students are tasked with relating sustainability topics to their own
lives, Singapore’s future, and globally. A broad and nuanced approach is
emphasized, and the three perspectives of society, economy and environment are
considered, compared, and evaluated for each course topic.
LO: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6.

Teamwork Doing tutorials, a written group report and a group presentation will facilitate the
development of connections between students from different disciplines,
communication skills and consensus building skills. LO: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6.

Use of three By continuously throughout the course using a model for analysis of sustainability
systems model for issues that encompasses all three perspectives (social, economic, and
analysis environmental) the students gain appreciation for the multi-dimensional and
interdisciplinary nature of sustainability. LO: 1, 2, 3

Singapore focus The topics of the course should be relatable to Singaporean students. The course
takes a “zoom in – zoom out” approach, addressing global issues with focus on
Singapore in many of the course topics. The focus on Singapore with local
examples will contribute to the course feeling meaningful and the topics
relatable, while also highlighting Singapore’s role in sustainable development of
the region and in the world. LO: 1 and 3.

Reading and References

Course materials will be provided on the online learning platform NTU learn.

Course Policies and Student Responsibilities

Students are expected to:

1. Complete all course activities.

2. Submit all assignments on time.

If you have any queries, please contact the in-class instructor assigned to your group.
Refer to the instructor contact list for contact information of individual instructors.

For problems with the learning platform (e.g. videos not working, dead links), please contact: CITS

If you are experiencing illness, personal distress, or other hardship, please contact iccOffice@[Link]

Academic Integrity

Good academic work depends on honesty and ethical behaviour. The quality of your work as a student relies on
adhering to the principles of academic integrity and to the NTU Honour Code, a set of values shared by the whole
university community. Truth, Trust, and Justice are at the core of NTU’s shared values.

As a student, it is important that you recognize your responsibilities in understanding and applying the principles of
academic integrity in all the work you do at NTU. Not knowing what is involved in maintaining academic integrity does
not excuse academic dishonesty. You need to actively equip yourself with strategies to avoid all forms of academic
dishonesty, including plagiarism, academic fraud, collusion, and cheating. If you are uncertain of the definitions of any
of these terms, you should go to the academic integrity website and handbook for more information. Consult your
instructor(s) if you need any clarification about the requirements of academic integrity in the course.

3
On the use of technological tools (such as Generative AI tools), different courses / assignments have different intended
learning outcomes. Students should refer to the specific assignment instructions on their use and requirements and/or
consult your instructors on how you can use these tools to help your learning.

Consult your instructor(s) if you need any clarification about the requirements of academic integrity in the course.

Course Instructors

This is a large course, which involves many instructors from different schools in NTU. Your primary point of contact for
course-related queries should be your tutorial instructor.

For questions on technical aspects of the course (e.g. completion of modules), please contact CITS.

Lead Instructors Office Location Email

Dr Le Chencheng ASE ccle@[Link]
Dr Swati Sharma SSS [Link]@[Link]
Dr Edson Kieu NBS [Link]@[Link]
Dr Tuti Lim CEE TMLim@[Link]
Multiple additional instructors
from various schools and
colleges.

Planned Weekly Schedule

Topic Course
Week Readings/ Activities
LO
Introduction
1 Lecture: The three systems: Society, Economy, and Environment 1-4

Tutorial:
Fundamental concepts of sustainability
Team formation and ice breakers

2 Lecture: Social inclusion/poverty and equality 1-5

Tutorial:
Social inclusion, poverty and equality

3 Lecture: Food system sustainability and food security 1-5 Submit project proposal
form
Tutorial:
Cultured meat
Info session for project (report and presentation)

4 Lecture: Water availability and sustainable management of water 1 - 5

resources

Tutorial:
Transboundary water cooperation

4
5 Lecture: Energy and climate change I - energy access and 1-5
technology focus

Tutorial:
Home-Based Learning
Energy conversion and Carbon Tax Calculations

6 Lecture: Energy and climate change II - policy focus, economics, 1-5

ethical and social

Tutorial:
Energy policy and mechanisms
Project consultations

7 Lecture: Pollution – air, plastic, light, noise 1-5

Tutorial:
Plastic pollution
Project consultations

Recess Week
8 Lecture: Responsible consumption and production - waste 1-5 Submission of report
management First Peer review
(Teamwork Evaluation)
Tutorial:
Responsible consumption

9 Lecture: Sustainable cities - role of big cities in sustainability 1-5

development.

Tutorial:
Sustainable Cities
Info session for the term quiz
Mockup quiz (Taking Online Test with Respondus LDB)

10 Lecture: Environmental and socio-economic feedback loop 1-5 Submission of

presentation
Tutorial: video
No Tutorial

11 Lecture: none 1–5

Tutorial:
Presentation Q&A session through Zoom

12 Lecture: No Lecture 1–6 End of Sem Quiz

Tutorial:
No Tutorial

13 Wrap up course 1–6 Deadline for weekly

quizzes submission.

5
 Final peer review
(Teamwork Evaluation)

Appendix 1: Assessment Criteria for in-class participation

Attendance

Make sure that you report any valid absence from class to your instructor and submit any relevant supporting
documents such as Medical Certificate (MC) to the undergraduate administrator in your own school. Low class
attendance will affect your class participation score.

Course Policy on Absence

You are required to attend each tutorial session. Due to the nature of group activities, it is difficult to provide
any online version of make-up tutorials, except a summary of group activities and tutorial content.

The only valid excuse for absence is MC. You should send a copy of your MC to your assigned instructor as well
as to your home schools to get an official excuse for absence. You are also encouraged to contact your group
members for their understanding in advance if possible.

An exception is COVID-19. When someone is tested positive for COVID-19 from self-administered ART test, they
should isolate themselves for 72 hours and retest. If the result is still positive, they are required to continue
isolation for another 4 days (total isolation period will be 7 days from the original test date). Thereafter, they
can attend classes regardless of the result. This is based on the current COVID-19 protocol. In this case, it would
be difficult for students to see a doctor to get a MC since they should isolate themselves. For this, a photo of the
positive test result together with their phone showing date and time should be sufficient for an official record.
The affected students should send the photo to the assigned instructor and their schools, following the same
procedure for MC.

For missing tutorial sessions, you are encouraged to catch up with your group members for any missed group
assignment and to make it up to your group by contributing more to their next assignment. An alternative
suggestion is for the group to invite the affected students to join group activity via Zoom if the symptom of the
affected students is mild. It is up to individual groups.

Active participation (15%)

This component assessment is individual and accounts for a total of 15% of your grade, which will be based on
instructor observation. To do well on this assessment you need to prepare for tutorials by studying the provided
material (videos, readings, etc.) beforehand.

There will be group-based activities during each class, including in-class presentations at the class level. To do
well in these activities, you need to communicate actively with your group members in the spirit of cooperation
during class. Speaking, listening, and respecting other viewpoints are all parts of this.

Assessment criteria for in-class group participation

Exemplary • Demonstrates excellent preparation: has analysed case exceptionally well, relating it to
readings and other material (e.g., readings, course material, discussions, experiences, etc.).

6
 • Offers analysis, synthesis, and evaluation of case material, e.g., puts together pieces of the
discussion to develop new approaches that take the class further.
• Contributes in a very significant way to ongoing discussion: keeps analysis focused, responds
very thoughtfully to other students' comments, contributes to the cooperative argument-
building, suggests alternative ways of approaching material and helps class analyse which
approaches are appropriate, etc.
• Demonstrates ongoing very active involvement.
Proficient • Demonstrates good preparation: knows case or reading facts well, has thought through
implications of them.
• Offers interpretations and analysis of case material (more than just facts) to class.
• Contributes well to discussion in an ongoing way: responds to other students' points, thinks
through own points, questions others in a constructive way, offers and supports suggestions
that may be counter to the majority opinion.
• Demonstrates consistent ongoing involvement.
Developing • Demonstrates adequate preparation: knows basic case or reading facts, but does not show
evidence of trying to interpret or analyse them.
• Offers straightforward information (e.g., straight from the case or reading), without
elaboration or very infrequently (perhaps once a class).
• Does not offer to contribute to discussion, but contributes to a moderate degree when called
on.
• Demonstrates sporadic involvement
Unsatisfactory • Present, not disruptive.
• Tries to respond when called on but does not offer much.
• Demonstrates very infrequent involvement in discussion.
Does not participate • Has not prepared for class or has little to no contributions.

Appendix 2: Assessment Criteria for Written Report (Part 1 of the Group Project)

The written report is a team assessment, and accounts for 25% of your grade. Each team is to hand in a written
report according to given instructions. The report should not be more than 2000 words with a 10% leeway.
Sections not included in the word count: (i) cover page, abstract, content page, and references. In principle, all
team members will receive the same mark. However, if the evaluation of team members’ contribution to
teamwork (see appendix 4) shows that the contribution of a team member is significantly different to that of
the others, the individual grade may be adjusted to reflect that.

Written Report (25%)

Excellent Very Good Average Fair Poor

Creativity, The project takes The project takes The project has Struggling to Unable to
relevance and an extremely a fairly creative, a more or less come up with an come up with
clarity of creative, innovative or independent independent an
approach innovative or novel approach. approach. approach, idea independent
(35%) novel approach. Well defined, Objectives are or question. approach.
Extremely well motivated and motivated and Weak or lacking Project topic
defined, clear objectives relevant to the motivation. not motivated
motivated and that in line with selected SDGs Poorly defined or defined in
clear objectives intended SDGs; but maybe a bit theme. Possibly line with

7
 that in line with set a theme that unclear or inconsistent intended
intended SDGs; is maintained report work report. SDGs.
form a continuous throughout the may deviate
theme throughout report. Maintains from them.
the report. good coherence Maintains some
Maintains by creating a coherence by
excellent logical pattern of creating a
coherence by development. logical pattern
creating a logical of development.
pattern of
development.

Implications Proposed their Proposed their Feasibility of the Feasibility of the Proposed
and feasibility own suggestions own suggestions proposed proposed suggestions
(20%) that are highly that are feasible suggestions is suggestions is are not
useful and but require fair and require not quite feasible.
feasible; minor some feasible; Obvious
implication would improvement; improvement; implication not problems with
be straightforward implication implication not straightforward, implications
and make a would be fairly straightforward, and/or and
significant straightforward and/or questionable. significance.
difference in and make a questionable. The significance
sustainability. The difference for The significance of the proposal
significance of the sustainability. of the proposal is absent.
proposal is valid The significance is invalid and
and clear. of the proposal is unclear.
valid but unclear.

Integration of
three systems’ All three systems All three systems All three Lacking cover of Lacking
perspectives (society, economy (society, systems one or two awareness of
(30%) and environment), economy and (society, systems. No the three
and their environment) economy and consideration of systems’
interrelations* are and their environment) interrelations or perspectives.
critically discussed interrelations are are considered integration of
and naturally meaningfully to some degree, systems.
integrated. considered. but not
necessarily
interrelated

Clarity of Interesting A good Fairly good A fairly good Bad layout,

expression, introduction with introduction with introduction introduction writing,
writing style, an excellent a demonstration with a with a poor formatting
formatting and demonstration of of a good demonstration demonstration and/or clarity
layout (15%) thorough knowledge of the of some of knowledge of of expression.
knowledge of the background knowledge of the background Background
background literature. The the background literature. knowledge is
literature. It is an layout and style literature. Fairly Layout was poor not expressed
excellent and are good and uniform format. and the format clearly. Poor
concise report. uniform. The The quality of was non- and obscures

8
 The quality of quality of images, figures, uniform. Poor content
images, figures, images, figures, legends, tables, use of figures, though out
legends, tables, legends, tables, and charts is legends, and the report.
and charts is and charts is fair. Discussion tables. Table, figure,
excellent. good. Discussion points are Discussion legends are
Discussion points points are clearly clearly defined points are not not clear and
are clearly and defined and and discussed in clearly defined self-
critically defined discussed in a a logical and discussed in explanatory.
and discussed in a logical sequence. sequence. The a logical
logical sequence. The conclusion conclusion is sequence.
Conclusion not only summarizes only Invalid
only summarizes the report. summarizing the conclusion is
the report but also Citations are report. Citations drawn from the
shares a final clearly are poorly report. No
insight. Citations referenced, but referenced and reference was
are clearly inadequate. inadequate. given. A lot of
referenced and Minor grammar, Some grammar, grammar,
adequate. No spelling, and spelling and spelling, and
grammar, spelling, punctuation punctuation punctuation
or punctuation errors. errors. errors.
errors.

*Interrelations: connections, contradictions, opposing or mutual interests.

Appendix 3: Assessment Criteria for Video Presentation (Part 2 of the Group Project)

The video presentation is a team assessment and accounts for 25% of your grades. For this assessment, you are
to record a 12-15 min (maximum 15 mins) team presentation on video and submit it to your instructor through
NTU Learn. Other students will watch your video presentation and give qualitative feedback through the Q&A
session conducted in week 11 through Zoom.

In principle, all team members will receive the same marks. However, if the evaluation of team members’
contribution to teamwork (see appendix 4) shows that the contribution of a team member is significantly
different to that of the others, the individual grade may be adjusted to reflect that.

Video Presentation on group project (25%)

Criteria
Excellent Very Good Average Fair Poor

Creativity, The project takes The project The project has a Struggling to Unable to
relevance and an extremely takes a fairly more or less come up with an come up with
clarity of creative, creative, independent independent an
approach (25%) innovative or innovative or approach. approach, idea independent
novel approach. novel approach. Objectives are or question. approach.
Extremely well Well defined, motivated and Weak or lacking Project topic
defined, motivated and relevant to the motivation. not
motivated and clear objectives selected SDGs Poorly defined motivated or
clear objectives that in line with but maybe a bit theme. Possibly defined in

9
 that in line with intended SDGs; unclear or report inconsistent line with
intended SDGs; set a theme that work may deviate report. intended
form a is maintained from them. SDGs.
continuous throughout the Maintains some
theme report. coherence by
throughout the Maintains good creating a logical
report. Maintains coherence by pattern of
excellent creating a logical development.
coherence by pattern of
creating a logical development.
pattern of
development.

Implications, Proposed their Proposed their Feasibility of the Feasibility of the Proposed
feasibility (15%) own suggestions own suggestions proposed proposed suggestions
that are highly that are feasible suggestions is fair suggestions is are not
useful and but require and require some not quite feasible.
feasible; minor improvement; feasible; Obvious
implication improvement; implication not implication not problems
would be implication straightforward, straightforward, with
straightforward would be fairly and/or and/or implications
and make a straightforward questionable. The questionable. and
significant and make a significance of The significance significance.
difference in difference for the proposal is of the proposal
sustainability. sustainability. invalid and is absent.
The significance The significance unclear.
of the proposal is of the proposal
valid and clear. is valid but
unclear.

Integration of
three systems’ All three systems All three systems All three systems Lacking cover of Lacking
perspectives (society, (society, (society, one or two awareness of
(20%) economy and economy and economy and systems. No the three
environment), environment) environment) are consideration of systems’
and their and their considered to interrelations or perspectives.
interrelations* interrelations some degree, but integration of
are critically are meaningfully not necessarily systems.
discussed and considered. interrelated
naturally
integrated.

Clarity of Clear, concise Mostly clear, Partly clear and Confusing, Failure to
expression, and well- concise and concise unclear and deliver the
organization, structured well-structured presentation. unattractive presentation.
presenting style presentation. presentation. Few speakers presentation;
(10%) Captivating, lively Most of the exhibited some Speakers
and engaging speakers expression and seemed
presentation with seemed the body was expressionless
all speakers enthusiastic and slightly rigid and and not

10
 seemed engaging with occasionally engaging at all;
enthusiastic and natural body engaging. Able to Delivery was not
with natural body posture. Smooth deliver within the finished by end
posture. Smooth delivery within time allocated. of the time
delivery within the time allocated.
the time allocated.
allocated.

Answering
questions All members Few members Only a few Could not Not able to
(15%) could answer show the ability members answer most of answer any
questions with to answer attempt to the questions. of the
excellent and questions with answer questions.
knowledgeable good answers. questions.
answers.

Raising
questions Demonstrates Demonstrates Demonstrates Demonstrates Not able to
(15%) excellent good adequate little or no raise any
preparation: preparation: preparation: evidence of questions
questions display questions questions show preparation:
an excellent display a good adequate questions are
understanding of understanding understanding of largely personal
the topic and of the topics and the topic and opinions or
underlying contribute to the only repeat or feelings without
concepts of ongoing summarize basic supporting
sustainability. conversations by information statements;
Questions also asking a related without showing little or
actively stimulate question or considering no evidence
and sustain making an alternative from watching
further oppositional perspectives or other group’s
discussion by statement connections video
building on supported by between ideas presentation or
peers’ responses related research based on relevant relevant
including building research. research.
a focused
argument around
a specific issue,
asking a newly
related question,
and making an
oppositional
statement
supported by
related research.

11
Appendix 4: End of Term Quiz

The End of Term Quiz is a closed book exam conducted in-person at physical venue (further details to be
provided during the semester).

Format 30 Randomized MCQ Questions

Duration 45 Minutes

Quiz Content Lecture materials from week 1 to 9

Assessment 30%
Weightage

Conduct In-person quiz conducted via NTU Learn.

Materials Needed Laptops with lockdown browser installed.

12
Appendix 5: Peer review (Teamwork Evaluation)

1. All team members are expected to complete the teamwork evaluation for all other members in the team
(i.e., self-assessment is not required); see evaluation criteria on page 16 and rating descriptors on page 17-
18. Should a student fail to complete the teamwork evaluation of all other members in his/her group, 5% of
the total grade will be deducted from the student’s final team assignment mark.

2. All assessments and qualitative comments are confidential, and we expect you to be constructive and fair
in all your feedback and ratings. Team members will be able to see the compiled qualitative comments
given by their team members given at mid and end semester but the average Peer Assessment score only
at end semester.
Note: Students should avoid identifying themselves in any manner when providing qualitative comments to
their team members.

3. Each member’s average rating given by his/her team members will be used to determine the final team
assignment marks awarded to each member as follows:

Average Rating Range Marks Deduction Final Adjusted Marks

(min: 1; max: 9) (out of 100%) (out of 100%)

≥ 6.5 0% Original team assignment mark (M%)

≥ 5.5 to < 6.5 -5% M% – 5%

≥ 4.0 to < 5.5 -10% M% – 10%

≥ 3.0 to < 4.0 -15% M% – 15%

> 1.0 to < 3.0 -20% M% – 20%

= 1.0 -M% 0%

4. Please complete the teamwork evaluation through Peerceptiv for all your team members for the team
assignment at the specified course dates.

5. If you have any concern with any of the qualitative comments that you receive from other members in your
team, please immediately consult your course instructor upon receiving the qualitative comments.

NOTES:

Please note that the teaching team reserves the right to adjust students’ final team assignment marks
based on additional considerations including gathered information, certified special education needs
(SEN), and medical diagnosis.

If you have certified special education needs (SEN) or medical concerns that might affect your
contributions and collaboration, but you are having trouble communicating your situation to your
groupmates, please approach your tutor for a chat in advance.

13
 Teamwork Evaluation Criteria

Score from 1 to 92,3

Criteria (Weighs)
(1: Never; 3: Rarely; 5: Occasionally; 7: Frequently; 9: Always)
(For 6-members team) Member A Member B Member C Member D Member E
Member name
a. Fulfilling one’s responsibilities duly (15%)
Behaved responsibly-- Score from 1 to 9
such as attend meetings
punctually and regularly;
participate in discussion; Qualitative comments/reasons
complete assigned
tasks/roles punctually.
b. Fulfilling one’s responsibilities effectively (25%)
Behaved and Score from 1 to 9
contributed effectively--
such as quality of work
produced; creativity of Qualitative comments/reasons
ideas; extensiveness of
research and thinking.
c. Managing interpersonal relationships (30%)
Listened attentively to Score from 1 to 9
and sought inputs from
others; helped team
resolve conflicts and Qualitative comments/reasons
achieved common
understanding to
function effectively;
promoted respect for
others and differences;
fostered camaraderie.
d. Providing support to others to achieve goals (30%)
Behaved fairly and Score from 1 to 9
ethically—such as
sharing responsibilities
Qualitative comments/reasons
and giving credits.
Exhibited group
citizenship behavior--
such as helping others to
learn and complete their
work through guidance
and encouragement;
standing up for others
when needed.
2 Scoreof 1 should be given only when a team member does not really deserve to be awarded any mark for the team
assignment (ie, zero mark) because the member either has not or has barely participated and/or contributed to the team
assignment in any meaningful manner.
3 See detailed score descriptions for each criterion in the next table.

14
 Teamwork Evaluation Criteria – Score Descriptions
a. Fulfilling one’s responsibilities duly (15%)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Never Rarely Occasionally Frequently Always
Behaved responsibly-- Did not participate Rarely participated Occasionally Frequently Always participated
such as attend actively in team actively in team participated actively in participated actively in actively in team
meetings punctually meetings at all (even meetings. team meetings. team meetings. meetings.
and regularly; though he/she might Rarely contributed Occasionally Often contributed Always contributed
participate in still be present.) Did useful ideas that were contributed useful useful ideas that were useful ideas that were
discussion; complete not contribute any relevant for getting ideas that were relevant for getting relevant for getting
assigned tasks/roles useful ideas that were the project completed. relevant for getting the project completed. the project
punctually. relevant for getting Rarely submitted work the project completed. Frequently submitted completed.
the project completed. on time and did so Occasionally assigned work on time Always submitted
Did not submit any or rarely without submitted work on without prompting. assigned work on time
usable work on time prompting. time and did so without prompting.
and never did so occasionally without
without prompting. prompting.
b. Fulfilling one’s responsibilities effectively (25%)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Never Rarely Occasionally Frequently Always
Behaved and Quality could not be Quality of work could Quality of work could Quality of work was of Quality of work was of
contributed evaluated because be improved vastly; be improved; required reasonably acceptable highly acceptable
effectively--such as nothing relevant or required major some revisions before standards; required standards; required
quality of work usable was submitted. revisions before submission. Work minor revisions before no revision before
produced; creativity submission. Work reflected some effort submission. Work submission. Work
of ideas; reflected superficial in completing the reflected reasonable reflected extensive
extensiveness of effort in completing project. effort in completing effort in completing
research and the project. the project. the project.
thinking.

15
1
c. Managing interpersonal relationships (30%)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Never Rarely Occasionally Frequently Always
Listened attentively Never listened to Rarely listened to Occasionally listened Frequently listened to Always listened to
to and sought inputs others. Never others. Rarely to others, with others, with frequent others, always
from others; helped attempted to help attempted to help occasional attempts to attempts to help team attempted to help
team resolve conflicts team resolve conflicts. team resolve conflicts. help team resolve resolve conflicts. team resolve conflicts.
and achieved Never attempted to Rarely attempted to conflicts. Occasionally Frequently attempted Always attempted to
common achieve common achieve common attempted to achieve to achieve common achieve common
understanding to understanding to understanding to common understanding to understanding to
function effectively; function effectively as function effectively as understanding to function effectively as function effectively as
promoted respect for a team. Never a team. Rarely function effectively as a team. Frequently a team. Always
others and promoted respect for promoted respect for a team. Occasionally promoted respect for promoted respect for
differences; fostered others, with no others, with rare promoted respect for others, with notable others and
camaraderie. attempt to foster attempts to foster others, with attempts to foster demonstrated
camaraderie. camaraderie. occasional attempts to camaraderie. consistent attempts
foster camaraderie. to foster camaraderie.
d. Providing support to others to achieve goals (30%)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Never Rarely Occasionally Frequently Always
Behaved fairly and Never took on a fair Rarely took on a fair Occasionally took on a Frequently took on a Always took on a fair
ethically—such as share of share of fair share of fair share of share of
sharing responsibilities; never responsibilities; rarely responsibilities; responsibilities; responsibilities;
responsibilities and gave appropriate gave appropriate occasionally gave frequently gave always gave
giving credits. credits to others. credits to others. appropriate credits to appropriate credits to appropriate credits to
Exhibited group Never attempted to Rarely attempted to others. Occasionally others. Frequently others. Always
citizenship behavior-- help others learn; help others learn; attempted to help attempted to help attempted to help
such as helping others never provided rarely provided others learn; others learn; others learn; always
to learn and complete guidance and guidance and occasionally provided frequently provided provided guidance
their work through encouragement. encouragement. guidance and guidance and and encouragement.
guidance and Never stood up for Rarely stood up for encouragement. encouragement. Always stood up for
encouragement; others when needed. others when needed. Occasionally stood up Frequently stood up others when needed.
standing up for others for others when for others when
when needed. needed. needed.

16
1