I completely agree with Marie, but would add a couple of notes: 1) I think it's important to create conditions in which it is hard for bullying to occur (e.g. having the evaluations done during the final or on-line) 2) Making it clear to everyone that the peer evaluations only differentiate WITHIN (but NOT between) teams. Thus, if everyone in the team gets the same score, the member(s) who contributed least are likely to end up with the same grade as the member(s) who contributed most. As long as those two things are in place, I'm neither surprised or troubled when there isn't much difference in member scores--especially in the better teams. Larry Larry K. Michaelsen Professor of Management Central Missouri State University Dockery 400G Warrensburg, MO 64093 660/543-4124 voice 660/543-8465 fax >>>Marie Thomas <[log in to unmask]> 12/17/05 11:28 am >>> I think it's not necessarily a bad thing when team members figure out how to award peer evaluations that result in everyone getting the same score. In my experience, teams that do this are the better-functioning groups, as seems to also be Maureen Jonason's experience. Even figuring out how to accomplish equal peer ratings requires teamwork! While everyone in a team may not make the same contribution, members of well-functioning teams may feel that everyone makes an equivalent contribution and, therefore, should be rewarded equally. In teams where there are big differences in contributions, I've seen big differences in peer ratings. While I'm aware that there is a possibility that some team members might bully others into producing equal ratings, I've never seen this happen in practice. Marie Thomas Marie D. Thomas, Ph.D. Professor of Psychology California State University San Marcos San Marcos, CA 92096 760-750-4157 (office) 760-750-3418 (fax) [log in to unmask] !DSPAM:1576,43a44e24195451236837510!