Intern Presentation Evaluation Form: Fill & Download for Free

Interns get an intern evaluation form from the placement cells which are filled by the project guides at the end of the internships. This form is sealed and should be submitted by the intern to college once he returns. Apart from this they need to submit an executive summary (2-3 pages) of their project. If you don't get positive reviews in the form, then the student needs to do an extra 3 credit course.

Companies handle employee evaluations in different ways. In fact, most companies change they way they handle evaluations as they grow and their business becomes more complex.I can only speak from my experience as a manager in an international corporation (now retired).I would meet with my Director along with the other managers that were under the Director to review evaluations and the managers recommendations for their employees. A Human Resources representative was always present to: (a) provide their expertise on particular questions that arose; and (b) to make sure that fairness ruled on evaluating employees. HR made no decisions but could ask questions and offer opinions. (I don’t know if HR could overrule the Director or not. I never saw it happen.) The Director conducted the meeting and made the decisions.The logic behind all managers being present is that many times more than one manager probably would have had involvement with any particular employee and might have an opinion. Sometimes the conversation may go like this:Employee’s Manager: “I used Alice quite a bit for some investigative research about why our productivity findings weren’t being followed up on.”Manager 1 laughing: “Oh yeah, she read Bob the riot act pretty effectively.”Manager 2: “I’m pretty impressed with her. I know that when we had her sit in one of our staff meetings and someone threw a question at her, she responded with a deluge of facts and figures — it made me sit up and notice”.And on and on. It is to give the Director a flavor of others felt.The manager that walked into the meeting with documentation and dates and the full stories of the employee’s accomplishments, as well as thoughtful considerations of the employee’s weaknesses, usually ended up getting the ratings and raises for the employee that was asked for. It was here that HR usually would chime in: “A thorough evaluation. Excellent job.”The written evaluation is carefully gone over with the employee in a conversational format. The employees strengths, areas for improvement, accomplishments, and goal achievements and failures are discussed in detail with the employee. If the employee brings up mitigating circumstances (whether business interface related or personal) are carefully documented on the multi-page evaluation form. The employee is then excused and the manager then completely fills out the evaluation form on the computer. It is then sent (or network accessed) to the employee to review and comment on. It is pointed out to the employee if they need additional space for review comments they can attach an additional page. Then the form is digitally signed, and then the Manager digitally signs the form.This form, along with employee comments, are brought to the meeting with the Director and HR. The Manager does take the time to address the evaluation form and employee comments at the meeting.It seems that Human Resources involvement in evaluations are typically advisory. They sometimes are asked to address certain criteria for a particular rating. For instance:Employee’s Manager: “How do I rate ‘Employee’s involvement with other departments?’ Joe routinely, I’d say almost weekly, meets with his accounting counterpart to review Project billables. Does that count? How high to I rate it?”The HR Rep would address the question which would may then erupt into a discussion between the managers and HR — but ultimately HR would define the criteria. Sometimes the Director would disagree — so usually a compromise of some sort was worked out.The whole Director/Manager/HR meeting was long (one or two days) and many times boring. But it was considered a necessity as far as evaluations were concerned.

How a reviewer screwed my master’s defenseThis is my story of how my research work was discarded by one of the reviewers for my master’s degree.I studied at one of the premier institutes in India (IIIT- Hyderabad). I joined in year 2013 and sumitted my thesis in November, 2015. Unfortunately, our institute has a policy for internal review of the thesis for MS students. So, my thesis was being reviewed by this one person who hates me as I was never attentive in his course and eventually did not perform well.He got so happy when he was nominated to review my thesis (vicious smile). I still remember the day after he was nominated, I saw the look in his eyes. It was like this time I will screw you. There are good people and there are bad people in academics, he is the worst. So, he starts reviewing my thesis and discards it stating plagiarism too high to review and banters my entire thesis in the evaluation form. I go back to check plagiarism, it was below 15% excluding my own research papers. I go back challenging his comments, he reviews again and this time he says unsuitable for master as his entire thesis is only on application of well-known models for a different case study. I go back asking what’s the basis of such comment. Research doesn’t always include new ideas it’s also about application and understanding the significance of the models for a different case study.By this time, I had lost all my patience because he was not willing to pass thesis and I had to go for further higher studues. His personal agenda was to somehow discard the entire work and not allow me to pass. In all this, he was taking his own time. I take a different route, go to the reviewer and talk to him regarding the reason for such comments. His first line was “ How are you feeling now?” followed by “ You North Indians spoil the rich culture and heritage of us (South Indian). Students like you should not be alloowed to get an admission here”. I lost my shit and I said to him you are not educated enough to review my thesis, and I wrote a letter to Dean (R&D). Some of the excerpts were:“It is my humble request to Dean R&D to select only those reviewers who understand the subject or at least are willing to understand, as such false statements are not expected from a professor of this esteemed institute.I have serious doubt on the capability and I am presenting every detail on how the reviewer has reviewed the thesis. The reviewer has taken a lot of effort to google every sentence and somehow demean the work. If that effort was applied in understanding the model, a serious interaction based purely on technical aspects would have been possible. But, I guess that wasn’t the intention of the reviewer. The review is horrible and pathetic. Any sensible person would not comment anything like that. It’s my request to the institute that reviewers like these hamper the future of students and should not be allowed to review any thesis (even if he is the subject expert).It is really surprising that a professor who is supposed to be considered good enough for reviewing a thesis has done mediocre work regardig review. As I said earlier also, the reviewer’s intention is to only demean and belittle the work. It is a shame on institute’s part to have a professor who doesn’t understand basic things, moreover not even trying to understand. This is a clear case of personal agenda , not having the knowledge of the subject and not even trying to understand, contradicting own statements.The reviewer should stop lecturing on plagiarism and moral ethics, he himself is committing a sin to the scientific community by evaluating a thesis of which he has no knowledge. Such reviewers are a blot to a research institute like IIIT. If the reviewer is in a good frame of mind, he can surely review the updated thesis which I would be submitting in hard copy, but my only request to Dean R&D is to keep an eye on the reviews and the type of comments being provided. I don’t think the reviewer is in a stable mental state and can review the thesis keeping his personal agenda aside.”The Dean did not mail back and was expected because one of his professors is being questioned. I waited and waited that someday the management of college would say we will get reviewed from someone who understands the subject. They couldn’t and I left the college without a degree. Today I am a PhD student at Indian Institute of Technology. The same work which was discarded by IIIT professors are now considered to be the best work for Indian scenario. I received the best paper award from one of the top conferences and from institute. I do not know what’s the status of that professor but I am sure there are students who would still be sufferring due to people like him. IIIT has failed as a research institute and that’s why it could never be IIT. The management is focussed on how to get in more money for CS students and treat other branches/labs as third world countries. I pray that what happened to me should not happen with anyone else.I rest my case.