How to Write Peer Evaluation English for a Group Project With Specific Evidence

Peer evaluation after a group project is harder than many students expect. The classmate may read it. The instructor may use it to judge contribution. That pressure pushes writers toward two bad extremes. One is empty kindness: she was nice to work with, great teammate, no issues. The other is a sudden flood of stored frustration. Neither helps much. The first hides the work. The second makes the reader sort through emotion before they can find the evidence.

A steadier evaluation starts with the work itself. Who handled research? Who built the slide deck? Who rehearsed the presentation? Who cleaned the data? Those are observable contributions. If you need to describe a problem, move from behavior to impact. Instead of he was lazy, try the literature summary was submitted after the group deadline, which reduced the time available for evidence integration. That sentence still names the issue, but it gives the instructor something concrete to assess.

Context matters too. If the team followed up twice in the group chat, redistributed editing at the end, or clarified expectations during a meeting, say so. Details like that make the evaluation more credible. They show that the problem was noticed and managed rather than invented after the fact. By contrast, a paragraph filled only with words like disappointed, unfair, or uncooperative may sound intense without becoming informative.