Performance Review Worksheet
Performance Review Worksheet
Workplace Communication & Supervisory Feedback
Name:
Date:
Period:
Employee Context: John (Administrative Support) Scale: 1 (Unsatisfactory) to 4 (Proficient)
John accurately completes regular data entry and filing on time. Unlike training-level peers, he works largely without direct supervision and seeks clarification only when needed. Suggested areas of improvement include systematically double-checking detailed records and setting task priorities on his own.
Evaluation Questions:
1. Rating & Why What rating do you assign, and for what reasons?
2. Growth vs. Trainee How does John demonstrate autonomy and growth?
3. Next Steps What actionable feedback will help John advance?
Sentence Frame Assist
“Based on John’s performance, I would give a rating of ___ because ____. John demonstrates independence by ____, and their work is generally ____. Compared to a training-level employee, John ____. To continue improving, I would recommend ____ because ____.”
Model Level 3+ Response Exemplar
“Based on John’s performance, I would give a rating of 4 – Proficient because John completes tasks accurately, meets deadlines, and works mostly independently. John demonstrates independence by completing data entry and filing tasks without constant supervision and by asking thoughtful questions when clarification is needed. Compared to a training-level employee, John requires far less supervision and is able to apply feedback quickly. To continue improving, I would recommend that John focus on consistently double-checking details and prioritizing tasks independently so they can work even more efficiently and confidently.”
Your Written Performance Evaluation
Draft your complete paragraph using the frame or your own synthesis
Evaluation Criteria Checklist:
Rating & Reason Given Independence Evidence Growth vs. Trainee Targeted Growth Advice
Performance Review Answer Key
Performance Review Answer Key
Teacher Reference, Frame Solutions & Evaluative Rubric
Teacher Reference Target: Level 4 Proficient
Completed Sentence Frame Assist (Target Answer) Underlined text indicates student responses filled into blanks
“Based on John’s performance, I would give a rating of 4 – Proficient because he consistently completes assignments accurately, meets deadlines, and works with minimal direct supervision. John demonstrates independence by managing regular data entry and filing tasks without manager oversight, and their work is generally timely, dependable, and high quality. Compared to a training-level employee, John requires far less coaching and asks clarifying questions only when encountering edge cases. To continue improving, I would recommend that John double-check fine data details and prioritize competing tasks on his own because this will prevent minor oversights and develop full workplace autonomy.”
Evidence & Analysis Breakdown
1. Rating & Justification
Rating must be 4 (Proficient) or strong 3 (Competent). Rationales must cite data entry/filing accuracy and adherence to deadlines.
2. Evidence of Independence
Must identify specific routine duties performed without oversight; questions asked are targeted and intentional rather than repetitive.
3. Trainee vs. Proficient Contrast
Response must directly contrast John against entry-level trainees (e.g., trainees require step-by-step supervision; John works independently and applies feedback rapidly).
4. Actionable Next Steps
Recommendations must be constructive (double-checking entries, independent workflow prioritization) and explain the business benefit.
Evaluation Scoring Rubric
| Level | Rating & Evidence | Trainee Comparison | Growth Feedback |
|---|
| 4 – Advanced / Exemplary | Accurate rating justified with multiple specific duties and data points. | Explicit contrast showing how autonomy exceeds training-level expectations. | Specific, actionable recommendations linked to business impact. |
| 3 – Proficient / Target | Clear rating with accurate context from the scenario. | Mentions John needs less supervision than a beginner. | Recommends double-checking or task prioritization. |
| 2 – Developing | Rating given with brief or vague justification. | Supervision level mentioned without contrasting trainee baseline. | Generic feedback (e.g., “work faster” or “keep trying”). |
| 1 – Beginning | Rating missing or arbitrary without scenario evidence. | Omits comparison to training-level staff. | No forward feedback provided or frame incomplete. |
Coaching Tip:
Remind students that professional evaluations must balance praise of verified strengths with constructive, specific growth targets. Watch for students writing vague suggestions like “do better”—prompt them to specify what to check (e.g., numerical data entries) and how to prioritize tasks.
