|Relevance to 210||10||9||9||9||6||-|
|TOTAL from Peers||49||41||41||43||41||43|
|TOTAL for GP||108|
> (1) Group Number and Group Name of Evaluators Our Group number is 16 and our group name is broken beakers. > (2) Group Number and Group Name of Evaluees > The group we evaluated was 21 and their name was the randoms. > > > Visual appeal 10 > > Content 9 > > WWW Suitability 10 > > Relevance to 210 10 > > Personal Gain 10 > > Total from Peers 49 > > Comments: This was a very imformative site that had a lot of great links. > Good job!!!! Nice site. > >
(1) 17, Catalytic Cretins (2) 21, The Randoms (3) Visual appeal of site: 8 (4) Content of site: 8 (5) WWW suitability: 8 (6) Relevent to chem 210: 9 (7) Personal gain: 8 Comments: good graphics and in-depth but seemed to lack focus, easily browsable
(1) 18, Six String (2) 21, The Randoms (3) Visual Appeal of the Site: 7 Points The web page itself was appealing, but the links weren't as appealing because there weren't many visual aids on the links. (4) Content of Site: 9 Points The content of the links was very informational. There were several links, and still links inside the links to branch to more information. (5) WWW Suitability: 8 Points The site had a lot of information, but most of the information, if not all, could come from a book. (6) Relevance to Chem 210: 9 Points "Steroids" is an interesting topic. The project showed the structure of the molecule and the chemistry involved in the molecule. The group also made a good point when they pointed out the relevance in medicine and every day life. (7) Personal Gain: 8 Points The site contained a lot of information that was interesting and easy to pick up on.
1) Group 19 Brandon Larkin Mike Snyder Richard Aldenderfer Jason Effmann Raina Thomas Christie Hampton 2) Group 21 Keith Kleiner Sandler, Amy Saffaf, Leila Winchester, Leslie White, Matt Wilkinson, Brian 3) Visual Appeal of Site: 7 points With the exception of the black and white model, the only visual effects were confined to the actual webpage, not the sites. More multimedia in the content of the project would have been nice. 4) Content of Site: 10 points Much information, at times was too wordy, but all in all, good presentation. 5) WWW Suitability: 7 points While information was presented well, we found that some links were simply to chemical search engines. More suitable would have been hard facts about the actual topic, not just providing the method for the viewer to find. 6) Relevance to Chem 210: 9 points Steroid information, in regards to chemistry, is taken care of in the chemistry search database. 7) Personal Gain: 10 points Much easy to understand info presented. Information also very practical. Good site.
1. Group 20 - psyched 2. Group 21 - randoms 3. Visual appeal - score 6 Visual appeal was slightly lacking, but forms and tables provided good organization. 4. Content - score 10 Content was excellent. Perhaps too much for this assignment. 5. www suitability - score 9.5 Text would be more suitable in other media. We liked the ability to search for specific chemicals. 6. Relevance - score 6 More chemistry, less physiology would make this more relevant to the class. 7. Gain - score 9 Total = 41