Peer Assessment of Group 20
C A T E G O R Y G11 G12 G13 G14 G15 Average
Topic Selection
(0-20)
20 15(18) 17 20 20 18.4(19)
Newspaper and Article Selection
(0-10)
9 7(8) 7 9 8 8(8.2)
Quality of Editorial Comments
(0-10)
7 6(7) 7 8 8 7.2(7.4)
Organic Chemistry Content
(0-10)
10 5(8) 8 10 8 8.2(8.8)
Selection and Quality of the Links 
(0-20)
19 11(17) 17 18 18 16.6(17.8)
Format, Number and Types of Questions
(0-10)
8 5(7) 8 9 9 7.8(8.2)
Quality of the Questions
(0-10)
10 5(8) 9 9 9 8.4(9)
Overall Impression 
(0-10)
8 3(7) 8 8 8 7(7.8)
TOTAL 81.6(86.2)

 
 

Evaluation by Group 11
 1.) 20 - Applied medicine and standard testing procedures are of
interest to anyone who must go through them, which includes most people
who will read this news item. Appeals to a broad audience, and is
clearly related to/based on the principles of chemistry.
 2.) 9 - This article is from the Winnipeg Free Press which appears to
be a credible source. (Winnipeg is a major city in Manitoba, Canada.)
There is a link to the newspaper at the top of the article. However,
the article was printed on April 14, 1997, which may make it a little
outdated.
 3.) 7 - The most glaring mistake that should be corrected, is that
Ottawa is NOT a province, it is the national capital of Canada, located
in the province of Ontario. Might step on some toes there. The
editorial showed a good understanding of the material in the article
and the surrounding issues. The first two paragraphs might be clarified
a little by distinguishing more between medical treatment and tests
(tests and diagnosis must come before treatment, and IR spectroscopy
only deals with improving tests and diagnosis, not actual treatment).
Also, mentioning that a tricorder is a medical device used in Star Trek
might be helpful.
 4.) 10 - The organic chemistry content was clearly related to the
material of Wade's textbook Chapter 12, on Infrared spectroscopy, and
the chemistry behind the article was emphasized adequately. The claims
were also supported well by the links provided.
 5.) 19 - There were six separate links (one was referenced several
times, at slightly different spots on the website) and all were
reliable and easily accessible. They were also embedded well in the
text of the editorial comments. The National Research Council link
didn't have any obvious information available on either IR or the
tricorder.
 6.) 8 - There were only four questions present - should be five!! The
four existing ones were good though. There was one technical (how IR
works), one comprehensive (the advantages of IR), one on a slightly
different topic (hemoglobin tests), and one opinion question (about
government funding).
 7.) 10 - All the questions were well-written, the intentions behind
them were clear, and it required a thorough reading of the article and
exploration of the links to arrive at the answers. The answers provided
satisfied the questions well.
 8.) 8 - With some minor changes to the editorial comments, and
questions, this news item could be of publishing quality! (Correct the
Ottawa mistake, clarify whether it is tests or treatment that IR
spectroscopy directly affects, explain a tricorder a little more, and
add one more question.)
 
 
 

Evaluation by Group 12

  (1) Topic Selection: 15 Points (0-20)
                        It is realatively broad and has importance but not to a large audience.  It has no real strong
relationship to the organic chemistry field.
 

        (2) Newspaper and Article Selection: 7 Points (0-10)
                        The article lacks detail and relevance to a specific topic of "organic" chemistry.  The article is
somewhat outdated and a newer study would have worked better in a related field of spectroscopy.  The
article is not all that exciting and the author did not seemed particularly qualified.  The article is a
fairly good length.
 

        (3) Quality of the Editorial Comments: 6 Points (0-10)
                        Extremely vague and it lacks direction or relevance.  The grammer is Good, but the information is weak
and wanting of depth to support the topic.  Perhaps with a more lengthy editorial this could have been
remedied.
 

        (4) Organic Chemistry Content: 5 Points (0-10)
                        Again, it lacks detail and direction.  The editorial and article give no information on chemical
processes and further only addresses future potential of infrared spectroscopy.
 

        (5) Selection and Quality of the Links: 11 Points (0-20)
                        We think that the topic was limiting to the value of the links.  We were satified with only two of the
six links provided. The others were of borderline relevance.  Some of the links were fair for visualation
but had little importance.

        (6) Format, Number and Types of Questions: 5 Points (0-10)
                        There are only four questions.  They have a variety of different questions but they lack a relationship
to the topic.  Question two in particular, is distantly related to the topic at best.  The last question
seems like a poor attempt to fill the limit of question required and their answer is not supported.
There is no PSP question.
 

        (7) Quality of the Questions: 5 Points (0-10)
                        The comment for number six explains, for the most part, the problems reflected in their questions.
 

        (8) Overall Impression. 3 Points (0-10)
                        We would not recomend this project for further use.  It has severe problems that need to be addressed,
such as a lack of subject matter and true focus.

                        All in all, the article lacked information from which the rest of the project suffered.  It seems that
the group did not put the necessary effort and time required to produce a quality product, for such a
vague article.

Reevaluation by Group 13

We decided that our grading of group 20 was a little harsh.  Upon further
examination we would like for you to change our grading as follows:
1: 18
2: 8
3: 7
4: 8
5: 17
6: 7
7: 8
8: 7

Evaluation by Group 13

  (1) Topic Selection: 17 Points (0-20)
                        Mildly interesting, however does not appeal to an audience as new and exciting news.  Relation to organic chemistry is present in moderation.

        (2) Newspaper and Article Selection: 7 Points (0-10)
                        Not very current article and credibility is questionable.  Information is not very exciting and the introduction of spectroscopy into the field of medicine is not new.

        (3) Quality of the Editorial Comments: 7 Points (0-10)
                        context of article was a liitle unclear.  New procedures in the field were not specified and presented with new techniques.  However length and organization were adequate.

        (4) Organic Chemistry Content: 8 Points (0-10)
                        Issues were a little cloudy, however links were helpful to establish the chemical concepts.  Reference section adequate.

        (5) Selection and Quality of the Links: 17 Points (0-20)
                        Links were good and bad.  Two Links in particular were very helpful to the project - second and fourth.  Material included in links was relevant.

        (6) Format, Number and Types of Questions: 8 Points (0-10)
                        Obligations for questions were met.  Questions covered most significant issues at hand.  Last question is opinionated.

        (7) Quality of the Questions: 9 Points (0-10)
                        Questions are readable and address the key issues.  Questions seemed very easy and may lack difficulty.

        (8) Overall Impression. 8 Points (0-10)
                        More research could have been done on the new techniques of spectroscopy in the medicine field.  The article addresses new advancements soon to come, but the uses further mentioned have already been in use.  Unfit.

                        Not bad.
 

Evaluation by Group 14

  (1) Topic Selection: 20 Points (0-20)
                        Cool.

        (2) Newspaper and Article Selection: 9 Points (0-10)
                        Kind of an obscure paper, but a knowledgeable author.

        (3) Quality of the Editorial Comments: 8 Points (0-10)
                        More input would have been helpful to make this seem more than just a synopsis of the article.

        (4) Organic Chemistry Content: 10 Points (0-10)
                        Yep.

        (5) Selection and Quality of the Links: 18 Points (0-20)
                        Loved the tricorders!  Last two links didn't work, so that was a bit inconveniant.

        (6) Format, Number and Types of Questions: 9 Points (0-10)
                        Question 2 wasn't exactly a question.

        (7) Quality of the Questions: 9 Points (0-10)
                        Qestion 4 seemed a little out there.  Certaintly there was something else of worth to question in your article.

        (8) Overall Impression. 8 Points (0-10)
                        Editorial really didn't catch ones attention with detail and facts, maybe could have talked more about the relationship of IR spectroscopy to organic chemistry.  Working links are nice, but s@#* happens, trust us, we know.
 

Evaluation by Group 15

    (1) Topic Selection: 20 Points (0-20)
                        This topic was very intriguing and could be a huge breakthrough in the medical field, thereby potentially affecting anyone receiving medical care.  There was also a strong correlation to organic chemistry.

        (2) Newspaper and Article Selection: 8 Points (0-10)
                        The article was not as current as required, but it did come from a reputable and high quality news paper.  The author seemed qualified, but he did tend to ramble and while the information given was good, there could have been more info and less quotes.

        (3) Quality of the Editorial Comments: 8 Points (0-10)
                        The editorial comments were well-written and interesting.  However, they could have been more indepth and certainly longer than they were. They did not clarify spectroscopy sufficiently.

        (4) Organic Chemistry Content: 8 Points (0-10)
                        The reference sections were not complete and the editorial comments failed to relate the article to organic chemistry as well as they should have.  Spectroscopy was not really referenced to except in the questions.

        (5) Selection and Quality of the Links: 18 Points (0-20)
                        The links were generally helpful and informative.  They could have chosen better links though which added new information to the article. The links should also primarily have been in the editorial comments, not the questions, and not all of the links actually connected.

        (6) Format, Number and Types of Questions: 9 Points (0-10)
                        All of the requirements were met.  They could have expanded a bit on question five though.

        (7) Quality of the Questions: 9 Points (0-10)
                        On the whole the questions were good.  They should have made sure all the links worked though.  Question 2 was not really a question, it should have been added in the editorial comments.

        (8) Overall Impression. 8 Points (0-10)
                        The news item was definitely very interesting and relevant to todays issues.  However, it needs quite a few adjustments and would also need to be linked to organic chemistry more effectively.