Peer Assessment of Group 22
C A T E G O R Y G16 G17 G18 G19 G20 Average
Topic Selection
(0-20)
20 19 20 18 18 19
Newspaper and Article Selection
(0-10)
10 8 10 9 9 9.2
Quality of Editorial Comments
(0-10)
8 9 9 8 9 8.6
Organic Chemistry Content
(0-10)
6 7 8 6 7 6.8
Selection and Quality of the Links 
(0-20)
16 18 18 15 12 15.8
Format, Number and Types of Questions
(0-10)
9 7 10 10 10 9.2
Quality of the Questions
(0-10)
10 7 10 8 10 9
Overall Impression 
(0-10)
9 8 9 7 10 8.6
TOTAL 86.2

 
 

Evaluation by Group 16
  (1) Topic Selection: 20 Points (0-20)
                        It was an extremely interesting topic, and related well to organic chemistry

        (2) Newspaper and Article Selection: 10 Points (0-10)
                        Scientific American is an awesome source, and the article was of perfect length and did not bore the reader.

        (3) Quality of the Editorial Comments: 8 Points (0-10)
                        It seemed to be just a summary.  A little more expansion might have helped (CFC details besides functions)  Tricia Eden says: "Big No-No, Russia is not a less developed country."

        (4) Organic Chemistry Content: 6 Points (0-10)
                        We need to learn more about the chemical properties of the CFCs.

        (5) Selection and Quality of the Links: 16 Points (0-20)
                        The political links were excellent, but there lacked a good link about  the chemical structure of CFCs.  The web has to be flooded with exciting chemical information about CFCs.

        (6) Format, Number and Types of Questions: 9 Points (0-10)
                        There was no graph interpretation question.

        (7) Quality of the Questions: 10 Points (0-10)
                        They were all very in-depth, directly addressing the content of the article.

        (8) Overall Impression. 9 Points (0-10)
                        A few minor adjustments could have this one set and ready to be published.

                        There was a lack of chemical background, but societal and political aspects were excellent.  Also, there doesn't seem to be a possible test question from the presented information.
 
 
 

Evaluation by Group 17

        (1) Topic Selection: 19 Points (0-20)
                        Relevent and to the point.  Good use of organic chemistry.

        (2) Newspaper and Article Selection: 8 Points (0-10)
                        Lacks great excitability.

        (3) Quality of the Editorial Comments: 9 Points (0-10)
                        Article was a good representation of the larger article.

        (4) Organic Chemistry Content: 7 Points (0-10)
                        Could have been more background and structure of CFCs.

        (5) Selection and Quality of the Links: 18 Points (0-20)
                        The links seem to tie in well with the topics of organic chemistry.

        (6) Format, Number and Types of Questions: 7 Points (0-10)
                        The group included more than the appropriate amount of questions.

        (7) Quality of the Questions: 7 Points (0-10)
                        Good questions, however there is little variability from question to question.

        (8) Overall Impression. 8 Points (0-10)
                        Maybe publication with a few adjustments.
 
 

Evaluation by Group 18

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

        (2) Newspaper and Article Selection: 10 Points (0-10)
 

        (3) Quality of the Editorial Comments: 9 Points (0-10)
 

        (4) Organic Chemistry Content: 8 Points (0-10)
                        There could've been more links/references with the actual mechanisms that O3 is changed to O2 with the CFC and how that mechanism is stopped by attaching a hydrogen to the CFC.

        (5) Selection and Quality of the Links: 18 Points (0-20)
                        It was hard to find the exact answer with so many options to choose from. Would it have been possible to make links to pages within the larger menus you referenced?

        (6) Format, Number and Types of Questions: 10 Points (0-10)
 

        (7) Quality of the Questions: 10 Points (0-10)
                        Good questions, to the point.  Very logically related to theme.

        (8) Overall Impression. 9 Points (0-10)
                        Very relevent.  Strong organization and use of links. Sources explained things well in conversational/easily-understood language.

                        We gave this project high marks across many categories because we felt it was well-organized, highly relevant, and usable.
 

Evaluation by Group 19

        (1) Topic Selection: 18 Points (0-20)
                        We thought the topic was very relevent to a large segment of people.  Environmental issues have the ability to transcend people of all ages,races, and religous affiliation.  CFCs are very relevant in chemistry and organic in particular.  Substitutions are a good example of how CFCs can relate to organic chem.

        (2) Newspaper and Article Selection: 9 Points (0-10)
                        We thought the article was very reputable.  (The Scientific American-need we say more?)  The author seemed to know what he was talking about, although it seemed more to do with regulation and the laws than any actual science aspect behind CFCs.  The article was not long at all and it did have the ability to hold your attention.  It was published recently as well.

        (3) Quality of the Editorial Comments: 8 Points (0-10)
                        The comments were concise and thought out.  No grammatical errors, helped frame the article in the proper context.  The societal and lawful aspects of the issue were clearly brought out.

        (4) Organic Chemistry Content: 6 Points (0-10)
                        It didnt seem to have enough info on the chemistry behind the issue.  One of the links did have some structural information on it, but we thought more info could be provided in the editorial comments.  Just needed more organic chem information available.

        (5) Selection and Quality of the Links: 15 Points (0-20)
                        All the links worked properly as well as provide useful information.  We thought however, that the links under the various countries could have been better explained.  When you have the link under the countries, the reader doesn't really know what to expect from it.  Just needed to be better explained.  The Operation Cool Breeze link was we think, mistitled b/c the project was only listed on the very bottom of the page, not much was mentioned on it.  The Montreal Protocol and convictions links were very interesting though as well as relevent.

        (6) Format, Number and Types of Questions: 10 Points (0-10)
                        There are 5 questions and everything is relevent.  The last one is a PSP ?.

        (7) Quality of the Questions: 8 Points (0-10)
                        Some of the questions were somewhat difficult to answer, and we thought they could have been a little more chem related, one more would have been sufficient.

        (8) Overall Impression. 7 Points (0-10)
                        With some work on the editorial comments and a little on the questions, it could be used in any classroom in chemistry.  It would be very relevent to discuss structures and substitutions as well as general reactions.
 
 

Evaluation by Group 20
 (1) Topic Selection: 18 Points (0-20)
                        Topic was interesting and something many people worry about.

        (2) Newspaper and Article Selection: 9 Points (0-10)
                        The article was good.  We had never realized that there was smuggling going on with CFC's

        (3) Quality of the Editorial Comments: 9 Points (0-10)
                        The editorial comments broadened the context of the article.

        (4) Organic Chemistry Content: 7 Points (0-10)
                        The relation to organic chemistry wasn't really brought up.  We had to find it ourselves.

        (5) Selection and Quality of the Links: 12 Points (0-20)
                        The links were either boring or didn't fit the word it was found under.

        (6) Format, Number and Types of Questions: 10 Points (0-10)
                        The questions focused on relevant topics and were actually very interesting.

        (7) Quality of the Questions: 10 Points (0-10)
                        Again the questions were great!  They focused on alot of details without being farfetched.

        (8) Overall Impression. 10 Points (0-10)
                        It was a very useful assignment that could use some major adjustments in the relevant links section.