Peer Assessment of Group 5
C A T E G O R Y G32 G33 G34 G35 G36 G37 Average
Topic Selection
16 18 18 16 18 20 17.7
Newspaper and Article Selection
6 5 10 4 8 9 7
Quality of Editorial Comments
7 6 9 9 9 10 8.3
Organic Chemistry Content
7 8 9 9 9 9 8.5
Selection and Quality of the Links 
17 18 18 15 19 19 17.7
Format, Number and Types of Questions
8 8 8 10 10 10 9
Quality of the Questions
8 7 9 10 10 10 9
Overall Impression 
7 7 9 7 9 9 8
TOTAL 85.2


Evaluation by Group 32

(1) Topic Selection: 16 Points (0-20)
                        Topic is OK.  It is a bit of a strech in relation to the article and editorial, which are a bit vague.

        (2) Newspaper and Article Selection: 6 Points (0-10)
                        The article stops in mid-thought.  It is pretty vague and a bit of a strech.

        (3) Quality of the Editorial Comments: 7 Points (0-10)
                        A bit short, vague and there are a few grammatical errors.

        (4) Organic Chemistry Content: 7 Points (0-10)
                        Bulima and tryptophan are related, but with the choice of article it makes it less credible.

        (5) Selection and Quality of the Links: 17 Points (0-20)
                        Links are great.  They make up for what the article lacks.

        (6) Format, Number and Types of Questions: 8 Points (0-10)
                        The questions could contain a bit more content and require more critical thinking.  Also there are 2 opinion questions.

        (7) Quality of the Questions: 8 Points (0-10)
                        Questions may be a bit too that possible?!?!

        (8) Overall Impression. 7 Points (0-10)
                        Needs some improvenments in the article choice and editorial before it would be useful in a classroom setting.

Evaluation by Group 33

1. Topic Selection: 18 points
2. Newspaper and article selection: 5 points ( the article seems to be
incomplete or just very short and rather uninformative)
3. Quality of editorial comments: 6 points
4. Organic Chemistry Content: 8 points
5. Selection and quality of the links: 18 points
6. Format, Number and Types of Questions: 8 points
7. Quality of questions: 7 points
8. Overall Impression: 7 points

Evaluation by Group 34

  (1) Topic Selection: 18 Points (0-20)
                        Didnt seem to be very informative, maybe a little short.

        (2) Newspaper and Article Selection: 10 Points (0-10)
                        Interesting. Dealt well with organic issues.

        (3) Quality of the Editorial Comments: 9 Points (0-10)
                        short.  Not much information to support article topic.

        (4) Organic Chemistry Content: 9 Points (0-10)
                        not very in depth with specific compounds

        (5) Selection and Quality of the Links: 18 Points (0-20)
                        the links dealt well with the topic but not much extra info to support from links

        (6) Format, Number and Types of Questions: 8 Points (0-10)
                        only 3 non-personal questions could have had more variety more challenging question other than regergetating, no pun intended, material directly from editorial and links.

        (7) Quality of the Questions: 9 Points (0-10)
                        as before, need more variety

        (8) Overall Impression. 9 Points (0-10)

Evaluation by Group 35

  (1) Topic Selection: 16 Points (0-20)
                        The topic appeals mostly to women or to people that are interested in or know something about the nature of eating disorders.  Tryptophan is an amino acid, so yes, it is related to organic chemistry in particular.

        (2) Newspaper and Article Selection: 4 Points (0-10)
                        We found the article itself not very informative and possibly too brief to give much of an understanding of how tryptophan affects the body's chemistry.  The article was not very exciting.  It is hard to say whether or not the author was qualified because it appeared in the St. Louis Post Dispatch as opposed to a Science or Medical Journal.  It was a plus, though, that the information was very current (written within the last 2 months).

        (3) Quality of the Editorial Comments: 9 Points (0-10)
                        The editorial comments present the information more clearly than the actual article!  The comments are well written and grammar and sentence structure seems fine to us, and having it broken up into paragraphs helps a lot with the reading. Good job!

        (4) Organic Chemistry Content: 9 Points (0-10)
                        It was made clear that tryptophan is an organic and biological compound, thus it is pertinent to organic chemistry.  It was nice to see the link to the structure of tryptophan.

        (5) Selection and Quality of the Links: 15 Points (0-20)
                        One of the links to "biologically rooted" was not found and the one under the "American Medical Association's Archives of General Psychiatry" was not directly accesible by the link.  It took a few minutes on this one to figure out where the web page was that you meant for us to view.  All of the other links were very informative with clear explanations.  The link on how seratonin works in the body was especially helpful.  We thought that you did a good job placing the links in your comments, they flowed right in with the rest of your sentences.

        (6) Format, Number and Types of Questions: 10 Points (0-10)
                        The questions seemed like they fit in exactly with the requirements.  The last question was a PSP question as requested.

        (7) Quality of the Questions: 10 Points (0-10)
                        The questions are very reasonable.  The first three are found easily in the reading and they relate well to the central issues of the topic.  The last two questions are PSP questions and seem like they would generate a very interesting discussion where there are two sides to the issue.

        (8) Overall Impression. 7 Points (0-10)
                        This problem set just needs a few minor adjustments with the links, but if the group could find another news article with the same topic that addresses the issue more completely, it would make a big difference with the overall impression of the project.

                        Good job!  We feel that the group did an outstanding job with the editorial comments and its questions, but the article was lacking some in substance and interest.  The group did well by covering up for this and explaining the issue better through the comments and links.

Evaluation by Group 36

  (1) Topic Selection: 18 Points (0-20)
                        This is a very interesting topic since it affects a wide range of people esecially on a college campus. Since the people vary so much, it would seem possible that there was a scientific link to bulimia and the people that it affects.

        (2) Newspaper and Article Selection: 8 Points (0-10)
                        It was an Associated Press article so we couldn't tell what newspaper it was from originally. There is no author listed either. We are assuming that it is from a high quality paper and that the author was qualified to write about the subject.

        (3) Quality of the Editorial Comments: 9 Points (0-10)
                        Since the article was so brief, the comments help to give you a clearer understanding of what it means to be bulimic and how it relates to chemistry.

        (4) Organic Chemistry Content: 9 Points (0-10)
                        The key issue was made very clear. It showed a link between an amino acid and bulimia, which in turns shows a link of bulimia to chemistry. They provided as much evidence as they could, considering this is a relatively new subject.

        (5) Selection and Quality of the Links: 19 Points (0-20)
                        We didn't know that bulimia was contributed to a chemical inbalance, the links they povided allowed us to go more in depth into the causes of bulimia. We learned that an amino acid deficiency causes moods and appetites to be altered.

        (6) Format, Number and Types of Questions: 10 Points (0-10)
                        They met all of the question requirements, and included 2 PSP questions.

        (7) Quality of the Questions: 10 Points (0-10)
                        The questions are well thought out. We liked the last 2 questions which required group discussion. This allowed us to express how much that we had each learned from their project.

        (8) Overall Impression. 9 Points (0-10)
                        We think that this is a very good topic, and as more research becomes available; this could make a high impact to the working understanding of Organic Chemistry and it's relevance to your body. This is a problem that affects a large group of college students so there would be an interest in it at this level(age wise).

Evaluation by Group 37

 (1) Topic Selection: 20 Points (0-20)
                        This article is of interest to a broad audience.  Many people may have an eating disorder and not tell anyone.  And maybe now they know another way of dealing with it.

        (2) Newspaper and Article Selection: 9 Points (0-10)
                        The article came from a high quality newspaper.  The article was not very long or very in depth

        (3) Quality of the Editorial Comments: 10 Points (0-10)
                        The editorial comment page was a bit short, but considering that the article was not that long it was well written.  It brought out the points of the article and explained a bit more in depth.

        (4) Organic Chemistry Content: 9 Points (0-10)
                        The organic chemistry was brought to light, but it could have been explained better.  The link with tryptophan was just the structure.  It didn't explain much about the amino acid.  Could have used another reference to explain it better.

        (5) Selection and Quality of the Links: 19 Points (0-20)
                        One of the links did not work.  Another lead me to a page of more information, but it did not deal with the topic.

        (6) Format, Number and Types of Questions: 10 Points (0-10)
                        There were five questions and a PSP question.  They dealt with the topic, but not to broad of a spectrum.

        (7) Quality of the Questions: 10 Points (0-10)
                        Questions were written in an understandable and clear fashion.  Some could have been in more depth.

        (8) Overall Impression. 9 Points (0-10)
                        Overall project was good.  It could use some changes for publication.  Dealt with chemistry, and looks like time was spent on it.  Great Job!  Hope the other evalutions turn out good also.