Peer Assessment of Group 21
C A T E G O R Y G16 G17 G18 G19 G20 Average
Topic Selection
16 20 19 19 19 18.6
Newspaper and Article Selection
9 9 8 8 9 8.6
Quality of Editorial Comments
10 9 10 9 10 9.6
Organic Chemistry Content
7 10 9 8 9 8.6
Selection and Quality of the Links 
20 20 19 18 17 18.8
Format, Number and Types of Questions
10 10 9 10 10 9.6
Quality of the Questions
10 10 9 10 10 9.6
Overall Impression 
9 9 10 8 8 8.8
TOTAL 90 96 93 90 92 92.2


Evaluation by Group 16

Subject: group 21 by group 16
Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2000 20:54:56 PDT

1) 16/20	too scientific
2)  9/10	too ling, boring/not exciting, was quality source
3) 10/10	good picture, good links, we liked the contrasting links
4)  7/10	summary like, chemicals are listed, does't talk about 		           
everyday application, organic aspect is lost
5) 10/10	good wording, variety of questions
7) 10/10
8)  9/10
total: 90/100


Evaluation by Group 17

(A) Group Number and Group Name of Evaluating Unit
    Group 17 - AAA

(B) Group Number and Group Name of Evaluated Unit
    Group 21 - The Chemettes

(C) Responses to Various Evaluation Categories
    (1) Topic Selection: 20 Points (0-20)
        This article is of great interest to the audience because these are   
        issues that are being debated to help protect our safety.  It
        strongly related to organic chemistry.

    (2) Newspaper and Article Selection: 9 Points (0-10)
        This article was published in a quality newspaper (Seattle Times),
        the author seemed to know what she was talking about (but not 
        completely), the article is new, it is not too long, and it is 
        somewhat exciting.

    (3) Quality of the Editorial Comments: 9 Points (0-10)
        The comments placed the article in greater context, but seemed to
        question the author's credibility.  The comments were written in
        good English (grammar and style).

    (4) Organic Chemistry Content: 10 Points (0-10)
        The article is very pertinent to organic chemistry; it deals with
        persistent organic pollutants.  Key issues were made and sufficient
        background information was provided.

    (5) Selection and Quality of the Links: 20 Points (0-20)
        The links are relevant, helpful, and plentiful.  This group
        obviously spent a great deal of time gathering quality links.

    (6) Format, Number, and Types of Questions: 10 Points (0-10)
        There are five questions, and the format was followed.  The last
        question was a PSP.

    (7) Quality of the Questions: 9 Points (0-10)
        The questions are easily understood and written in a clear fashion.
        It is possible to work them out in a reasonable time, perhaps too
        reasonable.  Some of the questions were obvious and really didn't
        make you think.

    (8) Overall Impression: 9 Points (0-10)
        This would be a useful assingment after minor adjustments, but it
        could have been slightly better.  Overall, it was a well-written
        project with all requirements followed in close detail.

    (9) Total Score: 96 Points (0-100)


Evaluation by Group 18

(A) Group 18:  Polyesters
(B) Group 21 - Chemettes
(C) Evaluations

1. Topic selection - 19
Good, interesting topic selection.  This is an important topic that
everyone needs to be concerned about.

2. Newspaper and article selection -8
The article was an editorial, and stated opinion rather than fact; the
opinion differed from that in the editorial comments.  Although this was
probably intentional, it took away from the project's overall
effectiveness.  Also, the article was too long and poorly written.  The
author clearly does not have the qualifications to write on science.

3. Quality of editorial comments - 10
The comments are very well written.  It addresses questions raised by
the article and explains them thoroughly.

4. Organic chemistry content- 9
There needs to be more discussion of organic chemistry.

5. Selection and quality of links- 19
Good number of links, more variety would have been good (a lot of links
are to the same sort of site).  Most links were good an informative, but
a few didn't work.

6. Format, number and types of questions-9
Most of the questions were along the same lines: opinion or

7. Quality of questions-9
The questions were good and covered the material well.  They could have
been more chemistry-specific.  Question 2 may have been a better choice
for the last, philosophical question.  

8. Overall impression -10
Overall, a very good project but needs more emphasis on organic
chemistry in the editorial comments. It raises some good issues.



Evaluation by Group 19

a) The Harris Group - Group 19
b) The Chemettes - Group 21
c) Evaluation

1) Topic Selection 19 points
It is a good topic because our environment is something we should all be
concerned about, and the actions our government is taking to improve it
through reducing harmful organic chemicals are very informative.
2) Newspaper and Article Selection 8 points
Yes, this was a current article from the Seattle Times, a reputable
newspaper, but the author was very critical of the plan and only showed
the negative parts, and didn't give an impartial, unbiased view of those.
It's not very exicitng, in fact, any attempts at creativity are confusing
and long-winded.  Plus, it's only about Washington State, not really
widely applicable.
3)  Quality of the Editorial comments  9 points
They definitely clarified key concepts and corrected some fallacies in the
article.  Good grammar, well-organized.
4)  Organic Chemistry Content 8 points
Their critique did not really address any organic structures or reactions.
It just attacked the article.
5) Selection and Quality of the Links 18 points
Very good.  Satisfy all qualificaitons.  Embedded clarly and well.  All
very informational.
6)  Format, Number, and Types of Questions  10 points
Five well-phrased and varied questions.
7)  Quality of the Questions 10 points
Same as above.
8)  Overall Impression 8 points
It is a good article and critique in some ways, but it didn't really deal
with much organic chemistry, like that which we've been studying.  

Total: 90 points

Jade Ashley Curry


Evaluation by Group 20

A) Evaluating group: Group 20; "Wolfepack"

B) Evaluated group: Group 21; "The Chemettes"

C)Responses to Various Evaluation Categories

1.  Topic Selection: 19 Points (0-20)

The topic would be of interest to most of the audience, especially those
who are environmentally conscious. Most of us know about pollution, but
not specific means of pollution.  It is interesting to learn how something
learned in class has real-life relevance. The topic holds a high relation
to organic chemistry, most of all benzene chemistry.

2.  Newspaper and Article Selection: 9 Points (0-10)

The newspaper article was published in the Seattle Times, which is a major
city newspaper and should be of high quality.  The author seemed to be
relatively qualified to write on science.  She was very knowledgeable on
the subject and had definite opinions, but she let often let her opinions
cloud the facts.  The article was published within one year (Dec. 1998),
and was not too long as to be uninteresting.  The article was entertaining
because of the author's tone and the usefulness of the subject.

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

The editorial comments were very insightful and helped to clarify the
article and put it in a much greater context.  The key ideas were more
defined, and the group both supported some of the author's ideas and
refuted others.  The English and grammar was used very well in the
editorial; there were no obvious mistakes.  Paragraphs were of an
appropriate length and were not too long as to be overbearing.  Overall
the editorial was highly effective.

4.  Organic Chemistry Content: 9 Points (0-10)

The organic chemistry content of both the article and the editorial relied
heavily on benzene chemistry and are centered on chapter 16 and 17.  There
was some background information offered, but most of it was about which
compounds are considered hazardous.   There should have been a little more
information on why they are hazardous (benzene rings and disruption of
nucleotide sequences in DNA and RNA). The pertinent reference section
seems to be complete; the most important common functionality of most of
these compounds is an aromatic ring.

5.  Selection and Quality of the Links: 17 Points (0-20)

The links mostly satisfy the requirements for relevance, quality, and
stability.  A couple of the links were of less quality than the others,
however.  They were links that were indirectly about the subject rather
than offering specific, useful information.  The effective links were
rather helpful in different ways.  Some helped in visualizing the compound
and some offered extensive information on the subject of the link.  The
links are found in a couple of clusters within the editorial; they would
have probably worked better if they had been more spread out.  With most
of the links it was obvious why they were chosen, but for a couple it was
a little cloudy.

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

The problem contains the five required questions and they are all of
different types.  They have a good variation of the type of questions
asked, and the questions themselves are highly reasonable.  They are not
long questions, but are intended to find out how much a person has learned
from both the article and the editorial comments.  The 3rd question in the
set is a definite PSP question, but the last one requires a little less
personal thought.  It is still a PSP question, but its answer is more
defined rather than opinion.

7.  Quality of the Questions: 10 Points (0-10)

The questions were all good questions and were by no means too expectant
of the reader.  They addressed the central points of both the article and
the editorial.  The questions were very clear and easy to understand,
which made it easier for the reader to finish the problems in a reasonable
amount of time.  Overall the questions were very effective.

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

The problem set would be a useful addition to the Chemistry 212 website or
a publication in Prentice Hall with a few minor adjustments.  Most of all,
the links need the most work; they need to be more relevant and
distributed more evenly throughout the editorial.  The project has great
strong points that make it highly effective and useful.  These are namely
the questions and the editorial comments.  With just a little touching up
this will be a publishable project.