Peer Assessment of Group 31
C A T E G O R Y G26 G27 G28 G29 - Average
Topic Selection
(0-20)
20 20 20 20 - 20
Newspaper and Article Selection
(0-10)
8 10 10 8 - 9
Quality of Editorial Comments
(0-10)
10 10 9 9 - 9.5
Organic Chemistry Content
(0-10)
9 9 10 8 - 9
Selection and Quality of the Links 
(0-20)
18 18 16 10 - 15.5
Format, Number and Types of Questions
(0-10)
9 10 9 7 - 8.75
Quality of the Questions
(0-10)
8 10 9 8 - 8.75
Overall Impression 
(0-10)
8 10 9 8 - 8.75
TOTAL 90 97 92 88 - 92

 
 

Evaluation by Group 26


---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2000 21:58:18 -0500 (CDT)
From: Kenneth Boc 
To: JamesB@npwt.net
Subject: Peer evaluation of Group 31 by Group 26


Group 26, the Chemical Brothers

Group 31, The Wacker Processors

1)  Topic selection: 20/20 pts.
  This is a very interesting topic.  Anyone with a cool name like Jackie
Love deserves no points to be taken off in this topic selection section.
We enjoyed the link between marijuana and chocolate.   

2)  Newspaper article selection: 8/10 pts.
  Article could have been more recent, but the location of the article is
from a scientific magazine (very good).  No author is given which
questions the validity, but we're going to say it's valid.

3)  Quality of the Editorial Comments: 10/10 pts. 
  Editorial comments were well written and helped make the article a
little easier to comprehend.  Good oranization of comments.

4)  Organic chemistry content: 9/10 pts. 
  The key issue was VERY clear.  More than enough background information
was provided.  The compounds could have been explained in a little more
detail.  

5)  Selection and quality of the links: 18/20 pts. 
  One of the links didn't even work.  One of the links talked about its
possible effect on the heart, which we didn't find pertinent.  Some links
were helpful though.   We especially enjoyed the link about THC, that was
pretty funny ladies and guy!! 

6) Format, number and types of questions: 9/10 pts.
  Questions 4 and 5 are good PSP's.  We don't like question 1 because,
it's kind of redundant.  The chemfinder link was good though.  We wish
you provided more questions that pertained to organic chemistry. 

7)  Quality of questions: 8/10 pts.
  Questions were too simple, but interesting.  Again, more organic
questions should have been used.  
  
8)  Overall impression: 8/10 pts.  
  Overall, the topic was interesting.  We found it a little too
simplistic.  We would not publish the artice, but it was a worthy effort.


Total score: 90/100 pts.

Good job

Light it up ladies and guy!!!!

 
 

Evaluation by Group 27

On Wed, 12 Apr 2000 c721990@showme.missouri.edu wrote:

> (A) Group 27- Kreuter's Circle
> (B) Group 31- the Wacker Processors
> (C)
> 1. Topic Selection: 20 pts (0-20)
> The topic selected was very creative and original- it would appeal to a
> broad audience.  
> 
> 2. Newspaper and Article Selection:  10 pts (0-10)
> The article was published in a high quality source,. The article was
> published in October of '96 so it was slightly old but not outdated.
The
> article itself was very interesting.
> 
> 3. Quality of the Editorial Comments:  10 pts (0-10)
> The editorial comments did a great job of summarizing the article.  This
> section was well organized and a good length.  There were no grammatical
> errors.
> 
> 4.  Organic Chemistry Content: 9 pts (0-10)
> The group did a good job of providing sufficient background, the only
> suggestion is to possibly include links for o-linoeleylethananolamine or
> n-oleoylethanolamine.  
> 
> 5. Selection and Quality of Links:  18 pts (0-20)
> The links were very relevant and high quality.  The link for anorexia
and
> bulimia could have been one which gave more general information about
that
> subject.   It was somewhat confusing to have three links for chocolate
but
> the links themselves were helpful.
> 
> 6. Format, Number, and Types of Questions: 10 pts (0-10)
> There was the correct number of questions and they varied in type.
There
> were two opinion questioned but the issues they addressed varied.
> 
> 7. Quality of the Questions:  10 pts (0-10)
> The questions are very good and address a variety of important and
> relevant issues.
> 
> 8. Overall Impression: 10 pts (0-10)
> This project was very well done, and I would consider it fit for
Prentice
> Hall.
> 
> Total points: 97

 
 

Evaluation by Group 28

A) The Prouty Group, #28
B) The Wacker Processors, #31
C)

1.  Topic Selection 20/20.  The article is of interest to a broad range of
people.  It also creates an interesting link to the sometimes ( but only
rarely) dull topic of organic chemistry.

2.  Newspaper and article selection 10/10.  The newspaper is definitely  
reputable and the author seems knowledgeable.  The article is a little on
the long and drawn-out side.  People don't care about chocolate that much.
But we still gave you a 10 because some people are being really mean on 
grading these projects.

3.  Quality of the Editorial comments 9/10.  The editorial points flowed
well but were a little repetitive.  Your group's use of humor makes the 
topic interesting.

4.  Organic chemistry content 10/10.  Very good, detailed use of organic
chemistry.  Very clear transitions from the chemistry to its relevance to
your topic.

5.  Selection and quality of the links  16/20.  Two of the links did not
work, which is kind of a problem.  There were so many "chocolate" links.
There are clearly more topics in the article to choose from to create
links.  Variety is key.

6.  Format/Number/Types of questions  9/10.  There were the right amount
of questions, but as far as type, there was not that much variation.  The
PSP question was good because, honestly, it relates to a college kid's   
society very well.

7.  Quality of the questions 9/10.  The questions had a lot of relevance
to organic chemistry and were very clear.  The questions were a bit
repetative.

8.  Overall impression 9/10.  A very well thought-out project.  A useful
assignment with minor adjustments.

Total Points = 92

 
 

Evaluation by Group 29

1. Topic selection  20 points
This topic would be of interest to a large audience.  The relation to
organic chemistry was also adequate.

2.  Newspaper and article selection  8 points
The article was from 1996.  Science News is a credible source.  The
article itself was interesting but a bit lengthy.

3.  Quality of the Editorial comments  9 points
Some things in the comments were repeats of points already stated in the
article.  The comments did provide a more condensed and better explained
version.  No major grammar errors except in the first paragraph "anorexia
and bulemia" was repeated twice.

4.  Organic chemistry content  8 points
The compounds n-oleoylethanolamine and n-linoeloylethanolamine weren't
ever described or characterized even though they seemed to be important to
the article.  Since the structure of THC was given and anandamine was
compared to it several times, the structure of anandamine should have been
given as well.  Reference section was ok.

5.  Selection and quality of the links  10 points
Two links didn't work, the "anorexia and bulemia" link seemed irrelevant
since it was only an advertisement for a drug.  Three separate links were
named "chocolate" so it made us wonder if they were all about the same
thing.

6.  Format/Number/Types of questions  7 points
Three out of five questions were opinion questions.  The last question
wasn't much of a PSP question with importance to society.

7.  Quality of the questions  8 points
The questions weren't too bad, there were just too many of the same kind.
We didn't know where the answer to question 2 was in any of the
articles/links.

8.  Overall impression  8 points
The article could be used as an assignment with minor adjustments.