Peer Assessment of Group 3
C A T E G O R Y G30 G31 G32 G33 --- Average
Topic Selection
(0-20)
20 20 20 20 - 20
Newspaper and Article Selection
(0-10)
10 9 10 9 - 9.5
Quality of Editorial Comments
(0-10)
10 8 10 9 - 9.25
Organic Chemistry Content
(0-10)
10 8 10 8 - 9
Selection and Quality of the Links 
(0-20)
20 17 20 17 - 18.5
Format, Number and Types of Questions
(0-10)
10 10 10 9 - 9.75
Quality of the Questions
(0-10)
9 9 9 8 - 8.75
Overall Impression 
(0-10)
10 8 10 9 - 9.25
TOTAL 99 89 99 89 - 94

 
 

Evaluation by Group 30

(A) Auf Wiedersehen, Group 30

(B) Rau Group, Group 3

(C)
(1) Topic Selection: 20/20
This is a good choice as many students are concerned with silly beauty
stuffs like this.  It
really makes an impact.

(2) Newspaper and Article Selection: 10/10
Well, it's Canadian, but I guess we can forgive that.  Ha.  It's from a
good newspaper and
recent enough.

(3) Quality of the Editorial Comments: 10/10
The editorial really expands on the article and is written well.  Wow.

(4) Organic Chemistry Content: 10/10
The biological reactions are explained, and chemical info given.

(5) Selection and Quality of the Links: 20/20
They have tons of good links, to interesting sites.

(6) Format, Number and Types of Questions: 10/10
The questions were formatted perfectly.

(7) Quality of the Questions: 9/10
The first four questions weren't very diverse in nature, but they were
good anyway.

(8) Overall Impression. 10/10
It looked good.  What else can we say.  This is a darned good article and
we would publish it.

Total: 99/100

 
 

Evaluation by Group 31

 Group 3

  Topic Selection:  20--good topic, relevant to college students
  Newspaper and Article selection:  9--good article with reputable
sources, but the newspaper itself is a bit obscure
  Quality of editorial comments:  8--the comments are a bit lengthy and
get off the point somewhat.  The actual discussion of the article is quite
good, though.
  Organic Chemistry content:  8--the article is great for organic content,
but the comments don't contribute much to our understanding, instead they
just reiterate the same points.
  Selection and quality of links:  17--some of the links were really good,
but then a few were too general (86 links to skin cancer?).  The make-up
company links were pretty worthless.  You went a little overboard with the
links.
  Format, #, type of question:  10--fits the requirements
  Quality of questions:  9--the questions require little thought
  Overall impression:  8--you obviously worked really hard on the project,
but maybe a little too much.  Trim down the comments and the number of
links and the project will be great.
Total  89 

 
 

Evaluation by Group 32

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2000 22:49:08 -0500 (CDT)
From: Michael Staed 
To: Dr. Rainer Glaser 
Subject: Group 32 (The Chemistry Dorks) Peer Reviews


Group 32 (The Chemistry Dorks) Peer Review of Group 3 (Rau Group) 


Topic			20  (Good choice, important topic)

Article			10  (Strong article, well suited for the
				assignment)

Comments		10  (Extensive and thoughtful)

O. Chem			10  (Great connections made)

Links			20  (Plentiful and working)

Question Format		10  (Neat, the links are a good way to do this)

Question Quality	9   (Good questtions, well thought out)

Overall			10  (Almost perfect, textbook job)
___________________________________________________________

Total			99

 
 

Evaluation by Group 33

(A) Group Number and Group Name of Evaluating Unit
Group 33: The Functional Group

(B) Group Number and Group Name of Evaluated Unit
Group 3: Rau Group

(C) Responses to Various Evaluation Categories

(1) Topic Selection: 20 Points (0-20)
The topic is relevant to our age group.  

(2) Newspaper and Article Selection: 9 Points (0-10)
The article was well written, easy to follow, and very informative.  It
was a little lengthy and took a while to get to the point.  WeĠre not too
sure about the source either.

(3) Quality of the Editorial Comments: 9 Points (0-10)
It was too long.  We didnĠt get the organic relevance until late in the
comments.

(4) Organic Chemistry Content: 8 Points (0-10)
There should have been more focus on the organic molecules within the
self-tanners.

(5) Selection and Quality of the Links: 17 Points (0-20)
Some of the links were very repetitive, and there could have been more of
a connection to chemistry within the links.  One of the links was also not
working.

(6) Format, Number and Types of Questions: 9 Points (0-10)
The required number of questions was fulfilled, but the PSP question could
have been more open-ended.  

(7) Quality of the Questions: 8 Points (0-10)
Question 2 threw us.  We could not find the word mentioned in the link,
and there was no way to find the answer.  Possible misspelling?

(8) Overall Impression: 9 Points (0-10)
The group put a lot of work into this project, but there should be some
minor adjustments.  Overall, it was well done.

Total Score: 89/100