Peer Assessment of Group 8
C A T E G O R Y G4 G5 G6 Average
Topic Selection
(0-20)
20 20 20 20
Newspaper and Article Selection
(0-10)
10 10 10 10
Quality of Editorial Comments
(0-10)
8 9 10 9
Organic Chemistry Content
(0-10)
7 10 8 8.3
Selection and Quality of the Links
(0-20)
14 17 17 16
Format, Number and Types of Questions
(0-10)
10 10 10 10
Quality of the Questions
(0-10)
8 9 10 9
Overall Impression 
(0-10)
8 10 10 9.3
TOTAL 85 95 95 91.7

 
 

Evaluation by Group 4

(A) Group 4: Die Absoluten Nullpuckte
(B) Group 8: The Dragons
(C) Responses to Evaluation Categories:
(1) Topic Selection:  18/20
The topic was eye-catching, definitely one most people would look at.  It 
is pertinent both because of the problem of drug abuse and the chemical 
workings of Viagra, a widely used drug.  We have dealt with carboxylic 
acids, however, Chapter 20 was not supposed to be used.
(2) Newspaper and Article Selection:  10/10
USAToday is a very reputable news source.  The author wrote a strong 
article with pertinent scientific references.
(3) Quality of the Editorial Coments:  7/10
The editorial did a good job recapping the problems presented in the 
article.  However, there was a lack of emphasis on explaining the organic 
chemistry angle and the first paragraph read like an advertisement for 
Viagra.
(4) Organic Chemistry Content:  7/10
The organic chemistry was not explained fully (only three lines devoted to 
explaining what Viagra is and why it is an organic molecule).
(5) Selection and Quality of the Links:  14/20
There was a lack of variety in the links, many of the links were directly 
to the Viagra homepage from which we had problems returning to editorial 
which was frustrating.  The relevance and the information provided by some 
of the links was below par, one was a form to fill out to have further 
information sent to you.
(6) Format, Number and Types of Questions:  10/10
There were five questions, they were of various types, and the last 
question was a PSP question.
(7) Quality of the Questions:  8/10
There was a marginal detail question in that the NO was not mentioned 
outside of the graphic, but probably should have been.  The other 
questions were relevant.
(8) Overall Impression:  8/10
This project would need some revision to be submitted to Prentice Hall.  
The editorial needed to be more direct, and its humor does not seem 
appropriate for a college scientific text.  The graphics did enhance the 
overall impression.

======
From: "Carson, Kathleen Marie (UMC-Student)" 
To: "Britt, David Cornelius (UMC-Student)" 
Cc: "Glaser, Rainer E." 
Subject: RE: Group Organic Project
Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 14:45:33 -0600 

Group 8,

As to the first question, we are willing to give you another 2 points if
Dr. Glaser said that this chapter is an acceptable reference.

In reference to the editorial comments, we do not feel that you totally
fulfilled the requirement to "crystallize the key issues in a clear and
authoritative manner."  Since the project was about organic chemistry,
we feel that this should have been a central topic in the editorial
comments, not a footnote.  However, we looked for a deeper explanation
of the chemistry and could not find one.  We will give you an 8/10 for
this catagory.

As to the links, we feel that viagra.com was not appropriate to use for
the majority of your links.  One of the criteria for the links was
credibility of the link.  Since Pfizer has profit interests in the sale
and use of the drug, they will be marketing it.  There are several
health-related sites that could have possibily provided more objective
information, for example: nih.gov, impotence.org.  There were also 2
links that completely lacked any useful information: one was a form to
fill out to have information sent to you and the other was a quiz which
was inapplicable to 50%(females) of the people who would view your
project.  We were also told that we were responsible for the stability
of the links.  Our group also had points taken off for link instability.
In all truthfulness however, this was more of a sidenote and no points
were taken off specifically for the fact that the site would not close.
Viagra sites may be at a premium, but there are many other sites that
could have been referred to, especially in reference to impotence.

One of the criteria for grading the questions was "Do the questions
address central issues or marginal details?"  Well, if NO has nothing to
do with the organic chemistry of how Viagra works, then it is a marginal
detail. Naming the other compound (PDE) does not fall within our realm
of study thus far.

An 8/10 on the overall impression does not mean that we did not like
your project.  It is still a strong grade.  This mostly reflects the
fact that we felt the links were inadequate and that the explanation of
the chemistry was not deep enough.  We do not want to you think that we
counted off just to count off, we did seriously consider each catagory
and your overall grade, and in the end, we feel that we gave an
objective review.  
 
We will inform Dr. Glaser of our changes.

Group 4


-----Original Message-----
From: Britt, David Cornelius (UMC-Student)
To: Carson, Kathleen Marie (UMC-Student)
Sent: 12/2/2001 11:36 PM
Subject: Group Organic Project

Dear Group #4, 

Congratulations on your good project and your top-media award.  We
enjoyed it and thought that it was one of the better projects.  The
reason why we were writing is because we were wondering if you could
take another look at our project and considere maybe changing your score
for us.  We looked at you comments, and we wrote this to address some of
them.

On topic selection, you gave us an 18/20, and mentioned that we were not
supposed to use chapter number 20.  We saw in the directions that we
should use the most relevant chapter, and wondered if we could use
chapter 20 even though we have yet to cover it.  So we e-mailed Dr.
Glaser and he told us that it would be fine for us to use chapter 20.

On editorial comments and Organic Chemistry content you gave us a 7/10,
mentioning that we did not stress the organic chemistry.  The reason for
this is because most of the organic chemistry was explained in the
questions.  We could have mentioned the organic chemistry twice, but we
thought that it would have been redundant.

On the selection of the links, you gave us a 14/20, because some of the
links made it difficult to return to the project page.  We could not
help that, and we are sorry, but it was out of our control.  The reason
why we used the Viagra site so much is because it is true because it has
to be, or else it is against the law.  The Viagra site is also one of
the only sites that is not just a commercial site trying to get you to
buy Viagra off of the internet.  The good Viagra sites are at a premium.

On quality of questions you gave us an 8/10 because we did not mention
enough about Nitrous Oxide.  The reason that we did not is because NO
itself has nothing to do with the organic chemistry of how Viagra works.
We just mentioned it to give a small amount of background information.

On overall impression, we cannot help if you do not think that our
project is that good, but after looking at what is written here, maybe
you will change your mind.  We felt that our pictures would help us more
in this category.  We know that things are getting busy with our quiz on
monday and finals coming up, but please just take another look.

Thank you for your time, 

Group #8, The Dragons 
 

 
 

Evaluation by Group 5

(A) Group 5: Carbon Conquerors

(B) Group 8: The Dragons

(C) 

(1) Topic Selection: 20 points (0-20)
Topic selection was very interesting to a wide range of ages and people
and a strong relationship to organic chemistry.

(2) Newspaper and Article Selection: 10 points (0-10)
USA Today obviously a good source and the author knew what he was
discussing.  The article was a bit lengthy but all information was
relevant to the topic.

(3) Quality of Editorial Comments: 9 points (0-10)
The Comments are good, maybe summary of the article wasn't necessary,
but the 3rd paragraph led into thought of greater context.

(4) Organic Chemistry Content: 10 points (0-10)
The Editorial Comments provided the organic chemistry content.  Enough
info was provided to make it clear.

(5) Selection and Quality of Links: 17 points (0-20)
Some of the links were not relevant to our better understanding of
chemistry, but others were very good.

(6) Format, Number, Types of Questions: 10 points (0-10)
Good job, there's 5!

(7) Quality of the Questions:  9 points (0-10)
Were very good, but could have given more complete answers.

(8) Overall Impression: 10 points (0-10)
The topic was very interesting and you guys were able to relate to
organic chemistry well.

Total points: 95 points

If you have any questions, let us know :)

 
 

Evaluation by Group 6

(A) Group 6: Ethanol Absorbers

(B) Group 8: The Dragons

(C) Responses to Various Evaluation Categories

(1)Topic Selection: 20/20
The topic was a new twist on an existing subject.  It was captivating,
and 'arousing'.  It is an issue which holds much pertinance to today's
society.
(2)Newspaper and Article Selection: 10/10
U.S.A. Today is a very reputable source.  The article was recent and
exciting.
(3)Quality of the Editorial Comments: 10/10
The comments were well organized and written in a fashion which makes
the key issues clear and understandable.
(4)Organic Chemistry Content: 8/10
Organic chemical issues were clear, but the discussion of them was a bit
brief.  The reference section was complete as well.
(5)Selection and Quality of the Links: 17/20
Links were a bit redundant, yet there were a good amount of them.  The
links helped clarify the article. 
(6)Format, Number and Types of Questions: 10/10
Questions followed the correct format, and were in good variety.
(7)Quality of the Questions: 10/10
Questions clearly addressed elements of organic chemistry and were
relevant to the article.   
(8)Overall Impression:  10/10
The project was very "sexy" and neat, and the graphics helped explain
the article.  Nice.
Total Points 95/100