![]() |
Learning & Writing, The "Chemistry Is in the News" Project |
Philosophical Background
Chemistry is the Central Science says
the American Chemical Society.
Chemistry is central indeed and in several ways. Chemistry is central
among the sciences and chemistry also is central to the most pertinent
issues of modern society.
When thinking about
Society and Chemistry,
you might reflect on
the agricultural growth due to fertilizers and herbicides, you might
remember your last bacterial infection and thankfully reflect on the
progress chemistry has brought to pharmaceuticals, you might be a space
travel enthusiast and contemplate that no shuttle would ever make it back
without the new materials developed for the heat shields. On the other
hand, you become aware and concerned about the damage caused by
chemistry in war and peace time. Chemical warfare has been used in the
last century causing unimaginable and extraordinary pain to millions of
people. Accidents in chemical plants pose a threat and have exposed many
people to potential long term harm. The ozone hole keeps reminding us
that atmospheric chemistry might have consequences that we might not even
realize.
Newspapers mirror society and newspaper articles allow
to construct the important relations between society and
chemistry. This is the basic premise of the
Chemistry
is in the News Project.
You begin recognizing these connection first by studying the existing
CIITN
items. Next, you create new
CIITN
items yourself. Moreover, your creations will be
evaluated not by your teacher but by other students instead. This peer
review adds a new layer of complexity as you need to consider the
perspectives of others on any given issue. Overall,
the CIITN activities serve as a preparation for
science
communication.
This collaborative group project includes the identification of an
important newspaper article, the writing of interpretative comments, the
location of pertinent references in a textbook, and the creation of
questions with suggested answers including an essay answer to a
question about a complex societal issue.
The project also includes the peer-evaluation of news items created by
three other groups. The first two writing assignments are preparations
for the main project.
Assignment
1: Abstract a Newspaper Article
Working as a group,
[1] Read an assigned science-related newspaper article and write an
abstract.
[2] Review I: Constructive review by Ms. Kathleen Carson.
[3] Revise your abstract.
[4] Review II: Evaluation & grading by Ms. Kathleen Carson.
Access to electronic journals will be the subject of one
collaborative learning session prior to this assignment.
In the "Notice to Authors" of the Journal of the American Chemical
Society one is advised that "an abstract should state briefly the
reason for the work, the significant results and the conclusions."
Hence, the abstract should contain answers to at least three questions:
"What question is being asked by the authors?",
"How do the authors answer the question?", and
"What do the authors think the results mean?"
Abstracts should be limited to about 250 words.
Start at URL http://www.chemistry.org, navigate to the Journal of
Organic Chemistry and view at least two JOC articles and their
abstracts. Such abstracts have a special significance in the way science
is communicated. Scientists do not have the time to read entire papers only
to find out that they have little or no relevance to their particular
interests. A well-written abstract will be the basis on which other
scientists will decide whether they should read the paper at all. Hence,
the ability to communicate the essential content with clarity and without
jargon is an important intellectual skill.
Abstracting also is a wonderful intellectual device to really understand
and this technique can be applied to any text. In this assignment you are
asked to write an abstract to a science-related newspaper article.
Several articles (about 6-8) will be posted on the course web site and you
will be assigned one of these. In analogy to the scientific abstract,
your abstract should contain answers to the following three questions:
"What issue is being addressed by the journalist?",
"What information and data are provided by the journalist to inform the
issue?", and
"What does the journalist report as conclusions to be drawn from the
information and data provided?"
Note that the abstract is written by the author of the article. In other
words, you should pretend that you are the author of the article and that
you need to write an abstract to accompany your article. Note also
that quotes are not usually a part of an abstracts. Quotes can be
evidence in the article but the abstract would merely refer to "testimony is
available to support ..."
Formating Rules:
[1] Give the headline of the article in the first line (or first two
lines if needed); give the headline in bold italics and
without quotation marks.
[2] Provide the complete reference in the next line; author name (e.g
Claudia Dreifus), paper (in italics, e.g. The New York Times), do
not miss "The"), publication date in the format Month Day, Year (year
in bold).
[3] Since we are working in groups, provide your names on the next line
"Abstracted by --your names here separated by commas with "and"
before the last name--. The "name" Group."
Example: Abstracted by Jason Gentry, Craig Watkins,
Anne-Marie Woelbel, and Kristin Rolwes. "The Prime Carbons" Group.
[4] Start your abstract on the next line.
[5] In the next line after the abstract, write "Word Count: N" where N is
the number of words in your abstract (no more than 250 words).
[6] In the next lines, suggest two alternative titles for the article and
start the titles with "Alternative Title 1:" and "Alternative Title 2:"
Give the alternative titles in bold italics and without quotation
marks.
[7] Leave an empty line.
[8] List title, authors, and complete reference for each of the two
JOC articles of which you read the abstracts. Use ACS format and
that means: Provide the title of the paper in italics and without
quotation marks. Provide the author names in the format family name
first, comma, initials, semicolon,
next name ... journal abbreviation in italics ... no comma ... year of
publication bold ... comma ... volume number in italics ... comma ... page
numbers and a period at the end. Example:
The Azine Bridge as a Conjugation Stopper: An NMR Spectroscopic Study
of Electron Delocalization in Acetophenone Azines.
Lewis, M.; Glaser, R. J. Org. Chem. 2002, 67,
1441-1447.
[9] The assignment needs to be typed double-spaced using Times 12-point
font, and 1-inch margins top, bottom, left and right. Submit hardcopy to
Dr. Glaser or Ms. Carson.
Sample: A student group in WS04 wrote a perfect abstract on the article
Brains and Brawn, One and
the Same, by Nicholas Wade, The New York Times,
Jan. 25, 2004.
Selection of Articles to Abstract
(1) Filmmakers
Examining the 'What Ifs' of Nuclear Power
(direct link),
Nancy Ramsey, The New York Times, September 8, 2004.
[0 groups]
(2) U.S. Hunts
for Evidence of Supercoca Plant
(direct
link), Dan Molinski,
The Washinton Times, September 3, 2004.
[1 groups]
(3)
Toxic waste ship
sinks off Turkey
(direct
link),
N.N.,
The Australian, September 8, 2004.
[3 groups]
(4)
DNA sequence
in hand, dog geneticists aim to build a better pooch
(direct
link),
N.N.,
The Boston Globe, September 7, 2004.
[8 groups]
(5)
Spurred by
Illness, Indonesians Lash Out at U.S. Mining Giant
(direct
link),
Jane Perlez and Evelyn Rusli,
The New York Times, September 8, 2004.
[1 groups]
(6)
More Cancer
Risk Seen in Full-Body CT Scans
(direct
link),
Thomas H. Maugh II and Daniel Costello,
The Los Angeles Times, August 31, 2004.
[6 groups]
Numbers given in corner brackets behind the articles shows how many groups
selected the article.
Categories for Review Assignment
2: Drawing Structures & Molecular Models
Categories for Teaching Assistant Review Assignment
3: CIITN Group Project Guidelines for
Newspaper Article Selection
Guidelines for Interpretative Comments and Links
Guidelines for Questions and Answers
Categories for Peer Review
Inter-Group Peer Review The more everybody browses all of the entries, the better the
quality of the grading. Evaluations of small subsets without having a
view of the overall quality inadvertantly distort the evaluation.
Intra-Group Peer Review
(1) Identification of Main Ideas
(0-20 points):
Did the abstract writer understand the article? Was the abstract writer
able to identify the essential responses to the three main questions
"What", "Why", and "So What"?
Is there any information that is not essential and should not be in the
abstract? Is there any information that is essential but is missing in
the abstract? Are the suggested alternative headlines "right on"?
(2) Communication of Main Ideas
(0-10 points):
Is the abstract clear, concise, and coherent? Is the organization
logical? Are there any redundencies? Does the abstract stir interest in
the article?
(3) Style & Grammar (0-10 points):
Is the abstract written in passive voice? Are there many typos? Are
there grammatical errors?
(4) Formalities (0-10 points): Is the
abstract within the word limit? Are all three required citations in the
correct format? Are the citations complete and correct?
Working as a group,
[1] Select a reaction with at least one substrate, one reagent
and one product.
[2] Draw a reaction diagram for this reaction using ChemDraw.
[3] Model the substrate(s) and the product(s) using Chem3D.
[4] Write a Word document that contains a brief verbal description of the
reaction, a ChemDraw diagram, and molecular models of substrate(s) and
the product(s).
[5] Review I: Constructive review by teaching assistants Ms. Cecelia
"Cece" Koetting and Ms. Kathleen Carson..
[6] Revise your assignment.
[7] Review II: Evaluation & grading by Ms. Cecelia "Cece" Koetting and
Ms. Kathleen Carson.
Instruction in the use of the programs ChemDraw and Chem3D will be the
subject of one collaborative learning session prior to this assignment.
More than other disciplines, chemistry heavily relies on symbolic
notations and modeling.
The notations are precisely defined, they allow for powerful condensation,
and mastering this symbolic language is a fundamental skill in chemistry.
In science modeling is inextricably bound to the generation of new ideas
and the development of theories. Linus Pauling described modeling as a
unique way of thinking. Instead of model sets, we can now use more
accurate computer generated models. Precise models represent precise
thinking.
Give the name of the reaction in line 1 in bold type (e.g. The Fischer
Esterification) and your names and the group name on the next line(s).
Leave an empty line. Start your brief description
of the reaction on the next line. The reaction diagram
should follow as Scheme 1 and the scheme should have a scheme legend
(e.g. Scheme 1. Reaction diagram of the Fischer esterification.).
The molecular models should be shown as Figure 1 and the figure should
have a figure legend (e.g. Figure 1. Molecular models of the
tetrahedral intermediate and of the ester.). Your reaction description
must include references to the scheme and the figure. Also include a
sentence about the significance of the reaction.
The assignment needs to be typed wikth "at least 24 points" using
Times 12-point font, and
1-inch margins top, bottom, left and right. The ChemDraw scheme needs to
be prepared according to the guidelines issued by the American Chemical
Society (discussed during ChemDraw instruction) and used after enlargement
to 125 percent. Chem3D models should be cylindrical bonds (atom size 20%),
depth ratio 60, shadowed color or pattern by element,
element symbols as atom labels.
There is a strict 2-page limit in portrait format.
Submit color hardcopy to Dr. Glaser or one of the teaching assistants as
announced on the online Schedule.
A sample assignment is
available.
(1.1) Reaction Description (0-5 points):
Describe a specific reaction as an example. Include
statements regarding the scope of the reaction. What is the significance
of the specific reaction and what is the significance of this type of
reaction in general?
(1.2) Nomenclature (0-5 points): Are all
compounds referred to by name (or just by number)? Are the names correct
or at least reasonable? Have abbreviations been defined?
(1.3) Reference to Scheme & Figure and Legends (0-5
points):
Have references to scheme and figure been included in the reaction
description? Have legends been provided for scheme and figure? Are the
legends descriptive and "headline-like" (e.g. incomplete sentences
allowed)?
(2.1) Drawings of Substrate(s) and Product(s)
(0-5 points):
Are the molecule complete? Are functional groups correct? Are substituents
missing? Are all heteroatoms shown? Are all bonds shown? Are
important lone pairs indicated? Are unpaired electrons indicated? Are
charges and formal charges properly shown? Are stereochemical issues
properly indicated?
(2.2) Arrows & Reagents (0-5 points):
Is the reaction arrow of the correct type? Is the reaction reversible?
Is this an equilibrium reaction? Is the reagent given on top of the
arrow? Are the reaction conditions indicated (pressure and temperature)?
Is the solvent indicated? Is it clear whether the reagent is
stoichiometric or catalytic? Are catalysts specified?
(2.3) Alignments (0-5 points):
Are the "crucial" bonds either vertical or horizontal? Are the
orientations of the molecules on both sides of the arrow the same?
Are substrate(s) and product(s) in proper horizontal alignment?
Are substrate(s), product(s) and arrow items clearly separated
(non-overlapping boxes criterion).
(2.4) Fonts & Sizes (0-5 points):
Have ACS requirements been met (bond and font settings)? Has the
magnification to 125 percent been performed?
(3.1) Modelling (0-5 points):
Do the models look right? Are all atoms where they should be? Are the
conformations right (as much staggered as possible)? Are the
configurations correct (at double bonds, at chiral centers)?
(3.2) Model Display (0-5 points):
Are the models displayed with the requested settings? Are labels visible
and inside the atoms? Have important structure parameters been included
in the Figure?
(3.3) Alignment & Size (0-5 points):
Are the models aligned in a reasonable fashion? Are they aligned (more or
less) in reasonable agreement with the drawings of the Lewis structures
in the scheme? Have the models been rotated in a reasonable manner to
best feature the most important structural issue? Are the sizes of the
substrate and product models consistent? Is the figure layout reasonable
(e.g. substrate on the left, product on the right).
Working as a group,
[1] Read online newspapers and search for articles whose content in some
way is connected to organic chemistry. Consider only top-notch well
recognized newspapers to assure the highest quality.
[2] Identify one article that illustrates an important consequence of
organic chemistry well. Identify the key organic chemistry topic the
article touches upon and identify the chapter in a textbook that is most
relevant. Identify keywords that best describe the issues raised by the
article. Identify keywords that best describe the most relevant
chemistry topics related to the article.
[3] Create editorial comments with links to useful online resources,
pertinent references section, and questions & answers in CIITN web
tool.
[4] Peer Review I: Constructive intergroup peer review.
[5] Revise your item considering the commentary and recommendations
made in the constructive peer review.
[6] Peer Review II: Evaluation & grading by intergroup peer
review.
[7] Peer Review III: Intragroup peer review.
Instruction in online searching of news media, using the CIITN webtool,
and preparations for the peer review will be the subjects of instructions
in lectures and another several collaborative learning sessions prior to
this assignment. The session "Revise, revise, revise!" will be taught by
Dr. Martha Patton of the MU Campus Writing Program; there will be a
handout on Revising Scientific Prose and
an example about Genetically Modified Corn.
A key feature of online publishing is access to national and global
information. To be able to access national and global information, one
needs to develop an awareness of the extraordinarily increased
accessibility. You can only find new things if you are looking for new
things. But how does one look for new things? Well, looking around in a
curious manner helps. To make your searches of "new" sources of
information more interesting, here is a little incentive. The instructor
will award 10 extra points to every member of three groups with
"novel" source selection.
You are not limited to any particular online news services, you can use
any online newspaper that you can find on the WWW. Let's restrict
ourselves, however, to English language newspapers for now. So, where to
look? The
New York Times and
the
Washington Post make a good
start. Get the West Coast view from the
Los Angeles Times. But then again,
don't limit yourself to the US, take a look across the Pacific and browse
the Japan Times. Why not.
In fact, let's think global and find a newspaper by way of an
online directory service, e.g.
Online Newspaper Directory,
World Newspaper Directory,
NewsDirectory,
NewsLink,
ScienceDaily,
PressDisplay, ...
You might also want to visit the
newswise web site, a search tool
for reporters, or
WurekAlert!, the media advisory
service of the American Association for the Advancement of Science.
Your selection of topic and of its connectedness to chemistry will be
judged by your peers. To further increase the quality of your selections
of topic, the instructor will award 10 extra points to each member of
three groups that, in his view, have done excellent jobs in
article topic selection.
The URLs of newspaper article sometimes change and that can be a problem.
Some online providers use a different link for their current editions and
their archives. Use an online provider that does not change the URL.
Also, use only an online provider that is accessible free of charge.
The MU Library has subscriptions to many electronic journals and
newspapers. For example, The New York Times is available through
the Nexis - Lexis Academic Database. The databases have powerful search
facilities you might find useful.
To determine whether MU has electronic access to specific magazines and
journals, use the "Electronic Journals" link on the Library's gateway page:
http://mulibraries.missouri.edu.
Make sure you have the text of the article stored in electronic form. If
there are problems with the direct link, we can always make the article
available via a local link. If that becomes necessary,
please upload the html file of the news and name it as
group#_article.html. A local link needs to contain
href="../2004001/group#_article.html". The absolute URL of the article is
http://ciitn.missouri.edu/testsite/www/2004001/group#_article.html.
Every news item should be connected to one of the book chapters covered in
the course. As much as possible, let's try to get an equal distribution.
There will be three top project awards; these awards give 20
extra points to each member of these groups. Two of these awards will be
made by the instructor. One of the awards goes to that project that wins
the highest peer review score.
There are many approaches you may take in writing the
8interpretative comments. Make sure that you realize at all times for what
audience you are writing.
Embedded Link Requirements and Construction.
The interpretative comments should contain between 4 - 8 links to sites
that provide information that deepen the understanding of the subject
matter of the newspapers article and provide the best possible context
definition. Several issues need to be considered in selecting these
links.
[a] Quality. Is the information provided by this link pertinent? Is
the information presented well? Are layout, graphics, and animations used
in the best possible way? How much can one learn from this site?
[b] Credibility. Is the information provided by this link
credible? Who wrote the link and what is the authors' agenda? A link
written by the tobacco industry telling you that smoking is good for you
might be suspicious.
[c] Stability. Will this link exist in future? This question is
much related to the quality issue. You should only use links that are
likely to be stable.
To construct an embedded link you need to supply the URL of the site to
which you want to link. This information is provided in a so-called
"a-tag". The "a-tag" starts with <a> and ends with </a> and
the word that will serve as the link will be between these tags. The URL
is provided as part of the <a> tag in the "href" qualifier in
the format <a href="URL">link-to-this-text</a>. The
web site of CNN for example is located at http://www.cnn.com and a link to
this web site could be provided by the statement
<a href="http://www.cnn.com">CNN</a>. When you enter the text
of your project in the online database, please do provide such "a-tags"
whenever you want to embed a link.
Inclusion of Reaction Diagram Requirement.
The interpretive comments section should contain one reaction diagram.
Prepare the reaction diagram with the program ChemDraw and save the
picture as a "gif" file.
Name your gif file group#_rxn.gif or group#_pic#.gif (e.g. for
group 9 the filename should be group9_rxn.gif or group9_pic1.gif)
and upload your gif file to the CIITN web site.
You should include the instruction
<BR> <BR>
<CENTER>
<img src="../2004001/group#_rxn.gif">
<CENTER>
<BR> <BR>
in your interpretive comments at the place where the structure diagram
should be inserted.
You can insert other images as well, e.g. other structure drawings,
pictures of molecular models generated with Chem3D, sketches as part of Q
& A, ... If you have several images, insert the others in the same
fashion and again use a name of the type group#_whatever.gif.
Inclusion of 3D Molecular Model. (Not Required.)
If you want to be really cool, include a molecular
model in 3D (e.g. as in the visualization centers). Create the model in
Chem3D and store it as a PDB file and name it for example
group30_ASPIRIN.pdb. Upload
this PDB file to the web site.
Then create the file group30_ASPIRIN.html as
follows and upload that file to us as well. Change the name of
the PDB file, adjust the height and width percentages
(percent of display screen covered by model window), play with the other
qualifiers as you wish.
Include this link:
<a href="../212w03%%PR/group30_ASPIRIN.html">Model of Aspirin</a>
The link will then call the following html file and display the model:
<html>
<body bgcolor=white>
<embed src="group30_ASPIRIN.pdb" frank=no name="molecule"
startspin=no height=100% width=100% display3D="ball&stick" bgcolor=white
palette="foreground" script="zoom 150; set specular on; set ambient 40;
select *.h; color atoms [196,209,146];
select *.c; color atoms [26,80,70];
select *.n; color atoms [92,180,220];
select *.o; color atoms [220,37,110]; select all">
</html>
Connection to Professional Chemistry Journal Requirement.
One of your links should lead to an article that has been
published in a professional chemistry journal. (In some cases, the
project might profit from a link to an article published in a
professional scientific journal rather than a chemistry journal.)
You will learn in one of the Collaborative Learning sessions how to
access and search the professional chemistry journals published by the
American Chemical Society.
Do provide the full citation to the article as well as the link
so that people off campus also can access the article (in their
libraries) if they do not have online access privileges. The full
citations contains the authors, the abbreviation of the journal in
italics, the year of publication in bold, the volume in italics, and page
numbers (e.g. Michael Lewis and Rainer Glaser J. Org. Chem.
2002, 67, 1441-1447.).
Asking good questions is not a simple task. In fact, to ask a good
question about a problem leads halfway toward its solution. Asking
questions is a key problem-solving skill and schools critical thinking.
You need to write 5 interesting questions. The questions should include
as many of the following types as possible and question 5 has to be of
the PSP type. You
should identify the type of each of your questions by providing the
type abbreviation in parentheses after the question.
You also need to provide answers to your questions. Answers to questions
1 - 4 will be rather factual and should be given as brief and concise as
possible. Question 5 should be answered by a 1-page essay and this essay
should be the result of a collaborative effort. There is no one
correct answer to PSP questions and instead the quality of the essay will
be decided by the depth of the analysis and the number and quality
of arguments in favor and against the thesis. Note that you are
answering your own question and you are in the wonderful position where
you might consider improving the question as you work on finding
an answer.
Identification of Components and Relationships (ICR)
Questions in this category seek to emphasize pertinent pieces of
information in the assignment. Questions of this type require the reader
to identify essential pieces of information and identify their logical
value (hypothesis, assumption, deduction, rationale, ...).
Seeking Clarification (SCL)
Questions that fall in this category seek closer definition of material or
clarifying background information.
Reasoning Using Quantitative Data (RQD)
Questions in this category require the interpretation of graphs,
tables, and figures or the manipulation of data therein.
Evaluation Process (EVL)
Questions in this category require judgment as to whether the conclusions
are justified by the evidence and whether the given interpretation is the
only one interpretation possible. Questions in this category assess
credibility.
Flexibility and Adaptability of Scientific Reasoning (FAR)
Questions in this category require the extension of concepts and
information presented to unfamiliar situations. Questions of this sort
often are useful to assess whether "the point really came across".
Reasoning about Philosophical, Societal and Political Implications (PSP)
Questions in this category usually will be open-ended and subjective.
Questions in this category are meant to create discussion and not
necessarily to lead to an immediate answer. Answers to questions of this
type might be subject to ideology.
Every news items is required to
contain one such question as the last question.
The evaluations of the Collaborative Group Projects will be carried
out by public and collaborative peer review. Each group is required to
evaluate the projects of three other groups using the CIITN web
tool.
Every group can assign up to 100 points to a project. The web tool will
request you to assess various aspects of the group projects. For each
criterion, you need to supply a number grade and a brief justification.
More detailed justifications should be given if the assigned score is
either very high or very low.
(1) Is the selected news topic a significant
real world issue? (0-10 points):
Is the selected topic of interest to broad segments of the audience in
their everyday lives?
Does the topic have continuing significance?
(2) Is the topic connected in a substantial
way to Organic Chemistry? (0-10 points):
Was the key organic chemical issue made clear? Was sufficient background
provided to understand the chemistry? Have important compounds been
described and characterized sufficiently. Is the pertinent reference
section complete? If not, what additional references should be given?
(3) Is the news selected from a highly credible
news source and is it timely? (0-10 points):
Was the newspaper article published in a high quality newspaper?
Did the author seem qualified to write on the science?
Was the article published within the past year?
Is the article too long or too short?
Is the article exciting? It it too sensational?
(4) Do the editorial comments provide pertient
information? (0-10 points):
Do the editorial comments help to place the article in the greater
context? Do the comments help to crytallize the key issues in a clear and
authoritative manner? Is the reaction shown in the reaction diagram well
selected? Is the chemical information provided pertinent?
(5) Are the editorial comments well written and
organized? (0-10 points):
Is the editorial written in good English (grammar and style) and in a well
organized fashion (appropriate number of paragraphs of appropriate lengths
and so on). Has a reaction diagram been included? Is the reaction
diagram of good quality and chemically correct?
(6) Judge the quality and selection of the
links embedded in the editorial? (0-10 points):
Do the links satisfy the requirements for relevance, quality and
stability? Did you learn something useful while visiting these links?
Are the links embedded well into the editorial comments.
Is it clear what the function of each link is and why these links were
chosen to be included in the editorial comments?
(7) Do the questions address central issues
rather than marginal details? (0-10 points):
Does the project contain 5 questions? Are the question types specified?
Do the questions vary as far as the categories of the questions are
concerned. Is the last question a PSP question?
Are the questions useful to deepen the connection between chemistry and
the real world? Or are the questions bizarre and far-fetched?
(8) Are the questions written in an
understandable and clear fashion? (0-10 points):
Is it clear what is being inquired?
Is it possible to work the problems in a reasonable time?
(9) Are the answers easy to understand and
convincing? (0-10 points):
Are the answers correct and complete? Could the answers be improved to be
more useful? Half of the points in this category should be assigned based
on the quality of the essay.
(10) Are all components integrated into an
interesting and constructive project as a whole? (0-10 points):
Would you consider this problem set fit for publication and use as an
educational material by others elsewhere (most points), a useful
assignment after some adjustments, or unfit for distribution
and general classroom use (few points)?
A detailed rubric is provided on the webtool.
The evaluations from all peer evaluations will be averaged. Do take
these evaluations seriously, you are affecting the grade of your fellow
students. Try to be fair and objective. You must be comfortable with
your judgment and be able to stand by it and defend it in public. Your
evaluations have to be made in writing and they will be made public on the
web.
The peer review will proceed in two stages. In the constructive peer
review, your should focus on pointing out the strengths and making
suggestions as to how the project could be improved. The projects will
then be revised. The second peer review evaluates the revised and
final version of the project. Usually, the scores of this second peer
review will be higher than those of the first. Only this final score
counts for the course grade.
You will receive via email the numbers of the groups to review.
Group Numbers refer to the group numbers used in the
CIITN database.
The basic idea is that most groups are reviewed by 3 other groups
- the averaging will take the edge off of individual judgements - and
that groups never evaluate their own evaluators - revenche is a bad
strategy. Some groups will benefit from 4 reviews and some groups will
have to prepare 4 reviews.
After project completion, you will be asked to fill out an online
questionnaire about each of the other members of your group. The
intragroup peer review webtool was developed by instructional designers
Ms. Kathleen Carson and Mr. Brian Hodgen and implemented by database
programmers Zhengyu "Martin" Wu and Yongqiang "John" Sui. The intragroup
peer review tool will be introdcued to you by the members of the CIITN
chemistry education group.
For intragroup peer review, each person is given 100 points to divide as
they see fit between their group members, not all points have to be
assigned. Your intragroup peer review score is the total of the points
given to you by your group members. Your final score for CIITN will be
computed by multiplying the group grade by your intragroup peer review
score and division by 100.
For example: Student A was in a group with 4 other people. They
gave Student A 20, 18, 19, and 22 points respectively. The group as a
whole received an 80 on their group project. Student A's grade would
be (20 + 22 + 21 + 23)x(85) / 100 = 73.1. Theoretically, if all group
members contribute their share, they should receive credit for the
quality of the product they produced.
A detailed rubic for intragroup peer review is provided on the CIITN
webtool. Categories to being thought about are:
(1) What was the group member's level of performance? Did (s)he
fulfill what was required of him (her) toward completing group projects?
Did (s)he go "above & beyond" or did (s)he fail to contribute adequately
to the group project?
(2) Did the group member fulfill a variety of roles within the group? Did
(s)he attempt all of the roles (Facilitator, Proposer, Supporter,
Critic, and Organizer) or did (s)he only attempt 1 or 2 roles?
(3) How well did the group member fulfill each role?
(4) How much time did the group member devote to group activites? Did
(s)he attend all the meetings and do significant outside work? Did (s)he
miss meetings without having made prior arrangements?
(5) Did the group member contribute his (her) share of the workload?
(6) Did the group member have a clear understanding of the requirements of
the assignemt? Did (s)he contribute innovative ideas? Did (s)he
attempt to find answers to questions the group had?
(7) Did the group member provide the group with chemistry knowledge
necessary to do well on the project and assignments? Did (s)he work to
clarify questions?
(8) Did the group member collaborate with the group?
(9) Did the group member show enthusiasm for group work?