Evaluation by Group 6

1.  Topic Selection:  20
Subject is of interest to broad segments of the audience.

2.  Newspaper and article selection:  6
The article is not from a high-quality paper; it is from a news
release.  News releases often do not include both sides of the story,
especially when from interest groups (like this one).  In
addition, the article is from before 1-1-98 and is very short.

3.  Quality of editorial comments:  9
Addresses key issues clearly, but there are some English errors
(unclear sentences, word choice, etc.).

4.  Organic Chemistry Content:  10
Excellent.

5.  Selection and Quality of the Links:  15
Not enough links.

6.  Format, Number and Types of Questions:  8
Lacking a fifth question.

7.  Quality of the Questions:  10
Excellent.  Question 3 was particularly relevant; good job.

8.  8
This is because of the article selection.

Reevaluation by Group 6

1.  Topic Selection:  20
Subject is of interest to broad segments of the audience.

2.  Newspaper and article selection:  6
The article is not from a high-quality paper; it is from a news
release.  News releases often do not include both sides of the story,
especially when from interest groups (like this one).  In
addition, the article is from before 1-1-98 and is very short.

3.  Quality of editorial comments:  9
Addresses key issues clearly, but there are some English errors
(unclear sentences, word choice, etc.).

4.  Organic Chemistry Content:  10
Excellent.

5.  Selection and Quality of the Links:  16
Not enough links.

6.  Format, Number and Types of Questions:  8
Lacking a fifth question.

7.  Quality of the Questions:  10
Excellent.  Question 3 was particularly relevant; good job.

8.  8
This is because of the article selection.
 

Evaluation by Group 7

   (1) Topic Selection: 20 Points (0-20)
                        Topic should be interesting to many.  Very strong relation to organic chemistry.

        (2) Newspaper and Article Selection: 6 Points (0-10)
                        The article is published in September, 1997.  Article is press release, with no information about author's scientific qualification.  article is fairly interesting.

        (3) Quality of the Editorial Comments: 10 Points (0-10)
                        editorial comments helped to understand the article and to place the article in greater context.  Good English and good grammar.

        (4) Organic Chemistry Content: 9 Points (0-10)
                        Organic chemistry content solid.  The key issue made clear and additonal references are given.

        (5) Selection and Quality of the Links: 17 Points (0-20)
                        The links were nice, interesting and stable.  However, they have just four links and considering the iomprtance of the topic we feel that group 13 could find more quality links.  It looks like they did not spend enough time searching for the links.

        (6) Format, Number and Types of Questions: 7 Points (0-10)
                        Questions cover few topics.  They have just 4 questions.  the last question is a PSP.

        (7) Quality of the Questions: 6 Points (0-10)
                        The questions #3 and #4 were fine, but first two questions were just too bizzare, and do not take any time.

        (8) Overall Impression. 6 Points (0-10)
                        Topic was good, the choice of the article was not that good and the questions just did were not really good.  Editorial comments were fine, that is the best part of the project.
 

Evaluation by Group 8

 (1) Topic Selection: 18 Points (0-20)
                        The topic you selected is relevant to most of the audience.  There is a stong relation between the breakdown of the ozone and Organic Chemistry.

        (2) Newspaper and Article Selection: 6 Points (0-10)
                        This is the one area that your news item has problem with.  The quality of a press release as an article brings up questions.  One source of confusion stems from the fact that the "author" quotes himself in this piece.  The length is also a contributing factor in this low score.

        (3) Quality of the Editorial Comments: 10 Points (0-10)
                        Your editorial comments are great.  They really bring the topic into focus.  How ever there is the slight problem with the CFC becoming CFCO.  Otherwise, great job.

        (4) Organic Chemistry Content: 9 Points (0-10)
                        The organic content is very evident and is brought out by the editorial comments and the questions that you raise.  The reference section is complete and accurate.

        (5) Selection and Quality of the Links: 15 Points (0-20)
                        The links provided were very few.  The quality of the links is questionable.  They also lacked quality information that would have supported the topic choice.

        (6) Format, Number and Types of Questions: 10 Points (0-10)
                        You met all of the criteria for this section.

        (7) Quality of the Questions: 9 Points (0-10)
                        The questions were easy to understand and approachable form a sutdent's point of view.

        (8) Overall Impression. 8 Points (0-10)
                        This is a fairly good news item.  There are a few corrections that need to be made, but otherwise it takes a topic and presents it in a way that is interesting.
 

Evaluation by Group 9

 (1) Topic Selection: 18 Points (0-20)
 

        (2) Newspaper and Article Selection: 6 Points (0-10)
                        The article that appeared after clicking the link was not the same article listed by the link.  The author, title and source were different than what was listed.  The article too did not talk much about organic chemistry except for a brief mention of CFCs

        (3) Quality of the Editorial Comments: 8 Points (0-10)
 

        (4) Organic Chemistry Content: 8 Points (0-10)
 

        (5) Selection and Quality of the Links: 12 Points (0-20)
                        Because there were only four links, that required all of them to be excellent, but we found that only two of the four were really pertinent to the article.  There is an over abundance of information available on the web, but we feel that not enough time was involved to find better links.

        (6) Format, Number and Types of Questions: 6 Points (0-10)
                        Again, with only four questions, we were expecting them to be great, but we felt they seemed to lack depth.  There are many more creative questions that could have been used.

        (7) Quality of the Questions: 6 Points (0-10)
                        The quality was poor for only four questions.

        (8) Overall Impression. 6 Points (0-10)
                        This is a result of the wrong article being presented, lack of pertinent links, and poor questions.
 

Reevaluation by Group 9

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

        (2) Newspaper and Article Selection: 8 Points (0-10)
                        The article did not talk much about organic chemistry except for brief mention of CFCs

        (3) Quality of the Editorial Comments: 8 Points (0-10)
 

        (4) Organic Chemistry Content: 8 Points (0-10)
 

        (5) Selection and Quality of the Links: 17 Points (0-20)
                        There were only four links.  Granted that the project only called for four to eight links.  We were looking for four excellent links, but felt that these were good, but not excellent.

        (6) Format, Number and Types of Questions: 8 Points (0-10)
                        Only four questions were asked.  The project requested 5.

        (7) Quality of the Questions: 9 Points (0-10)
 

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

Evaluation by Group 10

 (1) Topic Selection: 20 Points (0-20)
                        Good topic which is very relevent to our generation.

        (2) Newspaper and Article Selection: 9 Points (0-10)
                        Good article which is from a reliable source.

        (3) Quality of the Editorial Comments: 10 Points (0-10)
                        Editorial comments were well discussed by breaking down the article into specific causes of ozone depletion.

        (4) Organic Chemistry Content: 10 Points (0-10)
                        Applied to elimination and other reactions.

        (5) Selection and Quality of the Links: 18 Points (0-20)
                        Maybe could have had a few more links.  CFC link was well detailed

        (6) Format, Number and Types of Questions: 8 Points (0-10)
                        Only for questions, needed one more.

        (7) Quality of the Questions: 9 Points (0-10)
                        Good questions that related to chemistry and learning the material.  The fourth question, maybe you could have put our own opinion.

        (8) Overall Impression. 10 Points (0-10)
                        This was a good web page that was very relevent to us.  Good work!!