Evaluation by Group 6

(1) Topic Selection: 20 Points (0-20)
                        The topic is of interest to a broad segement of the population and has a strong relation to organic chemistry.

        (2) Newspaper and Article Selection: 9 Points (0-10)
                        The author seemed qualified to write on the science.  It was a good article, published within the past year, not to long, and pretty exciting.  As for the quality of the newspaper we think that it is high quality based on the article you choose but are unsure of long term stability and were a little unfamiliar with the Why Files.  Therefore we only deducted 1 point.

        (3) Quality of the Editorial Comments: 9 Points (0-10)
                        The editorial comments provided good information, was appropriate length, and well organized.  The grammer and English was pretty good.  A few sentences were worded in an unclear fashion.  Othersise good job.

        (4) Organic Chemistry Content: 9 Points (0-10)
                        There was no pertient reference section.  Otherwise ok.

        (5) Selection and Quality of the Links: 15 Points (0-20)
                        We did not feel that the quality of the links were as high as they could have been.  We realize that it took time to make some of the links and took that into consideration, but we feel that they could have been a little more informative and creative.  The functions of most of the links were clear, and embedded well into the editorial comments.  Stability was also an issue when assiging points.  We were unsure of the stability due to the fact that some of the links appeared to be made by the group.

        (6) Format, Number and Types of Questions: 7 Points (0-10)
                        There are only four questions.  While the last question is not a chemistry related factual question we did not feel that it was an ethical question or very thought provolking. We thought you could have asked a question such as would you use the PV cells as an energy source if it was availabe.  Or something along that lines.  There was good potential for the PSP question.

        (7) Quality of the Questions: 7 Points (0-10)
                        The answer for question 3 was a little involved, rather detailed and time consuming.  We thought that it was to specific and their was not engouh background information given. Perhaps more of this information could have been included in the editorial comments to better explain the chemistry of getting energy out of ultraviolet light.

        (8) Overall Impression. 8 Points (0-10)
                        This was a good project with potential to be a little better.  It is a useful project after adjustments as described above.

                        Total points 84.
 

Evaluation by Group 7

    (1) Topic Selection: 20 Points (0-20)
                        Very interesting topic.In an age of ever increasing energy demands and restrictions on pollutans, this topic really hits home.  Using chlorophyll and UV light absorption brings in the organic chemistry while not boring you senseless.

        (2) Newspaper and Article Selection: 8 Points (0-10)
                        Very good article with good scientific basis.  It is up-to-date, relevent, and written by what it seems to be a very qualified journalist.  The problem is that rarely would the average person look under "The Why Files" of University of Wiskonsin for news.

        (3) Quality of the Editorial Comments: 9 Points (0-10)
                        the editorial comments are written very elegantly in scientific informative sort of way, but there was no conclusion or punch at the end.  They could have summed up better.

        (4) Organic Chemistry Content: 9 Points (0-10)
                        The article and editorial comments were teeming with organic chemistry.  The only issue would be that they did not address all of this in their citingof the textbook.  By marely giving reference to Chapter 15, they definitely shorthanded themselves as to where would find relevent information in Wade's text.

        (5) Selection and Quality of the Links: 20 Points (0-20)
                        Tres bien!  The links were exceptional.  An A+ for the links to structures and definitions for clarity.  The rest were bright and looked fun enough to entertain even the worst chemistry antagonist.

        (6) Format, Number and Types of Questions: 6 Points (0-10)
                        There were only 4 questions.  Also the last question was not exactly a PSP question.  Come now, who would actually know when the structure of chlorophyll was determined??  It couldn't find the article or the links.

        (7) Quality of the Questions: 9 Points (0-10)
                        Great questions.  Question #3could have been answered with last sentence and a bit less words.  The last question is kind of bunk.

        (8) Overall Impression. 8 Points (0-10)
                        Loved the topic.  With a few minor adjustmentsit could be Prentice-Hall Material.  Good job...
 

Evaluation by Group 8

 (1) Topic Selection: 19 Points (0-20)
                        Topic is quite relavent to all of our lives, especially as our
needs for power increase and our natural resources decrease.

        (2) Newspaper and Article Selection: 8 Points (0-10)
                         Article is succinct, interesting and recent, but the quality
of the source seems slightly dubious, as it is not a "real" newspaper
nor affiliated with one.
 

        (3) Quality of the Editorial Comments: 8 Points (0-10)
                        Comments do a good job of summarizing the article and are
grammatically correct, but do little in the way of placing the topic
in a broader scope.

        (4) Organic Chemistry Content: 10 Points (0-10)
                        Editorial comments do an excellent job of placing this story
in an organic context, with the inclusion of various types of
molecules described in the story, and it even mentions our old friends
the Zeolites.
 

        (5) Selection and Quality of the Links: 17 Points (0-20)
                        The "internal" links (those that lead to another part of the
group web page) are well done, but only two links are provided to
"external" sources.  This seems especially slim providing the
multitude of web pages devoted to alternative power sources.
 

        (6) Format, Number and Types of Questions: 9 Points (0-10)
                        Categories are well varied, but only 4 questions posted
instead of the requested 5.
 

        (7) Quality of the Questions: 10 Points (0-10)
                        Questions are varied in difficulty, and range from things that
can be found directly in the article to questions that require more
thought.

        (8) Overall Impression. 9 Points (0-10)
                        With a slight expansion of the editorial comments and some
better "external" links, this would be fit for publication.
 
 

Evaluation by Group 9

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

        (2) Newspaper and Article Selection: 9 Points (0-10)
 

        (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: 14 Points (0-20)
                        Most of the links were either a picture or a definition of a word instead of being filled with information to support the article and editorial.  The links appeared to be created by the group rather than located on the web.  Those that were located on the web either were a page to other links and had no specific direction, or was a general information link about a topic in the article.  The latter would have been sufficient had the other links been pertinent.

        (6) Format, Number and Types of Questions: 8 Points (0-10)
                        There was a thought question, but there were only four questions instead of the requested five.

        (7) Quality of the Questions: 8 Points (0-10)
 

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

Reevaluation by Group 9

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

        (2) Newspaper and Article Selection: 9 Points (0-10)
 

        (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: 16 Points (0-20)
                        Most of the links were either a picture or a definition of a word instead of being filled with information to support the article and editorial.  The links appeared to be created by the group rather than located on the web.  Those that were located on the web either were a page to other links and had no specific direction, or was a general information link about a topic in the article.  The latter would have been sufficient had the other links been sufficient.

        (6) Format, Number and Types of Questions: 8 Points (0-10)
 

        (7) Quality of the Questions: 8 Points (0-10)
 

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

Evaluation by Group 10

  (1) Topic Selection: 20 Points (0-20)
                        Topic was interesting and related to society.

        (2) Newspaper and Article Selection: 9 Points (0-10)
                        We couldn't find where your article came from.

        (3) Quality of the Editorial Comments: 10 Points (0-10)
                        Good comments that were inciteful

        (4) Organic Chemistry Content: 10 Points (0-10)
                        Relates to organic well.

        (5) Selection and Quality of the Links: 18 Points (0-20)
                        Links were kind of hurting here.  It looks as if you didn't search around for them.

        (6) Format, Number and Types of Questions: 8 Points (0-10)
                        Only had four questions.

        (7) Quality of the Questions: 10 Points (0-10)
                        Questions were well written and were understandable.

        (8) Overall Impression. 9 Points (0-10)
                        Good page but links were a little elementary