Evaluation by Group 26
 (1) Topic Selection: 17 Points (0-20)
                        Good topic, it could have been related better.

        (2) Newspaper and Article Selection: 5 Points (0-10)
                        Not a very high quality newspaper. The article was short not super interesting.

        (3) Quality of the Editorial Comments: 8 Points (0-10)
                        Good editorial comments could have been longer.

        (4) Organic Chemistry Content: 8 Points (0-10)
                        Good chemistry background. The issue was made very clear.

        (5) Selection and Quality of the Links: 16 Points (0-20)
                        We only got 3 out of 4 to work. The three that worked were good links.

        (6) Format, Number and Types of Questions: 8 Points (0-10)
                        Good variety of questions. PSP question?

        (7) Quality of the Questions: 9 Points (0-10)
                        Very good questions, good detail. They addressed the central issue.

        (8) Overall Impression. 7 Points (0-10)
                        Could be better with minor adjustments. The article needs to be longer.
 

Evaluation by Group 27

        (1) Topic Selection: 19 Points (0-20)
                        The topic was to a broad selection of people, and it pertained atrongly to chemistry.  Even though the actual use of Viagra is limited to those with erectile dysfunction, it is also, at this time, a very spoken topic.  The distribution of Viagra is an extremely debatable topic, because of many recorded deaths due to its use in older men, especially those with heart problems.

        (2) Newspaper and Article Selection: 7 Points (0-10)
                        The newspaper articles was not as informative as I hoped I learned more about erectile dysfunction then I did of the drug Viagra.  There was a little information on the chemical relavents of Viagra to Nitric oxide.
I would really like to know more about the chemical makeup and affects related Viagra, and how it interacts with the body. The transition from the Nobel Prize to the use of Viagra was interesting, but it brings a change of topic that is more interesting and has less information.

        (3) Quality of the Editorial Comments: 10 Points (0-10)
                        The editorial comments relate the topic nicely to organic chemistry and explains in more detail the content of Viagra, and the chemical operation.

        (4) Organic Chemistry Content: 8 Points (0-10)
                        There was not an sufficient amount of background to this article on viagra or the research behind nitric oxide.  Although they did name several chemicals that were important, their roles were not clear.  the reference section was fairley complete, because they supplied a refernce to the text book and chemfinder.

        (5) Selection and Quality of the Links: 17 Points (0-20)
                        The extremely relavent and important links were not functioning, and the ones that did work were not did not relate to the main topic of the article and of this project.(chemistry)  The chemfinder was helpful, but there wasn't any links to any reliable institutions.
 

        (6) Format, Number and Types of Questions: 8 Points (0-10)
                        There was only four queations and I was under the impression that there was suppose to be five.  The question veried and they addressed different, but relavent topics. The last question was a psp question.
 

        (7) Quality of the Questions: 8 Points (0-10)
                        The quality of the questions was not extremely exceptional, and all the question were on the subject of chemistry. The last question was a psp question, but the research and article did not supply me with enough information to form an opinion.  Also I think that they could have mention some of the social or political aspects of the issue.

        (8) Overall Impression. 8 Points (0-10)
                        Overall this was a very impressive idea, but I think that it could have been expanded on.  Taking into consideration that only two persons worked on this project I think it was done in an organized manner and close to a complete project.  Overall it was good.
 
 

Evaluation by Group 28

(1) Topic Selection: 20 Points (0-20)
                        Good topic, especially since it has been in the news so much lately. We didn't realize that it was made with nitric oxide.

        (2) Newspaper and Article Selection: 8 Points (0-10)
                        The article was pretty short in length and was from the Columbia Tribune, not a national news source.

        (3) Quality of the Editorial Comments: 9 Points (0-10)
                        Good editorial comments, well organized

        (4) Organic Chemistry Content: 10 Points (0-10)
                        Nitric oxide was a good organic chemistry choice.

        (5) Selection and Quality of the Links: 18 Points (0-20)
                        We had trouble and couldn't view the Viagra link, but the other links were interesting

        (6) Format, Number and Types of Questions: 8 Points (0-10)
                        There were supposed to be 5 questions and we could only find four. Good use of chemfinder.

        (7) Quality of the Questions: 10 Points (0-10)
                        Questions made logical since, the structure required to find was interesting.

        (8) Overall Impression. 9 Points (0-10)
                        Good job, the article could have been longer and alittle more indepth.
 

Evaluation by Group 29

      (1) Topic Selection: 18 Points (0-20)
                        A reasonably good topic but not so eye catching.

        (2) Newspaper and Article Selection: 7 Points (0-10)
                        Good use of local resoucre , but the article itself was not interesting and not that informative.

        (3) Quality of the Editorial Comments: 9 Points (0-10)
                        Good editorial comments but to short .

        (4) Organic Chemistry Content: 8 Points (0-10)
                        A good enough chemistry background but not enough information.

        (5) Selection and Quality of the Links: 17 Points (0-20)
                        A lack of links. And some not accessable.

        (6) Format, Number and Types of Questions: 8 Points (0-10)
                        Short on questions , but it varied and it had a PSP question.

        (7) Quality of the Questions: 8 Points (0-10)
                        Questions varied and kept on the main issue but lacked enough information for us to build an opinion.

        (8) Overall Impression. 8 Points (0-10)
                        A job well done but could have improved on the number of links and information.
 

Evaluation by Group 30

        (1) Topic Selection: 20 Points (0-20)
                        The selected topic was a popular, interesting topic that would be of interest to a wide audience.  It showed a good relation to chemistry as well.

        (2) Newspaper and Article Selection: 7 Points (0-10)
                        The length of the article was very short.  It was taken from a reasonably high quality paper but not a major one.  There was not a great deal of science within the article but not bad.

        (3) Quality of the Editorial Comments: 7 Points (0-10)
                        Pretty good editorial in that there was a detailed description of Viagra at a molecular level.  However, the editorial did not really place the topic in a greater context.  Plus, the paragraphs were very short.

        (4) Organic Chemistry Content: 8 Points (0-10)
                        It was unclear what the exact chemical issue was.  There is a pertinent reference section and with a decent amount of background information.

        (5) Selection and Quality of the Links: 15 Points (0-20)
                        One of the links did not work and two of them seemed very similar.  Not a whole lot of variety in the links, but the working ones were fairly stable.  The links were a pretty good source of information on impotence.

        (6) Format, Number and Types of Questions: 8 Points (0-10)
                        There were only four questions.  There was a pretty good variety and the last one was a philosophical question.

        (7) Quality of the Questions: 6 Points (0-10)
                        The philosophical question seemed a little too ambiguous and insignificant.  The hybridization question seemed a little out of place and was not related well to the article.  Were the carbons on that question picked at random?

        (8) Overall Impression. 7 Points (0-10)
                        The overall impression of this project was that it was pretty good, but not quite ready for publication.  The questions could use work and the article itself was too short.

Evaluation by Group 31

 (1) Topic Selection: 20 Points (0-20)
                        Very interesting...

        (2) Newspaper and Article Selection: 9 Points (0-10)
                        Although the article was very factual, we feel that a better newspaper source and more exciting article could have been found.

        (3) Quality of the Editorial Comments: 9 Points (0-10)
                        Some good points were included, but the wording and organization could use some work.

        (4) Organic Chemistry Content: 10 Points (0-10)
                        The editorial comments included the description of multiple compounds.

        (5) Selection and Quality of the Links: 17 Points (0-20)
                        One of the four links did not work.  Although the other links were pertinent, we feel that the group should have focused more on the chemical compounds perhaps by adding more links.  (The Chemfinder link seemed rather lazy.)

        (6) Format, Number and Types of Questions: 8 Points (0-10)
                        Great questions, but one was missing

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

        (8) Overall Impression. 8 Points (0-10)
                        Needs minor work according to the above comments.