These pages are best viewed with a width of 7 inches
© 1997 Rainer Glaser. All rights reserved.
The University of Missouri at Columbia, Chemistry 416, Organic Spectroscopy, FS97

Collaborative Learning in Chemical Learning Communities Project #2: Creation of Problem Assignments

Peer Review Instructions

The evaluations of the Group Projects #2 will be carried out by your peers in this course. The created problem set (posted on the Chemistry 416 course web site) and its presentation & defense will be evaluated. The peer review will be carried out within the groups and not by individuals. Each group is required to evaluate the projects of all other groups. Each group must submit the completed evaluation to the instructor by electronic mail. Write and e-mail separate evaluations for each of the groups you are evaluating. It is essential, however, that the evaluations are carried out in groups. This is an excellent exercise in consensus formation.

Your group can assign up to 100 points to a project. The evaluations from all review groups will be averaged. Do take these evaluations seriously, you are affecting the grade of your fellow students. Be fair and be objective. You must be comfortable with your judgement and be able to stand by it and defend it in public. Your evalutions have to be made in writing and they will be made available on the web.

Your evaluation report should contain the following items. Please stick exactly to the format. Use the same item numbers.

(A) Group Number and Group Name of Evaluators

(B) Group Number and Group Name of Evaluees

(C) Responses to Various Evaluation Categories
In the next few items, you will be asked to assess various aspects of the problem assignments generated by the group you are evaluating. You will also be asked to evaluate the presentation and defense part of the project. For each item, your evaluation report should contain one line that contains the number of the item followed by the headline of the item in which you replaced the X by a number in the range indicated. Below each such line, you should very briefly justify your assignment. More detailed justifications should be given if the assigned score is either very high or very low.

(1) Topic and Paper Selection: X Points (0-15)
Does the selected problem meet the required criteria as far as NMR techniques is concerned? Was the paper published in a top-notch research journal in the last 3 years?

(2) Synposis and Identification of Specific Problem: X Points (0-15)
Is the synopsis brief, concise and understandable? Has the specific problem been clearly defined? Is the specific problem important and highly relevant to this paper? Is the specific problem only a marginal sideshow and not worthwhile the scrutiny? Does the specific problem have significance beyond the scope of this paper?

(3) Spectroscopy Section: X Points (0-10)
Have the spectra been scanned well? Has the editing been done carefully. Would more editing be required to adapt the art work best to the problem assignment? Is the information given sufficient to answer the questions? Is the information redundent?

(4) Format, Number and Types of Questions: X Points (0-10)
Does the problem contain 5 questions as requested? Are the categories specified for the questions? Have the correct categories been identified for the questions? Do the questions cover at least three different categories? Consider here also whether the page limitations and the format requests have been taken into account.

(5) Quality of the Questions: X Points (0-20)
Are the questions good ones or are they bizarre and far-fetched? Do the questions address central issues or marginal details? Are the questions written in an understandable and clear fashion? Have you been able to work the problem set in a reasonable time?

(6) Presentation & Defense: X Points (0-20)
Did you have the impression that the presenters really knew what they were talking about? Was the presentation organized? Did the presenters merely lecture from notes or memory? Were the overheads done carefully and was the number of transparencies adequate? Were the presenters understandable? Did the presenters handle questions in a satisfactory fashion?

(7) Overall Impression. X Points (0-10)
If you were the instructor of Chemistry 416, would you consider this problem set fit for use as an assignment in class (most points), a useful assignment after minor or major adjustments, or unfit for distribution and general classroom use (no points).

Relevant Dates and Deadlines

Submission of Evaluations. Friday, December 5, 1997.