Peer Assessment of Group 1 - Project 2
Peer Assessment of Group 1
| Category |
Group 2 |
Group 3 |
Group 4 |
Group 5 |
Average |
| Topic and Paper Selection
(0-15) |
13 |
10 |
15 |
15 |
13.25 |
| Synposis and Identification of
Specific Problem (0-15) |
13 |
11 |
15 |
11 |
12.25 |
| Spectroscopy Section (0-10) |
8 |
6 |
10 |
7 |
7.75 |
| Format, Number and Types of
Questions (0-10) |
7 |
8 |
8 |
9 |
8 |
| Quality of the Questions (0-20) |
18 |
14 |
18 |
15 |
16.25 |
| Presentation & Defense (0-20) |
18 |
15 |
20 |
19 |
18 |
| Overall Impression (0-10) |
9 |
7 |
10 |
7 |
8.25 |
| TOTAL |
86 |
71 |
96 |
83 |
84 |
Evaluation by Group 2
(A) Evaluators
Group 2: JAW Asitha, Wen and Jianzheng
(B) Evaluees
Group 1, Dissolved in Water
(C)Responses To Evaluation Categories
(1) Topic and Paper Selection: 13
This project comes from a top-notch research journal
(2) Synopsis and Identification of Specific Problem 13
The introduction part is brief and understandable
(3) Spectroscopy Section 8
The spectrum is clear.
(4) Format 7
Miss reference part
(5) Quality of the Questions 18
The five question is helpful to understand the propose of the origin paper
(6) Presentation & Defense 18
The presentation was organized well
(7) Overall Impression 9
A good web page design
Evaluation by Group 3
> (A) Group 3: Bible Study Class
>
> (B) Group 1: Dissolved in Water
>
> (C)
>
> (1). Topic and Paper Selection: 10 Points
>
> (2). Synposis and Identification of Specific Problem: 11 Points
>
> (3). Spectroscopy Section: 6 Points
>
> (4). Format, Number and Types of Questions: 8 Points
>
> (5). Quality of the Questions: 14 Points
>
> (6). Presentation and Defense: 15 Points
>
> (7). Overall Impression: 7 Points
>
> TOTAL POINTS: 71 Points
>
Evaluation by Group 4
>a)Group 3, Sundeep Rayat/Dan Philips/Subhabrata Sen (GROUP 4!!)
>b)Group 1, Emma Teuten/Paul Benny/Mike Lewis
>c)(1)The selected problem did meet the required criteria.15
> (2)Synopsis and identification of specific problem.15
> (3)Spectra well scanned.10
> (4)Well formatted and typed.8
> (5)Quality of questions were high.18
> (6)Presentation was effective and the idea of putting the questions on
>the transparency was fine.20
> (7)The selected problem could be assigned to the class.10
> Total 96
Evaluation by Group 5
A) Group 5 Alcohol Protecting Group
B) Group 1 Dissolved in Water
C)
1) Topic and Paper Selection: 15
fulfilled all requirements
2) Synposis and Identification of Specific Problem: 11
unsure of significance beyond paper
3) Spectroscopy Section: 7
spectra could be cleaner
captions on spectra and figures would be helpful
4) Format, Number and Types of Questions: 9
met requirements
5) Quality of Questions: 15
question 1 was somewhat difficult
question 5 - how does this relate to NMR?
6) Presentation & Defense: 19
nice presentation - handled questions very well
7) Overall Impression: 6
problem not too relevant to common NMR techniques taught
in class