These pages are best viewed with a width of 7 inches
© 1997 Rainer Glaser. All rights reserved.
The University of Missouri at Columbia, Chemistry 210, Organic Chemistry I, WS97

Collaborative Learning in Chemical Learning Communities

Group Assignments for Peer Evaluations

This assignment is now active.

Each of Groups  1 -  5        evaluates each of Groups  6 - 10
Each of Groups  6 - 10        evaluates each of Groups 11 - 15
Each of Groups 11 - 15        evaluates each of Groups 16 - 19 (20 does  WN)
Each of Groups 16 - 20        evaluates each of Groups 21 - 25
Each of Groups 21 - 24        evaluates each of Groups 26, 27, 29, 30
Each of Groups 26, 27, 29, 30 evaluates each of Groups 31 - 35
Each of Groups 31 - 35        evaluates each of Groups  1 -  4 (5 does WN)

The basic idea is that every page gets reviewed by 5 groups. The simplest way to have this accomplished involves the above scheme. However, the above scheme will only work perfectly if an integer-multiple of 5 groups are evaluating and are being evaluated.

Some groups among the 35 posted ones no longer exist. For example, group 28 has dissolved and the original group 25 was replaced by a one-man-group 25. This means, for example, that groups 30 - 35 would now only be evaluated by 4 groups. The one-man group 25 will not participate in the peer review as reviewer while this group will be evaluated like every other project. Evaluations by four groups instead of five will be tolerated. If however, a situation should arise where not even 4 groups would evaluate, then I will assign additional evaluation duties as I see fit.

Some of the groups have chosen to be involved in the WebNotes. Group 10 did the group project in addition to the webnotes. Groups 5 and 20 did the webnotes instead of the group projects. All of these groups --- whether they submitted a group projects or not --- are still required to be involved in the peer review. Another consequence is simply that some groups will have to evaluate less than the maximum of 5 groups.

The more everybody browses all of the entries, the better will the quality of the grading be. Evaluations of small subsets without having a view of the overall quality inadvertantly distort the evaluation.

Submission of the Peer Evaluations

Your group has the power to assign between 0 and 50 points to each site. The evaluations from all evaluating groups will be averaged. The remaining 50 points are assigned by the instructor based on scope, technical merit, and completeness of assignment. 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 judgment and be able to stand by it and defend it in public. Your evalutions will be made available on the web. Each group will know which groups evaluated them.

Each evaluation MUST be carried out be the entire group!! Once the group comes to concensus, then you submit the evaluation by e-mail. Send each evaluation separately. Write in the subject line of the message "Group X evaluates Group Y".

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

(1) Group Number and Group Name of Evaluators

(2) Group Number and Group Name of Evaluees

In the next few items, you will be asked to assess various aspects of the sites you are evaluating. 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 between 0 and 10. 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.

(3) Visual Appeal of Site: X Points
There is no question that visual appeal stimulates interest and creates a positive learning attitude. Evaluate the sites with regard to their visual appeal. Are multimedia tools used well? (Note: Do not judge the visual appeal of the "groupname.html" pages. These, of course, only will contain text and linked URLs. It is the visual appeal of these linked URLs that you need to evaluate.)

(4) Content of Site: X Points
Visual appeal only gets you so far. In the end content matters to attract customers. How does this site do in that respect. Does it convey information and how much?

(5) WWW Suitability: X Points
Evaluate the importance of the WWW as the carrier of the information the sites offers for you. Does this site convey information that is better accessed through the WWW than through any other medium (books, journals, TV, ...). Be very critical about this!

(6) Relevance to Chem 210: X Points
Do you feel that this site is relevant to Chemistry 210? Do you feel that the group that submitted the entry has made the case for relevance sufficiently well?

(7) Personal Gain: X Points
How much did you learn from browsing this site.

Relevant Dates and Deadlines

Submission of Evaluations. Friday, April 4. You will have almost three weeks to get the evaluations in.

Posting of Final Results of Group Projects. Friday, April 11.

Further Information

Group Projects are being carried out in Chemistry 210 for the first time in the present fashion. Your input is crucial to us. Please be as open and frank as possible when commenting on any aspect of the design, planning, and execution of the group projects. Let us know what works and what does not work. The Chemistry 210 Group Projects will be monitored by professional educators and your comments on any aspects of "Collaborative Learning in Chemical Learning Communities" will be valuable. All materials associated with this project will be used in thesis research in the Department of Education. Thank you for you cooperation.