Peer Assessment of Group 5
Peer Assessment of Group 5
Category |
Group 1 |
Group 2 |
Group 3 |
Group 4 |
Average |
Problem Definition and
Selection (0-15) |
11 |
12 |
13 |
12 |
12 |
Proposed Spectroscopic Solution
(0-15) |
13 |
13 |
13 |
15 |
13.5 |
Market Screening (0-10) |
8 |
8 |
8 |
10 |
8.5 |
Class Selection (0-10) |
8 |
6 |
7 |
7 |
7 |
DCA I: Characteristics (0-10) |
8 |
9 |
9 |
6 |
8 |
DCA II: Completeness (0-10) |
8 |
9 |
8 |
10 |
8.75 |
DCA III: Costs (0-10) |
6 |
8 |
9 |
9 |
8 |
Pros & Cons: The Verdict
(0-10) |
8 |
9 |
9 |
8 |
8.5 |
Overall Impression (0-10) |
8 |
9 |
9 |
8 |
8.5 |
TOTAL |
78 |
83 |
85 |
85 |
82.75 |
Evaluation by Group 1
(A) Group 1:Dissolved in Water: Mike Lewis, Emma Treuten, and Paul Benny
(B) Group 5:Alcoholic Protecting Group-Dave Alvarez, Tara Fuchs, and Pat
Kirchhoefer
(C) Responses to Various Evaluation Categories
(1) Problem Definition and Selection: (0-15) 11
(2) Proposed Spectroscopic Solution: (0-15) 13
(3) Market Screening: (0-10) 8
(4) Class Selection: (0-10) 8
(5) Part I: Characteristics. (0-10) 8
(6) Part II: Completeness of Quote. (0-10) 8
(7) Part III: Costs. (0-10) 6
*No time period listed for a valid quote
(8) Pros & Cons: The Verdict. (0-10) 8
(9) Overall Impression. (0-10) 8
*Good proposal with some minor revisions
TOTAL 78
Evaluation by Group 2
(A) Group-2: JAW(Evaluator)
(B) Group-5: The Alcohol Protecting Group(Evaluee)
(C) Responses to Various Evaluation Categories
(1). Problem Definition and Selection:12
It is a realistic
(2). Proposed Spectroscopic Solution:13
How to separate products and starting materials with
overlapping UV adsorption.
(3). Market Screening:8
Most important manufactures are included
(4). Class Selection:6
The selection are not fully understood
(5). Detailed Comparison ( Part I) Characteristics:9
These characteristics are very important for UV /VIS
spectrum
(6). Detailed Comparison( Part II ) Completeness:9
(7). Detailed Comparison( Part III) Costs:8
The quotation is complete. Only valid time is needed.
(8). Pros & cons 9
The outstanding performance of HP8453 can be seen from this
section. Actually we often use HP8453 which is located in
the second floor, it is really a good one.
(9). Overall Impression: 9
It is a good project.
Evaluation by Group 3
> Group 5--- The Alcohol Protecting Group
> (A) Group-3: Bible Study Class
> (B) Group-5: The Alcohol Protecting Group
> (C) Responses to Various Evaluation Categories
> (1). Problem Definition and Selection:13
> (2). Proposed Spectroscopic Solution:13
> (3). Market Screening:8
> (4). Class Selection:7
> (5). Detailed Comparison of Alternative: Part I Characteristics:9
> (6). Detailed Comparison of Alternative: Part II Completeness:8
> (7). Detailed Comparison of Alternative: Part III Costs:9
> (8). Pros& Cons:9
> (9). Overall Impression: 9
Evaluation by Group 4
Dr. Glaser,
This is our evaluation for 'Alcohol Protecting Group'.
(1) Problem Definations and Selections:12
Well defined although the selection needs to be more vivid.
(2) Proposed Spectroscopic Solution:15
UV-Vis spectroscopy seems to be the best technique to study enzyme
catalysis.
(3) Market Screening:10
Five major companies were contacted.
(4) Class Selection:7
The class selecton was not properly done.
(5)Detailed Comparisons: Characteristics:6
Comparison has not been nade in a proper manner.
(6) Part II. Completeness of Quote:10
well covered and all the accessories have been tabulated.
(7) Part III. Costs:9
Costs of all the neccessary items have been tabulated. Although no
information about the hidden costs has been given e.g. shipping, setup
training etc.
(8) Pros and Cons:(8)
A more specific conclusions could have been written.
(9) Overall Impression:(8)
This project can be implemented with a little orientation on class
selection and a detailed descripltion of characteristics.
Total:85
From
Gang of three.