1) Seq Structure Function group
2) Overall 7
3) Content 9
4) Organization 8
5) Quite good detail with flowcharts and example screen shots
6) Poorly organized resulting in too much time being taken; Could make
   presentation more lively


1. Evaluation Of: Seq-Structure-Function

2. The overall quality of the group project
     1 - 10 (best):  8

3. Content:
     1 - 10 (best)  8

4. Organization:
     1 - 10 (best)  8

5. what you liked most;
The breakdown of various methods for 

6. what is missing in your opinion
Thought it could have been clearer how the different methods compared.




1. Sequence-to-Structure-to-Function Group
2. 10
3. 10
4. 10
5. I thought the presentation was done very well.  The talk was split
up nicely based on different approaches the protein folding problem
and how we can predict structure based on the primary, seconday, and
tertiary structure.  I also liked the way that they showed pictures of
the experiments they run.
6. I would have liked to see maybe one or two more examples of protein
fold predictions by all the programs they tested.

1. The name of the group being evaluated:
Sequence-to-Structure-to-Function Group

2. The oevrall quality of the group project: 9

3. Content: 9

4. Organization: 9

5. what you liked most: flowchart for organization and flow of talk, great
example (lysozyme) to tie parts of talk together, good choice of topic,
good amount of text per slide, well organized

6. what is missing in your opinion: hard to read flow chart,

--------------------

1. Evaluation Of: Seq-Structure-Function

2. The overall quality of the group project
     1 - 10 (best):  8

3. Content:
     1 - 10 (best)  8

4. Organization:
     1 - 10 (best)  8

5. what you liked most;
The breakdown of various methods for 

6. what is missing in your opinion
Thought it could have been clearer how the different methods compared.



	1. The name of the group being evaluated:   Sequence-Structure-Function

	2. The oevrall quality of the group project:  10

	3. Content:  9

	4. Organization:  10

	5. what you liked most:  The presentation was stated clearly.

	6. what is missing in your opinion:  More software info.


Group 5            9.0                    8.5                    8.5
Two methods of predicting structures                None
(Sequence Structure)


V. The name of the group being evaluated:
	Protein Sequence-Structure-Function
1.The overall quality of the group project: 9
2.Content:     9
3.Organization:     10
4.what you liked most: the same

Evaluation for the sequence-to-structure-to-function group:
  
 1. The name of the group being evaluated:
  sequence-to-structure-to-function 
  
 2. The overall quality of the group project
     1 - 10 (best)
 10
  
 3. Content:
      1 - 10 (best)
 10
  
 4. Organization:
      1 - 10 (best)
 9
  
 5. what you liked most;
 - clear presentation, easy to follow, examples of experiments with 
   results 
  
 6. what is missing in your opinion
 - the main flow chart was difficult to see and it didn't help the 
   presentation
 - too long: watch out for time!