The Electoral College, while controversial in some respects, probably isn't going anywhere because it is part of the Constitution, and abolishing it would require support from more states than we could get the votes for to amend the Constitution.

There are really only two main reform proposals:

1)  Abolition - The Electoral College is most often a winner take all system for each state, that is the electoral vote does not always represent the popular vote nationwide, and it is possible to win the popular vote and lose the electoral vote that counts.  This happened as recently as the year 2000 with Gore receiving 600,000 votes more than Bush, but losing the election.  The drawback to this proposal is that smaller states would receive a statistically smaller amount of representation with a straight popular vote than they do with the Electoral College.  Each state gets a minimum of three electoral votes, and 3/538 is greater than their percentage of the population as a whole.

2)  The second reform, which is much more achievable, is to abandon the winner take all system of apportioning electoral votes in each state and award a percentage of electoral votes equal to the popular results.  The drawbacks are that every state would have to move to this method, it still wouldn't accurately represent the popular results, and smaller states would still lose some influence.

Analyze criticism of the �Electoral College� system and the alleged advantages and disadvantages of various reform proposals.

States with a small population, such as Alaska, North Dakota, Wyoming, etc. usually have close to the minimum number of electoral votes, which is 3.  One for the at large Representative from the state, and two because each state has two Senators. 

If you take that as a percentage of electoral votes, 3/538 = .5% roughly, of the total vote.  If you take North Dakota's population, 641,481/304 million total population in 2008, then the percentage is much less, .2% of the vote. 

So by moving to a national popular vote system (which makes much more sense), small states lose what little voting power they have.  Why would any state vote to lessen their own say in the process?  Since we need 3/4th of the states to ratify a new Constitutional amendment, that makes one abolishing the Electoral College very difficult to pass.

Analyze criticism of the �Electoral College� system and the alleged advantages and disadvantages of various reform proposals.

It would be a lot more helpful if you would specify which reform proposals you want analyzed.

A lot of people say that it is unfair to the losing candidate to have a state's electoral votes all go to the winner.  They say that it makes more sense to have the loser get some amount of electoral votes to reflect all the people who voted for that candidate.

One proposed reform is the idea of dividing electoral votes by congressional district.  In my state of Washington, that would end up giving some amount of a voice to those of us on the east side of the state who tend to vote Republican even though the state as a whole goes Democratic because of the huge numbers of people over on the west side.