Talk:Determining Measurement Methods in Earned Value Management - Revision history

Veronikabanko: /* Feedback 3 | Reviewer name: Durant Mangum */

2019-02-26T17:09:47Z

Feedback 3 | Reviewer name: Durant Mangum

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:09, 26 February 2019
Line 102:		Line 102:
	''No recommendations. Good as is.''		''No recommendations. Good as is.''

	==Feedback 3 \| Reviewer name: ''Durant Mangum''==		==Feedback 2 \| Reviewer name: ''Durant Mangum''==
	===Question 1 · TEXT===		===Question 1 · TEXT===
	'''Quality of the summary:'''		'''Quality of the summary:'''
Line 190:		Line 190:
	===Answer 7===		===Answer 7===
	''N/A. but the user knows to put one in. .''		''N/A. but the user knows to put one in. .''


	==comment by mercedes hachmann==		==comment by mercedes hachmann==

	looks very finished, great that you put in diagrams for illustration. good narrative and structure, good introduction to the topic		looks very finished, great that you put in diagrams for illustration. good narrative and structure, good introduction to the topic

Veronikabanko: /* Feedback 2 | Reviewer name: Sandro Pina */

2019-02-26T17:09:36Z

Feedback 2 | Reviewer name: Sandro Pina

@@ Line 102: / Line 102: @@
 ''No recommendations. Good as is.''
 ==Feedback 3 | Reviewer name: ''Durant Mangum''==
 ===Question 1 · TEXT===

Mercedes Hachmann at 22:07, 25 February 2019

2019-02-25T22:07:20Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 22:07, 25 February 2019
Line 278:		Line 278:
	===Answer 7===		===Answer 7===
	''N/A. but the user knows to put one in. .''		''N/A. but the user knows to put one in. .''


			==comment by mercedes hachmann==

			looks very finished, great that you put in diagrams for illustration. good narrative and structure, good introduction to the topic

S190035 at 20:21, 25 February 2019

2019-02-25T20:21:46Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:21, 25 February 2019
Line 190:		Line 190:
	===Answer 7===		===Answer 7===
	''Answer here''		''Answer here''
			==Feedback 3 \| Reviewer name: ''Durant Mangum''==
			===Question 1 · TEXT===
			'''Quality of the summary:'''

			Does the summary make the key focus, insights and/or contribution of the article clear?

			What would you suggest to improve?

			===Answer 1===
			''I think the abstract could be more direct. But it I do know what the article will cover.''

			===Question 2 · TEXT===
			'''Structure and logic of the article:'''

			Is the argument clear?

			Is there a logical flow to the article?

			Does one part build upon the other?

			Is the article consistent in its argument and free of contradictions?

			What would you suggest to improve?

			===Answer 2===
			''The article was clear in the various tools that can be applied in project management in relation to EVM.''

			===Question 3 · TEXT===
			'''Grammar and style:'''

			Is the writing free of grammatical and spelling errors?

			Is the language precise without unnecessary fill words?

			What would you suggest to improve?

			===Answer 3===
			''There are no major grammatical errors. Check your quotation marks though.''

			===Question 4 · TEXT===
			'''Figures and tables:'''

			Are figures and tables clear?

			Do they summarize the key points of the article in a meaningful way?

			What would you suggest to improve?

			===Answer 4===
			''I liked the graphs a lot and I found them supportive of the text. ''

			===Question 5 · TEXT===
			'''Interest and relevance:'''

			Is the article of high practical and / or academic relevance?

			Is it made clear in the article why / how it is relevant?

			What would you suggest to improve?

			===Answer 5===
			''Yes, it is of high practical importance, and how a project manager can use it in real life. ''

			===Question 6 · TEXT===
			'''Depth of treatment:'''

			Is the article interesting for a practitioner or academic to read?

			Does it make a significant contribution beyond a cursory web search?

			What would you suggest to improve?

			===Answer 6===
			''The article is a nice conglomerate of a multitude of tools, so much better than a web search with tools all over the place. '

			===Question 7 · TEXT===
			'''Annotated bibliography:'''

			Does the article properly cite and acknowledge previous work?

			Does it briefly summarize the key references at the end of the article?

			Is it based on empirical data instead of opinion?

			What would you suggest to improve?

			===Answer 7===
			''N/A. but the user knows to put one in. .''

Yulisa: /* Answer 6 */

2019-02-25T13:24:09Z

Answer 6

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:24, 25 February 2019
Line 86:		Line 86:

	===Answer 6===		===Answer 6===
	''~~Answer here'~~'		''Most of my recommendation was listed above.'

	===Question 7 · TEXT===		===Question 7 · TEXT===

Yulisa: /* Answer 7 */

2019-02-25T13:23:40Z

Answer 7

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:23, 25 February 2019
Line 100:		Line 100:

	===Answer 7===		===Answer 7===
	''~~Answer here~~''		''No recommendations. Good as is.''

	==Feedback 2 \| Reviewer name: ''Sandro Pina''==		==Feedback 2 \| Reviewer name: ''Sandro Pina''==

Yulisa: /* Answer 5 */

2019-02-25T13:21:07Z

Answer 5

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:21, 25 February 2019
Line 74:		Line 74:

	===Answer 5===		===Answer 5===
	''~~Answer here~~''		''This is a hard question to answer because I feel like it is a very elaborated article, but might stray away or confuse those who have no idea of the topic. So I guess it all depends on the target audience. But as this is a student assignment where you are you write an academic paper with strong arguments, it is very valid for you to assume previous exposure to the topic. Just something to think about... Maybe include more examples? ''

	===Question 6 · TEXT===		===Question 6 · TEXT===

Yulisa: /* Answer 4 */

2019-02-25T13:18:31Z

Answer 4

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:18, 25 February 2019
Line 62:		Line 62:

	===Answer 4===		===Answer 4===
	''~~Answer here~~''		''Tables and figures were pretty straight forward. No further recommendations''

	===Question 5 · TEXT===		===Question 5 · TEXT===

Yulisa: /* Answer 3 */

2019-02-25T13:17:15Z

Answer 3

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:17, 25 February 2019
Line 50:		Line 50:

	===Answer 3===		===Answer 3===
	''~~Answer here~~''		''Grammar was good, but I will say to be careful with comma splices and run-on-sentences. I would also stray away from the words you, me, us, and use "ones"''

	===Question 4 · TEXT===		===Question 4 · TEXT===

Yulisa: /* Answer 2 */

2019-02-25T13:16:20Z

Answer 2

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:16, 25 February 2019
Line 38:		Line 38:

	===Answer 2===		===Answer 2===
	''~~Answer here~~''		''It was very interesting. Very well put together and thought through.''

	===Question 3 · TEXT===		===Question 3 · TEXT===