S183272: /* Feedback 1 | Reviewer name: Thea Pedersen */

2019-02-25T21:10:41Z

Feedback 1 | Reviewer name: Thea Pedersen

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:10, 25 February 2019
Line 93:		Line 93:
	===Answer 7===		===Answer 7===
	''You need more references and a briefly summarize of the key references.''		''You need more references and a briefly summarize of the key references.''
			==Feedback 2 \| Reviewer name: ''Theodoros Seremetakis''==
			===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===
			''Misunderstanding of the key focus''

			===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===
			''No logic flow.''

			===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 is a few grammatical and spelling errors''

			===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===
			''Answer here''

			===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===
			''I think the article will be of academic relevance''

			===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===
			''Answer here''

			===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===
			''Answer here''

Thea: Created page with "==Feedback 1 | Reviewer name: ''Thea Pedersen''== ===Question 1 · TEXT=== '''Quality of the summary:''' Does the summary make the key focus, insights and/or contribution of ..."

2019-02-25T14:06:03Z

Created page with "==Feedback 1 | Reviewer name: ''Thea Pedersen''== ===Question 1 · TEXT=== '''Quality of the summary:''' Does the summary make the key focus, insights and/or contribution of ..."

New page

==Feedback 1 | Reviewer name: ''Thea Pedersen''==
===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===
''The summery is good. It gives a good introduction to the article you will make. ''

===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===
''No logic flow. Section does not build up ''

===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===
''You can many long sentences. ''

''There is a few grammatical and spelling errors ''

''Read you text carefully and try to not make so long sentences''

===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===
''A figure of the iron triangle will be good''

===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===
''I think the article will be of academic relevance''

===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 interesting''

''You really need some references''

===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===
''You need more references and a briefly summarize of the key references.''

Talk:Measuring Project Success Beyond The Iron Triangle - Revision history

S183272: /* Feedback 1 | Reviewer name: Thea Pedersen */

Thea: Created page with "==Feedback 1 | Reviewer name: ''Thea Pedersen''== ===Question 1 · TEXT=== '''Quality of the summary:''' Does the summary make the key focus, insights and/or contribution of ..."