Talk:Agile project management
(→Answer 2) |
|||
| (6 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 33: | Line 33: | ||
===Answer 2=== | ===Answer 2=== | ||
| − | ''Nice explanation of the Agile Project Managment. Good flow | + | ''Nice explanation of the Agile Project Managment. Good flow is well organized and synteshised, . The article has a nice flow. |
| − | Very nice with links and the biography of the references, | + | Very nice with links and the biography of the references, maybe should be like a small example to illustrate the concept. |
===Question 3 · === | ===Question 3 · === | ||
| Line 46: | Line 46: | ||
===Answer 3=== | ===Answer 3=== | ||
| − | ''No grammar or spelling mistakes i think so. Good language and I | + | ''No grammar or spelling mistakes i think so. Good language and I could understand the whole idea, however i am not the best to speak in this topic i am spanish native speaker . |
===Question 4 · === | ===Question 4 · === | ||
| Line 58: | Line 58: | ||
===Answer 4=== | ===Answer 4=== | ||
| − | ''I think the pictures are place a good and are related with the | + | ''I think the pictures are place a good and are related with the article, however i beleive that there is a lack of picture, the author should introduce more pictures, only 1 picture and the article is to dense in terms of concepts, with pictures and drawings will be easier the concepts of the articule. But good choise of picture, they are easy to understand.'' |
===Question 5 · === | ===Question 5 · === | ||
| Line 71: | Line 71: | ||
===Answer 5=== | ===Answer 5=== | ||
''It has academic relevance nevertheless practical relevance should be reflected more directly in the text " | ''It has academic relevance nevertheless practical relevance should be reflected more directly in the text " | ||
| + | |||
===Question 6 · === | ===Question 6 · === | ||
'''Depth of treatment:''' | '''Depth of treatment:''' | ||
| Line 81: | Line 82: | ||
===Answer 6=== | ===Answer 6=== | ||
| − | '' | + | ''I believe that there is not enough information about Agile project management, it's the first time that i ear about that term, i believe that is of practical relevance because the method sounds new and are related with IT that nowadays have become in a important topic. |
===Question 7 · === | ===Question 7 · === | ||
| Line 96: | Line 97: | ||
===Answer 7=== | ===Answer 7=== | ||
''Yes there is prOperly citing. It is based on data. Nice with the annotated bibliography.'' | ''Yes there is prOperly citing. It is based on data. Nice with the annotated bibliography.'' | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==Feedback 2 | Reviewer name: ''Mint Rasmussen''== | ||
| + | ===Question 1 === | ||
| + | '''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=== | ||
| + | ''Good overview of the article. '' | ||
| + | ''Nothing to suggest. '' | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===Question 2 === | ||
| + | '''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 explanation of APM is good. '' | ||
| + | ''The article is incoherent. Work on the transition from each parts. '' | ||
| + | ''My suggestion would be to give some examples on practical application of APM. '' | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===Question 3 === | ||
| + | '''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 some minor grammatical and spelling errors in the article.'' | ||
| + | |||
| + | ''My suggestions would be to mark all the keywords with italic style, to give a better overview of which words are keywords. Be careful of the mixup of dots and comma and big and small letters. Another suggestion would be to ask someone to proofread the article, to minimize the minor errors. '' | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===Question 4 === | ||
| + | '''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=== | ||
| + | ''The figure gives a good overview of ‘’the roadmap to value’’ for agile planning. '' | ||
| + | The explanation of the process is also good. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ''More figures to gives an overview of other subjects. '' | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===Question 5 === | ||
| + | '''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=== | ||
| + | ''The article made it clear for someone who doesn’t know what APM is. Furthermore, it gives a good overview of which applications the topic is associated with. '' | ||
| + | |||
| + | ''As I have mentioned before, my suggestion would be to give some examples on practical application of APM. '' | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===Question 6 === | ||
| + | '''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 gives a good overview of what APM is. '' | ||
| + | ''My suggestions can be seen above. '' | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===Question 7 === | ||
| + | '''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=== | ||
| + | ''Good, nothing to suggest.'' | ||
Latest revision as of 08:18, 19 February 2018
Contents |
[edit] Abstract Feedback
Text Clarity; Ok.
Language; Ok.
References; missing references related to the standards
In general the abstract is ok, when developing the article don't forget to elaborate and describe the relevance for a Project Manager and try avoid a too generic article.
[edit] Feedback 1 | Reviewer name: Daniel Campos Rivera
[edit] Question 1 ·
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?
[edit] Answer 1
Good summary. It is very clear what you are going to tell about Agile Project Management, you have developed a good argument discussion related with the summary
[edit] Question 2
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?
[edit] Answer 2
Nice explanation of the Agile Project Managment. Good flow is well organized and synteshised, . The article has a nice flow. Very nice with links and the biography of the references, maybe should be like a small example to illustrate the concept.
[edit] Question 3 ·
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?
[edit] Answer 3
No grammar or spelling mistakes i think so. Good language and I could understand the whole idea, however i am not the best to speak in this topic i am spanish native speaker .
[edit] Question 4 ·
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?
[edit] Answer 4
I think the pictures are place a good and are related with the article, however i beleive that there is a lack of picture, the author should introduce more pictures, only 1 picture and the article is to dense in terms of concepts, with pictures and drawings will be easier the concepts of the articule. But good choise of picture, they are easy to understand.
[edit] Question 5 ·
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?
[edit] Answer 5
It has academic relevance nevertheless practical relevance should be reflected more directly in the text "
[edit] Question 6 ·
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?
[edit] Answer 6
I believe that there is not enough information about Agile project management, it's the first time that i ear about that term, i believe that is of practical relevance because the method sounds new and are related with IT that nowadays have become in a important topic.
[edit] Question 7 ·
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?
[edit] Answer 7
Yes there is prOperly citing. It is based on data. Nice with the annotated bibliography.
[edit] Feedback 2 | Reviewer name: Mint Rasmussen
[edit] Question 1
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?
[edit] Answer 1
Good overview of the article. Nothing to suggest.
[edit] Question 2
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?
[edit] Answer 2
The explanation of APM is good. The article is incoherent. Work on the transition from each parts. My suggestion would be to give some examples on practical application of APM.
[edit] Question 3
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?
[edit] Answer 3
There are some minor grammatical and spelling errors in the article.
My suggestions would be to mark all the keywords with italic style, to give a better overview of which words are keywords. Be careful of the mixup of dots and comma and big and small letters. Another suggestion would be to ask someone to proofread the article, to minimize the minor errors.
[edit] Question 4
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?
[edit] Answer 4
The figure gives a good overview of ‘’the roadmap to value’’ for agile planning. The explanation of the process is also good.
More figures to gives an overview of other subjects.
[edit] Question 5
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?
[edit] Answer 5
The article made it clear for someone who doesn’t know what APM is. Furthermore, it gives a good overview of which applications the topic is associated with.
As I have mentioned before, my suggestion would be to give some examples on practical application of APM.
[edit] Question 6
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?
[edit] Answer 6
The article gives a good overview of what APM is. My suggestions can be seen above.
[edit] Question 7
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?
[edit] Answer 7
Good, nothing to suggest.
