Talk:Risk Management in Construction Projects
| (5 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
===Answer 1=== | ===Answer 1=== | ||
| − | ''Good summary. It is very clear what you are going to tell about and | + | ''Good summary. It is very clear what you are going to tell about Risk management, maybe you have to speak more how is related the uncertain effectiveness and uncertain efficiency and the 4 fundamental elements with construction projects '' |
===Question 2 · TEXT=== | ===Question 2 · TEXT=== | ||
| Line 33: | Line 33: | ||
===Answer 2=== | ===Answer 2=== | ||
| − | ''Nice explanation of the | + | ''Nice explanation of the Management Risk. Good flow but I find that there is not relation with construction projects and the subtitles yet, . The article has a nice flow. |
| − | Very nice with links | + | Very nice with links and the biography of the references, but maybe is good idea to speak about the biography and how is related with construction projects with examples, arguments, illustration etc '' |
===Question 3 · TEXT=== | ===Question 3 · TEXT=== | ||
| Line 46: | Line 46: | ||
===Answer 3=== | ===Answer 3=== | ||
| − | ''No | + | ''No grammar or spelling mistakes i think so. Good language and I can understand the whole idea, however i am not the best to speak in this topic i am spanish native speaker .'' |
===Question 4 · TEXT=== | ===Question 4 · TEXT=== | ||
| Line 58: | Line 58: | ||
===Answer 4=== | ===Answer 4=== | ||
| − | ''I think the pictures are place a | + | ''I think the pictures are place a good and are related with the arcticule, however you know that you haven't finish yet and should put more pictures. But good choise of picture, they are easy to understand.'' |
===Question 5 · TEXT=== | ===Question 5 · TEXT=== | ||
| Line 70: | Line 70: | ||
===Answer 5=== | ===Answer 5=== | ||
| − | ''It has | + | ''It has academic relevance nevertheless practical relevance should be reflected more directly in the text " |
| − | + | ||
===Question 6 · TEXT=== | ===Question 6 · TEXT=== | ||
'''Depth of treatment:''' | '''Depth of treatment:''' | ||
| Line 82: | Line 81: | ||
===Answer 6=== | ===Answer 6=== | ||
| − | ''There is a lot about | + | ''There is a lot about Risk Management on the internet, PMBOOK Project Management Book is a good guide to work in civil engineering project and is to early to think that is significant contribution because the author haven't finished yet'' |
===Question 7 · TEXT=== | ===Question 7 · TEXT=== | ||
| Line 96: | Line 95: | ||
===Answer 7=== | ===Answer 7=== | ||
| − | ''Yes there is | + | ''Yes there is prOperly citing. It is based on data. Nice with the annotated bibliography.'' |
| + | |||
| + | ==Feedback 2 | Reviewer name: ''Hoda Vazirinasab''== | ||
| + | ===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=== | ||
| + | ''Nice summary. Clear to see that you talk about Risk Management and improve your discussion in the whole text with elements.'' | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===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=== | ||
| + | ''Well explanation of the Risk Management. Easy to understand and has a nice flow . Maybe that would be a good idea if you talk a little more about construction project with some example.'' | ||
| + | ===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=== | ||
| + | ''Good language and academic words . Easy to understand the whole text . '' | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===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=== | ||
| + | ''Good pictures related to every part of article, however some more pictures can be a good help to clarify the topics and comprehend the meaning.'' | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===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=== | ||
| + | ''It seems to be an academic relevance article . Although, thats a good choise if practical relevance be more clear in the text. '' | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===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=== | ||
| + | ''Risk management is more an academic text and lots of related articles are available on the web. However this in not finish yet and after author done that can comment about significant contribution.'' | ||
| + | ===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=== | ||
| + | ''Yes, it is an article base on data and properly citing. There are not key references summarize at the end of the text.'' | ||
Latest revision as of 20:36, 19 February 2018
Contents |
[edit] Abstract Feedback
Text Clarity; Ok.
Language; Ok.
References; Ok.
Try to avoid a too generic article.
[edit] Feedback 1 | Reviewer name: Daniel Campos Rivera
[edit] 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?
[edit] Answer 1
Good summary. It is very clear what you are going to tell about Risk management, maybe you have to speak more how is related the uncertain effectiveness and uncertain efficiency and the 4 fundamental elements with construction projects
[edit] 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?
[edit] Answer 2
Nice explanation of the Management Risk. Good flow but I find that there is not relation with construction projects and the subtitles yet, . The article has a nice flow. Very nice with links and the biography of the references, but maybe is good idea to speak about the biography and how is related with construction projects with examples, arguments, illustration etc
[edit] 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?
[edit] Answer 3
No grammar or spelling mistakes i think so. Good language and I can understand the whole idea, however i am not the best to speak in this topic i am spanish native speaker .
[edit] 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?
[edit] Answer 4
I think the pictures are place a good and are related with the arcticule, however you know that you haven't finish yet and should put more pictures. But good choise of picture, they are easy to understand.
[edit] 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?
[edit] Answer 5
It has academic relevance nevertheless practical relevance should be reflected more directly in the text "
[edit] 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?
[edit] Answer 6
There is a lot about Risk Management on the internet, PMBOOK Project Management Book is a good guide to work in civil engineering project and is to early to think that is significant contribution because the author haven't finished yet
[edit] 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?
[edit] Answer 7
Yes there is prOperly citing. It is based on data. Nice with the annotated bibliography.
[edit] Feedback 2 | Reviewer name: Hoda Vazirinasab
[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
Nice summary. Clear to see that you talk about Risk Management and improve your discussion in the whole text with elements.
[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
Well explanation of the Risk Management. Easy to understand and has a nice flow . Maybe that would be a good idea if you talk a little more about construction project with some example.
[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
Good language and academic words . Easy to understand the whole text .
[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
Good pictures related to every part of article, however some more pictures can be a good help to clarify the topics and comprehend the meaning.
[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 seems to be an academic relevance article . Although, thats a good choise if practical relevance be more clear 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
Risk management is more an academic text and lots of related articles are available on the web. However this in not finish yet and after author done that can comment about significant contribution.
[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, it is an article base on data and properly citing. There are not key references summarize at the end of the text.
