Talk:Post-Project Review

From apppm
(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
(Created page with "==Feedback 1 | Reviewer name: Ioannis Papadantonakis== ===Question 1 · TEXT=== '''Quality of the summary:''' Does the summary make the key focus, insights and/or contributio...")
 
(→‎Question 1 · TEXT)
Line 1: Line 1:
 +
==Feedback 1 | Reviewer name: Ioannis Papadantonakis==
 
==Feedback 1 | Reviewer name: Ioannis Papadantonakis==
 
==Feedback 1 | Reviewer name: Ioannis Papadantonakis==
 
===Question 1 · TEXT===
 
===Question 1 · TEXT===
Line 6: Line 7:
  
 
What would you suggest to improve?
 
What would you suggest to improve?
 +
 +
===Answer 1===
 +
 +
''Suggestion'':
 +
 +
===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===
 +
 +
''Suggestion'':
 +
 +
===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===
 +
 +
''Suggestions'':
 +
 +
===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===
 +
 +
''Suggestions'':
 +
 +
===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===
 +
 +
''Suggestion'':
 +
 +
===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===
 +
 +
''Suggestion'':
 +
 +
===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===
 +
 +
''Suggestions'':
  
 
===Answer 1===
 
===Answer 1===

Revision as of 17:42, 19 February 2018

Contents

Feedback 1 | Reviewer name: Ioannis Papadantonakis

Feedback 1 | Reviewer name: Ioannis Papadantonakis

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

Suggestion:

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

Suggestion:

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

Suggestions:

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

Suggestions:

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

Suggestion:

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

Suggestion:

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

Suggestions:

Answer 1

Retrieved from "http://wiki.doing-projects.org/index.php?title=Talk:Post-Project_Review&oldid=51572"
Personal tools
Namespaces

Variants
Actions
Navigation
Toolbox