Talk:Outcome, output, benefit: Difference between revisions

From DTU ProjectLab
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Bartlomiej (talk | contribs)
Blanked the page
No edit summary
 
Line 1: Line 1:
==Feedback on Abstract:==


{|
|'''Text clarity'''|| Good
|-
|'''Language'''|| Good
|-
|'''Description of the tool/theory/concept'''|| Not that clear
|-
|'''Purpose explanation'''|| OK
|-
|'''Title of the Wiki'''|| OK but the title could be more specific. 
|-
|'''Relevance to curriculum'''|| Relevant. Good you decided to focus on one of the types of management and not all of them.
|-
|'''References'''|| Remember to make correct references. Here are some guidelines from DTU Library: https://www.bibliotek.dtu.dk/english/servicemenu/find/reference_management/references
|-
|'''Other'''|| The abstract is too short. Have a look at the recommended structure for the wiki in the Course Handbook. What will the reader gain more than an explanation the words outcome, output and benefit?
|}

Latest revision as of 12:11, 19 February 2019

Feedback on Abstract:

Text clarity Good
Language Good
Description of the tool/theory/concept Not that clear
Purpose explanation OK
Title of the Wiki OK but the title could be more specific.
Relevance to curriculum Relevant. Good you decided to focus on one of the types of management and not all of them.
References Remember to make correct references. Here are some guidelines from DTU Library: https://www.bibliotek.dtu.dk/english/servicemenu/find/reference_management/references
Other The abstract is too short. Have a look at the recommended structure for the wiki in the Course Handbook. What will the reader gain more than an explanation the words outcome, output and benefit?