Talk:Managing habits in a project

From apppm
Revision as of 23:55, 25 February 2019 by Ole (Talk | contribs)

(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search


Feedback on Abstract:

Text clarity Really good
Language Good
Description of the tool/theory/concept Good but when you know the specific tool you can mention it in your abstract
Purpose explanation Really good
Title of the Wiki Good
Relevance to curriculum Relevant
References Good
Other In the last phrase you write specific tools and methods will be explained in the article. Be careful not trying to cover too many.Your structure of the article looks good so far!

Feedback 1 | Reviewer name: Ole Moe

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 abstract is clear, catching and to the point. It could be longer, but it is not necessary.

Question 2 · TEXT

Structure and logic of the article:

Is the argument clear? Yes

Is there a logical flow to the article? Yes, it has a logic structure.

Does one part build upon the other? The different parts correlate in a good way.

Is the article consistent in its argument and free of contradictions? There are no obvious contradictions in the article as the arguments are supportive in relation to each other

What would you suggest to improve?

Question 3 · TEXT

Grammar and style:

Is the writing free of grammatical and spelling errors? There are some minor grammatical and spelling errors. This would easily be fixed by Word autocorrect or similar.

Is the language precise without unnecessary fill words? Yes, the language is very understandable.

What would you suggest to improve? Do a quick autocorrection.

Question 4 · TEXT

Figures and tables:

Are figures and tables clear? Not added yet

Do they summarize the key points of the article in a meaningful way? -

What would you suggest to improve? -

Question 5 · TEXT

Interest and relevance:

Is the article of high practical and / or academic relevance? Yes. The article addresses a very relevant topic, as managing habits are crucial for successful projects.

Is it made clear in the article why / how it is relevant? Yes, as people are the most valuable resource for a project, and habits affects people behavior.

What would you suggest to improve? No obvious suggestions.

Question 6 · TEXT

Depth of treatment:

Is the article interesting for a practitioner or academic to read? Yes, especially the practical examples are interesting to read.

Does it make a significant contribution beyond a cursory web search? It seems that it could.

What would you suggest to improve? -

Question 7 · TEXT

Annotated bibliography:

Does the article properly cite and acknowledge previous work? Yes.

Does it briefly summarize the key references at the end of the article? Yes.

Is it based on empirical data instead of opinion? Yes.

What would you suggest to improve? The author is well on his way!

Personal tools