Group3 (ETC677) - 2 views
-
Frank Vidal on 06 Dec 095 - It is not my intent to be bias and it was my goal to look at 'our' paper objectively. For that fact, I will maintain my commentary brief. I did find that Team 3's paper retained formatting of text, spacing, and font uniformity throughout the paper. I also noted 21 References (>5 per team member). I did appreciate the presence of the Appendix at the bottom of the document without the need to visit elsewhere. The paper did appear much longer than other teams' work; unclear on that feeling. One item I did note some of the paragraphs to only contain two full sentences, where I believe a minimum of four is needed to make up a paragraph. I felt the subject matter was well-covered and explained clearly with the utilization of examples.