Friday, September 11, 2009

Reviewer: Donald Fuller

Bryan Minor, Alexander Peter, Donald Fuller: "Introduction to System Architecture," SU-IEE E, CIS512005016:04,2009
Posted by at

1 comment:

  1. DonaldSeptember 13, 2009 at 9:27 AM

    Peer Review of Bryan Minor’s Introduction to System Architecture

    Upon review of Bryan Minor’s paper, I noted the following:

    1. The research paper contained the basic sections. (abstract, introduction, body, summary, acknowledgement and references)

    2. Bryan used the appropriate subheadings to transition to the different parts of his paper. For example, he started with the evolution, beginning from early machines, then transition into each implementation during the evolution.

    3. The research paper was organized in a chronological order starting from the first computer to today’s computers. Also, you properly sequence the each computer part in the order of their use/execution.

    4. I rate this paper satisfactory in clarify. As I read through it, there were a few occasions where I could not grasp what he was trying to say because of missing words or run on sentences. An example within the paper is “There would really be any other need for devices such as hubs, routers, switches, operating systems without the computer”. Perhaps if it read, “There would "not" be any need for devices such as hubs, routers, switches, operating systems without the computer”, I could have transition smoothly to next sentence.

    5. I rate the paper’s relevance, strength, credibility strong because of the source.

    6. I rate the paper’s arrangement of ideas and guiding the reader satisfactory. The information flowed with the sequence of his sources. The flow, arrangements and guiding of the reader made sense.

    7. I rate the paper’s mechanics as a weak satisfactory. One reason was stated in number 4 above. Other reasons are lack of use of commas to break up ideas, items and incomplete sentences. An example of one incorrect sentence is “Communicate with sources outside the computer such as other devices, users and system administrators in addition to transporting data and instructions to internal and peripheral hardware components such as processors, disk drives, video displays, and printers”. Ok, who/what is communicating? What is the point? Additionally, there was a point in the paper where he used “do” but should have used “due”.

    8. Overall, I think the paper was satisfactory. There were some grammatical shortcomings within the paper, but they did not detract from the meaning. I understood his points and therefore, the purpose of his paper was achieved.

    Note: During my investigation for the research paper, I learned there was more than one IEEE Format. Based on this finding, I did not comment of the format.

    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)