Today, I received the following feedback from one of the journal reviewers:
This has been a pleasure to read piece of writing. The abstract is brief yet sufficient and addresses the necessary components of the paper. The introduction section is great as it manages to acquaint readers less familiar with this field to the basic concepts discussed in the paper. The second section of the paper provides clear description of the design aesthetics course in UPSI. However, minor fine-tuning could be carried out to further enhance this paper. For example, a bit more depth in the discussion section would help problematize the three challenges mentioned and further illustrate their importance in the running of the course. Perhaps the author/s could also provide academic discussion on the terms ‘relativism’, ‘criterion’, ‘aesthetics’ besides providing dictionary definitions. I would also suggest consistency in naming the university (either in English or Bahasa Malaysia). Consistency is also required in the spelling system (i.e. criticise or criticize).I am grateful for this constructive comment and suggestions, and this is exactly what I hope to gain from writing a paper. To me, this is a form of life-long learning, from peers.
