Comments of the paper evaluation team 1

In the five-minute presentation, the student introduced the main points, content and structure of the paper, and the writing process of the paper. The organization is clear and the language is correct, but sometimes he has to read the lecture notes, so he is not fully prepared. For the first question raised by the teacher, the students gave a basically correct answer only under the inspiration of the teacher.

For the second question, the students' answer is satisfactory, but there are some language errors. In terms of pronunciation and intonation, survival lies in several problems. Fluency is not the same as other students in a defense group. After careful discussion, the defense team still agreed to pass the student's graduation thesis, but asked the student to correct some language errors left in the thesis.

Opinion of the paper evaluation team 2

During the defense, the student introduced the main points and contents of the paper and answered the questions of the defense members. The defense shows that the student has a deep research on the land expropriation compensation system, collated a large number of documents, has a certain ability of literature review, and has innovation in the research of land expropriation compensation. The students' answers to the teacher's questions are basically correct. In addition, there are still some shortcomings in the paper, such as the deep-seated basic theoretical issues involved in land expropriation are not discussed deeply enough.

Based on the opinions of the tutor and reviewers and the performance of the student in the defense process, the defense team unanimously agreed to pass the defense of the student's graduation thesis after careful discussion, and suggested granting a bachelor's degree. According to the opinions of the defense team, the student can skillfully and concisely state the main contents of the paper within the specified time, and respond quickly, clearly and accurately when answering questions. After full discussion, the defense team agreed to evaluate the papers as excellent according to the quality of the students' papers and their performance in defense.

The tutor has a good opinion.

The defense team suggested that the student should be able to explain the main contents of the paper fluently and clearly within the specified time, and answer the questions related to the paper appropriately. After full discussion, the defense team agreed to evaluate the paper score as "good" according to the quality of the students' papers and their performance in defense.

The tutor's opinion is moderate.

The defense team believes that the student can describe the main contents of the paper within the specified time and answer the questions raised without any mistakes in principle. After full discussion, according to the quality of students' papers and their performance in defense, the defense team agreed to evaluate the papers as medium.

After reviewing the thesis, the defense team thinks that the topic of the thesis has research value, and the author has certain ability to read reference materials, basically completed the contents stipulated in the graduation thesis task book, and was fluent in writing and able to answer the questions correctly. There are still some defects in this paper, such as unreasonable structure, too many introductions and discussions. After discussion by the defense team, the defense score is determined as.