The proposal needs to cover three key areas:
1) Describe the problem.
2) Offer ideas and methods to solve the problem.
3) Consider the implications of this proposed solution.
see attachment for the paper to be reviewed
The requirement of peer review: ( 700 words)
Respond to each part using the following questions as your guide. Write the review as a letter to the group, developing as many paragraphs as you feel you need. If you want to offer some parts of your letter in list form that’s fine, but if so, weave those into your paragraphs where you use full sentences:
–Is the problem succinctly, yet adequately described?
Does the proposal set the table by describing the problem, offering some background
and context? Is there some support for this description based on research, on literature
gathered from the literature review? Here the writers should state how each discipline
frames or approaches the problem. Perhaps one discipline is more attuned to the
problem than the other. How does each discipline approach it? Where are the variances? Where are the overlaps?
Is this section well organized into as many paragraphs as needed? Are there section
headings to guide and focus you and to allow for quick, initial skimming of the
–Ideas and methods to solve the problem.
Here is where the proposal really should impress. This is the area for original thinking,
where the power and possibility of transdisciplinary thinking becomes apparent. Look
for rich cross-fertilization that can spring from two disciplines in conversation. That’s
the ideal being sought here. Are the ideas to solve the problem engaging? Supported? Innovative? Do you want more? If so, where and why? Offer suggestions to push the writers? For example, you might ask, “what about X?” or “why couldn’t Y work as well?” “Would research in area A help address this problem?”
The writers should also say why they are offering this proposed solution and whether
they see any limitations to it.
The writers should also consider the implications of this proposed solution. Where
might it lead future researchers? What else may need to develop or be done? What are
possible upsides and downsides of this approach? Related problems their proposed solution does not address? Who might benefit? Who may not?
How may the proposed solution change things in the immediate or distant future?
Comment on this draft’s readability so far: is the writer using sections and headings? Are you confused anywhere? What might make the text’s design sharper, more inviting, and readable? Noticeable grammar issues?