Analyzing and evaluating

STEP 6 in" rel="nofollow">in Repko’s IRP is to analyze the problem and evaluate each in" rel="nofollow">insight or theory. Briefly, discuss (1-2 sentences) why you have chosen the particular disciplin" rel="nofollow">ines you have for this study, and write the current version of your focus question. Then provide a short summary of what you have learned from each scholarly, peer reviewed, research article for one of your disciplin" rel="nofollow">ines. Be sure to use citations and compile a reference list. Remember, no quotes in" rel="nofollow">in the summaries. This post will be a first draft of transformin" rel="nofollow">ing your Annotated Bibliography in" rel="nofollow">into STEP 6 for the fin" rel="nofollow">inal paper. The first thin" rel="nofollow">ing you need to do for STEP 6 is to summarize the disciplin" rel="nofollow">inary perspective from each disciplin" rel="nofollow">ine. This summary should in" rel="nofollow">include in" rel="nofollow">information about the phenomena that each disciplin" rel="nofollow">ine studies and how those phenomena make a difference in" rel="nofollow">in your study. The next element of STEP 6 is to evaluate those perspectives. Chapter 8 in" rel="nofollow">in the text discusses this process and the content that should be in" rel="nofollow">included. On page 255 Repko provides you a checklist of items to use for evaluatin" rel="nofollow">ing research that might be useful. D6: Identify conflict What conflicts occur within" rel="nofollow">in the literature you are usin" rel="nofollow">ing to address our problem? Repko talks about different disciplin" rel="nofollow">inary approaches to a problem. Is that an issue with your disciplin" rel="nofollow">ines? Is there a vocabulary issue? Do your disciplin" rel="nofollow">ines use the same word to describe different phenomena? Or do your disciplin" rel="nofollow">ines use different words to describe the same phenomena? Are the basic assumptions of your disciplin" rel="nofollow">ines in" rel="nofollow">in conflict? This discussion post should focus on any conflicts that have occurred in" rel="nofollow">in the disciplin" rel="nofollow">ines and/or the research studies you are usin" rel="nofollow">ing for this course project. Identify at least one conflict you have found in" rel="nofollow">in your research. Refer to Chapter 10 in" rel="nofollow">in the Repko text for types of conflict that commonly occur. Also, look at the Tayler article for an example of how this STEP 7 can be completed. Next usin" rel="nofollow">ing one conflict you identified in" rel="nofollow">in STEP 7, propose a technique(s) you can use to create common ground and resolve your conflict. Repko discusses some of these techniques on pages 335-348. Next, carry out the process of that technique for your identified conflict. This will be the begin" rel="nofollow">innin" rel="nofollow">ing of STEP 8 for your fin" rel="nofollow">inal paper Peer review type responses are expected. Please make sure everyone has some feedback. D7: Conclusions & Suggestions for future research What new in" rel="nofollow">insights developed from your research that provide a new and better understandin" rel="nofollow">ing of the “wicked” problem that you studied? What suggestions and proposals did you make for addressin" rel="nofollow">ing the problem? What do you propose is needed for future research by scholars? This is your rough draft for STEPs 9 & 10. If you use the appropriate headin" rel="nofollow">ings and in" rel="nofollow">introductory and transition sentences this should be close to ready to in" rel="nofollow">insert in" rel="nofollow">in the fin" rel="nofollow">inal paper. Peer review responses: By now you should have a feel for what a peer review response is, and why it is helpful. Peer review is more than editin" rel="nofollow">ing, although it does in" rel="nofollow">include some editin" rel="nofollow">ing. How could the origin" rel="nofollow">inal post be improved, or developed, or edited to strengthen the fin" rel="nofollow">inal paper?