Make comments and write a revision letter for the attached two papers according to the instructions below: You’ll be keen to consider these elements of their work:1). Do you see specific bit of knowledge taken from each source? If so, mark these. If not, what can you suggest?2). Do you see specific relations drawn between these bits of knowledge? Relationships, as we know, have a whole vocabulary. What’s the state of the relationship between your sources?: ‘Source A agrees with Source B, because….’ ‘Source C disagrees with Source D in the way that….’ ‘Source E slightly agrees with Source F but has a closer affinity with Source G….’ Relationships, as we also know, are complicated. It is extremely unlikely that two sources agree entirely–that would mean they would be identical, and two identical publications shouldn’t be possible. Even if sources agree, there’s likely some degree–and what degree is among the challenges to figure out–of disagreement. It’s complicated. It’s a debate. So, if you see, in your partner’s paper, specific relations drawn between sources, mark them. If not, what can you suggest?3). Do you see judgment on these relations drawn between sources? That is, if disagreement between sources is described, does your partner’s paper take a side? Take no side (for some specific, stated reason)? Combine sides? Say that it is too early to take sides, more specified research needs to happen? The best outcome for a relationship is complicated. Figuring out how to resolve the debate is another challenge to figure out. So, if you see judgment on relations between sources, resolution of debate, mark it. If not, what can you suggest?Background of the assignment:If you are writing a literature review, I hope you have found authoritative sources of knowledge; have taken specific and strategic elements of knowledge from each source; have put those elements into coherent relation (assimilation)–which, in an emerging field of knowledge, will be some form of debate; and have worked to offer your judgment on the significance of that relation (synthesis)–which in an emerging field of knowledge, will resolve that debate (is there a winner? no winner? should positions in the debate be combined in some specific, strategic fashion? should, because specific questions are unresolved, specific further research should be done, in order to pick a winner?). This is challenging work. If you are penetrating an emerging field of knowledge in your strongest fashion, there will be complexity; it’s unlikely that one approach is best and so unlikely that the debate among sources has a clear, simple winner. If you are writing a proposal, I hope you have found authoritative sources of knowledge to help you identify and describe a gap. I hope you have found authoritative sources of knowledge to help you identify and describe the way to fill that gap. Now, any time we see a gap, we will debate the best way to fill it. Everybody has an opinion! Given the nature of the gap and the possible ways of filling it, which your proposal details for its reader, what is the best way to proceed? Why? How did you arrive at that solution? I also attached a example of a revision letter and comments for a paper, please follow the example and write a revision letter and make comments for each paper (paper 1 and paper 2 in the attachments) in the same format as the example.Attachments: paper1.docx paper2.docx example_of_revision_paper.docx
You can hire someone to answer this question! Yes, essay96.com has paper writers dedicated to completing research and summaries, critical thinking tasks, essays, coursework, and other homework tasks. It's fast and safe.