LoganCommentByDenver

Presenter: Logan

Reviewer: Denver

1.Did the presentation clearly describe the aims of the research—empirical, conceptual, methodological and practical? Technology transfer. Appropriate technology, Neoliberalism, NGOs. 2.Did the presentation provide a overview of what we already know about the research subject, and then explain how the proposed research will create new knowledge? A clear introduction of the background of her research project. 3.Did the presentation provide a robust sense of how the research will be carried out, and of the type of data that will be collected? Yes. Fields sites: labs, hospitals, Nepal, India, Kenya, and Tanzania. Government officials, policy, NGO, etc. 4.Did the research plan presented seem credible and feasible? Yes, good understanding and feasible plan. 5.Did the presentation provide a tangible sense of the book and other outcomes of the research? Yes. Dissertation, book, presentations. 6.Did the presentation persuade you that the proposed research is important, in this historical moment in particular? Development and Neoliberalism 7.Was the speaking style clear, engaging and well timed? Clear speaking. Good order. Good control of time. 8.Further comments and questions. What would be the directions for your next research?