FodnessReviewsBarton

1.Did the presentation clearly describe the aims of the research – empirical, conceptual, methodological, and practical?

Yes – integrating the context of space and knowledge production together – integration of STS and geographic foci.

2.Did the presentation provide an overview of what we already know about the research subject, and then explain how the proposed research will create new knowledge?

Yes – there was a slide on the current state of mountaintop removal which were well explained, and the questions presented will drive new knowledge production.

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 – semi-structured interviews, participant observation, and media analysis.

4.Did the research plan presented seem credible and feasible?

Yes. It seems to be of a good scope to be able to capture the phenomenon without being over-broad.

5.Did the presentation provide a tangible sense of the book and other outcomes of the research?

Not explicitly, but it could definitely be used to create a book and conference presentations.

6.Did the presentation persuade you that the proposed research is important, in this historical moment in particular?

Yes. She said that the movement is coming to a “crescendo” at this particular historical moment, and MTR is damaging the lives of residents of Appalachia.

7.Was the speaking style clear, engaging, and well timed?

Yes, it was excellent.

8.Further comments and questions:

Very well done.