LamprouCommentFodness

Proposal Presentation Review

Presenter: Kevin Fodness Reviewer: Anna Lamprou

The methodological aims, the conceptual yes but not too much of theoretical framework, both empirical and practical aims were obvious from the presentation. Yes, good background too much if you ask me and obvious how it will create new knowledge. Yes, I think. I don't know about interviews so and who the researcher is going to interview. But I think according to the background information and the background of the research this will be an easy part. Yes, very. Yes, and the outcomes very important for the disable. Yes, internet has been a part of our lives and has to be designed for everyone. Yes, very well. A couple of suggestions: Stuff on universal design might be of interest for your research; when you talk about volunteer private standards even if they seem to develop under democratic procedures make sure you address power issues. The Habermasian public sphere is a myth; maybe you should think of comparative study between EU and US or US and Canada.
 * 1. Did the presentation clearly describe the aims of the research – empirical, conceptual, methodological and practical? **
 * 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? **
 * 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? **
 * 4. Did the research plan presented seem credible and feasible? **
 * 5. Did the presentation provide a tangible sense of the book and other outcomes of the research? **
 * 6. Did the presentation persuade you that the proposed research is important, in this historical moment in particular? **
 * 7. Was the speaking style clear, engaging and well timed? **
 * 8. Further comments and questions. **