I think I understand what you mean but I am not sure exactly, without seeing your list of references. First, I don’t know what Tracy (2010) is, but I guess it outlines 8 characteristics of an effective research paper and you are evaluating Khaki et al (2013) on those eight characteristics. So far, so good.
It’s from there that I am confused, because I can’t see what the 8 characteristics are. Alo in the part I have copied below, you have reference such as Keenoy & Oswick 2004, Zou 2008, and I am not sure how you are using those references or where they are coming from.
Actually, that last section that you have headed ‘critique’ is quite short and I think if you expand it to clearly cover the 8 characteristics and refer directly to content and page numbers in Khaki et al 2013, it will be much better!
From your draft…
Khaki et al. (2013) managed to create a level of interconnectedness between the various sources reviewed in their work, but the argument could have been presented in a better manner by presenting contrasting arguments instead of just complementary ones (Keenoy & Oswick, 2004)
Should have reviewed the role of technology in language learning, especially in the face of wide adoption of computer-assisted learning (Zou, 2008). In addition, the role of culture on perceptions and attitude towards learning a language should have been discussed, especially in the case of L2 language outside countries like China where English is not the dominant language (Xu, 2011). Culture has been observed to affect many aspects of modern life in the face of globalization, and cross cultural considerations in regard to language acquisition should have been discussed (Javalgi, Granot, & Alejandro, 2011). "
Use the order calculator below and get started! Contact our live support team for any assistance or inquiry.
[order_calculator]