Identify a meaningful weakness of the selected reading (not those trivial ones, such as too small sample size, or the study should be tested with a different group or context). Explain why this weakens the paper, including—if possible—a discussion of how to overcome the identified weakness in order to improve the selected reading. You are encouraged to identify more than one weakness and more than one solution. For your second selected reading, please address question Q-2: Identify a meaningful weakness of the selected reading (not those trivial ones, such as too small sample size, or the study should be tested with a different group or context). Explain why this weakens the paper, including—if possible—a discussion of how to overcome the identified weakness in order to improve the selected reading. You are encouraged to identify more than one weakness and more than one solution. Based on the two selected readings, please address either question Q-3-A or Q-3-B listed below. Q-3-A: After conducting your comparative/synthetic analysis, what kind of new insights (e.g., conceptual insights) could be generated? Q-3-B: After conducting your comparative/synthetic analysis, identify a shared and vital weakness that requires investigation (e.g., conceptual or methodological, etc.). Please focus on insights/weaknesses that are unique, interesting, and/or meaningful. For example, you can compare and contrast the selected readings to see (1) if insights/strengths derived from one reading can be used to address/overcome the weaknesses/issues from the other reading, and/or (2) if there is an identical or similar weakness from the selected readings that requires investigation (e.g., conceptual or methodological, etc.) in order to advance our knowledge. Note: Insights/questions/weaknesses for Q-3-A or Q-3-B do not need to be the same as those for Q-1 or Q-2. The reason is that Q-3-A or Q-3-B is more about comparing all selected readings while Q-1 or Q-2 emphasizes each individual selected reading.
