Instructions:
Thesis: A social constructionist inquiry exploring Video Interact
Instructions:
Thesis: A social constructionist inquiry exploring Video Interactive Guidance (VIG) trainees’ lived experiences of learning, development and creativity through the VIG supervisory process
The original draft of the Methodology chapter needed to be separated in two chapters, which I have done, I need help with each one of them in total. They should amount to 8,000 words: Both chapters need to be thoroughly proofread, copy-edited and developmental edited
The two chapters for the Methodology chapters The theory called Chapter 3: Theoretical framework OR conceptual framework – only constructivism and the video tool ( needs to go in this chapter )
And it will be only or mainly concerned with containing all that it needs to be in it: about the constructivism, it needs to comprise about 2000 words ( at the moment 5064) So please, if you use track changer, you cut, point out what needs to be cut or what I need to leave there
If you are able to condense the text and to keep only the essence of what is important to say at PhD Level in this chapter, to develop the critical thinking and arguments so it does not just read as a summary but in a much more concise text: what would be the essential to leave from any other things mentioned in that ch3 that can be under the heading of theoretical or conceptual framework and use of VIG tool with constructionism frame.
Please if can you point out what I need to move from chapter 3 into chapter 4, now called the Methodology and Method chapter
in Chapter 4: methodology and methods – the following needs to be definitely there: interpretivism, method, procedure, ethics, sample, and coding, comprising about 6,000 ( at the moment, about 5,000)
I left the comments in chapter 4 . Please, help with addressing these comments and improvements on chapter 4 and also use your expertise in The level to rewrite the text, improve and strengthen the arguments, offer suggestions with other links of literature or and over all improve the chapter to meet the examiners PhD Level.
In both chapters:
Please help me to use the right voice, not to refer to myself as a researcher in the chapters and change this where this seems appropriate and also to use the Harvard referencing style.
If you can help to sort these out in chapter 4 and also what to keep and what to move from chapter 3 into chapter 4, that will be great If you can help with how to formulate the arguments throughout chapter 4 as highlighted in the comments
