Literature review and discussion sections need to be rewritten.
Here are more specific comments:
Currently the literature review (up until the point that you talk specifically about Zwarte Piet) is interesting but very abstract and not clearly related to this study how can you relate the theory and research that you cite here to relevant examples? The theories need application (i.e. to other changing traditions / mores / cultural practices). I suggest looking at Hobsbawms Invention of Tradition as a useful text and also refer to Lamond and Spracklens Critical Event Studies in which they look at events as traditions used as ideological tools of continuing oppression.
In the Discussion section, I also note how you need to bring the authors relied upon in that section up into the Literature Review. You might usefully condense the sections on social change in order to allow this addition to the word count.
Your sections on conflict theory and the functionalist model will work only if you give them a direct relationship to THIS study.
The discussion section should ideally do the following things:
– mirror the literature review in terms of theories / concepts discussed
– NOT include new authors, or new texts, or new themes
I would strongly recommend therefore that you place more emphasis in the literature review on the themes that you have articulated this Discussion education, populism, colour sensitivity and so on and that the authors that you use here (Ozdil, Chauvin, Mesman et al, Duyvendak etc) are used there and explored in detail and ONLY referred back to in the Discussion
P.S. Let me know if you need the bibliography list. I assume you have it from the previous orders.
Use the order calculator below and get started! Contact our live support team for any assistance or inquiry.
[order_calculator]