Many thanks for your comprehensive review. I feel as always very priviliged to have such wonderful professionals of your experience review and critique my work.
I amÂ pleased with your overivew interpretation of my exploration of tools and frameworks as a means to try and improve my practice and learning and in so doing to influence the learning of others in this complex field. I struggled so much during the research process - so it is quite wonderful to communicate these struggles and recieve feedback from you, Ram and Jack.
I am particularly grateful forÂ your detailed editorial suggestions and I have addressed these as follows:
1. The length of the paper - in fact I had shortened the paper after Ram's reviewÂ - you have reviewed the first draft Jackie - but in the meantime I did actually edit out sections from the beginning as you have suggested, so I hope that this reads betterÂ -
2. Complete edit - I have gone through each of your editing suggestions and applied them across the paper -
3. Other voice validation - again I had revisited the validation section after Ram's review and included more evidence ofÂ other voice validation from my data. However I took the opportunity on reading your review Jackie to revisit the full text of the paper as well as the validation section again - and to substantiate my claims with more references to the discourse /interactions/ artefacts containing other voicesÂ - peers/ tutors/ partners - voicesÂ that were instrumental in helping me to evaluate the quality of my workÂ Â and influence throughout the cyclical research process.
4. Website and video links have now been updated
5. Photos/ audios/ videos have been integrated throughout the doc with descriptors as you suggest.Â
Thank you again for your time, consideration and guidance,