1) First half will be held on Monday March 10 (9-10:30am) the 2nd half on Wed March 12, (10:30 - 12:00am).
But all course students should appear at both!!!

2) Those who do not find their topic listed at the bottom of this email, please let us know TODAY!!!!
We have to allocate presenters for Monday and Wednesday session in time!

3) Coordinate among yourself who will discuss what. Only make sure that the topic you choose as discussant is sufficiently different from the topic of your own critical review.
The presenter should meet with the discussant days before and inform (discuss with) him about his topic. If he can provide him written draft or PPT already, the better.

4) The plan is that each student presents for 10 minutes (strict!) followed by 4 minutes of comments by the discussant.
- people from the audience can provide presenters own suggestions at the end of discussant's comments but given the short time available, make sure you are very brief
- if there are questions from the audience, please leave them to bilateral discussions after the event (we do not have time)
- I and Mariola will make mainly written notes during your presentation and you are welcomed to visit us for consultations days after the event

5) In your presentation, focus on the following, i.e. explain:
- the essence of your topic
- why it is important
- what is known (stylized facts), what is not known, what is still contradictory,
- your own critical questions (even raw and preliminary) you plan to develop in written in the final text (e.g. what is not being explored or questioned, what is not properly analyzed etc.)

You have 10 minutes only (strict!) so make sure that you prepare for your presentation, do not repeat yourself, craft your argumentation well in proper order.

You can prepare a PPT presentation but 2 slides are maximum! Think twice about what you want to say and what to show!
Make sure your PPT is installed on the lecture room laptop 5 minutes before 9am!!!

6) Discussants are expected to present their own ideas and comments, possibly augmented by additional knowledge found in the literature.
In some sense, it should be some kind of a brainstorming inspiring the presenter how to improve written version of the Critical Literature Review.

At this moment, you are not expected to provide written text to us (this is just your well crafted presentation)!

Best regards
Daniel Munich & Mariola Pytlikova