Case 9: The four outcomes of transit and land-use. Sybil Derrible and Bilal Farooq
PLEASE NOTE THAT THE CASE IS IN FILE “case bank”!
Think about Abstract, strengths, opportunity or weakness and what you learn about the case, there are some questions be listed as below. Thinks about them and select 2 to 3 questions to answer for each part. (you do not need to answer all of them)
Abstract
An abstract is an encapsulation of the paper:
• What is the paper about (scope)?
• Did they identify a problem (economic, logistical, etc.)
• What did the author(s) want to do (objectives)?
• How did they go about doing it (methodology)?
• What evidence did they use in the analysis?
• What did they find (conclusion)?
Paper’s Strengths
Here are some questions you can consider as you prepare the critique of the paper:
1. Is the article well written and easily understood with clear objectives and reasonable conclusions?
2. Does the author(s) address a tangible problem in society and provide an insightful discussion?
3. Does the author(s) present convincing data and other evidence to support their position?
4. Is the methodology technically sound and appropriate for the data collected?
5. Does the author(s) make a useful contribution to the knowledge of transportation and could it have long term value?
6. Does the author(s) make good use of the diagrams, figures or data to support their arguments? Are any missing, that should be there?
7. Do the conclusions flow from the material presented in the paper?
8. How could the paper be made even stronger?
Opportunities for Improvement
Weaknesses
Here are some questions you can consider as you prepare the critique of the paper:
1. Is the article well written and easily understood with clear objectives and reasonable conclusions?
2. Does the author(s) address a tangible problem in society and provide an insightful discussion?
3. Does the author(s) present convincing data and other evidence to support their position?
4. Is the methodology technically sound and appropriate for the data collected?
5. Does the author(s) make a useful contribution to the knowledge of transportation and could it have long term value?
6. Does the author(s) make good use of the diagrams, figures or data to support their arguments? Are any missing, that should be there?
7. Do the conclusions flow from the material presented in the paper?
8. How would you recommend that the author(s) could improve the paper?
Which Implicit Economic Model?
Explain why, given the examples in the case
What did you learn?
This is your opportunity to assess the intrinsic value of the paper from your own perspective.
What surprised you most?
Did anything challenge your prior impressions?
Did you learn anything about organizing a paper, or what to avoid?
Are you convinced by the analysis, or skeptical of its validity?