During my discussion with supervisor he said I had to address these areas in my overall thesis
1: he said in the case study i also had to include the ills/wrong doings of the Nigerian forces, and only then can i talk of the pro’s of SAF.
2: include case study in introductory part, methodology and properly justify how it fits into this research work and its aim.
3: he also mentioned that i mostly talked about military shirking and nothing about agency theory in case study & methodology section. Also said i need to be in detailed about Rosenbaums theories of partnership policing and community participation in case study and operationalize it properly.
4: also, said when talking about ills of Nigerian forces cmr under case study section i could include the issue of Nigerian JTF(which compromises of troops from across the country and often don’t understand local culture, religion or even speak local language) as compared to their SAF counterparts.
and then lastly his emailed comments which are;
Here are the points:
- there seems to be a gap between the theory and conceptualisation and its application in the empirical analysis. You should do something to narrow it. You may reemphasise/change the theoretical chapter and/or rework the analysis.
- SAF as a good example – you need to include this step in the methodology section and properly justify it.
- The SAF analysis cannot come from nowhere. The analytical framework should reflect the theory section and communicate with the analysis of the Nigerian CMR.