Critical Review of the article; see the link in order instructions

Project description
https://research.stlouisfed.org/publications/review/02/11/ChiodoOwyang.pdf
Article Title: “A Case Study of a Currency Crisis: The Russian Default of 1998”
SUMMARY (approximately 300 words).
Present a summary of the key points along with a limited number of examples. You can also briefly explain the authors purpose/intentions throughout the text and you may briefly describe how the text is organised. The summary should not make up more than a third of the critical review
CRITIQUE (approximately 700 words).
The critique should be a balanced discussion and evaluation of the strengths, weakness and notable features of the text. Remember to base your discussion on specific criteria. Also include other sources to support your evaluation with reference.
If there are both strengths and weakness for each criterion you use, you need to decide overall what your judgement is. For example, you may want to comment on a key idea in the text and have both positive and negative comments. You could begin by stating what is good about the idea and then concede and explain how it is limited in some way. While this example shows a mixed evaluation, overall you are probably being more negative than positive.
Theories or frameworks used should also be discussed in the critique section; you can also include recommendations for how the text can be improved in terms of ideas, research approach.
No introduction or conclusion needed!!
Just make sure to base the Critical review on the points discussed above!!
File uploaded by writer

rev2.doc (33,50 KiB)
Uploaded on 07-05-2016, 01:36. Downloaded by customer on 07-05-2016, 09:08
rev.doc (33,50 KiB)
Downloaded by customer on 07-05-2016, 09:06
russia.doc (33,00 KiB)
Downloaded by customer on 05-05-2016, 10:42
Old files
russia.1.doc(33,00 KiB)
Please check the MB.

rev.2.doc(33,50 KiB)
Again, in the essay revised you are writing how the authors help readers understand the text by using tables or whatever else, whereas I need these strength to be empirically supported. For example, the strength of the article is the Asian crises experience, which authors argue to have an affect on Russian economy. This argument is supported by the suggestions of the second generation models. Also, the study of Sachs et al provides a clear correlation between the two crisis in support of the argument. However, authors did not do a good job in explaining this correlation. Rather a bit more information could have been used with links to other studies.