The wonderful paper about reasearch didnâ€™t get such good reviews. Is there a way that you may revisit what you wrote to incorporate these suggestions. If you need the paper back I will attach it.
You have the starting elements of the paper. There are a couple major items:
1) I see an emerging pattern that you want to avoid in your writing. When organizing your work, organize it around topics and themes not around sources/authors. Many of your paragraphs and sections of the paper have summarized one author at a time. Rather, your organization should be by topic (e.g. definition of theory, tests for good theory, etc.) Then, synthesize and integrate your sources around those topics/themes.
The way I approach this in my work is to review all the literature I gather. I create a set of synthesized notes on each source. I then scan those notes to identify major themes or topics that seem to run through and across all those notes. I capture those headings in a Word document. I then cut and paste notes related to each theme/topic from my synthesized listing and paste them under the associated heading. This begins to create an outline. When I go to write, all I need to do is organize my paper using those headings and flesh out the organized writing to integrate those sources and make the paper flow.
2) In scholarly writing, we need to persuade the reader that our claims are credible. One important way we do this is by showing the reader (through sources) that study findings support our views. If you do not cite sources to support your ideas, the reader is left wondering if they can trust what you say.
You have strong sources, but there are long paragraphs with only one citation. It is not clear if that is for the whole paragraph or just 1 sentence. That can confuse the reader.
3) The most important part question 3 part 1 is to do a true critical evaluation. This is important because it helps ensure that you properly use the findings. To do this, there are a few key elements to really examine:
Limitations: All methods have limitations. What are they?
Generalizability: Given the nature of the sample and sampling methods, how generalizable are the findings?
Validity: What validity issues exist? Again, all studies have potential issues with validity â€“ the key is to be aware of them and see how the authors mitigate those.
Reliability: What is the reliability of the data? This impacts how we consider the findings.
This is all important to ensure we properly interpret and utilize the findings.
4) Revisit part 3 of Q3. Your actual research outline is not clear. You spend a lot of time arguing about different methods, but in this question, you need to focus on the actual study. You want to answer the following:
1) What is the purpose?
2) What research question are you trying to answer? (this should be based on gaps you show in your literature review from part 2).
3) What data will you collect?
4) How will you collect that data? (be more specific)
5) How will you analyze the data once collected?