Research Proposal
by
Submission date: 22-Apr-2022 03:49PM (UTC+0200)
Submission ID:
File name:
Word count: 6355
Character count: 37255
1
2
3
4

5
6
7
8
9
10
11 12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
40 39
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67

68

69
FINAL GRADE
77/100
Research Proposal
GRADEMARK REPORT
GENERAL COMMENTS
Instructor
Much feedback was provided on previous draft
(and diligently acted upon), hence fewer comments
KNOWLEDGE AND UNDERSTANDING (20%) – 15%
(75%)
Title indicated the scope well
Knowledge and understanding demonstrated very
well and extensively, going beyond the
requirements of a RP; numerous current citations
well-embedded in the text; overview provided
(non-mandatory); research problem well stated
and documented, together with the knowledge gap
and rationale; aim and objectives well phrased
and addressed collectively; RQs mostly well
phrased, could be further explained, same refers
to hypotheses (how will be tested? what numerical
variables considered?)
APPLICATION OF KNOWLEDGE (30%) – 21.9%
(73%)
knowledge of previous studies on the topic well
applied for a RP, also that of research
methodology; three thematic subsection sin
preliminary literature review addressed; 12
publications referenced, some attempt of a
synthesis detectable, citations are well-embedded
in the text, literature gap is addressed rather at
length and documented with citations
methodological knowledge also well applied
ANALYSIS AND EVALUATION/ORIGINALITY &
CRITICALITY
EVALUATION of
applicable research design, assessment of ethical
(40%) – 32% (80%)
All sections addressed expensively and critically
Research design comprehensively addressed with
regard to all the layers of the research onion,
purpose indicated, 3.2 addressed extensively, as
detailed as possible at this stage; some overlap
with 3.3 – also well addressed; 3.4 analysis
methods relatively well indicated for a RP;
reliability and validity very extensively discussed,
as well as possible at this stage
some originality detected; scope and limitations
extensively discussed, most ethical concerns
identified; Gantt chart is inserted, but some action
verbs are missing and project resources not
identified
COMMUNICATION AND
PRESENTATION & REFERENCING STYLE (10%) –
8.2% (82%)
Correct ToC, well formatted; some paragraphs
could be shorter, though; well cited and
referenced (only numbering should be removed),
course resources very well utilised; all the aspects
comprehensively addressed (apart form project
resources); tentative questionnaire Qs provided in
appendix ; minor inaccuracy in expression; the text
referenced is well paraphrased (only 3% similarity
rate); academic style applied
Overall mark: 77% (77.1%)
PAGE 1
Comment 1
remove the word
bold type the title
Comment 2
on
Comment 3
no full stop in title
Comment 4
Lecturer and…
PAGE 2
PAGE 3
Comment 5
so child labour in Europe?
where?
Comment 6
be more precise, name specific countrites/regions
– certainly the US and Europe are not the main places of concern, are they?
Comment 7
good
PAGE 4
Comment 8
Make use of shorter – meaningful – paragraphs
PAGE 5
Comment 9
good
PAGE 6
Comment 10
good
Comment 11
Tentative
Comment 12
: C
omment 13
avoid yes/no Rqs
PAGE 7
Comment 14
not in italics
Comment 15
rephrase
social sustainability
Comment 16
how will be tested?
PAGE 8
Comment 17
why was this particular company selected?
Comment 18
source more suitable for 1.1
PAGE 9
Comment 19
rephrase
Comment 20
justified
Comment 21
sample?
really?
not a valid finding them – look for more credible findings
PAGE 10
Comment 22
good
PAGE 11
Comment 23
rephrase
individual opinions and beliefs will be taken into account
PAGE 12
Comment 24
divide into shorter paragraphs
Comment 25
good
PAGE 13
Comment 26
no, the sample size has to be higher, accounting for socio.demographic variation
Comment 27
Why only Gen Z?
to be discussed
Comment 28
rephrase
not kindly 🙂
you have to go beyond convenience
Comment 29
rephrase
Comment 30
first convenience
also purposeful, volunteer
Comment 31
nothing to do with sample size but the sub-groups
Comment 32
explain
Comment 33
magazines not
what data will be relevant?
what criteria will you use to select them?
Comment 34
sampling techniques here?
Comment 35
tentative sample size for the secondary data set?
PAGE 14
Comment 36
socio-demographic variables
Comment 37
which companies do you have in mind?
PAGE 15
Comment 38
data analysis
Comment 39
not information
rephrase
Comment 40
Any other non-parametric test
suitable for nominal and ordinal variable testing?
Comment 41
there will be more
Comment 42
rephrase
Comment 43
toward what?
What about sentiment analysis?
PAGE 16
Comment 44
ot a methodn
Comment 45
explain better
what measure?
refer to instruments of data collection
Comment 46
no, not study but questionnaire design
Comment 47
good
Comment 48
well, unavoidable with convenience sampling
Comment 49
that does not quite fix it
Comment 50
NO, this will not be accounted for
only relationships/associations between variables – not cause-effect
PAGE 17
Comment 51
toward what?
numerous issues were named
Comment 52
this has to be evidenced
Comment 53
good
Comment 54
mention in 3.2
PAGE 18
Comment 55
that does not justify small sample size
Comment 56
too vague
Comment 57
you mean sources for literature review here (?)
Comment 58
not clear where from
Comment 59
that would be good, so start looking for available data sources
PAGE 19
Comment 60
no
Comment 61
do not skip any project stages
address data analysis as well
Comment 62
so far so good, but why aren’t project resources not named?
Comment 63
action verbs are missing for each to-do
Comment 64
okay, in here
Comment 65
which is?
PAGE 20
Comment 66
in
provide concrete milestone dates
Comment 67
do not number
PAGE 21
PAGE 22
Comment 68
yes, to be discussed with me and perhaps you can adapt some existing consturcts
PAGE 23
PAGE 24
Comment 69
where are the 5-point Likert scale Qs indicated above?