The points to be edited based on instructor feedback are :(where only point 4 and point 6 were met) so 7 points need to be addressed:
1. COMPLETE? (not met)
DOES THE PROSPECTUS CONTAIN ALL THE REQUIRED ELEMENTS? REFER TO THE ANNOTATED OUTLINE TO SEE THE REQUIRED PARTS OF THE DOCTORAL STUDY PROSPECTUS DOCUMENT. not met
COMMENTS:IF NOT MET, WHICH ITEMS ARE MISSING?
2. MEANINGFUL? (not met)
HAS A MEANINGFUL PROBLEM OR GAP IN PRACTICE AS SUPPORTED IN THE RESEARCH LITERATURE BEEN IDENTIFIED? IN OTHER WORDS, IS ADDRESSING THIS PROBLEM THE LOGICAL NEXT STEP, GIVEN THE PREVIOUS EXPLORATORY AND CONFIRMATORY RESEARCH (OR LACK THEREOF) ON THIS TOPIC? IT IS NOT ACCEPTABLE TO SIMPLY REPLICATE PREVIOUS RESEARCH FOR A DOCTORAL DEGREE. not met
COMMENTS: IF NOT MET, WHAT IS THE REASONING FOR THIS ASSESSMENT?
3. JUSTIFIED?(not Met)
IS EVIDENCE PRESENTED THAT THIS PROBLEM IS SIGNIFICANT TO THE DISCIPLINE AND/OR PROFESSIONAL FIELD? THE PROSPECTUS SHOULD PROVIDE RELEVANT STATISTICS AND EVIDENCE, DOCUMEN TABLE DISCREPANCIES, AND OTHER SCHOLARLY FACTS THAT POINT TO THE SIGNIFICANCE AND URGENCY OF THE PROBLEM. Not met
COMMENTS: IF NOT MET, IN WHAT AREAS IS ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE NEEDED?
4. GROUNDED?(Met)
IS THE PROBLEM FRAMED TO ENABLE THE RESEARCHER TO EITHER BUILD UPON OR COUNTER THE PREVIOUSLY PUBLISHED FINDINGS ON THE TOPIC? FOR MOST FIELDS, GROUNDING INVOLVES ARTICULATING THE PROBLEM WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF A THEORETICAL BASE OR CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK. ALTHOUGH MANY APPROACHES CAN GROUND A STUDY IN THE SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE, THE ESSENTIAL REQUIREMENT IS THAT THE PROBLEM IS FRAMED SUCH THAT THE NEW FINDINGS WILL HAVE IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PREVIOUS FINDINGS. met
COMMENTS: IF NOT MET, WHAT OTHER THEORIES OR FRAMEWORKS MIGHT BE MORE APPROPRIATE?
. 5-ORIGINAL?(notbMt)
DOES THIS STUDY HAVE POTENTIAL TO MAKE AN ORIGINAL CONTRIBUTION? THE PROBLEM MUST BE AN AUTHENTIC “PUZZLE” THAT NEEDS SOLVING, NOT MERELY A TOPIC THAT THE RESEARCHER FINDS INTERESTING. ADDRESSING THE PROBLEM SHOULD RESULT IN AN ORIGINAL CONTRIBUTION TO THE FIELD OR DISCIPLINE.
COMMENTS: IF NOT MET, HOW COULD THE STUDY MAKE A MORE ORIGINAL CONTRIBUTION? not met
–6. IMPACT? met
DOES THIS STUDY HAVE POTENTIAL TO AFFECT POSITIVE SOCIAL CHANGE? AS DESCRIBED IN THE SIGNIFICANCE SECTION, THE ANTICIPATED FINDINGS HAVE POTENTIAL TO SUPPORT THE MISSION OF WALDEN UNIVERSITY TO PROMOTE POSITIVE SOCIAL CHANGE.
COMMENTS: IF NO, HOW COULD THE STUDY ADDRESS SOCIAL CHANGE MORE DIRECTLY?
–7. FEASIBLE? not met
CAN A SYSTEMATIC METHOD OF INQUIRY BE USED TO ADDRESS THE PROBLEM; AND DOES THE APPROACH HAVE THE POTENTIAL TO ADDRESS THE PROBLEM WHILE CONSIDERING POTENTIAL RISKS AND BURDENS PLACED ON RESEARCH PARTICIPANTS? THE TENTATIVE METHODOLOGY DEMONSTRATED THAT THE RESEARCHER HAS CONSIDERED THE OPTIONS FOR INQUIRY AND HAS SELECTED AN APPROACH THAT HAS POTENTIAL TO ADDRESS THE PROBLEM.
COMMENTS: IF NOT MET, WHAT OTHER APPROACHES TO RESEARCH SHOULD BE CONSIDERED?
8-ALIGNED? not met
DO THE VARIOUS ASPECTS OF THE PROSPECTUS ALIGN OVERALL? THE NATURE OF THE STUDY SHOULD ALIGN WITH THE PROBLEM, RESEARCH QUESTIONS, AND TENTATIVE APPROACHES TO INQUIRY.
COMMENTS:IF NO, IN WHAT WAYS COULD ASPECTS OF THE PROJECT BE BETTER ALIGNED?
9. OBJECTIVE? not met
IS THE TOPIC APPROACHED IN AN OBJECTIVE MANNER? THE FRAMING OF THE PROBLEM SHOULD NOT REVEAL BIAS OR PRESENT A FOREGONE CONCLUSION. EVEN IF THE RESEARCHER HAS A STRONG OPINION ON THE EXPECTED FINDINGS, THE RESEARCHER MUST MAXIMIZE SCHOLARLY OBJECTIVITY BY FRAMING THE PROBLEM IN THE CONTEXT OF A SYSTEMATIC INQUIRY THAT PERMITS MULTIPLE POSSIBLE CONCLUSIONS.
COMMENTS: IF NOT MET, PLEASE IDENTIFY THE POINTS OF SUBJECTIVITY.
4 and 6 only met
"Looking for a Similar Assignment? Get Expert Help at an Amazing Discount!"
