Does introduction provide both an academic and a societal justification for doing your study and answer the “Why bother?” question?

Quality of Content:Introduction. Does introduction provide both an academic and a societal justification for doing your study and answer the “Why bother?” question?Methods. Does paper address the following:Participants: Who will be included in the study and why? How will they be chosen/found? Who will be excluded and why? How many people will you use altogether?What instruments (e.g., surveys, diaries, questionnaires, interview questions, etc.) will you use in your study? Explain them. Give reliability and validity information if it is available. Are copies of your instruments, questions, etc. in Appendices?Data Analysis: What will you do with the data once you have it? In other words, how will you use your instruments to answer RQs and Hypotheses? How are surveys scored? How will you analyze interview questions or diary entries?Conclusion. Does it summarize your prospectus and stress the value of doing your study?
Edits:Biggest serious problem: There are still 10 sources that you used in the paper, but that you did not include on the References page.
The lit review could still use some reorganization to establish what variables we know make a difference and which variables do not.
You still need a rationale for each of your RQs/hypotheses and they need to come after the lit review.
Intro: Your intro need to be more structured. Provide an academic and societal justification for your study. What gaps are you filling in the research? How will organizations be able to use this research to become more productive or have more satisfied employees? Conclude your intro with a preview of your paper that includes your lit review, RQs, and study.
I’m very concerned that you have no real rationale for your study, as you keep saying that what you are studying has already been studied before. You need to figure out why what you are doing is unique.
Methods:This section could use some fleshing out. Who in the department will you interview? How will you decide? How will your interview data be transcribed? Coded? Analyzed?
Conclusion: Good!APA: Title Page? Headers? Headings? Are the in-text citations and citations on References page structured correctly according to APA style? Are there any errors? Spacing? Margins? Are instruments in Appendices and formatted correctly?
Edits:Need a page number in the upper right corner of every page.I can’t really tell where the abstract ends.There are still several problems with the References list.
New:Writing Quality, Conventions & mechanics: Does essay have a clear, organized body and transitions? Is the piece grammatically sound? Are there any misspellings and/or typos? Are there errors in structure and/or punctuation? Does writing exhibit clarity? Do ideas flow smoothly? Is source material integrated into paper, as a whole? Is file labeled correctly? Is rubric attached?
Number of Errors: At least 15
Edits:Grammar was good. There were few typos or misspellings. Organization was better, but could still be improved.
There are too many pronouns with unclear referents. As a result, the clarity of your paper is harmed significantly. Most of your errors are clarity errors.
Develop more transitions to help your ideas flow together more smoothly. I felt like we jumped from topic to topic.