Hello, I am looking for help to continue writing my research paper. I've completed most parts of the paper and require assistance with completing the Methodology along with writing the initial draft of the Results and Findings and all preceding sections (Introduction through Methodology). I request you to kindly read through the paper and help in proceeding further.

Analysis No indication of how data or related artifacts will be analyzed Little or inadequate indication of how data or related artifacts will be analyzed Clear indication of how data or related artifacts will be analyzed; adequate relationship to hypotheses or propositions Superior demonstration of how data or related artifacts will be analyzed; supporting relationship to hypotheses or propositions clearly in evidence 2.5

Justification None present Selected methods or methodology clearly inappropriate to the study Selected methods or methodology appropriate to the study Justification builds confidence in the study and its results 2.75 Data/artifacts used/generated Input data or other artifacts not in evidence or not identified; no indication of anticipated results or artifacts generated Input data or other artifacts not clearly in evidence or not clearly identified; little indication of anticipated results or artifacts generated Input data or other artifacts clearly identified; connected to hypotheses Input data or other artifacts clearly indicated and woven into methodology narrative in manner that effectively supports tests of hypotheses or propositions 2.75

Unacceptable (1) Novice (2) Competence (3) Excellent (4) N/A (at this time) SCORE Identification Methods or methodology not identified; missing study design Methods or methodology not clearly identified or only loosely identified; missing or overly brief study design Methods or methodology clearly identified; adequate study design Methods or methodology clearly identified; superior study design 2.5

Analysis Most gaps in literature, theory, or practice were missing; most claims made were not supported with pieces of scholarly/practical evidence; most articles/works cited were not critically analyzed. Some gaps in literature, theory, or practice were identified; some claims made were supported with pieces of scholarly/practical evidence; some articles/works cited were critically analyzed. Most gaps in literature, theory, or practice were identified; most claims made were supported with pieces of scholarly/practical evidence; most articles/works cited were critically analyzed. All gaps in literature, theory, or practice were identified; all claims made were supported with pieces of scholarly/practical evidence; all articles used were critically analyzed. 2.5

Conceptual framework, hypotheses or propositions developed None in evidence Inadequate, unrealistic or inappropriate propositions or hypotheses; does not flow from the cited literature or related works; does not match the given problem statement; framework for the study was designed using some factors affecting study Propositions or hypotheses developed are adequate and mostly realistic for the given problem statement; flow from the cited works and literature; framework for the study was designed using most factors affecting study Propositions or hypotheses are superiorly stated and derived from the cited works and literature; provide confidence in the future results of the study; framework for the study was designed using all the factors affecting study 2

Content/Flow No flow or narrative logic in review No buildup in narrative or analysis Literature review or analysis follows a progressive logic Narrative flows effortlessly, incorporating cited sources and related works as it builds toward or with the development of propositions or hypotheses 2.75

Number and sources origin No reviewed sources or related work; no justification for lack of related works or sources; dominated by questionable, non-reputable or non-academic sources Very few sources or cited related works; little or no justification for lack of related works or sources; cited sources and related works are a mixture of questionable, non-reputable or non-academic sources; Adequate number of cited related works; adequate justification for lack of related works or sources; no questionable, non-reputable or non-academic sources; Number and kind of sources are adequate in both number and reputation; caliber of sources and related works creates confidence in necessity or justification for proposal 3

Related work/Source recency ‘recent’ sources or cited related work OR justification of recent sources or related works Most sources or cited related works are recent of recent sources or related works All sources are recent enough for inclusion; included older works are ‘classic’ or well-cited sources of other existing studies OR justification for absence of recent studies or related works Source or cited related work recency justified; recency of sources helps create impetus for current study 3

Related work/Source relevance No relevant or comparable material/studies described; no justification for lack of missing supporting materials/studies Minimal relevance or comparability of previous studies; inadequate justification of lack of missing supporting materials/studies; sources do not clearly support understanding of the problem statement and/or research goals Cited literature, studies, experiments, or analogous applications clearly relevant; sources clearly support understanding of the problem statement and/or research goals Cited literature, studies, experiments, or analogous applications further understanding of the significance of the problem statement and help support the need for the proposal’s study 3

Statement of thesis organization Present, clearly indicative of flow of thesis Clearly indicative of flow of thesis Flow of thesis wrapped in attention-grabbing sentences. 1

Justification for study present convincing justification Current and desired state of knowledge and/or practice clear; outlined advantages of potential knowledge gained Identifies current and desired state of knowledge and/or practice; identifies advantages of potential knowledge gained Convinces reader of the necessity of the study; study aims seen as desirable and beneficial to research or practice 3

Problem statement and/or research goals present or broad to identify contribution; original Present and clear; tied to Introduction content Clearly stated and grounded in Introduction Traces a thread for the entire study which ties together all subsequent sections 2.75

Background and/or introductory literature Does not introduce reader to general problem area; does not provide supporting literature or connection to analogous or related problems; provides no details of the scope of the study Reader unable to determine full extent of problem area; little in the way of supporting literature or connection to analogous or related problems; cited research does not match problem area; insufficient details of the study scope Problem area identified; literature cited supports understanding of problem area or analogous or related literature used to support understanding; sufficient details of study scope Problem area thoroughly identified so that reader understands the extent and scope of the area; breadth/depth of cited literature builds the readers appreciation of the problem area 3

Unacceptable (1) Novice (2) Competence (3) Excellent (4) N/A (at this time) SCORE Content/Flow Fails to build toward problem statement; does not build interest in problem; does not define critical terms or concepts Inadequate build toward problem statement;; little or no interest created, or context provided; critical terms or concepts missing Builds toward problem statement; builds interest and provides context; critical terms and concepts covered Creates interest and flows logically toward problem statement; critical terms and concepts support flow and interest 2.75