2. Meaningful?

Does the envisioned PAS address an organizational problem in the public sector in a meaningful way or identify a gap in professional practice that needs to be addressed?

Is addressing the problem the logical next step for this organization and/or profession for this topic?

COMMENTS: IF NOT MET, WHAT IS THE REASONING FOR THIS ASSESSMENT?
0. Not Met 1. Met

Criterion Score :
1.00
3. Justified?

Is evidence presented that this problem is significant for the organization or for the field of public administration? The prospectus should provide preliminary evidence and documentation that point to the significance and urgency of the problem.

COMMENTS: IF NOT MET, IN WHAT AREAS IS ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE NEEDED?
0. Not Met 1. Met

Criterion Score :
1.00
4. Grounded?

Is the problem framed to enable the researcher to build upon previous research and build upon previous organizational knowledge?

COMMENTS: IF NOT MET, WHAT OTHER THEORIES OR FRAMEWORKS MIGHT BE MORE APPROPRIATE?
0. Not Met 1. Met

Criterion Score :
1.00
5. Original?

Does the study have potential to make an original contribution to the collective understanding of the problem or an original contribution to the public sector organization? The study must be relevant to the client organization and/or practice of public administration and not merely a topic the researcher finds interesting. Addressing the problem must make an original contribution to the organization or field of public administration.

COMMENTS: IF NOT MET, HOW COULD THE STUDY MAKE MORE ORIGINAL CONTRIBUTION?
0. Not Met 1. Met

Criterion Score :
1.00
6. Impact?

Does the study have potential to affect positive social change at the appropriate levels- individual, community, and/or societal? Anticipated findings of the study support the mission of Walden University to promote positive social change.

COMMENTS: IF NO, HOW COULD THE STUDY ADDRESS SOCIAL CHANGE MORE DIRECTLY?
0. Not Met 1. Met

Criterion Score :
1.00
7. Feasible?

Can a systematic method of inquiry be used to address the problem? The tentative methodology includes descriptions of options for inquiry and there is evidence that the researcher has selected an approach that supports a procedure to address the problem.

COMMENTS: IF NOT MET, WHAT OTHER APPROACHES TO RESEARCH SHOULD BE CONSIDERED?
0. Not Met 1. Met

Criterion Score :
0.00
Comments on this criterion:
It is still not clear if this proposed study will explore a) the causes of so much turn-over (lack of retention) and/or b) how the respondents think the problem can be positively addressed? In some sections, it appears the problem will be identified, yet later in the Prospectus it appears the focus is on how to address the problem. Is it one or both? This will need to be clarified.

In the Nature of the Study section, please remove the word “questionnaire” and you are proposing to use interviews, which simply use interview questions. Questionnaire’s are used for Survey Methodology.
8. Aligned?

Are the problem statement, purpose, research questions, and envisioned research approach aligned with one another and the nature of the study?

COMMENTS:IF NO, IN WHAT WAYS COULD ASPECTS OF THE PROJECT BE BETTER ALIGNED?