The librarians also provided questionnaires that contained questions that were inquisitive of; directions and building locations, reference and general library information etc. The librarians contacted 28 people over a period of two weeks only, which was an average turn up for the research. The target group was well established, as the librarians targeted students and the community, which were the most frequent users of the library. It would have been unjust to choose a group that hardly did any academic research. The data gathered was also reliable and relevant, because it came directly from the users of the electronic library, and they were in the best position to understand what affected their research. The researches were lenient enough to avoid biasness, as they were gender sensitive and did their sampling sensitively. The methods of secondary data collection were rightfully adopted and implemented, because of the fruitful results and analysis.
Statistical analysis of both the qualitative and quantitative analysis was well established. Different times were provided for the collection of data through giving students questionnaires to fill and return observation of students by their librarians and adoption of the new model to observe the response. The allocation of time for data collection was efficient to ensure the students were observed during their research and after their research too. The librarians ensured they did not collide research time with the time for lessons as it would hinder data collection and also limit the amount of information required. The researchers used the right procedures; they collected data, analyzed the data and later interpreted to make a conclusion based on the information collected. However, the data was not well reported in the research paper. The writers of the paper were obligated to provide a deeper analysis of their findings, information they received,...
Reporting data collection and analysis is critical for any research work and writing.
Gaps in the research design, methodology and implementation
There were a few gaps in the research paper. The design of the paper lacked very fundamental aspects that need not be ignored. The problem statement was not as clear as expected by standards. However, the objective of the research was well tackled. The writers should have given a more detailed objective that is supposed to be framed in positive terms. The background and significance of the research was not dealt with, increasing the gaps left by the researchers and authors of the article. The authors were also expected to enumerate the benefits that come after the research such as the services it would render to community. This was mentioned in the paper, but in unclear terms.
Link of research conclusion with objectives of research
The best way to conclude the research and integrate this conclusion with the objective is to conclude by providing a summary statement that notes whether the research managed to fully answer the research questions earlier stated. When doing the conclusion, it is necessary to include the right time frames and show the authors skillfulness during the research (Website, 2012). The conclusion would therefore be that the paper under scrutiny was not well concluded, as per the expectations. In conclusion, any other critique would support me that regardless of the fact that the author of the paper tried to present a good case, there are still numerous elements in the paper which ought to be revised and corrected.
Reference
Okladot (2012). Contents of a Research Proposal. Retrieved 19 October, 2012 from http://www.okladot.state.ok.us/hqdiv/p-r-div/spr-rip/spr-pdf/submission.pdf
