Undergraduate Rationale and Final Feedback (excluding A&F): Student ID : 36294 Student First Name: Rashidat Student Surname: Bisiryyu Nature of the problem being investigated and justification: The statement of the problem, purpose of the research and its objectives have been appropriately formulated, with perhaps little bit more discussion how you arrived to them would enhance this section. Some background information provided, with the topic looking perhaps in need of narrowing down. Two null hypotheses formulated suggesting quantitative research appropriately. Section 1.8 (operational definition of terms) is merely a list – is this glossary of terms used in the report? There is no outline of the project structure available. Literature review: This Chapter is largely plagiarised from other sources and merely description of various models/theories applicable, even though you examined a large body of knowledge. There should be more academic debates on theory to make the chapter more evaluative, with you demonstrating to synthesise the information to align it to research objectives. The areas covered here however are relevant to the topic being investigated and contemporary sources used. It seems to have been borrowed from other people’s work and put as they are, without apparent attempts to paraphrase, summarize or compare. Research methodology: You use descriptive survey and chi-squired test applies to test your two hypotheses. This method found appropriate as chi-test is asymptotically true, meaning that the sampling distribution (if the null hypothesis is true) can be made to approximate a chi-squared distribution as closely as desired by making the same size large enough. The chi-squared test is used to determine whether there is significant difference between the expected frequencies and the observed frequencies in one or more categories and this can be used in context of Marlborough Court Care Home as a case study. I note you used generic formula, as you did in section 3.5 and make calculations Manually (rather than use SPSS), however in section 3.5 you really need to put the formulae in context of your research. For example, I understand p1 would relate to first probability of relationship between leadership style and employee productivity, p2-2nd probability formulae here is not sufficient to justify what to do. In Section 3.8 you say about pilot study (p.33) – I need more information on That, where did you do this pilot study, who participant were and how many, any revelations from that, etc. I also note much of the text here relating to method of data analysis 9sections 3.5 and 3.6) are taken from 3rd sources as per Turnitin? I note you completed Application for ethic approval to go to Ethics Panel as Gsm – this is required as you research goes beyond standard ethics check as you have worked with employees in a residential care home. However the application was not signed by the supervisor and it is not clear whether indeed you applied and, if so, what was the outcome of the panel decision? These important ethical considerations should have been taken forward as part of your project.Checklist (tick as appropriate) Poor Weak Good Strong Outstanding Level of knowledge and understanding demonstrates  Level of cognitive or intellectual skills Use of Research informed literature  Graduate skills for life and employment demonstrated Presentation and Analysis of Findings : In Chapter 4, you presented results in tables and refer to as Field Survey (I assume this is the same as the one you discuss in Chapter – there should be more clarity what you mean by field survey). There is sufficient analysis under each of the figures presented, which are appropriately linked to research objectives. Two hypotheses have been tested by rejecting null and accept alternatives using descriptive statistics analysis – this was presented to a standard required, though I expect the calculation to appear to have been manually (rather than using IMB SPSS). Significance relationship proved for both elements which suggest you are able to apply quantitative research methods with confidence. Conclusions/Recommendations: In Chapter 5, you seem to conclude more one (2nd) hypothesis (leadership style and its impact on organisational effectiveness) and less so, on the 1st hypothesis (employee productivity). Despite your research borne rather technical and quantitative analysis, the conclusions you arrived at look quite generic and might lack level of sophistication/detail which one would have expected from this type of research. The recommendations are vague, and there could have been more insightful considerations for a specific sector context (e.g. Residential care homes). Are your conclusions/recommendations applicable in any sector? Overall layout and presentation: The report somewhat suffers from a consistent approach in presenting the information. Whereas prescribed structured was broadly followed, you seem to have struggled with formatting the document (e.g. page numbering). It would also be good to clarify which questions in your questionnaire addressed with by applying Chi test and which ones by looking at significance levels and which ones – by merely determining frequencies and percentage using Likert scale. Academic English used throughout. Overall Comments + Reflection: A very good effort connecting questions/use of SPSS and link to secondary data.