英语论文网

The examiners have identified the following deficiencies that you must address when revising and resubmitting your thesis. However, you should note that the revised thesis will be examined in its entirety and not solely in relation to any changes you have made.

Regrettably I don’t think this is of a master level but I am convinced he can address its shortcomings. Jia had two significant absences from Cranfield so produced this thesis in a very shortened time frame. For the time spent, he made good progress but the time away was not “authorised” and therefore I feel unable to mark in consideration of it.

Jia starts well with a solid scoping portion of the thesis. Regrettably the scoping study does not seem to inform his systematic review search strings which could have been determined without reading anything about the field. Therefore his data set of articles is suspect.

There is no clear research question. The cover talks about a review of private brands in retail – strategy, objective and competition. This is not a question nor is it amenable to a systematic / structured literature review. The end of the scoping section asks “what evidence has been published that links own brand success with building retailers’ corporate reputation…” this is a question amenable to asking the literature. But this does not seem to have been done. Jia then adds further questions about what strategies are employed and will they be successful. It is not clear that the literature can answer the latter part of that question and hence may not be suitable for review. Nonetheless, there are two distinctive questions one might ask of the literature. The search strings chosen do not match to either one. They are generic informational strings.

The process of narrowing from many articles to a manageable number is reasonably well done and I could follow it mostly. He produces data from the articles included in the study in the form of data extraction tables as demanded by the process. The tables are rather obvious and lack the material I think needed to produce some real insight. There is no detailed discussion of what the tables mean or how they relate to each other. I am not sure Jia understands that the extraction tables become the data set that forms the basis of the findings of his thesis. What he appears to have done is to generate extraction tables, present them and then ignore them.

The discussion of findings is really a narrative review of the articles that made it into his study rather than a discussion of the data extraction tables. The section starts by examining the background of private brands, positioning strategies etc… This is not in line with the question what evidence is there for private brands improving corporate reputation.

In addition. Jia had a very high score for similarity in Turnitin (44%). I looked at this very carefully and do not believe he is guilty of plagiarism. There is no wholesale lifting of ideas or sections. The score is generated from many 1% similarities. What he has done is to use and or paraphrase the language of scholars frequently in his thesis but at each time he does cite the reference to acknowledge it. Sometimes he uses quotation marks and other times he paraphrases but still acknowledges the source. The assembly of these phrases does flow into a narr本论文由英语论文网提供整理，提供论文代写，英语论文代写，代写论文，代写英语论文，代写留学生论文，代写英文论文，留学生论文代写相关核心关键词搜索。