Detailed Report

Title of the Paper: Spelling Problems and Causes among Saudi English Language Undergraduates Aims: • The researcher aims to bring out the spelling problems, having been confronted by the undergraduates in Arabian context. • The researcher appeals the policymakers to introduce necessary changes in the curriculum, based on the outcomes of the research.
DOI: 10.31235/osf.io/3rje9 Review Date: 24-04-2020

I. Abstract, Title and References:

The researcher has commenced the ‘Abstract’ introducing the necessity of executing a research on Spelling. The researcher has clearly indicated the hypothesis here. Here, the aim of the present research is being justified. The locality, totality and the background of the participants in the research have also been eloquently enumerated. Further, the title is generalized and misleading, as the research is exclusively done at Tabuk University. Hence, the title could have been slightly modified as, “Spelling Problems and Causes among Saudi English Language Undergraduates at Tabuk University.” The researcher has quoted enough and relevant references to affirm the research arguments.

II. Introduction/Background: The researcher succinctly builds his research arguments. He has also logically intertwined his perceptions in a cohesive manner. However, there are ambiguous sentences found here due to lack of linking: (ie: “ A second language has patterns… apply to the second language” Pg.179). As it is a quote, it has to be linked with his previous statement to get more clarity, but it fails to link. As a result, fragmentation prevails and it shall be avoided.

III. Methods: The researcher has apparently identified the best method to be adopted for the research:(‘‘This research paper employs case study approach.’’) (pg.182). Here, it becomes appropriate that the researcher has applied one of the best methods related to present research. He has received the inputs both from students and staff pertained to the research problem to scrutinize issue in different dimensions. However, as the input has been collected only from 15 students as well the staff, it questions the reliability. As far as the student part is concerned, had it been collected from the entire class, it would have given some more reliable output.

IV. Results and Discussions: The researcher has perfectly recorded the responses of the participants, having substantiated the same with external references. Here, the lacking part is that it has not been converted into graphical data. Had the responses been converted into pictorial representations with proper categorization of responses, the results will surely be very obvious and reliable.

V. Discussion and Conclusions: In the Discussion Part, the researcher has quoted the previous studies executed in line with the research problem adopting ‘Compare and Contrast Approach.’ In addition, he has also stated the findings which are not found in the previous researches and thereby brought some novelty in the culmination of his research.

VI. Overall Statement or Summary of the article and its findings: The researcher is able to list out the problems in a well-organised manner, but the solutions and the recommendations to rule out the issues are missing. The findings of the study endorse the research problem. As the researcher makes an appeal in the beginning of the research to the policymakers to utilize the output of the study, the recommendations are unaddressed.

VII. Overall strengths of the article: The researcher has followed the research methodology without any violation. All the arguments have been enumerated with clarity with the supporting references.

VIII. Specific comments on weaknesses of the article to improve: There are some typos in the article which can be eliminated. The subtitle named ‘‘The Case for Good Spelling’’ (Pg.180), shall be changed as ‘‘The Causes for Good Spelling’’. In the same way, the author writes: ‘‘There is a causal relationship between the habits, skills, and ability involved in, handwriting, spelling, punctuation, and sentence construction and paragraphs formation” (Pg.181). In the above stated sentence, the conjunction ‘and’ has been used many times and it does not serve any specific purpose.

Major issues to be noted 1. While discussing the different types of spelling, the researcher has added lot of explanations in general, rather it should have been limited with the chosen area and context. 2. The suggestions for the future research have not been stated in Conclusion.

Minor Points to be considered: 1. The questions asked among the participants can be prepared as a questionnaire and added in the ‘Appendix’. 2. The use of punctuation shall be prudently executed to avoid flaws.