6200	Assessment Initial Draft	Final Draft comments
Abstract	The abstract covers the right ground, but it is both too long and too hard to read.  Try to make it more focused and improve the writing.	The much improved abstract is clear and direct.
Research Question	The overall research agenda seems reasonably clear, although the descriptions of the research questions are sometimes inconsistent and suffer from unclear writing.  Briefly put, the goal appears to be assessing how the educational achievements of immigrants who arrive in the U.S. as children compare to the education achieved by 2nd generation children of immigrants.	The formal statement of the research question is fairly good, although it does have some ambiguity.  Most of that is cleared up elsewhere, but it is preferable that it be clear in the formal statement.
Literature Review	Some parts of this have been copied directly from published work.  For example, the last two paragraphs of the literature review were copied directly from the article "Educational attainment: analysis by immigrant generation" by Barry R.Chiswick and Noyna DebBurman.  This constitutes plagiarism.  As this is a preliminary draft, we will let this go, but we do not want to see any signs of this in the future.	The literature review is concise, but well organized and to the point.  It could go into greater depth.
Data & Analysis	The CPS data seem plausible for the study.  However, the draft proposal does not explain why that data is better suited than alternatives, such as the ACS.  Nor does this draft explain why it would use only the 2015 data.  A proposal should indicate not only that the selected data will work, but that it is a good choice compared to others.	Overall, well done.  All the information is there, but the organization could be better (the table format is a bit awkward and needs greater explanation).  One oddity is the reference to the average years of schooling of the 1st and 2nd generations.  It is not clear what role these could play in the analysis.  Also, the definition and proposed use of "National Population" is very unclear.
Causal Interpretations	Although the draft proposal offers a couple "hypotheses", these appear largely to be empirical generalizations or speculation.  Are there good arguments about what circumstances influence the educational achievement of immigrants, particularly ones that distinguish immigrants whose schooling begins in their original countries and finishes in the U.S. (1.5 generation) compared to those who get all their education in the U.S. (2nd generation?  Do these arguments take into account the education of the parents?  Or the affluence of the parents?  As it now stands, it is hard to see what motivates the research project (although this may in part be the result of the writing issues).  As now written, the research goal appears to neglect the variation in immigration timing of the parents of 2nd generation (their parents could be 1st generation or 1.5 generation) or, to put it differently, where the first generation parents went to school.  If we need to distinguish a 1.5 generation, should we also consider distinguishing a 2.5 generation. The patterns of education change over time, both in the U.S. and the source countries for immigrants.  Although the research design suggests it will look at the age of entry for 1.5 generation subjects, it seems to neglect other possible timing issues. Both the source and meaning of the hypotheses are unclear.  For example, the second hypothesis appears to suggest that second generation will achieve higher schooling than the third generation ("those with native born parents").  Why?	Well done.  The hypotheses are now much clearer and reflect links to the literature reviewed.
Research Contribution	The potential contribution of this proposed project, its value, is not clearly examined in this draft.  Try to provide a brief, focused statement showing how this research will provide results that do not already exist in the relevant literature and will enhance that literature.	Well done.  The proposal clearly articulates the theoretical and practical value of the project.
Citations & Bibliography	The form of the citations and bibliography are fine.  The absence of cited sources from the bibliography is not.	Well done.
Quality of Writing & Organization	This paper is difficult to read and understand because of the many syntactic and grammatical errors.  This should not be true of the final draft.  Please seek writing assistance.	Well done.
Priorities for Revising / Responsiveness to Feedback	This proposal still needs quite a bit of work.  The writing needs improvement throughout.  The literature must be rewritten from scratch.  The causal arguments need development.  The research plan needs to be better specified.	The proposal is fully rewritten.  It has been significantly revised and the final version addresses major areas of feedback.
Miscellaneous Notes
Proposal		While some specifics need to be worked out after examining the data, the proposal is in good shape and should lead to effective research.
Class Overall		Serious engagement with the class has produced notable improvements.