Below are snippets that illustrate the mentoring, constructive wording we ask our reviewers to use to deliver the news that improvements are needed. 

Introduction: This paper would be even stronger by adding a new section giving details on the environment that led to the research (economic, political, etc.). Without it, the reader is left to infer details and may infer incorrectly. For example, make it clear if the program was mandated, what funding was available, if and how technology was distributed to schools and students.

Literature Review: Adding a review of Change Theory literature here will provide a stronger basis for the subsequent Results and Findings. 

Including more recent references will strengthen the literature review and demonstrate that the most recent developments have been taken into consideration. Examples of useful papers include [and list some examples of papers that should be read and, if appropriate, cited].

Method/Methodology: Consider rearranging the opening paragraph in this section so that lines 213 to 216 follow line 217. Doing this would improve flow. Have the paper provide further justification for the decision to use mixed methods; this will build a stronger case for accepting the results of the analysis. Explain to the reader what a mixed methods study does that a quantitative method only study does not. This justification might well fit as part of the Literature Review.