Walden University.

Send a short message that is easy to answer, with a specific question and a proposed date rather than a general request for feedback. If that produces nothing, most programs have a named person above the chair and contacting them is a normal step rather than an escalation. Meanwhile keep drafting, because a stalled chair is not a reason for a stalled document.

Read the whole packet in one sitting, cold, as somebody who has not seen it before. If the consent form describes a study your method does not carry out, or the appendix holds an instrument the analysis plan does not assume, you are not ready and no amount of polish will change that. That read takes an hour and saves a term.

Then the first move is to find out what they are worth, because the answer decides whether that is a problem or simply how the quarter feels. Where they are worth a great deal, the fix is usually timing rather than effort: posting on the required day and answering the required number of classmates recovers rows that quality alone does not.

Answer the letter in the letter's own order, quoting each item and stating what changed and where. A resubmission that simply attaches a revised document forces the reviewer to re-read everything to find your changes, which invites new comments. Walking their list makes the second read short, and short reads get approved.

No. Nobody here contacts your university, your faculty or your employer, and no account of yours is ever accessed. Files run against a client number, specialists sign confidentiality agreements before any work reaches them, and no student's work is reused, resold or shown to anyone else.