A painting of contrasts

I'd call this a further step along the path.  You've invited criticism - brave lad! - and mine would be centred not on your colour, which is a largely individual thing, but on the relative strength of the colour: the tonal values: these suggest to me that your figure with his dog could be a little stronger in tone, as they appear to be a little ghostly at present, I'm not entirely convinced by the perspective of the building, but that may be accounted for by the idiosyncracies of its architecture, and I think there's just something about those trees which isn't quite there yet.... I'd certainly make the foreground tree a lot darker, it's melting too much into the tone of the further tree almost as if it's the same object: try taking a black and white version of it, and you should see the tonal issues more clearly.  Maybe a branch or twigs in strong tones would help, too.  What you've done here is basically apply colour theory - which is valuable in itself; but I think the tonal qualities are more important, and most important is combining colour and tonal theory and practice: with which, be it said, I have just as much trouble as anyone. It was absolutely worthwhile - I think if you pushed those contrasts even more than you have, in colour, tone, recession, focal point, it would be of benefit.  And adding a note of praise to the criticism - I very much like the way you've handled those steps: I well remember painting a flight of steps and discovering I'd put the shadows in exactly the wrong places - another ripped up piece of expensive watercolour paper......