Driving Network Externalities in Education for Sustainable Development

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Some of the suggestions and recommendations have finally been addressed.

However, the authors should still

1. Clarify, in detail, the research design they are applying.
2. Review informational inconsistencies between the abstract and the text (statistical tests).
3. Smooth out the content of the conclusions. As noted in previous evaluations, these conclusions risk affirming especially relative results in the context of this research. For example, the abstract itself states that "Therefore, encouraging driving network externalities and expanding networks by providing ESD on a field trip can solve social problems and achieve sustainable development". (lines 21-23).

It seems logical to think that an excursion or day of activities on ESD is not sufficient or comparable to an educational intervention aimed at addressing social problems related to sustainability. The conclusions reached are too forceful about the effectiveness of an occasional outing of students to informal educational contexts.It is precisely at this point that research is weakened, since it fails to contribute, in a clear and significant way, to the field of knowledge in which it could be inserted.

Author Response

1. Clarify, in detail, the research design they are applying.

• The authors added the Figure 2 to explain the research design and added the explanation about the research design (P.6, lines 233-236).

2. Review informational inconsistencies between the abstract and the text (statistical tests).

• The authors are grateful for reviewer’s careful comments. We revised the abstract (P.1, lines 19-22) to enhance consistency between the abstract and the text.

3. Smooth out the content of the conclusions. As noted in previous evaluations, these conclusions risk affirming especially relative results in the context of this research. For example, the abstract itself states that "Therefore, encouraging driving network externalities and expanding networks by providing ESD on a field trip can solve social problems and achieve sustainable development". (lines 21-23). It seems logical to think that an excursion or day of activities on ESD is not sufficient or comparable to an educational intervention aimed at addressing social problems related to sustainability. The conclusions reached are too forceful about the effectiveness of an occasional outing of students to informal educational contexts. It is precisely at this point that research is weakened, since it fails to contribute, in a clear and significant way, to the field of knowledge in which it could be inserted.

• The authors agree with the reviewer. We revised some sentences to weaken our conclusions to deal with risks. The authors believe that these revisions can decrease forceful of conclusions. However, we really appreciate if the reviewer would point out the parts which are too forceful when our revision is not enough.
  • a field trip can solve social problems → a field trip can contribute to solve social problems (P.1, lines 22-23)
  • The findings revealed that field trip experiences affected driving network externalities → The findings revealed that field trip experiences can affect driving network externalities (P.13, line 348)
  • onsite visits and group discussions—the program of an ESD field trip—is effective in cultivating students’ experiential value → onsite visits and group discussions—the program of an ESD field trip—may be effective in cultivating students’ experiential value (P.13, line 392)

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

I have no further comments, since I have seen that the authors integrated my previous ones.

Author Response

1. I have no further comments, since I have seen that the authors integrated my previous ones.

• The authors really appreciate that this paper was improved according to reviewer’s insightful comments.

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Suggestions and recommendations have been incorporated to a greater or lesser extent. Inconsistencies identified between the text of the abstract and the text of the article have been resolved. Likewise, the affirmative forcefulness of the conclusions has been softened in due course.

Nevertheless, it is suggested to the authors that they please write a specific sub-section on the design of applied research. The research design should not be confused with the procedure followed to develop the research (Figure 2).

Author Response

Thank you for your kind suggestion. We added sub-section "1.2. Research Design, Contributions and paper structure" and some sentences to explain about research design (P.1, lines 65-72).

This manuscript is a resubmission of an earlier submission. The following is a list of the peer review reports and author responses from that submission.

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

I have read the manuscript entitled "Driving Network Externalities in the Education for Sustainable Development". The research could have the potential value to be published in the journal Sustainability, but first it needs linguistic corrections, furder explanations, because in its current form it is quite incomprehensible in certain segments, so it is difficult to judge its quality. Let me just highlight a few examples: P.1, lines 29-30: "access to environments". P.2, lines 61-71: I cannot understand the connection between the statement in the first sentence and the remaning sentences in this section. P.2, lines 68-69: "This effect on the field trip ESD affects students' diffusion behaviour..." Not clear what you mean!? P.2., lines 72-76: "This effect on the field trip affects the diffusion behavior of the students..." Why are you discussing contributions from this research here and not in the conclusion? P.5, lines 202-221: I am not clear what you mean by 'sacrifice'." Give a clear explanation about the organized field trips - lectures, group discussions, group presentations, 10 hours preparation time for the trip... it would be more appropriate to present this in a separate subchapter. P.5, line 229: "consultation with the program contents of field trips"? General: consider replacing "field trip" for "excursion"   ... and more.

Reviewer 2 Report

Despite the potential interest of the study in the field of educational studies (education for sustainable development), and the adequacy of the sample (1,950 students), it seems logical to think that an excursion or day of activities on ESD is not sufficient or comparable to an educational intervention aimed at addressing social problems related to sustainability. The conclusions reached are too forceful about the effectiveness of an occasional outing of students to informal educational contexts. A longitudinal study could confirm or refute these conclusions, which could be incorporated in a complementary manner.

Likewise, a greater detail and scientific rigour is recommended in the methodology section. No scientific evidence is provided on the relevance of the use of parametric statistical techniques (at least, with respect to multiple regression analysis). Why were these tests selected (without evidence of compliance with the corresponding statistical assumptions) instead of others oriented to analyze changes in the social representations of students before and after the visit? The Likert scales have an ordinal nature, so its qualitative character, except for a demonstration of the existence of parameters of normality, implies the absence of validity of the statistical analysis used.

Reviewer 3 Report

Introduction, lines 44/45: it's not clear what you mean here, consider revising:

"(...) related to these problems; therefore, schools lacking sufficient resources to prepare such actual field trips for students."

Line 59: "wicked social problems" (maybe choose a synonym for wicked)

Methods, 3.2. Measurements: "The questionnaire was divided into 3 groups categories"