Students’ Learning on Sustainable Development Goals through Interactive Lectures and Fieldwork in Rural Communities: Grounded Theory Approach

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This article is very interesting, both from the standpoint of presentation and content. However, certain things have to be added to ensure that the content is clear.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Responses to the reviewers’ comments

Thank you for reviewing our manuscript and providing suggestions for its improvement. We have provided point-by-point responses to the reviewers’ comments. Our revisions are indicated in red font here and in the manuscript. We hope that the revised manuscript meets the journal’s requirements and can now be considered for publication.

This article is very interesting, both from the standpoint of presentation and content. However, certain things have to be added to ensure that the content is clear.

 

Line 79: In this section you can add the characteristics or typical Shimane University students who study at so that readers can get an idea of the mindset and background of students.

Response:

Thank you for your valuable feedback. Per your comment, we have added information about the gender and previous residences of the university students(Lines 95–98).

 

It is also advisable to provide a brief explanation of the tasks and obligations of the instructor, lecturer or trainer in this course.

Response:

Thank you for your valuable feedback. Per your comment, we have added information regarding the instructors’ educational instruction and methods for interactive lectures (Lines 107–114).

 

Are students given directions or instructions when they write reflections? If so, what kind of instructions were given? If not, how do they write it down? Please add an explanation about it.

Response:

Thank you for your valuable feedback. Per your comment, we have added information regarding the instructions for the reflection notes in the method section (Lines 125–127).

 

In the abstract and introduction, it is stated that one of the ways of this research is to find a change in the expectations or ideas of the participants for their future work. But I have not found a discussion about it. It is advisable to add or clarify the findings.

Response:

Thank you for your valuable feedback. Per your comment, we have revised the discussion section by including the changes in the participant’s expectations or ideas after completing this educational course (Lines 486–498, 504–513, and 520–533).

Reviewer 2 Report

Great paper with an interesting content and a lot of examples. It is a pity that the Conclusions are so brief - only a short paragraph. Maybe it would be good to expand a little the conclusion section.

Author Response

Responses to the reviewers’ comments

Thank you for reviewing our manuscript and providing suggestions for its improvement. We have provided point-by-point responses to the reviewers’ comments. Our revisions are indicated in red font here and in the manuscript. We hope that the revised manuscript meets the journal’s requirements and can now be considered for publication.

Great paper with an interesting content and a lot of examples. It is a pity that the Conclusions are so brief - only a short paragraph. Maybe it would be good to expand a little the conclusion section.

Response:

Thank you for your valuable feedback. Per your comment, we have enriched the conclusion section by adding more description (Lines 562–570).

 

Reviewer 3 Report

This is an interesting paper based on the Students’ learning on sustainable development goals through 2 interactive lectures and fieldwork in rural communities, which fits the scope of sustainabilty, although it needs some work before considering the publication of it:

- In the introduction, this reviewer suggest to add at least one paragraph considering and describing about the technology in the learning process of the University as it hasn’t appear in the whole text and I suggest its introduction as for example using following references:

-Maruping, T. E., & Velempini, M. (2022). Awareness And Readiness of Stakeholders on ICT Implementation in Rural Schools. African Perspectives of Research in Teaching and Learning, 6(1), 199-215.

- Prendes Espinosa, M. P., & Cartagena, F. C. (2021). Advanced technologies to face the challenge of educational innovation. RIED-Revista Iberoamericana de Educacion a Distancia, 24(1), 35-53.

- Wang, J., Tigelaar, D. E., & Admiraal, W. (2022). From policy to practice: integrating ICT in Chinese rural schools. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 1-16.

- Gonzalez Vidal, I. M. (2021). Influence of ICT on the school performance of vulnerable students. RIED-REVISTA IBEROAMERICANA DE EDUCACION A DISTANCIA, 24(1), 351-365.

In its actual form there is a lack of that consideration, and it is completely necessary to add it as the use of ICTs in University, rural or not, has become a really useful tool that has been used and  studied by several authors and need to be considered.

- On the other hand, section 3, the consideration of the students should be interpreted and discussed by authors not just repeating it, so I urge the authors to add some deeper study of the responses given by students.

- Finally, section 5 needs a deep work as you must conclude not summarizing the previous sections and in its actual form it is just a summary.

 

General comments

- Please revise the whole manuscript as it appears some missprints and mistakes.

- Moreover, some references are complicated as for example reference 7, consider to renew the format.

Author Response

Responses to the reviewers’ comments

Thank you for reviewing our manuscript and providing suggestions for its improvement. We have provided point-by-point responses to the reviewers’ comments. Our revisions are indicated in red font here and in the manuscript. We hope that the revised manuscript meets the journal’s requirements and can now be considered for publication.

This is an interesting paper based on the Students’ learning on sustainable development goals through 2 interactive lectures and fieldwork in rural communities, which fits the scope of sustainabilty, although it needs some work before considering the publication of it:

 

- In the introduction, this reviewer suggest to add at least one paragraph considering and describing about the technology in the learning process of the University as it hasn’t appear in the whole text and I suggest its introduction as for example using following references:

 

-Maruping, T. E., & Velempini, M. (2022). Awareness And Readiness of Stakeholders on ICT Implementation in Rural Schools. African Perspectives of Research in Teaching and Learning, 6(1), 199-215.

- Prendes Espinosa, M. P., & Cartagena, F. C. (2021). Advanced technologies to face the challenge of educational innovation. RIED-Revista Iberoamericana de Educacion a Distancia, 24(1), 35-53.

- Wang, J., Tigelaar, D. E., & Admiraal, W. (2022). From policy to practice: integrating ICT in Chinese rural schools. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 1-16.

- Gonzalez Vidal, I. M. (2021). Influence of ICT on the school performance of vulnerable students. RIED-REVISTA IBEROAMERICANA DE EDUCACION A DISTANCIA, 24(1), 351-365.

In its actual form there is a lack of that consideration, and it is completely necessary to add it as the use of ICTs in University, rural or not, has become a really useful tool that has been used and studied by several authors and need to be considered.

Response:

Thank you for your valuable feedback. Per your comment, we have added a paragraph regarding methods for SDG education, namely the use of ICT, by referring to the suggested articles (Lines 65–73).

 

 

- On the other hand, section 3, the consideration of the students should be interpreted and discussed by authors not just repeating it, so I urge the authors to add some deeper study of the responses given by students.

Response:

Thank you for your valuable feedback. Per your comment, we have comprehensively revised the results section to include additional interpretation and discussions (Lines 173–477).

 

 

- Finally, section 5 needs a deep work as you must conclude not summarizing the previous sections and in its actual form it is just a summary.

Response:

Thank you for your valuable feedback. Per your comment, we have enriched the conclusion section by adding more description (Lines 562–570).

 

 

General comments

 

- Please revise the whole manuscript as it appears some missprints and mistakes.

Response:

Thank you for your valuable feedback. Per your comment, we have revised the English grammar by ourselves and through a professional English language editing service.

 

- Moreover, some references are complicated as for example reference 7, consider to renew the format.

Response:

Thank you for your valuable feedback. Per your comment, we have comprehensively revised the reference list.

 

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

Paper has improved and can be published.

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.