International Projects as a New Way to Solve Global Problems, Case Study of a European Project
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
While this work has rich insights and provides some interesting proposals, it presents some important issues that need revision: “The authors should describe in greater depth the results obtained and their implications, improving the discussion of these results with international studies on the topic of European projects. Likewise, the main results that imply social and educational transfer derived from the development of the project should be highlighted.
Author Response
Please see the attachment. Thank you very much.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
This paper is written well
This research analysis of projects dedicated to the training of adults to combating unemployment and social exclusion.
It is relevant and interesting.
It is original, because it is one research that informs the academic people about different programs of adults’ education, in special the programs which it methodology are successful in combating da unemployment an social exclusion.
This publication makes a summary about the different programs in adult education existents.
The conclusions are consistent with the evidence and arguments presented, but we think that the presentation of the results could be clearer, namely indicating the effective impact of the study, presenting the real results achieved in relation to unemployment and social exclusion and presenting new forms of adults education to promote a sustainable educatucation.
Author Response
Please see the attachment. Thank you very much.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Dear authors,
This is an interesting research, but unfortunately I found it too descriptive, with missing analytical framework and clear methodology to be used in the paper (not in the project) as a standard of academic writing. Consequently, you research results are hard to evaluate.
More concrete:
1. Keywords: You choose “employability” but you could also add social inclusion as these two are used complementary through paper. But I don’t believe the focus of your paper is on employability, neither adult education, and I would suggest to change this key words with new one that more adequately reflect the problem you are addressing oi your paper (e.g. project design, implementation and dissemination)
2. In State of the question chapter, I would build stronger analytical framework through which results of the paper can be discussed, although the authors are referring to limited scientific literature in addressing the paper problem (p. 2, lines 55-59). I would also suggest to clearly indicate the main aim/purpose of the paper. In this chapter (see p. 3, line 99), something is missing in the sentence.
3. In the objectives and methods chapter I would strongly advise to set methodology of your paper and not to refer on methodology you used in your project. These are two different things in your case and should not be confused. You should add here or in chapter above your research questions, that are missing now. In this chapter and elsewhere, I would change “document” to paper or article as this is what your writing is about, and also, the acronyms should be given full name when first time used (e.g. AEI). On p. 4 (line 163) you are referring to “the European educational system is a world reference”. Please be aware that there is no "European educational system", only different educational systems in European countries (one could argue in this direction for Bologna based higher education, although high diversity in implementation exists in European countries as well).
4. In the Table 1 you are referring to “European Qualifications Framework (MEC) at the non-university level.” This is not correct. First, the abbreviation used is »EQF« and it is a tool for LLL meaning that includes level descriptors that apply for university and non-university qualifications. It is not correct that it serves “non-university level”. In line 181: “In the case of 181 education, the challenge was having at least 15% of adults in permanent training”; should be more concreate here as this is true for “Education & training 2020” period, but not for Skills agenda period that applies after 2020 where the rates are much higher. On p. 5, line 189, the meaning here it is not clear: “methodologically different from young people” (how are they methodologically different and what does this mean?).
5. Results chapter it is not possible to judge as there are no research questions set (and thesis/hypothesis made) to see if the results corresponds. There are a lot of normative claims about adults and adult education and we do not know if they are empirically based on your project results.
Author Response
Please see the attachment. Thank you very much.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
