An Experiential Learning-Based Virtual Reality Approach to Foster Students’ Vocabulary Acquisition and Learning Engagement in English for Geography

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This is an interesting approach to teaching English using VR.

However, given you are submitting this to the Sustainabilty Journal this really needs situating within Sustainabilty education (see the remit of the journal), or consider for an altnerative journal where your work would seem a much better fit (e.g. Education Sciences)

Regarding the paper itself, it would help the reader if you could explain a little more the significance of the values/results of your ANCOVA tests (including especially the eF, p, and eta2 values).

Given the nature of your experiment, with two groups being used in teaching, you should explain the ethical approval/process as this could be of concern.

In your conclusion you should explain the limitation that your experiment assumes that the videos and VR are equivalent except for the immersive side. However, unless they have exactly the same content, they could be their nature be more/less engaging.  If you have uesd exactly the same conent in the VR/videos, then that is fine. If not it needs explaining and exploring. Would a 2D version of your VR content have the same impact (e.g. on a smartphone rather than VR device).

 

 

 

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

In Figure 1, are the categories and +/++ based on the article cited or on the current study (or the current authors') ideas? If it's the study cited, please make that clear. If it is the current study/authors, then was this based on data and a specific analysis, or the ideas of the authors? Similar questions for the VR scheme, though that sounds more like it's from the authors.

 

I love that the alternate situation to the VR was a video - it's a nice way to minimize the variables being tested!

 

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

The abstract should be revised.

Likewise, it is recommended to improve the format of the tables and figures included.

Similarly, it would be convenient to review the structure of the manuscript, give more details in the description of the study and avoid redundancies.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 4 Report

This is a finely written paper where the form is in balance with the content. The approach viewed is promising and it is finely opened.

From my side, the two requests I make, is that the English needs corrections in some places. For example, geography students instead of geographical students (the meaning is quite different); and that you would add a paragraph or two about the challenges of learning and teaching a specific  vocabulary of a specific field (for example, geography). You need to demonstrate your understanding about the problems of learning a language as an adult.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

thank you for adapting and updating your work in line with the comments and suggestions - that seems to be suitable covered now.