Estimating the Socio-Economic Value of Dance Curriculum as Public Education in Korea for Sustainable Development: Using Contingent Valuation Method
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Thank you for the opportunity to review your paper. The paper has a very narrow focus (dance education in South Korea) and, in my view, is therefore likely to be of limited interest to the broader readership of the journal. It would be useful if you broaden the scope of the paper, both along the lines you already suggested in the conclusion by comparing dance education to other subjects, and by comparing the value of dance education in South Korea with the value of dance education in other countries.
Author Response
Thank you for reviewing our paper. Also, I deeply appreciate your opinion for understanding the problem consciousness of researchers who had to explore social benefit values because the situation in Korean dance education was different from other countries.
Reflecting the opinions of the reviewer, we revised most of the titles, introduction, research methods, conclusions, and discussions of the paper and strengthened the references. Therefore, the revised sentences are marked in red and uploaded.
Like the opinion of the judges, various studies on the value of dance education were added through other educational meanings such as the concept of sustainable education and the field of art and sports. Thank you for your careful and courageous review.
Reviewer 2 Report
The paper entitled Estimating the Economic Value of Physical Activity in School as Public Education in Korea: Using Contingent Valuation Method (CVM) has been reviewed.
In general, I consider it to be a work with an interesting analysis of results (although with certain shortcomings) and a sufficiently correct method (there is a lack of data to replicate it). However, the introduction and discussion are feeble. The authors should work on these aspects in depth before reviewing them again for publication.
Abstract
Check the first word in bold in summary.
Please try to omit the exact words in the abstract and the title. It will improve the scope of your paper.
Introduction.
The background is adequate in content but rather poor in depth. Would you please try to improve the introduction? It is not very clear what is the research gap detected and, therefore, the justification of your work.
Also, please note that you are writing for the journal Sustainability. Please try to relate the sustainable development of the planet to Physical Education. Keep in mind that the economic dimension is one of the three dimensions of Sustainability and can be worked from the EP. You can review the works of Baena-Morales or Lynch to justify these statements.
Method
I consider that there are missing variables to be described in the method. Age of the subjects, sex, studies or educational level. Is it possible to integrate this information?
Line 84 Contingent Valuation Method should be CVM.
Line 88 What is VM survey, should be CVM survey?
The square is always marked with a green background (x2).
I think that a lot of information about your questionnaire is missing. How many items are there?
No Confirmatory Factor Analysis data is presented? If so, please justify why.
Results
Check ALL your tables, the results presented in them should be understood without reading the text. There is a lack of legends in the tables that help to understand the results obtained directly.
In table 3 data are presented with commas, not dots. Is this correct?
Discussion
It is really poor. Only two authors are cited in the whole text. And only one of them is a previous study. Would you please work in-depth on both the theoretical framework and the discussion? I think you have some fascinating results that are not accompanied by your explanation.
A lot of information, in conclusion, should be discussed. Please, synthesize much more the findings of your work and do NOT lose the relation with your study objectives and hypotheses (they were not formulated).
A total of 14 bibliographical references are presented. This is poor for a paper that should be published in this journal.
I have suggested significant revisions to your research; I think the data you provide is exciting, but there is still a lot to be done. Lots of encouragement and strength
I wish you all the best,
Author Response
Response to Reviewer 2 Comments
Point 1: Abstract
Check the first word in bold in summary. Please try to omit the exact words in the abstract and the title. It will improve the scope of your paper.
Response 1: We revised the research title and abstract as follows, reflecting the reviewer's opinion.
Research Subject: Estimation of the economic value of dance education as public education for sustainable development: A study using conditional valuation method.
Reasons for revision: Currently, physical activity in public education in Korea is only covered in pe subject, and dance education has not been actively carried out due to the lack of a separate dance curriculum. The 2022 national curriculum will be revised to a specific title containing the gist of the study.
Point 2: Introduction
The background is adequate in content but rather poor in depth. Would you please try to improve the introduction? It is not very clear what is the research gap detected and, therefore, the justification of your work.
Also, please note that you are writing for the journal Sustainability. Please try to relate the sustainable development of the planet to Physical Education. Keep in mind that the economic dimension is one of the three dimensions of Sustainability and can be worked from the EP. You can review the works of Baena-Morales or Lynch to justify these statements.
Response 2: Reflecting the reviewer's review opinion, we made many revisions, citing the contents of sustainability, which could be a theoretical background, and the studies of the researchers who recommended it. You can check the revised contents in red.
Point 3: Method
I consider that there are missing variables to be described in the method. Age of the subjects, sex, studies or educational level. Is it possible to integrate this information?
Line 84 Contingent Valuation Method should be CVM.
Line 88 What is VM survey, should be CVM survey?
The square is always marked with a green background (x2).
I think that a lot of information about your questionnaire is missing. How many items are there?
No Confirmatory Factor Analysis data is presented? If so, please justify why.
Response 3: The errors pointed out in the research method were corrected, frequency analysis and exploratory factor analysis used in the CVM study were applied, and a table including the characteristics of the study subjects was added.
Point 4: Results
Check ALL your tables, the results presented in them should be understood without reading the text. There is a lack of legends in the tables that help to understand the results obtained directly.
In table 3 data are presented with commas, not dots. Is this correct?
Response 4: Errors in the contents of the table presented in the results were corrected, and citations from previous studies were added in the interpretation and discussion of the results, and the contents of the discussion were further reinforced.
Point 5: Discussion
It is really poor. Only two authors are cited in the whole text. And only one of them is a previous study. Would you please work in-depth on both the theoretical framework and the discussion? I think you have some fascinating results that are not accompanied by your explanation.
A lot of information, in conclusion, should be discussed. Please, synthesize much more the findings of your work and do NOT lose the relation with your study objectives and hypotheses (they were not formulated). A total of 14 bibliographical references are presented. This is poor for a paper that should be published in this journal.
Response 5: A number of previous studies were cited by actively reflecting the opinions of reviewers throughout the study, and the contents of the discussion were greatly revised to enrich. Please confirm that most of the contents of the manuscript marked in red have been revised and that this is an active acceptance of the reviewer's opinion.
Thank you for reviewing our paper. Also, I deeply appreciate your opinion for understanding the problem consciousness of researchers who had to explore social benefit values because the situation in Korean dance education was different from other countries.
Reflecting the opinions of the reviewer, we revised most of the titles, introduction, research methods, conclusions, and discussions of the paper and strengthened the references. Therefore, the revised sentences are marked in red and uploaded.
Like the opinion of the reviewer, various studies on the value of dance education were added through other educational meanings such as the concept of sustainable education and the field of art and sports. Thank you for your careful and courageous review.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
Dear colleagues, Congratulations on the article. But I would like to make a few suggestions: 1. carefully read the instructions of the journal on the making of the manuscript (organization of the manuscript, bibliographic references, etc.); 2. I think it would be useful to insist on the analysis of the data on the relationship between the socio-demographic characteristics of the investigated population and the option for dance in the curriculum; 3. to detail or at least put in context the results of your research with the current situation of this discipline in the national curriculum: educational objectives at the national level, transdisciplinarity, expected results, etc. Best regards Gabriela NeaguAuthor Response
Response to Reviewer 3 Comments
Point 1: carefully read the instructions of the journal on the making of the manuscript (organization of the manuscript, bibliographic references, etc.)
Response 1: Thank you for reviewing our paper. Also, I deeply appreciate your opinion for understanding the problem consciousness of researchers who had to explore social benefit values because the situation in Korean dance education was different from other countries.
Reflecting the opinions of the reviewer, we revised most of the titles, introduction, research methods, conclusions, and discussions of the paper and strengthened the references. Therefore, the revised sentences are marked in red and uploaded.
Like the opinion of the reviewer, various studies on the value of dance education were added through other educational meanings such as the concept of sustainable education and the field of art and sports. Thank you for your careful and courageous review.
Point 2: I think it would be useful to insist on the analysis of the data on the relationship between the socio-demographic characteristics of the investigated population and the option for dance in the curriculum;
Response 2: There was an overall revision to the research method, and a table containing information on the research subject was added.
Point 3: to detail or at least put in context the results of your research with the current situation of this discipline in the national curriculum: educational objectives at the national level, transdisciplinarity, expected results, etc.
Response 3: In the research results and discussions, a number of preceding studies were added to reinforce educational goals, interdisciplinary goals, and expected results at the national level.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Thank you for addressing the initial concerns I had about the paper so thoroughly. In my view, this is a much improved paper.
Reviewer 2 Report
Dear authors,
The article can be published. The authors have made a great effort to make it so, as the article was based on enormous shortcomings.
Congratulations for your work.
Reviewer 3 Report
Dear colleagues,
I appreciate your efforts to improve the context of the manuscript. Please pay attention to some strictly administrative/technical issues but which are important for your article to be published in the journal:
- section 2.3 - the title is either ”data collection” or ”survey”.
- in subchapter 2.6 correct the references according to the journal requirements
- in the conclusions chapter - attention to references (OECD, 2016).
Best regards,
Gabriela Neagu
