Sustainability in Higher Education during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Systematic Review

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The quality of this paper is very good. This paper have a worthwhile contribution. This paper should be accepted as is.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you kindly for your positive review. 

Kind regards, 
Lead Author

Reviewer 2 Report

This paper discusses a very important problem, i.e. the sustainability in higher education during COVID-19 pandemic. The authors present a review of the recent studies conducted on this topic and highlight their findings and draw conclusions based on the data of those studies. The paper can be improved if the following points can be included and appropriately addressed in the paper:

1. In the Introduction section, including the Definition of sustainability in general and then in the context of education and specifically higher education.
2. Please re-write the following line: “Globally, in 37 (2021) and 64 (2020) academic institutions signed onto the Global Compact,”
3. By the end of the Introduction section, it would be better if the flow and sequence of the paper is written by associating it with the Section numbering, for example: ‘Section 2 represents an overview of the systematic review method used in this study. And so on.
4. In the subsection Thematic analysis, include some details that which of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals are relevant in the higher education context. Are the Goals given in Table.3 only relevant ones?
5. The title of the paper can be changed to be generic rather than making it specific for the AY2020-2021.
6. The introduction section can be further improved by giving appropriate and up-to-date references such as,
   • Students’ Perceptions of the Actual Use of Mobile Learning during COVID-19 Pandemic in Higher Education. Alturki U, Aldraiweesh A., Sustainability. 2022 Jan;14(3):1125.
   • Dynamic Group Formation With Intelligent Tutor Collaborative Learning: A Novel Approach for Next Generation Collaboration IU Haq, A Anwar, IU Rehman, W Asif, D Sobnath, HHR Sherazi, IEEE Access 9, 143406-143422
   • Teachers’ Satisfaction, Role, and Digital Literacy during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Alturki, Li M, Yu Z., Sustainability. 2022 Jan;14(3):1121.
   • Features of mobile apps for people with autism in a post covid-19 scenario: current status and recommendations for apps using AI IU Rehman, D Sobnath, MM Nasralla, M Winnett, A Anwar, W Asif, Diagnostics 11 (10), 1923, 2021
   • Online foreign language learning in higher education and its correlates during the COVID-19 pandemic, MA Maican, E Cocoradă, Sustainability 13 (2), 781, 2021
   • Futuristic Trends and Innovations for Examining the Performance of Course Learning Outcomes Using the Rasch Analytical Model, MM Nasralla, B Al-Shattarat, DJ Almakhles, A Abdelhadi, ES Abowardah Electronics 10 (6), 727
7. The paper discusses three studies cited as [27],[28] and [31]. The discussion from the student and faculty perspectives has been presented in good detail but the last one which is from the pedagogical perspective needs some more detailed explanation.
8. Does any of the works cover the problems during pandemic under Goal 4 of UN SDG, where the students and faculty were dissatisfied by the measures or policies devised by their universities or higher education authorities?

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Thank you for you positive feedback, we have responded to each item of feedback in kind below.

1. In the Introduction section, including the Definition of sustainability in general and then in the context of education and specifically higher education.

Thank you, we have now extended commentary in the introduction defining sustainability in the broader context in the first paragraph. We also incorporated a defining comment on sustainability in the educational context in paragraph two. 

1. Please re-write the following line: “Globally, in 37 (2021) and 64 (2020) academic institutions signed onto the Global Compact,”

Thank you, this now reads as "In recent years, 37 (2021) and 64 (2020) academic institutions signed onto the Global Compact, contrasted with 577 academic institution signatories added between the years of 2003 and 2018."

1. By the end of the Introduction section, it would be better if the flow and sequence of the paper is written by associating it with the Section numbering, for example: ‘Section 2 represents an overview of the systematic review method used in this study. And so on.

This feedback is appreciated. The sentence now reads: "To do so, we begin with an overview of the systematic review method used in this study (Section 2). Next, an exploration of the emergent themes against United Nations SDGs (Section 3), and a careful discussion of the implications of this research for future higher education sustainability research and practice (Section 4)." 

1. In the subsection Thematic analysis, include some details that which of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals are relevant in the higher education context. Are the Goals given in Table.3 only relevant ones?

We have now included the following statement to address the reviewer's comments "The aim of this was to identify the most relevant Goals, but we recognize that there were much shorter references (e.g., passing comments in manuscripts) that could have been aligned to other goals." 

1. The title of the paper can be changed to be generic rather than making it specific for the AY2020-2021.

Thank you, this has been updated.

1. The introduction section can be further improved by giving appropriate and up-to-date references such as,

We have reviewed the new literature, and have incorporated some of these into text based on their relevance to the manuscript. 

1. The paper discusses three studies cited as [27],[28] and [31]. The discussion from the student and faculty perspectives has been presented in good detail but the last one which is from the pedagogical perspective needs some more detailed explanation.

The work in [31] was interesting; however, much of its work was descriptive of pre-2020 blended learning perspectives packaged into the new model 'OaC'. While we did include this manuscript because it met the inclusion criteria, its novelty was considered limited with limited capacity to extend a more detailed explanation. 

1. Does any of the works cover the problems during pandemic under Goal 4 of UN SDG, where the students and faculty were dissatisfied by the measures or policies devised by their universities or higher education authorities?

Thank you for posing this question. It was one that we considered on writing this manuscript. In consultation with the SDG white paper, we identified that the primary focus of Goal 4 related to the provision of quality education. In particular, this related to education that was inclusive. We aimed to ensure this was carefully examined in the literature. 

Thank you again your feedback, which we believe has improved our manuscript.

Kind regards, 
Authors.

Reviewer 3 Report

This paper using systemic approach to review published articles from 2020-2021. Those reviewed articles are related to three important topics that COVID-19, sustainability, and higher education. The systemic process is the PRISMA approach, three phases are using in the searching strategy.

After I read this paper, I think that is reviewed article is meaningful in today. But this paper is not consisted academic framework and results. The first, a reviewed paper should conduct a rigorous process as a systemic analysis, I think that this paper is no problem. However, when I read the analyzed results, I think that is not sufficient to show what the trend and theory have revealed. Especially, the reviewed articles have relationship with SDGs 4, 8, 9, and 12, are not surprise. Because, ESD or termed as sustainability learning is developed for SDGs.

Therefore, this paper is not a significant contribution in the proposed concerns. But I would like to encourage that this paper can make more efforts on checking the format of journal and doing more time to learn what the theory can develop in an article with systemic review. 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer 3, 

Thank you for taking the time to consider our manuscript and provide feedback. We address your comments below individually:

This paper using systemic approach to review published articles from 2020-2021. Those reviewed articles are related to three important topics that COVID-19, sustainability, and higher education. The systemic process is the PRISMA approach, three phases are using in the searching strategy.

Thank you for this positive feedback. 

After I read this paper, I think that is reviewed article is meaningful in today. But this paper is not consisted academic framework and results. The first, a reviewed paper should conduct a rigorous process as a systemic analysis, I think that this paper is no problem. However, when I read the analyzed results, I think that is not sufficient to show what the trend and theory have revealed. Especially, the reviewed articles have relationship with SDGs 4, 8, 9, and 12, are not surprise. Because, ESD or termed as sustainability learning is developed for SDGs. 

Thank you for the feedback. We agree, that we are likely to see a relationship between sustainability in education and SDGs. What is interesting and novel however, is which goals emerged when we examined the extant literature. Highlighting clear opportunities for improved education in other SDG areas. We have made this more explicit now with a brief additional section following the Goal presentations. 

"SDGs not included

Interestingly, there were many goals which did not have a clear alignment to the published literature during the pandemic, and relating to pandemic education. We found this curious, and perhaps pointed to a need for more explicit research on how higher education seeks to support and enable achievement of a more diverse range of SDGs. This research is novel not just in its approach to identify which SDGs are currently being embedded in higher education and published on, but also by understanding those goals that did not feature in the pandemic literature between 2020 and 2021. It provides an important foundation for the types of higher education research that still need to be contextualized within the COVID-19 condition."

Therefore, this paper is not a significant contribution in the proposed concerns. But I would like to encourage that this paper can make more efforts on checking the format of journal and doing more time to learn what the theory can develop in an article with systemic review. 

Thank you for this feedback. While we do identify explicitly in the conclusion why this research is important, and the implications thereof. We have further reviewed the implications section to ensure this is more explicit. The novelty and important of early-stage systematic reviews is not in the design to generate new theory - although it can. But, rather to highlight key areas where the literature has gaps and needs fixing. This manuscript is an important first step in identifying the key gaps in our literature on pandemic embedded SDGs in higher education.

We thank the reviewer again for their feedback.

With kind regards, 
Authors. 

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments are addressed. 

Reviewer 3 Report

This is my second time to read the paper. After I check the revised article, I think that this paper has revised some contents and more suitable for publication in the journal. 

Only one thing needs to check in the end of paper is section of Conclusion. The Implications and Strengths and limitations, the authors may give a sub-section to them, such as 4.1. and 4.2. is better no any section title at the point.