Impact of Parents’ Stress on Engagement with Online Learning during COVID-19

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This study examines the influence of parental stress on engagement with online learning during the COVID-19 pandemic. Results indicate that parents' academic stress significantly predicts their engagement with their children's online learning. Additionally, technical stress is a significant predictor of cognitive engagement but not of behavioral and emotional engagement. Personal stress is a significant predictor of behavioral engagement, while financial stress is not a significant predictor of any type of parental engagement. Furthermore, the study finds that parents' gender and academic qualifications have a notable impact on stress levels. This research enhances our comprehension of online learning during the COVID-19 pandemic, as it is the first study to investigate the connection between parental stress and engagement with online learning.

 

The research is well-written and provides valuable insights into the topic. However, there are some points that need to be addressed.

In the introduction, there is a contradiction in the first paragraph. The first sentence states that 190 countries relied on home learning during the Covid period, while the second sentence suggests that universities failed to provide e-learning. Therefore, it is recommended to revise this paragraph to acknowledge the urgent need for e-learning during the Covid period. However, due to the lack of professional training for teachers and inadequate preparation of students for this type of education, it resulted in great psychological pressure on them. This stress was then transmitted to parents. Studies have shown that online teaching professionalism has been described as a set of required competencies, and behaviors for the effectiveness of educational online sessions.

It is recommended to remove the first paragraph of the literature review from line No. 62-69, as it discusses communication with customers from a commercial perspective, while the current research focuses on an educational perspective. Additionally, the paragraph contains an outdated reference from Jacoby & Chestnut in 1978. In an educational context, communication with customers refers to the interactions between teachers, students, and parents or guardians that occur during the learning process. Teachers must also provide feedback and guidance to help students improve their skills and knowledge. Additionally, teachers need to communicate with parents or guardians to keep them informed about their child's progress and address any concerns they may have.

The first figure entitled Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) is considered the most important part of the manuscript, so it must be with a high degree of clarity, as the current figure is not clear, and I faced great difficulty in reading it and comparing the results with the discussion. Please provide a high resolution one.

The discussion of the research is quite broad and lacks a clear connection with the results presented in the first figure. Furthermore, the psychological dimension of the pressures that parents face from a theoretical perspective needs to be explored in greater depth. It is recommended that the authors revise the discussion of the study and link it to the goals and results. For instance, the significant role of personal stress as a predictor of parents' engagement with their children's online learning, in terms of behavioral, emotional, and cognitive engagement, requires further exploration. The discussion should also delve into relevant psychological theories to provide a more comprehensive understanding of the impact of stress on parental engagement. By doing so, the authors can provide a more nuanced analysis of their findings and contribute to the existing literature on the topic.

It appears that some sentences in the research paper are challenging to read. Therefore, it is recommended that the paper undergo a linguistic review to enhance its quality. This review can help to improve the readability of the paper and ensure that the ideas are conveyed clearly and coherently. By doing so, the research paper can be more accessible to a wider audience and contribute to the advancement of knowledge in the field.

Author Response

Reviewer 1:

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This study examines the influence of parental stress on engagement with online learning during the COVID-19 pandemic. Results indicate that parents' academic stress significantly predicts their engagement with their children's online learning. Additionally, technical stress is a significant predictor of cognitive engagement but not of behavioral and emotional engagement. Personal stress is a significant predictor of behavioral engagement, while financial stress is not a significant predictor of any type of parental engagement. Furthermore, the study finds that parents' gender and academic qualifications have a notable impact on stress levels. This research enhances our comprehension of online learning during the COVID-19 pandemic, as it is the first study to investigate the connection between parental stress and engagement with online learning.

Response: This is a very accurate description of our study. Thank you.

 

The research is well-written and provides valuable insights into the topic. However, there are some points that need to be addressed. In the introduction, there is a contradiction in the first paragraph. The first sentence states that 190 countries relied on home learning during the Covid period, while the second sentence suggests that universities failed to provide e-learning. Therefore, it is recommended to revise this paragraph to acknowledge the urgent need for e-learning during the Covid period. However, due to the lack of professional training for teachers and inadequate preparation of students for this type of education, it resulted in great psychological pressure on them. This stress was then transmitted to parents. Studies have shown that online teaching professionalism has been described as a set of required competencies, and behaviors for the effectiveness of educational online sessions.

 

Response: Thank you. We have edited it to the following:

In early 2020, COVID-19 forced the closure of many businesses and schools, which led to an urgent need for e-learning during this period. It has been estimated that more than 1.6 billion students in more than 190 countries were forced to study at home (United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization, 2020). The lack of professional training for teachers and inadequate preparation of students for online learning resulted in great psychological pressure on the students, which in turn resulted in  stress for the parents. Face-to-face classes ended, and were replaced by online learning (Kabir et al., 2021; Radwan, Radwan, Radwan, & Pandey, 2021). Importantly, online learning is less efficient for students than face-to-face learning, because of internet problems, heavy workload, and lack of support (Jaggars, 2014).

 

It is recommended to remove the first paragraph of the literature review from line No. 62-69, as it discusses communication with customers from a commercial perspective, while the current research focuses on an educational perspective. Additionally, the paragraph contains an outdated reference from Jacoby & Chestnut in 1978. In an educational context, communication with customers refers to the interactions between teachers, students, and parents or guardians that occur during the learning process. Teachers must also provide feedback and guidance to help students improve their skills and knowledge. Additionally, teachers need to communicate with parents or guardians to keep them informed about their child's progress and address any concerns they may have.

 

Response:  Thanks for this point. We have now removed this section.

We have also removed the Jacoby & Chestnut (1978) reference, as recommended by the reviewer.

 

The first figure entitled Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) is considered the most important part of the manuscript, so it must be with a high degree of clarity, as the current figure is not clear, and I faced great difficulty in reading it and comparing the results with the discussion. Please provide a high resolution one.

Response: We have now added another figure with a higher resolution.

 

The discussion of the research is quite broad and lacks a clear connection with the results presented in the first figure. Furthermore, the psychological dimension of the pressures that parents face from a theoretical perspective needs to be explored in greater depth. It is recommended that the authors revise the discussion of the study and link it to the goals and results. For instance, the significant role of personal stress as a predictor of parents' engagement with their children's online learning, in terms of behavioral, emotional, and cognitive engagement, requires further exploration. The discussion should also delve into relevant psychological theories to provide a more comprehensive understanding of the impact of stress on parental engagement. By doing so, the authors can provide a more nuanced analysis of their findings and contribute to the existing literature on the topic.

 

Response: We have edited the discussion massively to address these points. Please, let us know if it needs any more work.

 

We have also added the following regarding the theory point raised by the reviewer:

As for theoretical model, our results can be explained using the stress-vulnerability model (Goh & Agius, 2010; Weissman et al., 2021). The model argues that external stressors can exacerbate wellbeing of individuals, and that managing external stressors may help achieve better outcomes.  This model may explain why parents’ academic stress, personal stress, and technical stress impact engagement with children’s online learning. It is possible that these stressors causes massive disruptions unlike other kinds of stressors. According to the the stress-vulnerability model, schools and agencies should aim to reduce factors related to external stressors that impact parents’ engagement with online education.

 

References added:

Goh, C., & Agius, M. (2010). The stress-vulnerability model how does stress impact on metal illness at the level of the brain and what are the consequences?. Psychiatria Danubina, 22(2), 198-202.

Weissman, D. G., Rodman, A. M., Rosen, M. L., Kasparek, S., Mayes, M., Sheridan, M. A., ... & McLaughlin, K. A. (2021). Contributions of emotion regulation and brain structure and function to adolescent internalizing problems and stress vulnerability during the COVID-19 pandemic: A longitudinal study. Biological psychiatry global open science, 1(4), 272-282.

Further, we have divided the Discussion into 2 sections that align with our presentation of the  results: (a) Stress and parents’ engagement during COVID-19 and (b) The relationship between parents’ demographics and stress

Please, let us know if Discussion needs any more edits.

Comments on the Quality of English Language. It appears that some sentences in the research paper are challenging to read. Therefore, it is recommended that the paper undergo a linguistic review to enhance its quality. This review can help to improve the readability of the paper and ensure that the ideas are conveyed clearly and coherently. By doing so, the research paper can be more accessible to a wider audience and contribute to the advancement of knowledge in the field.

Response: We have edited the entire file, as suggested by the reviewer. Please, let us know if it needs any more work. We hope now it is more readable.

 

Reviewer 2 Report

I have reviewed the manuscript ID (sustainability-2432440) entitled “Impact of Parents’ Stress on Engagement with Online Learning during COVID-19”. The authors have a good methodology and contribution. So, the manuscript, in its entirety, meets the criteria for acceptance, and it is suitable to be published in this journal for the following reasons:

1-      The manuscript is up to the journal's standards.

2-      The effort is clearly beneficial to the community.

3-      The introduction is delivered in a clear and concise manner.

4-      It is sufficient to grasp the contribution thanks to the full explanation given.

5-      The steps involved in the approach are easy to follow.

6-      The analysis of the results is done in a satisfactory manner.

 

Author Response

Reviewer 2:

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I have reviewed the manuscript ID (sustainability-2432440) entitled “Impact of Parents’ Stress on Engagement with Online Learning during COVID-19”. The authors have a good methodology and contribution. So, the manuscript, in its entirety, meets the criteria for acceptance, and it is suitable to be published in this journal for the following reasons:

1-      The manuscript is up to the journal's standards.

2-      The effort is clearly beneficial to the community.

3-      The introduction is delivered in a clear and concise manner.

4-      It is sufficient to grasp the contribution thanks to the full explanation given.

5-      The steps involved in the approach are easy to follow.

6-      The analysis of the results is done in a satisfactory manner.

 

Response: We thank the reviewer for the positive view on our manuscript.

 

 

Reviewer 3 Report

 

The study provide a well-designed examination of some of the stressors that can be related to online learning of the Covid-19 pandemic. The study do well to identify and relate the factors that are significant and importantly also report insignificant findings.   While the study is good in its present form, I think it can be even more forward-looking. The authors state how "Our findings have implications for the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, as well as possible future crises that necessitate stay-at-home learning.” Here there are many learnables for future crises and also new work and educational environments we are currently constructing. The authors can fruitfully present some more of their conclusions from the study for these areas.

Author Response

Reviewer 3:

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

 The study provides a well-designed examination of some of the stressors that can be related to online learning of the Covid-19 pandemic. The study do well to identify and relate the factors that are significant and importantly also report insignificant findings.   While the study is good in its present form, I think it can be even more forward-looking. The authors state how "Our findings have implications for the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, as well as possible future crises that necessitate stay-at-home learning.” Here there are many learnables for future crises and also new work and educational environments we are currently constructing. The authors can fruitfully present some more of their conclusions from the study for these areas.

Response: Thanks for this point. We have now added more conclusions from our findings.

 

We have add the following to address this point:

Our findings also have implications for crises such as hurricane, earthquakes, among others. These natural disasters may cause relocation of families and thus force the students to study at home. It is predicted that these crises may lead to stress in a similar fashion to that caused by Covid-19. Accordingly, our findings have implications for other crises and natural disasters.

Reviewer 4 Report

I made some remarks and you can find them in the file.

Good article, good luck!

Comments for author File: Comments.zip

Author Response

Reviewer 4:

 

 Impact of Parents’ Stress on Engagement with Online Learning during COVID-19

1. For the Abstract – it is good to end with the exact purpose of the investigation, so lines 323-327 (the beginning of the Discussion) are better to be moved to the end of the Abstract.

 

Response: thanks for this great point. We have done that.

 

 

2. References:

- Solís García, Lago Urbano, Real Castelao, & Health, 2021 – line191; 188; 617 – it is García S. – please, check it, the family name should be García;

 

- Line 50: Anthony-McMann et al., 2017 - ??? – or just Anthony et al., 2017 – please, check it!;

 

- Line 113: No 31 and No 32 – are the same - Khan, 2014 – one of them to be deleted!;

 

- Line 122: 2017; McConnell, Breitkreuz, Savage & development, 2011 – please, replaced with McConnell et al. 2011;

 

- Line 135: Gabret al., 2021 – it is Gabr et al.;

 

- Line 480-481: number 16. Frankel et al. (2021) – to be deleted No 17 is the same!

 

- Didn’t find it in the article:

 

Nielsen, T., Pontoppidan, M. & Rayce, S.B. The Parental Stress Scale revisited: Rasch-based construct 576 validity for Danish parents of children 2–18 years old with and without behavioral problems. Health 577 Qual Life Outcomes 18, 281 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-020-01495-w.

 

Response: thank you so much for helping us improve our manuscript. We have now corrected all of these typographical and other errors.

 

 

• - Didn’t find it in the reference list:

1. Line 43- Bikmazer et al., 2020;
2. Line 44- Calvano et al., 2021;
3. Line 47 - Segerstrom and O'Connor (2012);
4. Line 52 - Halbesleben et al., 2014;
5. Line 356 - Knoema, 2018;

•  

• Response: We have added almost of these references. We removed one as it is not very relevant here.
•  
• We have also removed other references that were not cited in the text.
•  
• Here are the references we have added:
•  
• Bıkmazer, A., Kadak, M. T., Görmez, V., Doğan, U., Aslankaya, Z. D., Bakır, F., ... & Öztürk, M. (2021). Parental psychological distress associated with COVID-19 outbreak: A large-scale multicenter survey from Turkey. International Journal of Social Psychiatry, 67(6), 696-704.
•  
• Calvano, C., Engelke, L., Holl-Etten, A. K., Renneberg, B., & Winter, S. M. (2023). Almost 2 years into the COVID-19 pandemic: an update on parental stress, parent mental health, and the occurrence of child maltreatment. European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 1-17.
•  
• (2018). United Arab Emirates: Internet users. Retrieved from https://knoema.com/atlas/United-Arab-Emirates/Share-of-the-Internet-users
•  
• Segerstrom, S. C., & O’Connor, D. B. (2012). Stress, health and illness: Four challenges for the future. Psychology & health, 27(2), 128-140.
•  
• Hollebeek, L. D., Hammedi, W., & Sprott, D. E. (2023). Consumer engagement, stress, and conservation of resources theory: A review, conceptual development, and future research agenda. Marketing Review, 23(3), 331-349. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.21807

 

- Typically, the rule is, when the article has more than 3 authors to be sited as: the name of first author followed with et.al and year of publication – so, please, correct it in the text!

 

1. Radwan, Radwan, Radwan, & Pandey, 2021 – to be replaced as Radwan et al. 2021;
2. Adams, Smith, Caccavale, & Bean, 2021; - to be replaced as Adams et al. 2021;
3. Freisthler, Gruenewald, Tebben, McCarthy, & Wolf, 2021 - to be replaced as Freisthler et al. 2021;
4. Do, Rahman, & Robinson, 2019 (line: 46) - to be replaced with Do et al. 2019;
5. Yang, Gu, & Hong, 2021 - to be replaced as Yang et al. 2021;
6. Yu, Park, & Hyun, 2021 - to be replaced as Yu et al. 2021;
7. Rodrigues, Silva, & Franco, 2021 - to be replaced as Rodrigues et al., 2021;
8. Seguin, Kuenzel, Morton, & Duerden, 2021 - to be replaced as Seguin et al., 2021;
9. Spinelli, Lionetti, Pastore, & Fasolo, 2020 - to be replaced as Spinelli et al., 2020;
10. Haverila, Haverila, McLaughlin, & Tran, 2022 - to be replaced with Haverila et al., 2022;
11. Prentice, Wang, & Lin, 2018 - to be replaced with Prentice et al., 2018;
12. Vivek, Beatty & Morgan, 2012 - to be replaced with Vivek et al., 2012;
13. Naumann, Bowden, & Gabbott, 2020 - to be replaced with Naumann et al., 2020;
14. Ng, Sweeney, & Plewa, 2020- to be replaced with Ng et al., 2020 (line 93);
15. Kotchick, Dorsey, Heller, & family, 2005 - to be replaced with Kotchick et al., 2005;
16. McConnell, Breitkreuz, Savage, & development, 2011 - to be replaced with McConnell et al., 2011;
17. Oppermann, Cohen, Wolf, Burghardt, & Anders, 2021 - to be replaced with Oppermann et al., 2021;
18. Achterberg, Dobbelaar, Boer, & Crone, 2021 - to be replaced with Achterberg et al., 2021;
19. Donker, Mastrotheodoros, & Branje, 2021 - to be replaced with Donker et al., 2021;
20. Mohan, Sen, Shah, Jain, & Jain, 2021 – to be replaced with Mohan et al., 2021;
21. Lau, Li, & Lee, 2021 - to be replaced with Lau et al., 2021;
22. Masha'al, Rababa, & Shahrour, 2020 - to be replaced with Masha'al et al., 2020;
23. Li, Tang, Wu, Wang, & Li, 2021 – to be replaced with Li et al., 2021;
24. Solís García, Lago Urbano, Real Castelao, & Health, 2021 - to be replaced with García et al., 2021;
25. Solís García et al., 2021 - to be replaced with García et al., 2021;
26. Line 383, also 387: Lau, Li, & Lee, 2021 - to be replaced with Lau et al., 2021;

 

 

Response: Thank you. We have done that. We hope we have now addressed all of your comments. Please, let us know if there are any other work that we need to do here.

 

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

This version has been well revised and the authors have made the necessary modifications