Research Thesis for Undergraduate Engineering Programs in the Digitalization Era: Learning Strategies and Responsible Research Conduct Road to a University Education 4.0 Paradigm

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Review

“Research Thesis for Undergraduate Engineering Programs in the Digitalization Era: Learning Strategies and Responsible Research Conduct Road to a

University Education 4.0 Paradigm”

 

 

General assessment:

 

·          This paper investigates some aspects concerning problems and ethical issues of writing a thesis in engineering programs. It proposes a vademecum supposed to facilitate the process of identifying a topic for a thesis in the disciplines considered here and to stress some notions related to sustainability.  

 

·          The topic of the paper is certainly relevant to the discussion on sustainability in general, but most of the information is self-evident and repetitive, which makes the paper a hard read. What is developed in the first sections could be efficiently summarized in one page. I suggest the authors should try to eliminate all the information that is repeated and focus on the new information to be conveyed here.

 

·          I see some problems in this paper that may be due to less-than-optimal lexical choices and language use in general. Many expressions are repeated in each section (“It is possible/important/… to mention that…” or similar introductions). This gives the reader the expectation that the information to appear in the following lines will be striking, but in many cases, what follows is a truism.

 

·          Unfortunately, the actual results do not seem to be very interesting, but I think the paper can be improved by focusing on the new information. In the next version of the article, I would like to see a considerable improvement.

 

For this reason, I believe that the paper cannot be published in the present form. My overall recommendation is:

 

Reconsider after major revision

 

 

Content:

 

-   p. 2: “it is appreciated that University students tend to read and write less, due to the use of digital platforms with videos where they learn new topics through tutorials or virtual classes” > This should be elaborated on a bit more. What is the direct connection between learning through tutorials and writing less? If a tutorial is about algebra or physics, as exemplified in the text by the authors themselves, I suppose that writing down some notes is not only useful, but also necessary. What is more, video tutorials generally present written information (in this case, for instance, in the form of formulas or similar notations accompanied by spoken input).

-   p. 2: “where people tend to write less and use images to communicate” > less than what? This is an additional way to communicate, not really one that replaces an old one.

-   p. 2: “This has been accentuated at the time of the Covid-19 pandemic, mainly due to the implementation of virtual classes on internet platforms by universities” > What is the link between using mobile phones and the pandemic? I do not see any implication here. Please explain this a bit more thoroughly.

-   p. 2: “In THIS sense, undergraduate engineering students develop logical-mathematical problem-solving skills with great efficiency by applying formulas and methods, but they lack creative ability to write texts when they reach the end of their studies when they must

     write his thesis research” > In what sense? I think math students do not develop creative writing skills just because they do not train that skill during their studies, irrespective of whether they use technology or not.

-   The section between p. 1 and p. 9 is quite repetitive and does not state anything new or particularly surprising. Please compress the information into a shorter section which only mentions the relevant information once and concentrates on the new focal aspects to be developed in the paper.

-   p. 10: “with invented sources” > What kind of invented sources?

-   p. 12: “It is important to consider that students, due to prior knowledge, must select the problem that they could address” > Why is this important? It is self-evident that this must be the case…

-   p. 13, Fig. 6: How is this different from the general structure of a thesis in any other discipline?

-   p. 15: “In order to carry out the oral presentation of the thesis research in the support in[1]stance, it is necessary that the students have the security and sufficient empowerment of the subject of study in order to be able to support the results obtained” > This is self-evident.

-   p. 16: “It is relevant to mention that the students, when answering the questions of the professors who are part of the thesis committee, must answer in the most precise, clear and concise way possible” > Why is it relevant to say this? This is obvious!

Formal aspects:

 

-   Throughout the text, the word “university” is capitalized even where it is a common noun. Please de-capitalize it in the relevant contexts.

-   Throughout the text, the noun “professor(s)” is used as an umbrella term to include – I assume – all kinds of thesis advisors (e.g. on p. 1: “towards professors and students”). Is that what the authors really mean? I interpret “professor” as a term referring to a specific position in the academic hierarchy, not as a general denomination for “instructor”/“advisor”. If that is not the case, I suggest the authors should reformulate the corresponding sentences or use another word.

-   abstract: “with an emphasis on use information and communication technologies” > on using or on the use of

-   p. 2: “that have affected students' writing …” > has

-   p. 2: “it has been evidenced: (i) a lack of clarity […]” > It is not possible to place a subject clause resuming a sentence-initial expletive like this in English >> “A lack of clarity […] and … have been evidenced”.

-   p. 2: “It is, therefore, in these courses that students learn to…” > Why “therefore”?

-   p. 3: “s, artificial intelligence (AI) ,” > Please delete the space to the left of the comma.

-   p. 3: “it is possible to mention” > Why “possible”?

-   p. 4: “the following stand out” > stands

-   p. 4: “Students are developing” > Why in the present continuous?

-   p. 4: “Students are currently very curious” > What is “currently” supposed to mean here?

-   p. 5: “As a third recommendation is to think about…” > Delete “as”

-   p. 7: “As mentioned above, it is key that students are informed, and knows …” > know

-   p. 7: “Another aspect that it is necessary to recommend to students in the thesis advisor or tutor professor selection process is to find out about …” > Please reformulate

-   p. 8: “Today in the era of digitalization of information” > Add a comma to the right of “today”.

-   p. 8: “This becomes evident when reviewing the references of the theses, more than 90% is in the student's native language, therefore, the scientific information in English considered by the students may be …” > Please reformulate by splitting the utterance into two sentences.

 -  p. 11: identificated > identified

-   p. 13: “This chapter of this article” > of the article

-   p. 14: “in the most succinct and intelligent way” > Do the authors really mean “intelligent” here?

-   p. 15: “Another relevant aspect that students must take into account when preparing their

     presentation is the duration of this, usually the duration assigned for this instance of presentation by students is 45 minutes” > Please split this utterance into two sentences.

-   p. 17: “It is also possible to mention…” > Why “possible”?

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

General Comments:

The manuscript provides a detailed discussion on conducting undergraduate engineering project research papers, along with comprehensive operational guidelines. Overall, I find the paper to be highly valuable, as it addresses a significant gap in the practical process of guiding undergraduate thesis research. Furthermore, it highlights some common issues in undergraduate engineering project research papers that have remained unresolved for a long time and require further investigation for clarification. The author also proposes this as a pathway towards the paradigm of University Education 4.0.

Specific Revisions:

1.           The manuscript should consider exploring and referencing the competence and skill standards for engineering graduates outlined by the International Engineering Alliance (IEA) in the Graduate Attributes and Professional Competencies (GAPC  21) document. By incorporating research and discussion on this topic, the paper would benefit from a more comprehensive understanding of the capabilities expected from engineering undergraduates.

2.           The connection between undergraduate engineering project research papers and the implementation of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) should be addressed. The GAPC 21 document also discusses this aspect, and the World Federation of Engineering Organizations (WFEO) has conducted research on the subject. The author should include references to these works to strengthen the paper's discussion on aligning undergraduate theses with sustainable development objectives.

3.           The manuscript introduces the concept of University Education 4.0, but it fails to provide a clear explanation of what constitutes University Education 3.0 and 2.0, as well as University Education 1.0. It is essential to clarify the differences between these paradigms to enhance the reader's understanding. Please provide specific details and explanations regarding each paradigm.

4.           The impact of undergraduate engineering research papers on students' post-graduation career paths and their adaptability needs to be addressed. The author should reference and incorporate viewpoints from a relevant paper that discusses this aspect to further enrich the discussion and highlight the significance of undergraduate theses in students' future endeavors. It is necessary to read and reference the following highly relevant papers:（1）Professional Identity and Career Adaptability among Chinese Engineering Students: The Mediating Role of Learning Engagement. Behav. Sci. 2023, 13, 480. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs13060480

 English language fine.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

I am glad to see that the authors have considered my suggestions and systematically addressed all the single aspects I mentioned in my first review.

The less-than-optimal lexical choices that were part of the first version have been corrected/adapted. The sections of the paper in which the innovative character of this study should be stressed have been improved.

I think the paper can now be published.