Promoting Climate Change Awareness with High School Students for a Sustainable Community
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
This study reports on an intervention that aims to increase climate change awareness among high school students. It is an interesting subject, but some modifications are needed to improve the scientific standard of the paper.
The country the study took place is suggested to be mentioned in Abstract (and in method). I think the 2 references within the abstract are not absolutely necessary.
Line 35, after the quotation, the relevant reference (and page number) to be added.
In introduction, I think the role of psychologists is over-emphasized: (i) the educators could also be briefly mentioned since they usually design and implement educational initiatives/activities in schools, (ii) the role of psychologists is discussed in a long paragraph (lines 56-86) which could be reduced, while evidence on similar interventions with high school students could be enhanced (earlier evidence on student perceptions/behavior, etc.)
The aim-purpose of this study is mentioned in section 1.1. However, the specific research objectives/questions are missing; it would be useful to see these objectives/questions, and possibly how these relate to the “Future Generation” aims.
The sample description (section 2.2) needs enhancement: from which country and city were these 25 students (Junior High School)? Was it a mainstream public school? What was students’ prior experience to the topic of climate change?
Design and Procedures (Section 2.3) also needs additional clarifications. Was the pilot intervention program “Future Generation” developed only by psychologists, for the purpose of this study? What was the communication with the school teachers for its implementation? Did the multidisciplinary training course target only students (this needs to be clearly stated since training courses could involve teachers as well), and did the training involve writing movie scripts? Was it accomplished outside the official school program, or within specific xx school subject? The authors have collected a lot of data (qualitative and quantitative), and I think the creation of a Table indicating the whole procedure from January to April (e.g., time distance between the different stages/phases, duration of phases, type of instrument/subscales administered, evaluation/projects, etc.) would add value to the study.
Regarding the research instruments, it would be useful to indicate all questionnaire items (exact phrasing and corresponding sub-scales) in Appendix, or better as a Supplementary material (total number of items= 95); having read the actual items, it is easier to follow the paper. How was the 13-item multiple-choice test (regarding knowledge) developed, or was it adapted from which studies?
Could the results from Movie scripts be summarized in a Table?
Line 420, explain who were the instructors? (class teachers, researchers,..)
All abbreviations (IPCC, GHG, NOAA, etc.) should be fully mentioned when these first appear in the manuscript
The reference list is not formatted according to the journal’s guidelines.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Recommendations for the authors of the article:
1. It is necessary to correct the section of the article: "abstract". It lacks, among other things, a description of the methodological issues of the article, including research limitations. Add a description of the structure of the issues described in the article. Similar remarks should be taken into account in the introduction to the article.
2. Add section: "Literature review" from "Introduction". Particular attention should be paid to the concept of sustainable development.
3. In the article, the conclusions of the studies should be given in sub-paragraphs. This section requires a lot of substantive reinforcement.
4. Finally, it is necessary to emphasize the proposed and adopted directions of action for strengthening social capital in the studied population.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
The article "Promoting Climate Change Awareness with High School Students for a Sustainable Community" addresses an important topic - engaging high school students in climate change awareness for building a sustainable community. While the research attempts to shed light on this crucial issue, I believe there are some significant limitations that need to be addressed before publication. In particular, the lack of comprehensive testing and assessment scores undermines the validity and reliability of the findings. This review aims to provide constructive feedback to improve the overall quality and rigor of the study. The article briefly mentions the methods employed, such as workshops and interactive sessions with high school students, as well as the use of surveys to gauge their knowledge and attitudes toward climate change. However, the article does not provide sufficient details about the survey design, the sample size, or the duration of the intervention. Without this information, it is challenging to assess the quality and representativeness of the data collected. I recommend expanding upon the methodology section to address these issues adequately. The article would benefit from a more comprehensive discussion of the implications of the findings. While the introduction highlights the importance of climate change awareness for building a sustainable community, the article falls short in discussing the practical implications of the study's results. It would be valuable to explore how the intervention could be scaled up or modified to address potential challenges faced by other educators or communities. To improve the article's impact and practical relevance, it would be beneficial to include recommendations for future research. Identifying areas for further investigation, such as long-term follow-up studies or strategies to overcome barriers to climate change education, would strengthen the article's contribution to the field.
Minor editing of the English language required
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
I consider the paper has been improved and the comments answered.
minor changes required
Author Response
We improve the quality of English language, thanks a lot for your feedback and suggestions.
Reviewer 2 Report
Dear Authors, I think in this version the article is scientifically, methodologically and empirically on a good level. Congratulations. I wish you scientific and professional success.
Author Response
We are pleased by your feedback on scientific, methodological and empirical improvement og our article.
Thanks a lot for your feedback.
Reviewer 3 Report
The paper has improved, most of the comments have been taken into account
Its OK
Author Response
We are pleased that you have found the article improved for what concernes your suggestions and on the quality of English language.
Many thanks for your feedback.
