Exploring Sustainability of Educational Environment among Health Science Students at the Largest Public University in Brunei Darussalam: A Convergent Mixed-Methods Study

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

1. The abstract follows the recommended IMRAD format. It is concise and gives a summation of the study.

 

2. The introduction is dominated with a description of the DREEM instrument that was used. Information on the DREEM should be described under the methods section. It must be understood that the introductory section of a paper offers a robust theoretical foundation for the study. While the explanation of the concept of EE and its relevance have been given, it is important to present interesting findings from EE recent studies globally and in the Asian context. This would ground the study. More so, there is the need to discuss intelligently in the section, the various tools and/or methods for approaching studies on EE generally, the strengths and weaknesses and why DREEM (with examples from previous recent studies that have successfully used it) is more appropriate for the study. Then you can expose the research gaps that necessitated the study and the exact research objectives that drive the research.

 

3. The methods section is excellent. It offers enough or comprehensive description of how the study was carried out with possible reproducible results.

 

4. The results are scholarly presented and discussed. The tentative conclusions drawn, as well as the strengths and limitations of the study have been presented in an academically rigorous manner.

 

 

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Good work with some recommendations:

1.The abstract of the manuscript could be improved by adding recommendations of the results obtained instead of statistical data to guide the reader's attention.

2.Missing definition of key terms: sustainability of educational environment, detailing the literature in support of the arguments and the need for the research. It is absolutely necessary, mandatory to introduce.

3. Described the population research and the number of gender implicated in research.

4.The results chapter needs to be supported by relevant results from the literature in line with the research topic.

5. The conclusions can be improved by adding the results as part of the use in the literature, as part of the originality of the article and recommendations for the use of the results obtained, along with new references in the literature.

Tripon, C. Supporting Future Teachers to Promote Computational Thinking Skills in Teaching STEM—A Case Study. Sustainability 2022, 14, 12663. https://doi.org/10.3390/su141912663

6.I appreciate the description of the limitations of the research.

                   

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

good work! I appreciate the result!