Advancing Student Learning Power by Operating Classrooms as Learning Communities: Mediated Effects of Engagement Activities and Social Relations

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Thank you for giving me the opportunity to review the paper. The concepts discussed in the paper are interesting. I have the following suggestions to improve the paper.

 

1) The concept of learning power has been discussed in the paper, and I wonder how learning power differs from self-regulated learning. I would recommend referring to the related literature and establishing a concrete distinction between the two concepts.

 

2) The second concept discussed is, the classroom as a learning community. I want to know in what ways the classroom as a learning community is different from a regular learning community. Also, I would suggest including a learning design section to help readers understand how the classroom as a learning community was created for this specific study and also, the learning design should emphasize how the following constructs fostered: learner-centered teaching, student engagement inquiry, cooperation and expression, classroom social relations, and student learning power. 

 

3) The intent of the study was to create an instrument. I would request that the authors include survey questions in a tabular form for each construct. Since this is a new survey, I would recommend the authors to include the results of the exploratory factor analysis as well. Also discuss related metrics such as Factor loading, rotation values, eigenvalues, if any items were removed from analysis etc.

 

4) The citations used in the paper are old I would recommend using recent citations in the paper.

Author Response

Please see the attached file.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

After reviewing the work, I consider that in the theoretical framework, specifically, in point two of conceptual background, some lines prior to point 2.1 should be included. In addition, I recommend reviewing the internal organization of the point and common thread because perhaps it would be more appropriate to start talking about the classroom processes that influence student learning, to continue with the following points that talk about the main theme of learning communities.

In the empirical part, it should be noted that it would be appropriate to briefly indicate what type of methodology is used in the initial section, in addition to the procedure followed in collecting data specifically in a section.

The part of results at a general level is adequate and structured.

Finally, it should be noted that both the references and the citations are a bit outdated, only three are from the last years, two from 2017 and one from 2022. I consider that an update in this section with more current works would be beneficial for the article, where at least half of the citations and references are from the last five years.

Author Response

Please see the attached file.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear Authors,

Thank you for making the changes.

The changes look good!

Author Response

Please see the attached file.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

From my point of view, the work has been considerably improved, but it would be advisable to indicate, prior to its publication, the unified citations throughout the work, that is, put the citations in brackets with the number in which they appear in references, as is done in the conclusions section. This unified format throughout the work is better presented, because on some occasions the authors and year are cited within the text.

The references should be ordered alphabetically, as many new references have been introduced, this aspect has not been taken into account and their alphabetical order is necessary.

I consider that it is not necessary to include the appendix with the items because in the text, specifically, when the instrument is explained, some of them are referred to, it can be eliminated.

If at any time a referenced author is not cited, remove it from the citations section because, although this point has been improved, it has become very extensive with 65 references.

It is true that learning communities have been carried out for years, since the last century it was applied in schools, therefore some of the references are understood to be old to refer to pioneering studies. In the review you have understood what was being referred to as updating with more current works without detracting from the merits or eliminating the basic studies and authors that need to be cited.

Good job.

Author Response

Please see the attached file.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 3

Reviewer 2 Report

Congratulations for the work done because it has improved only a few details prior to its publication, on page 2 the quote from Sato and Pan et al. in the reference numbering, two hyphens are indicated when there should be one to separate the two references that are indicated.

The methodology section must justify the text.

I do not understand why all the references have been removed according to the indications, unifying the complete text but the citations of Sato and Pan et al. are maintained, it does not detract from the value of the work or affect the understanding of the text, but if these had been removed citations and only indicating the reference number like all the others would also be understandable, it is a choice of the authors.

The improvements introduced in the results part both in the table with the figure have been very good for a better understanding of the results.

Considering all the aspects and making this adjustment of the errors that occur in the writing, the work is much improved to publish in its current version.