Digital Transformation and Technological Innovation on Higher Education Post-COVID-19

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

I value this article positively both for its formal characteristics and for its content. This evaluation is based on the following aspects:

- The study is original, contains academic manuscripts of the quality of this article.

- This article addresses a current issue in relation to the objectives of the magazine and the current state of digital transformation and technological innovation in post-covid-19 higher education institutions

- The title, abstract and keywords give a clear explanation of the scope of the article.

- The objectives are clearly defined.

- In addition to the objectives, a series of research questions are explicitly stated. These questions are very well formulated. In fact, the theoretical framework addresses these issues and explains them based on updated, varied and abundant bibliographical references.

- The sample is representative and the instruments used meet the necessary characteristics for the proposed research.

- The results reflect the key issues that need to be known to answer the questions posed. The results clearly reflect the empirical evidence of the object of study.

- The discussion presents an exhaustive comparison with previous studies. With this explanation, we can have a full understanding of the contributions that this research makes to the scientific field.

- The conclusions reflect the fundamental aspects of this investigation. The conclusions are presented concisely, without forgetting the limitations of this research.

- In general, this article contributes to a critical understanding of knowledge.

Author Response

Dear reviewer, thank you very much for your comments, with them we have improved our work. 
Our most sincere thanks, please find enclosed a letter informing you of the changes made.

Cordially, Angel Deroncele Acosta, PhD

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The study presents information on a current and relevant topic. Being a study in extension, the positive outlook highlights an original point of view on the data collected and analysed. As a weakness, from the point of view of the methodological procedures, there could be a greater rigor in the description of the objectives, the content of the interviews, as well as other information about the participants (e.g. areas of activity). It is necessary to revise the English, there are tables that must be translated to English.

Author Response

Dear reviewer, thank you very much for your comments, with them we have improved our work. 
Our most sincere thanks, please find attached a letter informing you of the changes made.

Cordially, Angel Deroncele Acosta, PhD

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

The study is relevant and well structured.

The title is clear, as is the abstract, which presents the study's objective, methodology and main results.

It presents a consistent theoretical framework and an extensive and current list of references.

However, it presents a panorama in a very positive perspective, without mentioning difficulties and constraints, which already existed before the pandemic and still exist, to the integration of technologies and teachers' initiatives for change and innovation. Perhaps it should be complemented.  

It could also be enriched with some reference to pedagogical models with integration of technologies, besides TPACK, which is not made explicit and may not be generally known.

In line 114, period June-August 2023, should it be 2022?

In the Materials and Methods you can better explain how the sample was selected (how were the teachers chosen, randomly?) and how the interviews were carried out, it is not clear whether they were carried out in person or through some platform and what was the level of structuring (whether or not a script was developed).  

The article is valuable for the results obtained with a high level of depth. 

The conclusions are interesting, but it seems to me that they point mainly to the future and do not portray the generality of the reality today, so it would be important to understand what kind of questions were asked to the interviewees.

Author Response

Dear reviewer, thank you very much for your comments, with them we have improved our work. 
Our most sincere thanks, please find attached a letter informing you of the changes made.

Cordially, Angel Deroncele Acosta, PhD

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf