A Systematic Review of Postgraduate Programmes Concerning Ethical Imperatives of Data Privacy in Sustainable Educational Data Analytics

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Overall, the idea of an SLR about this topic is a good one; however, once you had filtered out manuscripts, you were left with only 14 papers. This resulted in a very small sample. Perhaps the focus was too narrow. Choosing to focus just on postgraduates for example. The actual themes that emerged were interesting and very useful to future research. You spent quite a lot of time describing your process and I would've liked to hear more about your findings.

What you are seeking to uncover is topical and important but I would've liked to have seen it come form a larger sample that is transferable to other context in Higher Education.

There were some grammatical errors noted at these point:

The of big data has propelled data privacy to the forefront of ethical concerns. (line 50) 

 

To examine current practices and emerging frameworks employed HEIs (line 98) 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The English was good except for a few grammatical errors that I noted in the comments to the author.

Author Response

 

1	2	Introduction	2	51	There were some grammatical errors noted at these point: The of big data has propelled data privacy to the forefront of ethical concerns. (line 50)	ü		The word ‘deluge’ has been added
2	3	Introduction	1	100	There were some grammatical errors noted at these point: To examine current practices and emerging frameworks employed HEIs (line 98)	ü		The word ‘by’ has been added
3					What you are seeking to uncover is topical and important, but I would've liked to have seen it come from a larger sample that is transferable to other context in Higher Education.		ü	While the rigorous eligibility criteria limited the sample size to 14 studies, it ensured the inclusion of only the most relevant research for this investigation.
4.					You spent quite a lot of time describing your process and I would've liked to hear more about your findings.		ü	While the extensive description of the methodology might appear detailed, it was crucial for ensuring the study's trustworthiness, generalisability, and replicability.

 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The manuscript investigated the intersection of data privacy, postgraduate educational data analytics (EDA), and sustainability. Through identifying key data types collected in postgraduate initiatives, evaluating existing ethical frameworks, and exploring privacy-preserving educational data analytics techniques, this study provided practical guidance for higher education institutions to navigate the challenges of balancing data utility and student privacy. The authors finalized 14 papers based on eligibility criteria through a systematic review. The results showed that higher education institutions can achieve sustainable data use by adopting a comprehensive approach that incorporates best practices, emerging technologies, and continuous monitoring to safeguard student privacy while leveraging the benefits of educational data analytics for achieving the Sustainable Development Goals. However, there are still some things that could be improved with the structure and content of the manuscript.

1.     I suggest adding “systematic review” in keywords.

2.     I suggest adding a part about the literature review.

3.     I suggest adding research questions in 2. Materials and Methods.

4.     I suggest explaining why 2011 was used as the starting year for searching literature in the eligibility criteria.

5.     It is recommended that further details of eligibility criteria be provided, such as the type of literature (empirical or non-empirical).

6.     I suggest providing information about reviewers, including the number of reviewers, their specialties, positions, etc.

7.     Please pay attention to the expression of the content of the text. For example, P2 line 50 “The of big data” is incomplete.

8.     Please note the formatting in the text. For example, there is a redundant symbol in “[17], 23, 24]” in Table 4, line 3.

9.     Please copyedit before resubmitting the revised version.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Please copyedit before resubmitting the revised version.

Author Response

Reviewer 2:

Item	Page	Section	Paragraph	Line	Nature of Correction	Effected	Not Effected	Explanation
1	1	Abstract	2	26	I suggest adding “systematic review” in keywords.	ü		The term ‘systematic review’ has been added
2					I suggest adding a part about the literature review.		ü	Adhering to the rigorous PRISMA 2020 checklist, this research employed a systematic literature review methodology, integrating the literature review process seamlessly within the study's introduction.
3					I suggest adding research questions in 2. Materials and Methods.		ü	In accordance with the PRISMA 2020 guidelines, clearly defined research objectives were established within the introduction. While the PRISMA statement suggests the option of research questions, the exploratory nature of this study, aimed at constructing a comprehensive understanding of area under study, rendered research questions less suitable. Instead, the defined objectives provided a focused direction for the systematic review.
4.	5	Systematic Search Strategy and Study Selection	3	146 - 156	I suggest explaining why 2011 was used as the starting year for searching literature in the eligibility criteria.	ü		The rationale for selecting 2011 as the starting point for the literature search has been comprehensively detailed within the study's relevant methodology section.
5.	5	Systematic Search Strategy and Study Selection	5	155	It is recommended that further details of eligibility criteria be provided, such as the type of literature (empirical or non-empirical).	ü		The eligibility criteria has been meticulously refined to show that the study exclusively encompassed empirical studies.
6.	5	Systematic Search Strategy and Study Selection	1	178 - 179	I suggest providing information about reviewers, including the number of reviewers, their specialties, positions, etc.	ü		To ensure transparency, the authors' dual roles as researchers and reviewers have been explicitly disclosed within the manuscript. Furthermore, detailed biographical information, including areas of expertise and affiliations, is readily accessible through the journal's author biography platform.
7.	2	Introduction	2	51	Please pay attention to the expression of the content of the text. For example, P2 line 50 “The of big data” is incomplete	ü		The word ‘deluge’ has been added
8.	11	Results	Table 4	-	Please note the formatting in the text. For example, there is a redundant symbol in “[17], 23, 24]” in Table 4, line 3.	ü		Redundant symbol removed
9.					Please copyedit before resubmitting the revised version.	ü		The manuscript has been further subjected to professional copyediting to enhance language clarity and precision

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

You have (1) identified a clear research gap- the lack of focus on data privacy issues specific to postgraduate educational data analytics (EDA) initiatives and followed established guidelines (PRISMA) for conducting and reporting systematic reviews; and (2) provided practical guidance for higher education institutions to balance data utility and student privacy. The conclusion could have further explored the potential trade-offs or tensions between data privacy and the effective use of educational data analytics for achieving sustainability goals and how these tensions could be navigated.

 

 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

English is not a first language but there are no communication issues.

Spacing throughout the paper needs to be addressed.

2 minor editing issues:

Line 50-missing word

Table 2-spacing and epsilon

 

 

Author Response

Reviewer 3:

Item	Page	Section	Paragraph	Line	Nature of Correction	Effected	Not Effected	Explanation
1	13- 14	Conclusion	4; 1 – 2	427 – 445	The conclusion could have further explored the potential trade-offs or tensions between data privacy and the effective use of educational data analytics for achieving sustainability goals and how these tensions could be navigated.	ü		The conclusion has been refined to elucidate the complex interplay between data privacy imperatives and the potential of educational data analytics to advance sustainability objectives. The analysis explores strategies for navigating these tensions to optimize outcomes.
2	2	Introduction	2	51	Line 50-missing word	ü		The word ‘deluge’ has been added
3	10	Results	10	-	Table 2-spacing and epsilon	ü		The manuscript's spacing has been standardised to comply with journal requirements.

 

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The authors did good revisions. I recommend it to be published in the current form.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

I hope the authors can check the whole mansucript carefully before the paper was sent to be published.