Flipped Classroom: A Good Way for Lower Secondary Physical Education Students to Learn Volleyball

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

I would like to congratulate the author/s. It is good quality work. I think it will be a contribution to educational sciences. 

Author Response

     Authors’ comment: We are very grateful for these words. Thank you so much for spending time reading and reviewing our work.

Reviewer 2 Report

Thank you for your paper and for seeking to address a gap in the field of physical education. I enjoyed reading your paper.

I've attached a PDF of your manuscript with tracked changes for you to see my further and more detailed comments.

I have some general comments also:

• Given that you have used statistics, I think a summary at the end of the findings to explain these main results in words that are easy to understand would benefit the reader. You do some of this work within the discussion. I think this could come earlier within the findings and then focus on some of the extensions of the literature within the discussion sections.
• Some further explanation in places is needed to explain what you are referring to or sometimes to give an example (see attached file)
• I struggled to see that application of SDT in this paper - despite your claim to do so both at the start and at the end. I think this needs to come across much more within the paper in terms of how you interpreted it and applied it. 
• I have a query in regards to ethical approval which needs further clarification 
• Are you able to draw on some further conclusions of your work that would be applicable to other contexts or sports?
• Good use of literature to situate your work

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Comments and suggestions for Authors:

Thank you for your paper and for seeking to address a gap in the field of physical education. I enjoyed reading your paper.

Authors’ comment: Thanks for your comments. We are very grateful for these words. Thank you so much for spending time reading and reviewing our work.

 

I've attached a PDF of your manuscript with tracked changes for you to see my further and more detailed comments.

Authors’ comment: Thanks for your comments. Please, find a response to your remarks within the manuscript. All changes are marked.

 

I have some general comments also:

* Given that you have used statistics, I think a summary at the end of the findings to explain these main results in words that are easy to understand would benefit the reader. You do some of this work within the discussion. I think this could come earlier within the findings and then focus on some of the extensions of the literature within the discussion sections.

Authors’ comment: Thank you very much for your comment. In fact, the summary of the results is paragraph 3.4 Hypothesis testing. The above paragraphs compare the treatment groups (between-groups) at the beginning, at the end and within each group (pre-post). It is true that it would not be necessary to give so much information, but we think that for the more expert readers (and reviewers) and future meta-analysis is necessary.

 

* Some further explanation in places is needed to explain what you are referring to or sometimes to give an example (see attached file)

Authors’ comment: Thank you very much for your comment. We have tried to provide the reader with examples and clarifications. Please, if there are still any sentences that needs to be better written, we will be happy to do it again.

 

* I struggled to see that application of SDT in this paper - despite your claim to do so both at the start and at the end. I think this needs to come across much more within the paper in terms of how you interpreted it and applied it. .

Authors’ comment: Thank you very much for the comment. In fact, SDT uses it to contextualize the motivation that we have evaluated. Our intention is not to deepen this aspect, but it is not complementing the results of academic performance and allowing their discussion.

 

The results are clear although the graphs could be improved. I mean, the lines of LOA should be dashed lines and the authors could rescale the graphs for a better view.

Authors’ comment: Thanks for your comments. We have improved the graphs.

 

* I have a query in regards to ethical approval which needs further clarification.

Authors’ comment: Thank you very much for the remark. We agree with your comment and, in addition, we have added the approval of our university's ethics committee.

 

* Are you able to draw on some further conclusions of your work that would be applicable to other contexts or sports?

Authors’ comment: We think so, thanks to the design of our research. Although it is a single sport, using a control group and an important sample, we think that the results can be projected in other contents within PE.

 

* Good use of literature to situate your work

Authors’ comment: We are very grateful for these words.

Reviewer 3 Report

Congratulate the authors. The article allows to know the impact on the motivation of students who have learned about volleyball through FC compared to traditional teaching.
The sample is relevant, as well as the instruments and tests carried out. The theoretical framework gives solidity and foundation to the realization of the study and the setting of the hypotheses, which are discussed with multiple studies in the discussion.
It is the example of a well developed and completed article. Best regards

Author Response

Authors’ comment: We are very grateful for these words. Thank you so much for spending time reading and reviewing our work.