Exploratory Study on the Blended Learning of Research and Language Skills in EFL and Interinstitutional Assessment
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The aim of this study is to test the feasibility and success of blended learning on research and FEL skills that might be implemented with students from different universities at the same time and receive an internationally valid assessment.
To achieve this a short module was created and executed, and students presented posters about some research. The posters were assessed by lecturers from different universities in order to find out if they share criteria. Their evaluations were not uniform.
I'm sorry it is not clear to me what the authors want to achieve with this study and in what sense the results obtained can be useful for the community. I don't agree that this is the way how to measure feasibility of blended learning. Last but not least, there are no research questions or hypothesis provided in the study.
Author Response
Thank you for your time reviewing this paper and for your useful and kind comments.
Regarding the question of how the methodology and the results address the objective of the study, the introduction has been extended to address more specific issues dealt with in the study and an additional objective has been introduced to make these issues more explicit.
Additional references have been inserted for further contextualisation.
Research questions have been added.
A paragraph has been added to reinforce the contribution to the community in the research questions section. Also, a paragraph has been added in the conclusions section to contextualise the final highlights.
Minor English mistakes have been corrected.
Reviewer 2 Report
It is a well-written paper on a cutting-edge subject. The results of the work and the whole research process are of interest. The research methodology with the involvement of Google forms (in fact 4-point Likert scale) along with a sufficient number of open questions and an analysis that could not be documented as quantitative or qualitative and statistically guaranteed, except for descriptive results. It does not ensure a guaranteed statistically verifiable imprint. However, it may give rise to further research under certain conditions.
Author Response
Thank you for your time reviewing this paper and for your useful and kind comments.
The introduction has been extended to address more specific issues dealt with in the study and an additional objective has been introduced to make these issues more explicit.
Additional references have been inserted for further contextualisation.
Research questions have been added.
A paragraph has been added to reinforce the contribution to the community in the research questions section. Also, a paragraph has been added in the conclusions section to contextualise the final highlights.
Minor English mistakes have been corrected.
Reviewer 3 Report
In my opinion, the article meets the requirements.Author Response
Thank you for your time reviewing this paper and for your useful and kind comments.
The introduction has been extended to address more specific issues dealt with in the study and an additional objective has been introduced to make these issues more explicit.
Additional references have been inserted for further contextualisation.
Research questions have been added.
A paragraph has been added to reinforce the contribution to the community in the research questions section. Also, a paragraph has been added in the conclusions section to contextualise the final highlights.
Minor English mistakes have been corrected.
