Emotions of University Professors and Students in Times of Pandemic: An Analysis from the Perspective of Resilience in Chilean Higher Education

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Dear Authors

 

The article provides valuable insight into the emotional experiences of university professors and students during a pandemic. By focusing on the resilience aspect, the study offers a fresh perspective on the impact of positive emotions on the teaching-learning process during times of crisis. The large sample size of respondents from multiple universities enhances the generalizability of the findings.

 

My analysis of the article includes both positives and weaknesses of the following parts.

 

Introduction

 

Strengths:

·      The passage provides a clear and detailed background of the challenges faced by universities, professors, and students during the COVID-19 pandemic, setting the stage for the research question.

·      The passage emphasizes the importance of understanding the emotional dimensions of remote learning, both for professors and students.

·      The passage points out that while there is ample research on the negative emotions experienced during remote learning, there is a lack of studies exploring the impact of positive emotions.

·      The study's objective is well-defined and focuses on analyzing the emotional experiences of professors and students during the pandemic, particularly positive emotions, and examining potential relationships with remote learning experiences.

Weaknesses:

·      The passage could benefit from improved organization and structuring of ideas, making it easier for readers to follow the logical flow of the text.

·      Some sentences are long and complex, which could hinder the comprehension of the passage. Simplifying the sentence structure could enhance readability.

·      Mentions identifying differences by gender at the end, but this point is not developed or integrated with the rest of the discussion. Expanding on the rationale for investigating gender differences could strengthen the passage.

 

Some scopes of emotion

Strengths:

·      The passage extensively explores the role of emotions in the teaching-learning process during the pandemic, discussing both positive and negative emotions.

·      The passage effectively links emotions to the context of remote learning during the COVID-19 pandemic and how this shift has impacted both professors and students.

·      The passage integrates several studies and theories to support its arguments, showcasing a solid theoretical foundation.

Weaknesses:

·      The passage could benefit from a clearer organization of ideas, making it easier for the reader to follow the logical flow of the discussion.

·      Several sentences are long and complex, which might hinder the comprehension of the passage. Simplifying sentence structure could improve readability.

·      Some points and ideas are repeated throughout the passage, which could be more concise and focused on enhancing clarity.

·      While the passage does mention gender differences in emotional experiences, it does not effectively integrate this point into the broader discussion. Further development and incorporation of this aspect would strengthen the passage.

 

The methodological part consists of points 3 to 6. Further analysis of strengths and weaknesses covers the points together.

 

Strengths:

·      The passage provides a detailed description of the participants, including numbers, gender distribution, and students' academic stages, which adds to the study's credibility and validity.

·      The passage outlines the process of designing two instruments for students and professors, along with the dimensions addressed, which helps readers understand the data collection process and its theoretical basis.

·      The passage discusses the validation and reliability aspects of the study, including Cronbach's Alpha coefficients for both questionnaires, which is crucial in quantitative research.

·      The passage mentions ethical considerations such as informed consent and the review of questionnaires by Universidad del Desarrollo’s Ethics Committee, demonstrating the researchers' commitment to ethical research practices.

·      The passage provides information on the accessibility sampling technique used, which helps understand the study's generalizability and potential limitations.

Weaknesses:

·      The passage mentions an accessibility sampling technique but could provide more details about the reasons for choosing this strategy and its implications for the study.

·      The passage could provide more information on the data collection process, such as how the universities and participants were contacted, and any challenges faced during data collection.

·      The passage does not provide demographic information about participants, such as age, socio-economic status, or discipline, which may be relevant to understanding the study results.

·      The study's methodology and statistical analysis are not well-explained in this part of the article, making it challenging for readers to comprehend how the data was collected, analyzed, and interpreted.

 

Other strengths and weaknesses were identified based on the analysis of the empirical material. These are the results in the article included in point 7.

 

Strengths:

·      The article breaks down the emotional experiences based on gender and role (professor or student), which helps to highlight the similarities and differences between different groups of participants.

·      The article investigates the relationship between emotional repertoire and pedagogical practices, which could help to understand the impact of emotions on teaching and learning.

·      The article includes multiple tables summarizing the findings, which enhances the understanding and visualization of the results.

·      The article presents specific dimensions of pedagogical practice and student interaction, providing an in-depth understanding of different aspects of remote education during the pandemic.

Weaknesses:

·      Some sections of the article are not easily understandable, with complex sentence structures and data presentation. This can make it difficult for readers to grasp the main points and conclusions drawn from the study.

·      The article mentions that it seeks to identify differences by gender, but it does not explore other demographic factors that could influence the emotions and experiences of professors and students during the pandemic, such as age, socio-economic background.

·      While the article aims to delve into positive emotions, it also discusses negative emotions. However, the exploration of negative emotions might not be as in-depth as positive ones, potentially limiting the understanding of how these emotions impact remote learning experiences.

·      The article does not deeply investigate the role of technology, online platforms, and their limitations in shaping the emotional experiences of professors and students during remote learning, which could be a significant factor influencing emotions and teaching practices.

 

The discussion is the last, very important part of scientific work. Generalizing theorems and conclusions can provide practice solutions and inspire further discussion and research.

 

Strengths

·      The discussion provides an in-depth analysis of the findings, relating them to the broader educational context and the implications of the pandemic on remote education.

·      The discussion relates the findings to existing research on emotions, resilience, teaching strategies, and student outcomes, which helps to validate the results and demonstrate their relevance.

·      The article emphasizes the importance of a resilient perspective in understanding the role of positive emotions in the teaching and learning process, which offers valuable insights for educators and policymakers.

·      The discussion highlights areas for further investigation, such as the management of positive emotions within the framework of resilience, and the potential for positive emotions to reconstruct adverse educational scenarios.

Weaknesses

·      While the authors mention the limitations of their study, such as the non-random sampling and the specific time frame of the data collection, they do not delve deeply into the potential consequences of these limitations on the study's findings and implications.

·      The discussion provides theoretical insights and suggestions for future research but falls short in offering concrete, actionable recommendations for educators, institutions, or policymakers.

·      While the article acknowledges the presence of negative emotions in the teaching and learning process, the discussion primarily focuses on positive emotions and their impact. This could lead to an unbalanced understanding of the emotional dynamics in remote education.

·      The discussion does not clearly address how the findings and insights might impact various educational stakeholders, such as administrators, policymakers, or parents, who play an important role in shaping the remote learning experience.

·      Lack of discussion on potential interventions: The article does not offer suggestions or recommendations for addressing the emotional challenges faced by professors and students or propose interventions that could potentially improve remote learning experiences.

 

The cited sources in this article are valuable and relevant to the issues addressed. They include research articles from various fields, such as education, psychology, and technology. The sources are mostly current, with many published between 2018 and 2021. These sources comprehensively understand the topic and offer evidence for the authors' arguments.

 

However, it is important to note that the knowledge cutoff for these sources is September 2021, so any developments, research, or changes in the field beyond that date are not included in the article. Therefore, it is recommended to consult more recent sources.

 

Best regards

Reviewer

Author Response

Thanks for your revision. Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The study fails to highlight the motivation of the research. The authors fail to justify the reasoning for doing the research in the common area of online education. Research Methodology is unclear and the reason for conducting the descriptive research is not objective and clear. What has been done for reducing the bias in the data collection? Sampling adequacy is checked by which methodology, it is not mentioned. The correlation application is not correct. Why correlation is checked wrt statements, instead it should be factors. The discussion fails to relate the result to the existing literature. Overall the study is weak and not ready for publication.

English overall seems fine. However, at many places the sentences are too long.

Author Response

Thanks for your revision. Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

 

Dear Authors,

Thank you for submitting your article " EMOTIONS OF UNIVERSITY PROFESSORS AND STUDENTS IN TIMES OF PANDEMIC:AN ANALYSIS FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF RESILIENCE IN CHILEAN HIGHER EDUCATION." for review. After careful consideration, I have come to the decision that mino modifications are necessary. Below I will provide the details concerning each section:

This abstract does a good job of introducing the topic and outlining the research questions. However, it could be improved by providing more detail about the findings and discussing the implications of the results. Additionally, the authors could provide more information about the methodology used. Overall, the abstract is clear and concise and provides a good overview of the article.

 

The introduction to this article is quite comprehensive and provides a good overview of the current literature on the subject and the need for this particular study. It is well-written and provides a clear argument for why this study is important. However, it could benefit from more focus on the research questions that the study is trying to answer. For example, the introduction should clearly state and explain the key research questions that the study seeks to address. Additionally, the introduction should provide more context on how the study is unique and how it will contribute to the broader discussion on the impact of the pandemic on higher education.

 

This section of the article describes a well-structured methodology, with clear steps and thoughtful considerations taken. However, one area where the authors can improve is in providing more detail on the categorization of the emotions reported. It is unclear how exactly the categorization took place and what the categories were. Additionally, it would be beneficial to include more information on the process of external peer review and how the Cronbach’s Alpha coefficients were calculated. These additional details would help to provide a better understanding of the methods used in this study.Finally, it is important to unified all the information regarding methods and methodology in one section (see mdpi guidelines).

 

This discussion section does an excellent job of summarizing the research and the implications of the findings. The authors make strong connections between the study results and existing literature, which helps to strengthen the argument. Additionally, the authors provide a clear summary of the limitations of the study and directions for future research. The authors could consider more explicitly mentioning the practical implications of their findings, such as suggestions for university professors on how to foster positive emotions in their students. Additionally, the authors could provide more concrete suggestions on how to implement resilience-based approaches to emotion regulation in times of crisis. Adittionaly, conclusions are lacking.

 

I hope that these suggestions will help you to revise your article and make it more effective. I look forward to seeing your revised paper.

Sincerely,

 Reviewer

Author Response

Thanks for your revision. Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

- Removed for peer-review - The authors still fail to justify the reasoning for doing the research in the common area of online education. Research Methodology is unclear and the reason for conducting the descriptive research is not objective and clear. Accessibility sampling is an improper way of justifying the sampling procedure and is not at all logical. The application of statistical techniques is still wrong.

English overall seems fine.

Author Response

dear reviewer
we have adjusted the manuscript according to your suggestions and comments.
This time they have been highlighted in light blue, keeping the first review in red.
Cordially
Authors

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 3

Reviewer 2 Report

The author has well incorporated the suggestions. The discussion section should add implications of the study in the last paragraph.

Author Response

Dear reviewer
Attached you will find the modified file; In the discussion section we have highlighted in yellow the emphasis that we believe is necessary to respond to your suggestions.
We thank you again for the guidance received and we remain attentive.
Cordially
Enrique

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf