Examining the Effects of Supervised Laboratory Instruction on Students’ Motivation and Their Understanding of Chemistry

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The study is generally interesting and well described. It has good potential to be published, but it is very long. Authors are suggested to carefully check the MS with the aim to reduce its length, e.g. in sections 4.2 and 5, or in the descriptions of the interventions. It would be good as if there were 20-30 % less text, the readability will benefit from it. Below a few minor points:

-          Keywords: Better say acid-base-chemistry; start with chemistry education, then supervised laboratory instruction, and then the chemistry topics; solutions is misleading, better say solution chemistry

-          The first paragraph is very general and does not really contribute to the focus of the paper. I suggest to delete and start with paragraph 2 instead.

-          Line 96 It is suggested not to call this section literature review. It is not a review, better call it theoretical background and framework

-          Line 110, 392, 393 and so on where charges are: H+, + in superscript, or -

-          Line 114 should be submicroscopic instead microscopic

-          Line 325 delete ( before from

Check sections 3.3, 4.2, 5 for condensing the length and throughout.

 

 

Author Response

Dear reviewers,

Please the revised version of the manuscript that highlights the changes.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The paper has a potential to contribute to knowledge in science education, however in the current form the paper is too broad. 

See attached comments.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

There were few grammar errors for example see line 32 and 33. 

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

 Please the revised version of the manuscript that highlights the changes.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

None