PhDs of International Students—The Case of Israeli PhDs

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The topic is novel and important, but the results are not really analyzed and interpreted in the light of the research questions. The Discussion section does not relate to some of the strange and counter-intuitive findings (e.g. why do these Ph.D. hoders complete their degrees at such an advanced age? Why would they need a tertiary degree in education at the age 50+? The question about contribution of their studies to their knowledge and careers isn't addressed at all. Generally, Discussion should be rewriten to address the actual findings and not other topics (e.g. why Ph.D.s from foreign extentions' in Israel had been previously rejected by the CHE - this isn't their research q-n). There is a complete disconnect between the results and Discussion, thus it can't make any real policy contribution (which should be presented in the separate section in the end). Some of the results are also unclear and unexplained, e.g. why is it important that some respondents fly abroad with companions or part of study groups - does it mean that they also produce a 'collective' Ph.D. thesis abroad? And most important, given than about half of all non-Jewish/Arab advanced students got their degrees in Jordan (and in a very short time too) - what does it say about the quality and appicability of these degrees in the Israeli system of education? The results suggest that there are apparent gaps in the standards and outcomes between those who studied in E.Europe or US and in Jordan - again, not explained in the Discussion. So, Discussion should be completely re-written in relation to the study q-s and then policy conclusions clearly presented. 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

English is OK, the issues are with the content

Author Response

Please see the attachment

thanks

 

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The major problem with the paper is that it is written as a technical report rather than as a study. Therefore it lacks a substantive focus. Why is it important to study international doctorate holders in education who seek accreditation from the Israeli ministry of education? Probably because they seek employment in the Israeli public sector (teacher training colleges, the school system, municipalities). As such it is important to define sub-groups in this particularly large group, hence the focus on sectorial (Arab/Jewish) and gender differences within the group. This should be clarified in the introduction and hypotheses should be drawn.

   The findings section right now looks like a fishing expedition for significant differences rather than inter-related findings. After changing them the conclusions should be more coherent and related to the study itself.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

THANKS

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This revision is much improved and has answered most of my comments. The only missing detail in the picture is the predominace of East European degrees in the sample (for the Jews), and much fewer degrees obtained in West Europe/America. This finding needs some explanation and may be more detail: Which countries and Universities? Do they offer special kinds of programs (e.g. with remote study and a few physical visits)? Are they less costly? In brief - please relate to this finding. The older age has been well explained in the Discussion, I think.

 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

We would like to thank you for the valuable feedback and insightful comments on our manuscript. Your input has been instrumental in enhancing the quality and depth of our study.

In response to your request for further explanation regarding the predominance of East European degrees among the Jewish participants, we have added a detailed discussion in the relevant section of the manuscript.

We believe this addition provides a comprehensive understanding of the reasons behind the preference for Eastern European institutions and enriches the overall context of our study.

We appreciate your time and effort in reviewing our manuscript and providing constructive feedback.