Enhancing Quality Appointment, Preparation and Support System for Malaysian Principals

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear [Author's Name],

 

I recently read your paper on Improving the Quality of Hiring, Preparation, and Support Systems for Principals in Malaysia. I found this paper very interesting, and it provided comprehensive insight into the subject matter. Your analysis of the evolving educational landscape, demands on contemporary education, and the role of effective leadership is commendable.

However, I would like to point out a few areas that may require further attention and refinement:

 

1. Abstract: Pay attention to the abstract, which should have more detailed information regarding the methodology, findings, conclusions, and analysis recommendations. This will help readers understand and appreciate the contribution and importance of the article better.

2. Introduction: 1) An introduction can help by highlighting the urgency or importance of the addressed issue. Providing clear context about why the problem is urgent or timely can help readers get the information immediately. This introduction should provide transparent information about the issue, goals, and hypotheses. 2) Limited Reference to Previous Research: Including more references to previous studies or research supporting the chosen problem's urgency and significance would be beneficial. This adds credibility to your work and helps contextualize your research within the existing body of knowledge. 3) Lack of Adherence to Template and General Writing Rules: The article deviates from the standard academic writing norms, especially regarding structure and organization.

 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Many thanks for the constructive feedback. We have tried our best to address all your comments.

 

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The paper stands as a good report. However, it must be presented in a standard journal article format using the following sections - abstract, introduction, literature review, methodology, results, conclusion, references. 

A clear aim, research question with the problem statement and rationale that are to be well argued and justified at the introduction. 

Good exploration, review and discussion of related concepts, theories and literature that are well situated in the topic and context in a comprehensive manner would be supportive at literature review section. 

The methodological choices, application in the study that are well argued and supported with methodological references would be required (even if this is a literature review - provide methodological details of the review). 

A good analysis of the results that are critically discussed and interpreted would be supportive at the results section. 

The conclusion could be drawn with necessary reflections on the findings as a response to the research question is needed. 

The abstract must be rewritten capturing all the above details in brief. 

 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The paper is not written in a standard academic journal article format. The authors must rewrite the paper following the steps I have listed to them before this could be considered for further review and publication. 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Many thanks for your constructive feedback. Attached is the revised manuscript and author response. We have tried our best to address all your comments.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Methodology: Add visualizations such as tables, diagrams, and images to help readers understand the content better.

Discussion: adding research that is strengthened by the results of this research and research that has different results from this research

Reference: replace old ones with the latest articles

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

Attached is the response to reviewers. Many thanks for your constructive feedback,

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Revision addressed my comments  

Author Response

Many thanks for the constructive feedback