Influence of an African Indigenous Language on Classroom Interactions and Discourses

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

REVIEW REPORT

Introduction

Although a great effort has been made to capture the work from a qualitative approach, some aspects must be improved.

- The research question, which is fundamental for these studies, is not observed in the introduction. The objective has been set, which could be modified as the work is constructed with the question as a guide.

- The justification of the study is not observed in the introduction. It would be important to know what has guided researchers to study the topic and what impact it has on the academic community to justify its development, since several authors have already concluded that receiving information in the mother tongue benefits more than receiving said information in another language. language.

Results

The results have been presented using texts. However, it would help to understand the comparisons proposed if a table or figure were used within the results to facilitate readers' understanding of the manuscript.

 

Discussion

Although several authors have been presented who argue on the reviewed topic, the discussion is not necessarily presented as such. A result is not taken and discussed in light of what other authors have found. It is suggested to reformulate the discussion by contrasting the results obtained with what was found in other research, reflecting on it, as this will enrich the work.

 

Conclusions

It is also suggested to mention the limitations of the study.

 

References

It has not been possible to review the manuscript in depth because, although 27 references are presented, only two of them declare DOI. The rest of the references do not present a DOI or URL that allows an adequate review. It is suggested to considerably improve the number of references that must be taken from indexed databases and that are no older than 5 years. In addition, each reference should preferably include DOI or URL to be able to refer to the original sources that support the study.

 

 

Some subtitles of the manuscript need to be revised. For example: 6. Patents. Although the journal gives the possibility of declaring whether patents will be generated, in this case it should not be used.

Author Response

Good day

I hope thta you are well.

Attached is the revised manuscript together with table of corrections.

Looking forward to hearing from you.

Warm regards

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This is a fairly original and worthy study. Also timely in the context of the study. It is well written and adequate and relevant citations have been used. The authors however need to revisit the following issues as detected along the manuscript:

1. The manuscript needs to be given a close proof reading so as to eliminated grammatical errors.

2. Common along the manuscript are of long sentences (e.g. sentence that runs between line 38 to 41 of p.1) that need be split into at least two so as to capture the real message intended in the study.

3. The introduction section needs to be signposted for better emphasis of the key items of the argument for the study. 

4. The attributes of the sample (participants) seem to have been left out altogether yet it is these that will enable the findings/data to gain legitimacy. What grade level was targeted in the study?

5. I have not seen any research questions nor the clear statement of the objectives of the study. 

6. It needs be made clear that mother tongue, African indigenous language, home language and isiNdebele all refer to the language of learning and teaching in the schools/teachers/learners who participated in the study reported in the manuscript. 

7. it also need be clear which were the assumptions about the home language as used in this study or as may have guided the selection of the sample used in the study reported in the manuscript. 

8. Authors to clarify who is the 'He' as used as the first word of line 243 of p. 5 of the manuscript. This points to the fact that the authors could have given codes to the participants as well as details of their attributes as already mentioned in 4 above. 

9. It is important that the authors provide the RQs or come clear on the objectives of the study and to use these to better align the results section. 

10. Authors to ensure appropriate recognition of sources, e.g. direct quotes often should come with page number, unlike what obtains at the end of para 1, p. 2 of the manuscript, with regard to source number 10. 

This is an important study and has a focus very relevant and timely in the context of the study. Authors will hopefully be able to revise the manuscript in line with the points listed herein as a means to present the message more clearly.

 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Proof reading to eliminate unwanted words, as well as to insert missing words will be adequate. An item on long sentences has been included in the 'to authors' section.

Author Response

Good day

I hope that you are well.

Attached is the revised manuscript together with table of corrections.

Looking forward to hearing from you.

Warm regards

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf