Beyond the Classroom: Integrating the ORID Model for In-Depth Reflection and Assessment in Service-Learning
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsIt would be nice to have more information about ORID and how it has been used outside this study. Line 72 I suggest a definition for transformative learning. I suggest a reference for line 102 for affective experiences. Line 177, what is the total number of service hours for completion? Finally, just a question for interpretation, between lines 352 and 353 you have Figure 2, do students define these equally, I can assume defining ORID terms did happen.
Author Response
Reviewer #1:
- It would be nice to have more information about ORID and how it has been used outside this study.
First of all, we would like to thank you for all your valuable and clear suggestions.
Done. For having more information about ORID (kindly see the highlighted text at page 3), we added a subtitle under theoretical framework, called “2.2. Structured Reflection Models” and explicitly included a title for the ORID model (2.2.1.), expending on the earlier explanations.
We used the references from 39 to 44.
Next, for having more information about how ORID is used outside this study, under the title “5. Discussion and Conclusion”, we provided information about other studies that implemented ORID model. Kindly see the highlighted text at page 16. We used the references 64, 65 and 66.
- Line 72 I suggest a definition for transformative learning.
Done (kindly see the highlighted text at page 2). We made the following addition, under the title “2.1. Role of Reflection in Service-Learning”:
“Taking both modes of reflection together, students can draw upon their learning process, through and from experience, on five progressive levels: noticing, making sense, making meaning, working with meaning, and transformative learning [27] which ultimately takes them beyond theoretical knowledge to a deeper understanding, leading to a paradigm shift in the way they see and interact with the world [28].”
We used the references 27 and 28.
- I suggest a reference for line 102 for affective experiences.
Done (kindly see the highlighted text at page 3). We cited the following reference and added it to the reference list:
- Jacobs, R. Affective and Emotional Experiences in Arts-Based Service-Learning Environments. International Journal of Emotional Education 2023, 15(1), 4-20. https://doi.org/10.56300/UANJ1022
- Line 177, what is the total number of service hours for completion?
Done (kindly see the highlighted text at page 7). The corresponding sentence is updated by including information about the number of service hours, as below:
“At the end of the tournaments, students were evaluated by their FIFA World Cup supervisor based on their performance, behavior, task accomplishment, and completion of a minimum of 40 service hours.”
- Finally, just a question for interpretation, between lines 352 and 353 you have Figure 2, do students define these equally, I can assume defining ORID terms did happen.
Thanks for the question. Yes, before students started their community service, the instructor explained the ORIDS model and related terms in detail. In addition, students were provided a template for filling in their ORIDS reflection, including the guided questions under each stage. Also, the instructor and students stayed connected throughout the semester using an application and Blackboard software, ensuring that any question or uncertainty were promptly addressed.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors1) The authors should clearly state the research questions guiding the study. This needs to be in a separate section, along with the aim of the study
2) The paper should restructured to contain introduction and theoretical framework (with relevant research studies) in distinct sections, whereby the authors need to more explicitly ground the originality of their study: how it differs and how it expects to contribute to existing knowledge
3) It would be useful to add a table with the profile of the participants
4) The main issue of the paper is data analysis and interpretation. There is no point in quantifying qualitative data from 11 participants ! (and this definitely cannot be qualified as quantitative research!). The authors should focus on greater in-depth analysis of the data. Most of their analyses remain on a superficial level, reporting what the students stated about their experience. However, the study aimed to “explore the extent to which the ORID model serves as a framework for students to reflect on their service learning experience”, which has not actually taken place
5) There is no Discussion of results against relevant literature
Author Response
Reviewer #2:
- The authors should clearly state the research questions guiding the study. This needs to be in a separate section, along with the aim of the study.
First of all, we would like to thank you for all your valuable suggestions.
Done (kindly see the highlighted text at page 5).
We added a subtitle called “2.3. Aim of the Study”. There, we stated the aim of the study and the research question, as below:
“Reflection is one of the most predominantly applied assessment technique for evaluating students’ authentic learning experiences [11, 35]. While the literature high-lights the ORID model as a comprehensive and structured framework for critical re-flection [32, 39-43], there remains a significant lack of documentation illustrating its practical application, particularly in service-learning. Recognizing the central role of reflection in service-learning, the purpose of this study is to provide concrete examples of students’ reflective work, structured through the ORID model in practice. In particular, demonstrating the model’s practical utility can provide valuable insights for educators, practitioners, and researchers on its effectiveness in facilitating critical reflection. While the findings could inspire the future research, teaching practices, and curriculum development in service-learning, it can also support and strengthen the model’s broader adoption to other authentic learning contexts.
In addition to demonstrating practical application, this study expends on the ORID model by adding “solution” aspect, which captures students’ creative thinking on overcoming challenges and turning them into positive outcomes. Particularly, in this stage, students find innovative solutions to address challenges they face during their community service and propose ways to turn those challenges into opportunities. It is important to highlight that while the existing reflection models mostly promote critical thinking, they overlook the important element of creative thinking. In addition to enhancing the depth of reflection, incorporating creative thinking to the model can cultivate the development of entrepreneurial mindset, fostering students’ resilience, adaptability, and ability to realize the opportunities in their environment where others may see only the obstacles [55]. When students approach to challenges with inventive solutions, they can drive meaningful change in their communities and beyond, becoming more proactive citizens and change-makers in the rapidly evolving world [56]. With this integration, the study seeks to address the following research question:
"How does the ORIDS model engage students in deep reflection in their service-learning?”
- The paper should be restructured to contain introduction and theoretical framework (with relevant research studies) in distinct sections, whereby the authors need to more explicitly ground the originality of their study: how it differs and how it expects to contribute to existing knowledge.
Done (kindly see the highlighted text at pages 2, 3, 4, and 5).
We added “Theoretical Framework” title after the introduction, which included information about the role of reflection in service-learning (2.1.) and different structured reflections models (2.2.), as well as the aim of the study (2.3.) which explicitly highlight the originality of our study.
We used the references from 25 to 56, to address this comment with the relevant studies.
- It would be useful to add a table with the profile of the participants
Done (kindly see Table 2, at page 6).
We added a table, providing an overview of students’ profiles, detailing their year of study, college, major, prior volunteering experience, and nationality. It takes place under the heading “3.2. Participants”.
- The main issue of the paper is data analysis and interpretation. There is no point in quantifying qualitative data from 11 participants! (and this definitely cannot be qualified as quantitative research!).
Done. Thank you for your comment about the data analysis. Our intention of quantifying the data is for demonstrating patterns within the insights drawn from the data, by illustrating the prevalence of certain themes and finding the frequencies of those occurrences. However, we understand that finding frequencies cannot be qualified as quantitative research. So, we revised our manuscript and referred to our analysis as “content analysis” all through the paper, rather than stating as qualitative or quantitative research.
The authors should focus on greater in-depth analysis of the data. Most of their analyses remain on a superficial level, reporting what the students stated about their experience. However, the study aimed to “explore the extent to which the ORID model serves as a framework for students to reflect on their service learning experience”, which has not actually taken place
Thank you for your valuable feedback regarding the depth of our data analysis.
Our primary goal is to provide concrete examples of students’ reflective work, structured through the ORIDS model in practice. That is why, we reported on what students stated about their experiences and provided student quotes to explicitly illustrate the empirical evidences.
We revised our results section. In particular, we structured our analysis under two headings, as:
4.1. Analysis of the ORIDS Model
4.2. Analysis of Students’ Reflections
To understand the ORIDS model in detail: Before the actual analysis of students’ reflective work, researchers conducted a thorough analysis of the reflection model (at section 4.1.) to fully understand its stages and identify what is targeted in each stage. Then, using a deductive approach, researchers developed categories for each stage of the model, considering the types of data incorporated and the guided questions implemented. Researchers primarily created two categories for each stage and developed operational definitions to articulate what each category entails. Developing these tailored categories significantly contributed to the actual data analysis, as they provided researchers a structured and systematic approach for interpreting students’ reflections, thereby enhancing relevance, consistency, and accuracy.
To demonstrate the model’s practical utility: Then, at section 4.2., researchers analyzed students’ reflection papers, segmenting the data to fit under the tailored categories and finding the frequencies of those occurrences. In particular,
- during the objective stage, we highlighted how students identified specific events and experiences from their community engagement.
- during the reflective stage, we illustrated how students expressed their emotions and personal reactions to these experiences.
- During the interpretive stage, the analysis showed how students derived meaning from their experiences, linking them to broader concepts or personal beliefs.
- During the decisional stage, we presented examples of how students articulated future actions as a result of their reflections.
- Lastly, during the solution stage, we provided examples of students’ creative ideas, including their proposals for overcoming challenges and turning them into opportunities for positive outcomes.
We hope in this way, we could address your comment. However, if there is anything further you would like us to report, we would appreciate your specific guidance on what other actions to take.
- There is no Discussion of results against relevant literature
Done (kindly see the highlighted text at pages 14, 15, and 16).
Under the title “5. Discussion and Conclusion”, we made discussion about our findings, articulating on how the ORIDS model engaged students into comprehensive, meaningful, and profound reflections, specifically explaining how each stage enhanced students’ reflective work across various dimensions. Then, we discussed results against the relevant literature by providing information about other studies that implemented ORID model, using the references 64, 65 and 66.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe authors have extensively revised the paper and have successfully addressed all the comments in the review report.
