Sustainable Project-Based Learning Methodology Adaptable to Technological Advances for Web Programming
, Alejandro Medina-Santiago 2, Miguel Alcaraz-Rivera 1 and Carolina Del-Valle-Soto 1,*Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Dear authors, the article is of great educational interest at this time. The research design is not clear to me. What kind of research has been done. I would like to know how the results of the research have been incorporated into the educational intervention they propose.
Author Response
Response to Reviewer 1 Comments
Font code to understand the main changes in the article:
Replaced text: new text replaced text
Deleted text: deleted text
Added text: new text
Emphasizing previous already written text: text previously already written
Point 1: The research design is not clear to me.
Response 1: To improve the sense of the paper, it was decided to delete the paragraph that was between the research questions and the objective of the article (page 2 paragraph 5). This change allows us to clarify the main objective of the article, and also to give the reader understanding about what are the research questions, which are answered throughout the paper. Some important sentences of the deleted paragraph that seem important to us were included later with better structure (page 2, paragraphs 6 and 7). We think that these changes clarify the purpose of the article, the research questions, and its contribution.
Point 2: What kind of research has been done.
Response 2: The article is descriptive research (it was pinpointed on page 2, paragraph 7), as it seeks to show the structure, operation of a teaching approach in web programming that has been improved over several years. The article is supported by adapting the Project-based learning approach to develop a common application for students, which is the development of a remote desktop. The resulting method was improved year after year (as can be seen in Table 1); surveys were carried out to know the opinion of the students, reported in tables 5 and 6, and thus improve the methodology. A syllabus was generated that is also supported by the experience and other curricula, cited [15,36,37,38].
Point 3: I would like to know how the results of the research have been incorporated into the educational intervention they propose.
Response 3: Thanks for this comment. Page 6, at the beginning of the first paragraph we have explained that in each course we have made gradual changes, each improvement has been incorporated to a new course. In the last sentence of the same paragraph, we have explained how the methodology has been stabilized in the last 6 courses (as can also be seen in Table 1), and the result of each feedback course is incorporated into a new one. Tables 5 and 6 also describe the questions carried out to the students to improve the methodology. Our last course, which is explained in Section 6, incorporates the last feedback.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The authors are very detailed in describing the teaching methodology. This is not a research paper but a description about how the authors have developed over the years Project-Based Learning Approach Adaptable to Technological Advances for Web Programming looking at teaching data and course surveys. The paper has to make clear the objective by restructuring. Therefore, the reader will ask - are these the research questions to be answered by the study? Derived of the above, the following questions were raised: is it possible to prepare a web programming engineering-level course building the skill set of the students guiding the learning process with the development of a common specific solution but avoiding plagiarism?; and is it possible for this course to append a customized experience for every student’s needs and requirements? and given the fast pace of current technological changes, is it possible to obtain a course that doesn’t become obsolete every passing course?
Should this paragraph be here? After various years of improving and successfully implementing a web programming course, the result was a teaching-learning methodology accompanied with a syllabus, which combines the knowledge and experience of the teacher for guiding to the students for the development of an integrating project. This project is generated through student iterations (sprints) during a complete course, making it a personalized experience from the beginning to the end of the course avoiding plagiarism in the best case. The described approach has been continuously improved over the last 9 years, with the benefits of being an adaptable proven methodology that can be personalized to cover the needs of every student. Even more, it was successfully applied in our last course despite it was taught in a distance modality.
Laboratory practices on p. 12 is not clear in comparison with p. 15?
Expressions needing rephrasing:
Derived of the above,
teacher for guiding to the students for the development of an integrating project…
Usually when a teacher starts a course arises the question about how the course will be taught …
in the industrial
the role of the web developer in the industrial is itself a professional trade.
We have coincided with Wang and Zahadat, [12]
Maybe and depending of the curricula it requires
but it depends of the undergraduate career profile.
This clear separation allow us to propose a Remote Desktop
Avoid contractions - doesn’t
Author Response
Response to Reviewer 2 Comments
We appreciate your comments.
Font code to understand the main changes in the article:
Replaced text: new text replaced text
Deleted text: deleted text
Added text: new text
Emphasizing previous already written text: text previously already written
Point 1: This is not a research paper but a description about how the authors have developed over the years Project-Based Learning Approach Adaptable to Technological Advances for Web Programming looking at teaching data and course surveys.
Response 1: Thanks for this comment. The article is descriptive research (it was pinpointed on page 2, paragraph 7), as it seeks to show the structure, operation of a teaching approach in web programming that has been improved over several years. The article is supported by adapting the Project-based learning approach to develop a common application for students, which is the development of a remote desktop. The resulting method was improved year after year (as can be seen in Table 1); surveys were carried out to know the opinion of the students, reported in tables 5 and 6, and thus improve the methodology. A syllabus was generated that is also supported by the experience and other curricula, cited [15, 36, 37, 38].
Point 2: The paper has to make clear the objective by restructuring.
Response 2: The main objective of the article is described on page 2 at the beginning of paragraph 6, with the changes made in Points 4 and 5, we think that the main objective of the article becomes clearer.
Point 3: Therefore, the reader will ask - are these the research questions to be answered by the study? Derived of the above, the following questions were raised: is it possible to prepare a web programming engineering-level course building the skill set of the students guiding the learning process with the development of a common specific solution but avoiding plagiarism?; and is it possible for this course to append a customized experience for every student’s needs and requirements? and given the fast pace of current technological changes, is it possible to obtain a course that doesn’t become obsolete every passing course?
Response 3: In order to be clearer and avoid confusion if the research questions are answered in the paper or we focus on the objective of the article, the following changes have been developed:
- We decided to delete the paragraph that was between the research questions and the objective of the article (page 2 paragraph 5). This change, related to Point 4, allows us to connect the research questions (page 2, paragraph 4) more directly with the main objective of the article, which is in the next paragraph.
- The objective of the paper is clearly described on page 2, paragraph 5, and there, we have emphasized that the research questions are responded with the methodology and answered throughout the paper. We have added a paragraph in the last section pinpointing this aspect.
- The first research question: is it possible to prepare a web programming engineering-level course building the skill set of the students guiding the learning process with the development of a common specific solution but avoiding plagiarism? It is answered with the introduction of an integrating project based on the construction of a common application to all students such as a remote desktop but having a different operating system design for each student (as reported in Table 3) and emphasized in Section 7 (Discussion and Conclusions) in the Focus on Web Programming part (green text).
- The second research question: is it possible for this course to append a customized experience for every student’s needs and requirements? It is answered through the personalized design that students apply in their own integrating project (as explained in sections 4.2, 5.2.2, 6.1, and 6.2) and also emphasized in Section 7 (Discussion and Conclusions) in the Customization part (green text).
- The last research question: given the fast pace of current technological changes, is it possible to obtain a course that does not become obsolete every passing course? It is answered by the explanation given in Table 2, where despite the years and the different technologies that are being introduced year after year, the methodology is still in force; it is also emphasized in Section 7 (Discussion and Conclusions) in the Adaptability part (green text).
Point 4: Should this paragraph be here? After various years of improving and successfully implementing a web programming course, the result was a teaching-learning methodology accompanied with a syllabus, which combines the knowledge and experience of the teacher for guiding to the students for the development of an integrating project. This project is generated through student iterations (sprints) during a complete course, making it a personalized experience from the beginning to the end of the course avoiding plagiarism in the best case. The described approach has been continuously improved over the last 9 years, with the benefits of being an adaptable proven methodology that can be personalized to cover the needs of every student. Even more, it was successfully applied in our last course despite it was taught in a distance modality.
Response 4: This paragraph was originally in the introduction section (page 2, paragraph 5) but was deleted. However, some sentences that seem important to us from that paragraph were included in the next paragraph (page 2, paragraph 6). This change clarifies the purpose of the article, the research questions, and its contribution.
Point 5: Laboratory practices on p. 12 is not clear in comparison with p. 15?
Response 5: we have modified the last paragraph on page 12 in order to be clearer how the laboratory practices make synergy with the project. A fragment text that seemed verbose was deleted and rearranged in the first paragraph of page 8, we think it more suitable being there. The green text emphasizes the role of the laboratory practices with respect to the integrating project and a reference to section 6.2 has been included to relate an example.
Point 6: Expressions needing rephrasing:
Response 6: Expressions, in general, were modified throughout the document.
6a: Derived of the above,
Response 6a: The expression was wrongly expressed; it was replaced by Derived from the above. [page 2, paragraph 4]
6b: teacher for guiding to the students for the development of an integrating project…
Response 6b: The expression was wrongly expressed; it was replaced by teacher to guide the students for the development of an integrating project. [page 2, paragraph 6]
6c: Usually when a teacher starts a course arises the question about how the course will be taught …
Response 6c: The expression was restructured by When a teacher starts a course, usually arises the question about how the course will be taught. [page 4, paragraph 5]
6d: the role of the web developer in the industrial is itself a professional trade.
Response 6d: The expression was changed by in the industry. [page 4, paragraph 5 and also paragraph 6]
6e: We have coincided with Wang and Zahadat, [12]
Response 6e: The expression was changed by We have coincided, Wang and Zahadat, [12] [page 4, paragraph 8]
6f: Maybe and depending of the curricula it requires
Response 6f: The expression was changed by Depending on the curricula, it may require [page 4, paragraph 8]
6g: but it depends of the undergraduate career profile.
Response 6g: The expression was changed by but it depends on the undergraduate career profile [page 4, paragraph 8]
6h: This clear separation allow us to propose a Remote Desktop
Response 6h: The expression was changed by This clear separation allows proposing a Remote Desktop [page 5, paragraph 6]
6i: Avoid contractions - doesn’t
Response 6i: The expression was changed by does not [page 2, paragraph 4]
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
The authors need to be clear about the differences between ‘approach’ and ‘methodology’. Does methodology refer to research methodology or teaching- learning methodology? How is it different from approach?
1) p. 2 the title is ‘A Sustainable Project-Based Learning Approach’ but the authors talk about methodology ‘The aim of this paper is to introduce a sustainable teaching-learning methodology for web programming courses in Engineering Education using a project-based integrated approach adaptive to the continuous web technological advances.
2) p. 2 This is a descriptive research paper, which explains the methodology, shows an evolution of the web technologies that have been taught in past and more recent courses, provides surveys to know the opinion of the students.
- 18 Unclear how the section about benefits - We highlight the following benefits, which we consider that respond to the three research questions presented in the introduction respectively: - following answers the research questions: is it possible to prepare a web programming engineering-level course building the skill set of the students guiding the learning process with the development of a common specific solution but avoiding plagiarism?; and is it possible for this course to append a customized experience for every student’s needs and requirements? and given the fast pace of current technological changes, is it possible to obtain a course that does not become obsolete every passing course?
Still need to look at clarity of expressions … Rephrase
We think that our methodology responds the above three questions, which are answered throughout the paper,
When a teacher starts a course, usually arises the question about how the course will be taught.
We have coincided,with Wang and Zahadat [12], with respect to divide a web programming course in at least two; but following the next strategy:
This clear separation allows proposing a Remote Desktop based on an existing OS
We have made gradual changes in the way we have imparted the course with each group.
These practices help the students to develop small advances but making synergy with the integrating project.
Author Response
We really appreciate your comments to improve the paper.
Font code to understand the main changes in the article:
Replaced text: new text replaced text
Deleted text: deleted text
Added text: new text
Point 1: The authors need to be clear about the differences between ‘approach’ and ‘methodology’. Does methodology refer to research methodology or teaching- learning methodology? How is it different from approach?
1) p. 2 the title is ‘A Sustainable Project-Based Learning Approach’ but the authors talk about methodology ‘The aim of this paper is to introduce a sustainable teaching-learning methodology for web programming courses in Engineering Education using a project-based integrated approach adaptive to the continuous web technological advances.
2) p. 2 This is a descriptive research paper, which explains the methodology, shows an evolution of the web technologies that have been taught in past and more recent courses, provides surveys to know the opinion of the students.
Response 1: Thanks for this comment. Understanding that Approach becomes methodology when it has been time tested and proved its efficacy again and again, and Methodology is specific and has a step by step procedure to solve a problem, we have the following changes:
- a) We have changed the word approach by methodology in the title of the paper.
- b) Some words in the abstract has been paraphrased and also in the Introduction (page 2, paragraph 5)
- c) The phrase "PBL approach" has been replaced throughout the paper by the only abbreviated word "PBL".
- d) Caption of Figure 3 was also modified.
- e) Figure 3 was modified, before it had the title "Project-based learning approach", now it was replaced by "Integrated Project-Based Learning".
Point 2: 18 Unclear how the section about benefits - We highlight the following benefits, which we consider that respond to the three research questions presented in the introduction respectively: - following answers the research questions: is it possible to prepare a web programming engineering-level course building the skill set of the students guiding the learning process with the development of a common specific solution but avoiding plagiarism?; and is it possible for this course to append a customized experience for every student’s needs and requirements? and given the fast pace of current technological changes, is it possible to obtain a course that does not become obsolete every passing course?.
Response 2: We have modified such paragraphs highlighting more clearly, how the research questions are being responded to in the paper, page 18 items a), b) and c).
Point 3: Still need to look at clarity of expressions … Rephrase
Response 3: Expressions, in general, were modified throughout the document.
3a: We think that our methodology responds the above three questions, which are answered throughout the paper,
Response 3a: The expression was improved to: The above three questions are answered throughout the paper and clearly emphasized in the Discussion section [page 2, paragraph 5]
3b: When a teacher starts a course, usually arises the question about how the course will be taught.
Response 3b: The expression was deleted because it did not add value to the paragraph. [first paragraph of section 3]
3c: We have coincided,with Wang and Zahadat [12], with respect to divide a web programming course in at least two; but following the next strategy:
Response 3c: The expression was restructured to Wang and Zahadat, [12], proposed the division of a web programming curriculum in at least two courses: one focused on the client side and the other one on the server side. We also propose two programming courses, but with the following strategy [page 4, paragraph 6]
3d: This clear separation allows proposing a Remote Desktop based on an existing OS as a project for the web courses
Response 3d: The expression was changed to The clear separation achieved between the front and back-end part, it makes sense to propose a Remote Desktop based on an existing OS as an integrating project for the web course. [page 5, paragraph 6]
3e: We have made gradual changes in the way we have imparted the course with each group.
Response 3e: The expression was changed to Gradual changes were implemented with each iteration of the course, [page 6, paragraph 2]
3f: These practices help the students to develop small advances but making synergy with the integrating project.
Response 3f: The expression was changed to These practices stack over time and build the foundation of the integrating project. [Page 12, last paragraph]
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
