Skip to Content
You are currently on the new version of our website. Access the old version .
MDPIMDPI

Advanced

by
  • Wen Chen 1,2,3,
  • Chuansheng Chen 4 and
  • Jiacai Zhang 3,*
  • et al.

Reviewer 1: Anonymous Reviewer 2: Jesús De La Fuente

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The whole text is fluent and easy to understand the context of the article

 

1. The previous research focused on language learning and biology. Why did this study choose mathematics and history? Since mathematics and history are conceptually relative to understanding and memory, what is the basis for choosing subjects?

2. This research is based on micro-lectures. Although there are limitations, it indicates that it should be applied to real classrooms in the future. However, the suggestions for applying to real classrooms can describe how to plan and what to pay attention to.

3. This research is a micro-lectures applied to mathematics and history. Does the same effect apply to any micro-lectures? Recommendations can be given as guidelines for future related research

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

In general, the manuscript is correct and relevant.

The instrument reliability result is not a study result. It is information about the reliability of the instrument or the measures themselves; It is not the effects of the relationship between independent and dependent variables. Therefore, it must be located in the instruments section.

Information on ethics committees and permits for this experimentation must be included in the Procedure. Was there an informed consent signature?

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx