Review Reports - The Inclusion of a Sustainability Awareness Indicator in Assessment Tools for High School Buildings

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The manuscript is well organized and creatively argumentative, in alignment with the stated research objectives. Nevertheless, there is still room for further argumentative and structural improvement, thus, the review comments can be considered prior to the publication of this interesting manuscript at the “Sustainability” journal.

a) The duplicated notation of the word “sustainability” at the manuscript title can be avoided, thus, a more concise title can be given. Again the mixed use of small and capital letters (indicatively: Environmental, Education, Reference, Sustainability, High, School, Buildings) should be handled in an unified manner throughout the text narrative. The capital lettering at nouns, adverbs, adjectives should be avoided.

b) The entities of “awareness” and “assessment” are anthropogenic, while the “school building” is an artifact entity. For this reason the manuscript title and the “Abstract” section could be adjusted to a more meaningful manner. Nevertheless, the entity of “education” is, indeed, an entity of “sustainability awareness” thus it is excellently deployed at section 2.

c) Again, at the “Abstract” section it is noted that the criterion of the comparable analysis was the “similar characteristics of teaching patterns”. Nevertheless, this sole criterion of analysis it is not conceptually coordinated to the research objective of “sustainability” since the latter entity reflects wider socio-economic conditions, governmental strategies, everyday customs, and cultural attributes under which the high school buildings are placed and operated. Therefore, the creative discussion and/or concluding remarks upon these issues will be highly welcome. Two or more (properly) cited paragraphs are adequate.

d) The year of the conducted survey, “2017”, can be noted at the “Abstract” section.

e) The sporadic notation of “chapter(s)” has to be changed to “section(s)”, where applicable.

f) The symbol of percentage “%”, can be removed from all entries of Tables 1, 2, and 3, and to be placed only on the first-lined Table-headings. Again, the notation of “Question X, Y, Z,…..” at the left-handed side of all Tables 1, 2, and 3, makes the reader hard to follow the conceptual synapse with the values given. Therefore, all “Question X, Y, Z,……” have to be accompanied by one-sentence of the corresponding physical explanation/interpretation.

g) The theoretical coverage and the argumentation deployed, they can be enriched by the consideration of more recently published and relevant to the research topic papers. Therefore, the following list of papers can be considered, accordingly.

Ntona, E., Arabatzis, G., Kyriakopoulos, G.L.

56536887000;8884728500;6603382498;

Energy saving: Views and attitudes of students in secondary education

(2015) Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 46, pp. 1-15. Cited 28 times.

https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-84924045264&doi=10.1016%2fj.rser.2015.02.033&partnerID=40&md5=ae089b0dde38530344dc6e9bc5fdd004

DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2015.02.033

AFFILIATIONS: Environmental Education Center of Grevena, End of Taliadouri Street, Grevena, 51100,Greece;

Democritus University of Thrace, Department of Forestry and Management of the Environment and Natural Resources, Pantazidou 193, Orestiada, Greece;

National Technical University of Athens, School of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Photometry Laboratory, 9 Heroon Polytechniou Street, Athens, 157 80,Greece

ABSTRACT: Energy and its usage constitute one of the most important environmental issues nowadays that substantially affect economic and social development and the improvement of the quality of life in all countries. The risk of climate change and environmental degradation is real with the global development process and human intervention being the key components in dictating the nature of environmental problems. Education on energy issues should be the means for helping students cope with present and future energy needs and the adoption of appropriate, attitudes, lifestyle practices and behavior is deemed necessary. The purpose of this paper is to investigate the complex of students views and attitudes about energy and its usage related to the environment. A questionnaire has been used as a research tool most appropriate to these researchs goals. The results expose the need for a radical change in patterns of human behavior towards an environmentally sustainable orientation and the dominant role that environmental education possesses in realizing this direction. © 2015 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

AUTHOR KEYWORDS: Attitudes; Energy; Saving; Students; Views

DOCUMENT TYPE: Review

SOURCE: Scopus

Alfianto, I., Sulton, M., Sari, A.A., Dardiri, A.

57199504730;57193699610;57196040576;57193698160;

Energy performance of the vocational high school building for the convenience of thermal and lighting comfort in Medan

(2018) AIP Conference Proceedings, 1977, art. no. 060016, .

https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85049430877&doi=10.1063%2f1.5043028&partnerID=40&md5=b077752a3281b6e0cde4fdbe106af36b

DOI: 10.1063/1.5043028

AFFILIATIONS: Civil Engineering, Universitas Negeri Malang,Indonesia

ABSTRACT: As one of the standards of national education, facilities and infrastructure plays an important role to improve the quality of learning, thus the good quality of infrastructure management is required to achieve the educational purposes. In tropical countries, buildings generally require approximately 45-70% of total energy consumption for air conditioning, and 10-20% for the lighting system. Since the revitalization of Vocational High School (SMK) is currently one of the concerns of the Indonesian government, the energy consumption of its buildings - mainly for the purposes of thermal and lighting comfort also receive serious attention. The objective of this research was to identify the basic criteria as an initial indicator for assessing the energy performance of building. The analysis and identification of criteria was done by using Important Performance Analysis (IPA) method. This study involved 91 respondent from 3 (three) Vocational High Schools in Medan, consisting of students and teachers. The results show that from 41 performance criteria of building design that influence thermal comfort, there are 14 indicators perceived as important by the users of vocational building building facilities, they are: (1) building location, (2) heat reduction effort around building, 3) building plan, (4) architectural form, (5) structural design and building envelope, (6) structural design and sheath, (7) interior, and (8) air conditioning and artificial lighting system. © 2018 Author(s).

DOCUMENT TYPE: Conference Paper

ACCESS TYPE: Open Access

SOURCE: Scopus

Soeparno, Muslim, S.

57200562719;57188724366;

Effectiveness of E-Learning for Students Vocational High School Building Engineering Program

(2018) IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 336 (1), art. no. 012039, .

https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85046258041&doi=10.1088%2f1757-899X%2f336%2f1%2f012039&partnerID=40&md5=f953dbd56ed37982135d5cfc39adee03

DOI: 10.1088/1757-899X/336/1/012039

AFFILIATIONS: Department of Civil Engineering, Universitas Negeri Surabaya, Surabaya,Indonesia;

Department of Electrical Engineering, Universitas Negeri Surabaya, Surabaya,Indonesia

ABSTRACT: Implementation of vocational learning in accordance with the 2013 curriculum must meet the criteria, one of which is learning to be consistent with advances in technology and information. Technology-based learning in vocational commonly referred to as E-Learning, online (in the network) and WBL (Web-Based Learning). Facts on the ground indicate that based learning technology and information on Vocational High School of Building Engineering is still not going well. The purpose of this research is to know: advantages and disadvantages of learning with E-Learning, conformity of learning with E-Learning with characteristics of students on Vocational High School of Building Engineering and effective learning method based on E-Learning for students on Vocational High School of Building Engineering. Research done by literature method, get the following conclusion as follow: the advantages of E-Learning is learning can be done anywhere and anytime, efficient in accessing materials and tasks, ease of communication and discussion; while the shortage is the need for additional costs for good internet access and lack of social interaction between teachers and students. E-learning is appropriate to basic knowledge competencies, and not appropriate at the level of advanced competencies and skills. Effective E-Learning Based Learning Method on Vocational High School of Building Engineering is a Blended method that is a mix between conventional method and e-learning. © 2018 Institute of Physics Publishing. All rights reserved.

DOCUMENT TYPE: Conference Paper

ACCESS TYPE: Open Access

SOURCE: Scopus

Kupferschmidt, F., Wigger, B.U.

13102722800;6603696794;

Public versus private finance of High school buildings: Efficiency and distribution factors [Öffentliche versus private Finanzierung der Hochschulbildung: Effizienz- und Verteilungsaspekte]

(2006) Perspektiven der Wirtschaftspolitik, 7 (2), pp. 285-307. Cited 4 times.

https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-33646116058&doi=10.1111%2fj.1465-6493.2006.00210.x&partnerID=40&md5=7d0c5afa69890e0ed032928dc013a33d

Brown, A.

55482890400;

Integration of trainable students in a regular high school building

(1976) Education and the Training of the Mentally Retarded, 11 (1), pp. 51-53.

https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-0017034468&partnerID=40&md5=2a8d18fd68a61d528805b816b13e1cc2

AFFILIATIONS: Syracuse Univ., Syracuse, N.Y. 13210,United States

ABSTRACT: The practice of hiding trainable students is common in school systems throughout the country. The rationalization for this has been that parents do not want their trainable children exposed to the inhumanities they will undoubtedly experience if they are exposed to the regular school population. The main reason for moving the class was so these students could be with their own age mates, and thus provide a more normal environment. Another obvious reason for moving the class was that the physical setting in the elementary school was designed for younger and smaller students. The student advocates have expressed a desire to become involved over the summer with the trainable students. They are also planning a picnic for the trainable students. One might conclude by saying that everyone is very proud of these young people and what they have done. This is only the beginning; these students have paved the way to understanding and acceptance which is so often lacking in our adult society.

DOCUMENT TYPE: Article

SOURCE: Scopus

Fowlkes, J.G.

57188888870;

What Are the Trends in Planning and Constructing Junior and Senior High-School Buildings and Plans?

(1949) NASSP Bulletin, 33 (163), pp. 214-217.

https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-84964106859&doi=10.1177%2f019263654903316334&partnerID=40&md5=cb11e5527a1a3f92009d1fc0ecd81e0c

DOI: 10.1177/019263654903316334

AFFILIATIONS: School of Education, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin,United States

DOCUMENT TYPE: Article

ACCESS TYPE: Open Access

SOURCE: Scopus

Perkins, L.B.

57188888491;

What Are the Trends in Planning and Constructing Junior and Senior High-School Buildings and Plants?

(1949) NASSP Bulletin, 33 (163), pp. 207-214.

https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-84964102593&doi=10.1177%2f019263654903316333&partnerID=40&md5=3659a175d09c956a8d81a79f47a0b84e

Author Response

Reviewers’ Comments and Authors Responses

Reference: The inclusion of sustainability awareness indicator in assessment tool for high school buildings - 386307

Response to technical check results comments

The authors would like to thank the area editor and the reviewers for their precious time and invaluable comments. We have carefully addressed all the comments. The corresponding changes and refinements made in the revised paper are summarized in our response below.

Reviewer #1:

Comment-1 (a). The duplicated notation of the word “sustainability” at the manuscript title can be avoided, thus, a more concise title can be given. Again the mixed use of small and capital letters (indicatively: Environmental, Education, Reference, Sustainability, High, School, Buildings) should be handled in an unified manner throughout the text narrative. The capital lettering at nouns, adverbs and adjectives should be avoided (entire text)

Response: We accept this reviewer´s comment so we removed word “sustainability” at the manuscript title (Line 2). We fixed the use of small and capital letters (entire text).

Comment-2 (b). The entities of “awareness” and “assessment” are anthropogenic, while the “school building” is an artifact entity. For this reason, the manuscript title and the “Abstract” section could be adjusted to a more meaningful manner. Nevertheless, the entity of “education” is, indeed, an entity of “sustainability awareness” thus; it is excellently deployed at section 2.

Response: We accept this reviewer´s comment so the manuscript title (Line 2) and the “Abstract” section (Line 22 to 24) was adjusted to a more meaningful manner.

Comment-3 (c). Again, at the “Abstract” section it is noted that the criterion of the comparable analysis was the “similar characteristics of teaching patterns”. Nevertheless, this sole criterion of analysis it is not conceptually coordinated to the research objective of “sustainability” since the latter entity reflects wider socio-economic conditions, governmental strategies, everyday customs, and cultural attributes under which the high school buildings are placed and operated. Therefore, the creative discussion and/or concluding remarks upon these issues will be highly welcome. Two or more (properly) cited paragraphs are adequate.

Response: We agree and applied the requested improvement. In the Abstract (Line 22 to 24; and Conclusion (Line 314 to Line 316).

Comment-4 (d). The year of the conducted survey, “2017”, can be noted at the “Abstract” section.

Response: We accept the reviewer's comment ( Line 24) .

Comment-5 (f). The sporadic notation of “chapter(s)” has to be changed to “section(s)”, where applicable.

Response: We accept the reviewer's comment ( Line 169) .

Comment-6 (g). The symbol of percentage “%”, can be removed from all entries of Tables 1, 2, and 3, and to be placed only on the first-lined Table-headings. Again, the notation of “Question X, Y, Z,…..” at the left-handed side of all Tables 1, 2, and 3, makes the reader hard to follow the conceptual synapse with the values given. Therefore, all “Question X, Y, Z,……” have to be accompanied by one-sentence of the corresponding physical explanation/interpretation

Response: We accept the reviewer's comment in all Tables 1, 2, and 3.

Comment- 7 (h). The theoretical coverage and the argumentation deployed, they can be enriched by the consideration of more recently published and relevant to the research topic papers.

Response: We accept the reviewer's comment (Line 50 to 62 and Line 81 to 90).

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments to the authors:

It is an interesting paper and I recommend publishing it provided that the authors improve it according to the following comments:

1. The relevant literature should be updated. That is, although in the worldwide literature the material on the subject under investigation is considerable, the authors have included limited and not updated references.

2. To enhance the paper’s publication potential, the key-words should not be the same words as those of the title.

3. In section 3 (Materials and Methods) and specifically in the paragraph where information on the questionnaire is given, the literature used for constructing the questionnaire should be referenced.

4. I suggest adding one more section (4. Results) which will include 4.1 Santa Catarina School and Cristo Redentor School, Brazil, and 4.2 Francisco de Holanda High School, Portugal.

5. In essence, the Discussion in Section 6, is not a discussion but results. Therefore, after proper modification this content should be transferred to Section 4 where the results are presented.

6. Consequently, a Discussion section should be added.

7. Regarding the English language used in the paper, significant improvement is necessary. Most importantly, the authors should pay special attention to grammar in terms of articles, pronouns and tenses. Another point that requires focus is punctuation since it is very often not properly used. Finally, the language of the paper is not scientific on several points.

Author Response

Reviewers’ Comments and Authors Responses

Reference: The inclusion of sustainability awareness indicator in assessment tool for high school buildings - 386307

Response to technical check results comments

Reviewer #2:

Comment-1. The relevant literature should be updated. That is, although in the worldwide literature the material on the subject under investigation is considerable, the authors have included limited and not updated references.

Response: We accept this reviewer´s comment (Line 50 to 62 and Line 81 to 90)

Comment-2. To enhance the paper’s publication potential, the key-words should not be the same words as those of the title.

Response: We accept this reviewer´s comment (Line 27).

Comment-3. In section 3 (Materials and Methods) and specifically in the paragraph where information on the questionnaire is given, the literature used for constructing the questionnaire should be referenced.

Response: We accept this reviewer´s comment [Line 140 to 144)

Comment-4. I suggest adding one more section (4. Results) which will include 4.1 Santa Catarina School and Cristo Redentor School, Brazil, and 4.2 Francisco de Holanda High School, Portugal.

Response: We accept this reviewer´s comment (Line 168).

Comment-5. In essence, the Discussion in Section 6, is not a discussion but results. Therefore, after proper modification this content should be transferred to Section 4 where the results are presented.

Response: We accept this reviewer´s comment (start in Line 289)

Comment-6. Consequently, a Discussion section should be added.

Response: We agree and apply the requested improvements (167)

Comment-7. Regarding the English language used in the paper, significant improvement is necessary. Most importantly, the authors should pay special attention to grammar in terms of articles, pronouns and tenses. Another point that requires focus is punctuation since it is very often not properly used. Finally, the language of the paper is not scientific on several points.

Response: We agree and revised the language.

Reviewer 3 Report

I wish to thank the authors for their efforts for this article. The topic is interesting, and there is some novelty in the idea of a sustainability awareness indicator for school buildings. This could be a possible way to improve and strengthen environmental education in secondary education.

Unfortunately, I do not think that this article is quite ready for publishing yet. The content does not quite come up to the expectations based on the title. I would have expected to see a literature review of previous sustainability awareness research and sustainability assessment tools in the introduction, and a case study or other empirical try of using an awareness indicator as an element of assessment in the results. Instead, the introduction and empirical part do not quite connect.

I find the introduction and literature review somewhat shallow and disorderly written. Rather few sources are cited, and the chosen literature does not necessarily answer to the title or purpose of the article. For example, the paragraphs discussing the early years of the concept "environmental education" seem quite unnecessary - especially because it is not connected to the topics of awareness and assessment in the text. I recommend that the authors rewrite the introduction and strengthen the literature background of the study. I wish to see an analysis of previous, empirical studies of students' environmental awareness in different countries - there are plenty of them available - and a more thorough discussion of the different assessment tools, especially those aimed for schools. What are the differences between these tools? Has there been previous discussion about including an awareness indicator?

Questionnaire as a method is rather standard in a study like this. However, I find the number of questions rather low and am not convinced that all the questions are well formulated. For example, would it be likely that there would be a high number of students anywhere in the world that would not close the tap after use? A justification for how and why the questions were formulated is needed in the methods chapter. In addition, it is not clear how the respondents were chosen.

The results are mainly clearly presented. However, I would have wished to see a list of the topics of the questions first, before table 1. A table with answers to "Question 1, Question 2 etc." is not very informative. Please consider this.

The discussion and conclusions would benefit of comparison to previous studies of youth environmental awareness. Again, I did not quite understand the connection between assessment tools and these results. Please reason this clearly. For example, page 6 just above the table 3, sentence "Although the result is good..." - why is it necessary to include an indicator? This one sentence is not convincing enough.

One more minor comment about the style: There is some jumping from one tense to another, especially in the introduction. For example: "Although this topic is reaching ... also generated..." Please read the text carefully and check if this is reasonable.

Author Response

Reviewers’ Comments and Authors Responses

Reference: The inclusion of sustainability awareness indicator in assessment tool for high school buildings - 386307

Response to technical check results comments

Reviewer #3:

Comment-1. I would have expected to see a literature review of previous sustainability awareness research and sustainability assessment tools in the introduction, and a case study or other empirical try of using an awareness indicator as an element of assessment in the results. Instead, the introduction and empirical part do not quite connect.

Response: We accept this reviewer´s comment (Line 113 to 115 and Line 118 to 124)

Comment-2. I find the introduction and literature review somewhat shallow and disorderly written. Rather few sources are cited, and the chosen literature does not necessarily answer to the title or purpose of the article. For example, the paragraphs discussing the early years of the concept "environmental education" seem quite unnecessary - especially because it is not connected to the topics of awareness and assessment in the text. I recommend that the authors rewrite the introduction and strengthen the literature background of the study. I wish to see an analysis of previous, empirical studies of students' environmental awareness in different countries - there are plenty of them available - and a more thorough discussion of the different assessment tools, especially those aimed for schools. What are the differences between these tools? Has there been previous discussion about including an awareness indicator?

Response: We accept this reviewer´s comment (Line 51 to 62 and Line 81 to 90).

Comment-3. Questionnaire as a method is rather standard in a study like this. However, I find the number of questions rather low and am not convinced that all the questions are well formulated. For example, would it be likely that there would be a high number of students anywhere in the world that would not close the tap after use? A justification for how and why the questions were formulated is needed in the methods chapter. In addition, it is not clear how the respondents were chosen.

Response: We accept this reviewer´s comment (Line 140 to 144 and 299 to 306)

Comment-4. The results are mainly clearly presented. However, I would have wished to see a list of the topics of the questions first, before table 1. A table with answers to "Question 1, Question 2 etc." is not very informative. Please consider this.

Response: We agree and set the questions subject in Table 1, 2 and 3.

Comment-5. The discussion and conclusions would benefit of comparison to previous studies of youth environmental awareness. Again, I did not quite understand the connection between assessment tools and these results. Please reason this clearly. For example, page 6 just above the table 3, sentence "Although the result is good..." - why is it necessary to include an indicator? This one sentence is not convincing enough.

Response: We accept this reviewer´s comment (Line 299 to 306)

Comment-6. One more minor comment about the style: There is some jumping from one tense to another, especially in the introduction. For example: "Although this topic is reaching ... also generated..." Please read the text carefully and check if this is reasonable.

Response: We agree and repair that.

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

At the revised manuscript authors:

Thank you very much for the meticulous and constructive review comments given upon this manuscript reviewed. At the revised manuscript authors:

1. Proceeded in a meticulous and systematic reorganization of the text narrative, by effectively considering all reviewers’ comments suggested.

2. Restructured all narrative components in a solidified and meaningful manner.

3. Clearly unveiled the determining parameters of sustainability awareness and its accompanied assessment tools for high school buildings.

4. Outlined insightful remarks of their work towards a large-scale applicability at similar research settings worldwide.

Therefore, I recommend that this revised manuscript can be accepted for publication as it is.

Author Response

I recommend that this revised manuscript can be accepted for publication as it is.

Thank you

Reviewer 3 Report

Dear authors,

I wish to congratulate you for the efforts that you have made in a rather short notice. The article has been greatly improved. The introduction and literature review are now deeper and more coherent, and they support the aim of the article better than before.

However, I still think that especially the chapter "Education and sustainability awareness" could be improved. I wondered about some of the chosen references: they were rather old. Especially (7) Lawrence 1949 does not at all seem to be a current source of information considering benefits of a school building. Surely there is some more recent literature available, to be used instead. The question of how the school building could help the students learn would be very interesting if it was discussed in a proper manner. In addition, even though some new empirical research concerning youth environmental awareness has been added, I still think that the article would benefit of a few more examples. Giving several examples of previous studies would give a possibility to compare the results of this study to previous studies.

The last paragraph of the conclusion chapter brings up an interesting issue, the need to adapt assessment methodologies for less developed regions. I suggest that you strengthen this idea into a suggestion for future research.

Minor comments:

Page 3, line 97: "high school students have "very highlevel… " Where does the citation end? Or is there a citation? Highlevel -> high level

Page 6, lines 277-278: "The students' sustainability awareness level in Portuguese school was very significant because there is a sustainable culture in the country" - This is a very strong claim. It either needs a reference and/or explanation or ought to be altered or removed.

Reference list:

Pleace check that all the references are correct and in the same style. I found some variance and at least one that was falsely written (previously mentioned Lawrence, P.B 1949 actually ought to be Perkins, LB 1949, in case you decide to keep it.)

Translating non-English source titles into English would be beneficial. You can put the translation in brackets, like this: Piaget, J. (1966). La psychologie de l’enfant [The psychology of
the child]. Paris, France: Presses Universitaires de France.

Thank you again for the chance to read this interesting article.

Author Response

Round 2

Reviewers’ Comments and Authors Responses

Reference: The inclusion of sustainability awareness indicator in assessment tool for high school buildings - 386307

Response to technical check results comments

Reviewer #3:

Comment-1. I wondered about some of the chosen references: they were rather old. Especially (7) Lawrence 1949 does not at all seem to be a current source of information considering benefits of a school building.

Response: We accept this reviewer´s comment and I delete the reference, Lawrence, 1949 (7)

Comment-2. Even though some new empirical research concerning youth environmental awareness has been added, I still think that the article would benefit of a few more examples. Giving several examples of previous studies would give a possibility to compare the results of this study to previous studies.

Response: We accept this reviewer´s comment (Line 100 to 106)

Comment-3. The last paragraph of the conclusion chapter brings up an interesting issue, the need to adapt assessment methodologies for less developed regions. I suggest that you strengthen this idea into a suggestion for future research.

Response: We accept this reviewer´s comment (Line 338 to 341)

Comment-4. Page 3, line 97: "high school students have "very highlevel " Where does the citation end? Or is there a citation? Highlevel -> high level

Response: We agree and change to high level.

Comment-5. Page 6, lines 277-278: "The students' sustainability awareness level in Portuguese school was very significant because there is a sustainable culture in the country" - This is a very strong claim. It either needs a reference and/or explanation or ought to be alter or remove.

Response: We accept this reviewer´s comment and remove the claim.

Comment-6. Please check that all the references are correct and in the same style. I found some variance and at least one that was falsely written (previously mentioned Lawrence, P.B 1949 actually ought to be Perkins, LB 1949, in case you decide to keep it.)

Response: We accept this reviewer´s comment. We delete the reference, Lawrence, 1949 (7) and correct all the references (same styles)

Comment-7. Translating non-English source titles into English would be beneficial. You can put the translation in brackets, like this: Piaget, J. (1966). La psychologie de l’enfant [The psychology of the child]. Paris, France: Presses Universitaires de France.

Response: We agree and repair that (Line 403, 422, 426, 430 and 445)