The Perception Scale for the 7E Model-Based Augmented Reality Enriched Computer Course (7EMAGBAÖ): Validity and Reliability Study
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The work appears to be of interest to the journal topic, it presents a study with an adequate sample of participants and contributes to the knowledge base.
However, there are two issues that need to be addressed.
The introduction appears to be vague and should be more narrowed on the objectives of the work. The paragraph on generations of learners, although interesting, does not contribute particularly to the work. BLT should be written in full the first time and explained for the ease of reading. The 7E model and AR are crucial elements of the work and deserve to be explored extensively in the introduction to contextualize the goals of the work.
Regarding the study, it is not clear if all the participants know the technologies and modalities of the courses or if they were introduced to them before the study. The items of the scale are reported in their final form in the appendix. However, it would help the reader to consult the original items before the statistical study.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Line85: acronym BLT Must be defined earlier
Lines103- 107: good claim but has insufficient support, you may add more support citations from these two relevant and recent studies
https://doi.org/10.3390/su13052546
https://doi.org/10.3991/ijim.v15i05.20203
Lines: 118-119 The conclusion statement is not well structured – something missing - (need to reproduced nicely)
- 7E Model as main part of title components Must have short section or subsection to be defined and explained à Authors need also to define this Acronym (7EMAGBAÖ), many readers will spend time to get what it does men ?
line 185: why you did remove 26 items and only 28 items were valid please write your justification and statically evidence if any at same section.
- Data analysis section has lack of references
- Validity Study section has lack of reference
Lines 258-261: From section of Findings on reliability, authors talked in the paper about 7Es. However, they did all study about only 6 factors (dimensions) what do you mean by 7th Es here?
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
1. In the abstract, the authors are suggested to include some results of the research. The information about 7E model based augmented reality can be explained in the abstract
2. (Page 2, line 59). BLT should be explained in advance, including to provide the full name.
3. What do you mean with “powerful learning environment”?
4. The explanation on “The most basic learning circle of CLT is expressed as 3E” is unclear. The authors should explain it and how the 7E is developed in details.
5. What do you mean with “it is a necessity to determine the size of the learners' required perception levels in Digital Learning”? To determine the size or dimension/scale of perceptions? It must reflect to your topic.
6. What do you mean with “qualified scales”? (page 3, line 118)
7. Please check the language and do proofreading. For example, it revealed how much this study…? (page 3, line 119) and check the whole manuscript again. There are many grammatical mistakes.
8. Who are the 400 students? Undergraduate students? More explanation on the samples should be included. Need to explain the ways to use Random Sampling Method. How about the research procedure? How long did you spend to collect the data?
9. What are the resources or past studies being referred by the authors when developing the scale to determine the Students' Perceptions of the 7E Model- Based Augmented Reality Enriched Computer Class? It is unclear at all. How different and similar of the past studies from this research?
10. Six factors/ sub-dimensions should be introduced, explained and elaborated clearly in the introduction and research methodology section. Especially, why only these six factors are important and contributing the perceptions of students. How is flipped classroom video related to AR? Also, how is Computer Lab Anxiety related to AR?
11. The reason and justification why there is a need to develop a scale to determine the learners’ perceptions of the 7E 16 model-based, augmented reality enriched computer class are still unclear and no enough. It is still unclear to see the importance, novelthy and implication of this research.
12. In the questionnaire, there are some questionable items such as
• Lecturing in the computer lab improves my empathy skills. How does it reflect to “Laboratory Assisted Computer Course”?
• Applications in computer courses are as valuable as the notes I take in this course. What do you mean with the notes I take?
• These two items seem repeated “Computer course lecture videos should be sufficient so that the course can be understood better” and “Computer course lecture videos are sufficient because they are informative”.
13. The topic is about the perception scale, but the authors do not clearly justify and explain the scale in details. There are no enough past studies related to the perception scale explained by the authors in this paper.
14. It should have one section to explain “7EMAGBAÖ” and “6 factors/ sub-dimensions” in details.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Although the authors have revised the manuscript, it remains crucial to clarify the participants' previous experiences. It is unclear whether all students attended the courses or used the technologies covered by the survey. If a student, for example, has never used AR to learn, she cannot answer the questions.
It is, therefore, necessary to better clarify who the participants are, whether they attended the courses on which they are questioned and how long they have used the technologies.
Furthermore, due to the generic responses to the points of the review (all responses are "Has been revised and amended") it is not easy to understand the degree of intervention of the authors to resolve the issues provided.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
1. Please check the grammar throughout the whole manuscript. Some examples are “Cirriculum Improvment Study” (page 2, line 139). “together did not exwast in the literature to date.” (page 3, line 311). “AR Enriched Computer cours” (page 4, line 358).
2. In this paper, the authors should elaborate more on how 7E model-based augmented reality can help computer course, and why it is only for computer course.
3. The six factors should be discussed and justified in the introduction. How do these six factors contribute to the perception levels of the learners within the scope of the 7E Model-Based AR enriched computer course. How does it work for the concept? Also, how is it important to AR, the 7E model related to FCM, and LMS?
4. In the Study Group section, the authors should describe and elaborate more on how long the students underwent the 7E Model-Based AR enriched computer course. How was the model implemented in the course? Had these 400 students had experience with the 7E Model-Based AR enriched computer course? If without the experience, how did these students express the correct thoughts and perceptions on this 7E Model-Based AR enriched computer course?
5. It is noticed that the authors tried to change a few words in the survey questionnaire after doing revision in the review process of Sustainability. However, the data collection was conducted using the old version. Thus, will it affect the validation of research findings since the questionnaire is modified?
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 3
Reviewer 1 Report
The authors clarified the points indicated by the previous review, making clear improvements to the manuscript. I am satisfied with the latest changes.
Author Response
"Please see the attachment."
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
1. In the section"The Process of Creating the Scale", please include the explanation of the questionnaire prepared in Turkish and then translated to English in this paper. It will be better if the authors can include the original questionnaire in Turkish used in this research alongside the English version in the appendix.
Author Response
"Please see the attachment."
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
