Equity and Parity in Primary Education: A Study on Performance in Language and Mathematics Using Hierarchical Linear Models

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The paper: "Equity and parity in primary education: a study on performance  in language and mathematics using hierarchical linear models" proposes the pursuit of two goals: the evaluation of school equity and equality in relation to specific competences and the analysis of the relationship between school performance, equity and equality of these competences. 

The paper addresses issues that are very important for the achievement of the goals proposed by the 2030 Agenda but requires some revisions especially in the structure in order to make it more readable and thus usable for readers.
The introduction paragraph is excessively long, which means that the sense of what is meant is lost. Consider dividing it into two paragraphs, one more general (the introduction) and another that becomes a kind of state of arts analysis concerning the issues analysed in the article.
Consider including a paragraph describing the study area. It would be interesting to understand how these schools are composed specifically.

The methodology is not well described and the results contain information that should be made explicit in the methodology. For example, the formula on line 265 should be introduced and explained beforehand. 

The results should also be presented in a more readable form using, for example, graphs such as histograms or other types.

The paper does not contain a conclusion paragraph but only a discussion paragraph. This paragraph should be broken down because it contains final considerations that could be included in the conclusion paragraph.

In my opinion, the paper needs in-depth revisions before it can be accepted for publication.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The overall quality of the manuscript is very satisfactory. 

These are points that the authors may consider improving:

Introduction:

- The author utilized ESCS index as the controlling variable and mentioned it in the introduction but failed to give enough details about this index. I suggest more information about this index is provided in the introduction to give readers a better understanding of this index without having to look up from somewhere else. 

- The context of Andalusia with regard to the objectives of the study. While the author did a good job of describing the significance of the study, the rearrangement and more contextual info in the introduction could help clarify and highlight why Spain and particularly Andalusia were the focus of the study. Was there currently equity and parity concerns in the nation? Why was this region chosen over others? 

- Objective 2 focused on funding yet there was no prior mention of funding issues with regards to equity and parity. This could link to the above suggestion regarding Spain & the Andalusian context. 

 

Materials and Methods

Variables:

The authors stated that ESCS was obtained from PCA but did not provide sufficient details on how it came about. 

Discussions

With reference to the context of Spain & the region, the authors should consider adding an implication part to include contextualized recommendations. 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The authors clearly responded to my revisions and I consider the article suitable for publication in MDPI.

Author Response

Thanks a lot.