Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Thank you for this manuscript. It is highly relevant, however not quite ready for publication. Please consider the following examples that need clarifying or correction:

Line 207 Please clarify ‘children’s social psychologies’

Lines 219-221 Please clarify ‘few studies placed children’s social behaviors in after-school tutoring, an element of social environment, for integrated consideration’

Lines 251-253 Please explain what age groups participate in the different classes presented. Are these all in Kindergarten? I started thinking of primary and secondary school.

Lines 285 Please check this statement: ‘Higher scores indicated lower levels of parental engagement’ . It seems contradictory to the above-given four-point-scale where higher scores represent higher involvement.

Line 422 Please rephrase ‘which had the consistent results of the relevant studies’

Line 448 Please rephrase ‘n improving children’s comprehensive quality [67],’

Lines 492-502. This section is very problematic. Based on your study, you don’t have data for such long-reaching recommendations. Delete or rephrase.

Lines 508-509 Please rephrase ‘improved children’s social skills and problem behaviors better.’

Lines 518-526 This section is very problematic. Based on your study, you don’t have data for such long-reaching recommendations. Delete or rephrase.

Line 532 Please clarify ‘boys showed negative problem behaviors’

Lines 553-572 This section is also problematic. Based on your study, you don’t have data for such long-reaching recommendations. Delete or rephrase.

Minor text editing suggestions

Please consider the following concepts throughout the article:

Behaviors – I recommend behavior without s throughout the article

Relation/relations – in some places when it is about contact between humans I recommend relationship/relationships

Skill – I recommend most often skills – in plural

(social) emotion – I recommend most often emotions – in plural

In addition, some typos found

Line 116            participation in after-school

160                     and special classes71               tutoring, but no significant

196                     discussed on whether

200                    not significantly affected

211                     used by the researchers

218                     are only a few in-depth studies

232                     3. Does the more after-school

235                     Based on the literature review

241                     Children’s social behaviors does not more benefited by a

261                    interaction through is tested through 11 questions

351                     children had participated in one of the single type of 351 after-school tutoring

372                     social skills, but the

385                     , the more parental

391                     , the more parental

414                     that girls liked

416                     reflects that gender

421                     and the more prominent

506                     gender and age were

546                     status were of the important

550                     (3) the more participation

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear Authors,

I appreciate your research design but some elements of the paper are not in an academic manner written, such as the introduction part, research design, discussion, and conclusion.  

1. The introduction has the form of a professional paper.

2. the set hypotheses put forward don't seem  well theoretically grounded

3. the conclusions are presented imperatively, leaving little room for academic discussion referencing the previous research. It seems more like a persuasion.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf