Embedding Sustainable Mathematics Higher Education in the Fourth Industrial Revolution Era Post-COVID-19: Exploring Technology-Based Teaching Methods
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The article addresses a very interesting topic, applies an appropriate methodology and presents the results clearly. The purpose of the study is described in a logical, comprehensible, and explicit manner. A notable argumentation in support of research pointing to gaps in the literature is established.
However, the authors should also consider the following suggestions:
1. Introduction
- Line 65 - The introduction section could be continued by providing some information regarding the following structure of the article.
2. Materials and Methods
- Maybe this section should be improved with information about the participants. How were your participants chosen? Were this one Higher Education institution in South Africa and the participants chosen according to a certain criterion? Authors should state what the criteria/reasons were for choosing these Hei and participants and not others.
- This section should also be improved with information about the research period.
5. Conclusions
-The author (s) should better highlight the implications of the findings on all stakeholders (HEIs, students, teachers, researchers, others). Also, perhaps the contributions (implications of this study) should be grouped into theoretical and practical contributions.
-The limitations of the research, as well as the future directions of research were not presented. I suggest to the author(s) also address these elements if they have been identified.
References
- Line 446, 447, 453, 515, 516: Authors should indicate in the references section all information for sources 3,4, 8, 39 and 40 depending on their specifics.
- I would suggest to the authors to write the DOI in the same way in the entire references. Thus, the authors can decide and write DOI either: doi:10.1177/0273475311410845 or https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0276086 (for example see reference no 1, 6 or 24 and reference no 11 or 13).
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
While the article emphasizes the benefits of technology-based teaching methods, it would be valuable to address potential limitations and challenges associated with their implementation. This could include issues such as access to technology, technical difficulties, or the need for training and support for both students and educators.
It would be worthwhile to discuss the impact of technology-based teaching methods on student learning outcomes. Did students demonstrate improved performance in mathematics? Did their problem-solving skills or critical thinking abilities enhance as a result of these methods? Including such insights would strengthen the article's argument for the effectiveness of technology-based approaches.
Given the increasing reliance on technology, it is crucial to address potential equity and inclusion concerns that may arise when implementing technology-based teaching methods. How were students with limited access to technology or internet connectivity accommodated? Did the use of technology exacerbate existing educational disparities? Reflecting on these issues would contribute to a more holistic analysis.
The article would benefit from offering specific recommendations for future research and practice in the field of technology-based teaching methods in mathematics education. This could include suggestions for integrating technology seamlessly into curriculum design, addressing pedagogical challenges, or exploring innovative approaches to enhance student engagement and learning outcomes.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Dear authors
In general, the manuscript is of potential interest to the readership of this journal. However, I would like to address some points before the article can be published:
Strengths of the paper:
- The paper is well written
- The literature and the references are current and reflect extensive work done.
- Overall, the language used is suitable.
- The data analysis was done meticulously and presented.
- The discussion covered almost all the topics discussed
- The conclusion gives a valuable, informative insight into the issues discussed.
Feedback in overall
• The topic chosen is interesting.
• The study is well-designed and clearly explained.
Feedback in specific
· Abstract:
- The abstract needs a clear problem statement, as what really motivates this study, e.g., why choose mathematics other than other course, physics, chemistry etc.
- The methodology of the study, must be clearly stated in the abstract, i.e., Sample N=2?
· Introduction:
- Overall, the introduction is well-written and informative. It explains what the study is about.
- The problem statement needs further explanation and literature support. It would be better if some form of literature supported the problem statement.
- It will benefit readers, the technology-based, whether it is entirely online, hybrid learning, or blended learning since the context of the paper is post-COVID-19. Therefore, we clearly understand how the teaching and learning activities were done at the university.
- Elaborate on why the 4IR is relevant to technology-based teaching at the university, especially during post-COVID-19.
- This study has its uniqueness. Therefore it would be fascinating if you could highlight it.
· Literature Review:
- Overall, the literature review is up to date with a vast of references covered across the discipline, e.g., education, psychology, and neuroscience.
- However, adding earlier significant contributions that explored the problem statement would be good.
- Why is mathematics a subject chosen, that relates with the 4.0IR? Usually, author(s) will take the whole science subject, or at least the basic science subject, e.g., physics, math, chemistry, and biology.
- So, the reasons why chose the mathematics course need to be highlighted here.
· Methods
- Participants: A clear description of the study participant should be made.
- For example, the study participants are PMESs (i.e., postgraduate mathematics education students). This study examines how technology-based teaching can effectively teach mathematics courses in higher education. Therefore, once these PMESs student graduate, they will teach the secondary student? Primary student? Which is out of context. Therefore clear description of the sample is required, e.g., other students majoring in pure mathematics/applied mathematics can also be involved here.
- How long the interview process was done? i.e., two weeks? etc., just to get the time frame.
· Findings:
- How long the interview process was done? i.e., two weeks? etc., just to get the time frame.
- It may be good if the author(s) develops themes for all these four questions under different theoretical framing. From here the advantages and the disadvantages of technology-based teaching can be highlighted, therefore directly give a distinct finding of the two.
-
· Discussion:
- The implication of the technology-based teaching methods for sustainable mathematics during post-COVID-19 should be discussed further. It is better to see how it survived in developed and developing countries.
· Conclusion:
- Overall, the conclusion is well executed.
- However, it needs to realign with facts after corrections are made.
Best wishes
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 4 Report
1. This research is informative.
2. Please relate the findings to previously reported studies!
3. There have been many studies reporting on technology-based teaching methods or ICT in teaching during COVID-19 and Post-COVID-19. What is the novelty of this research? Please add substantiation of the contribution to the theory, and practice, then show the scientific novelty of the study conducted compared to the already known technique/approach, and why readers need to read the present study!
4. The discussion of the research is clearly explained and described. But it would be better if the author(s) conveys the practical limitation and potential open problems for further research.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 4 Report
The manuscript has been corrected according to comments
