Pathways to Resilient and Sustainable Online Education in the New Normal: Interpreting University Teachers’ Willingness to Use Online Teaching Platforms Consistently
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThis paper examines the extent to which university teachers are willing to continue utilising online teaching platforms, and the factors that influence this decision, in the context of the post-epidemic era. This research has both theoretical and practical significance. The article employs the UTAUT model and integrates SEM and fsQCA for analysis, which is a reasonable research method. Nevertheless, the article is not without shortcomings, which require further improvement.
1. The sample is limited to university teachers in specific regions, which may limit the generalisability of the results. It is recommended that the sample be expanded to include, for example, teachers from different cultural backgrounds and different stages of education in order to improve the generalisability of the results.
2. Although the article employs the UTAUT model, other potential influences, such as teachers' motivation, beliefs, and values, may be overlooked. It is recommended that other theoretical models, such as the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM), the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB), the Innovation Diffusion Theory (IDT), and so forth, be employed for a more comprehensive analysis.
3. The article proposes four paths, but does not provide a detailed analysis of the conditions of application, advantages and disadvantages of different paths. It is recommended that the scope of application and implementation strategies of the different paths be further explored.
4. L293-294: Why were 300 questionnaires sent out but 350 responses received?
5. There are non-English expressions in Figure 3.
6. There are two 6.1. Conclusions
7. There are some grammatical and phrase usage mistakes in the paper.
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageThere are some grammatical and phrase usage mistakes in the paper.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authors1. The research background and significance are well written, but the research contribution is not well highlighted
2. Literature review should be summarized in the form of research hypotheses
3. The explanation of research variables should be placed in Chapter 3
4. The experimental analysis is sufficient, but the author did not provide a good theoretical explanation for the reasons for the differences in various configurations
5.The author needs to provide a detailed introduction to the fsqca method. Provide this article for the author's study https://doi.org/10.3390/systems12020053
6.Why are there two research conclusions?
7.The article's' “Recommendations“should ideally align with the configuration results
8.The article should still emphasize the theoretical contribution in the last paragraph, which is currently lacking in reading
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThis study aims to explore university faculty's willingness to use online teaching platforms and the factors influencing this willingness within the context of sustainable education. The topic is interesting, but not innovative. Key comments that can improve the quality of the article:
1. In the abstract and when formulating the objective, it should be added which country the study concerns. In which year was the data collected?
2. In the Introduction, it should be written what new this study brings to science? What is its added value? The authors did not justify the necessity and value of their work.
3. In the conclusions, it should be noted that the study concerned only a specific country. The conducted study does not meet the conditions that would allow generalizing the results to the whole world.
4. I propose shortening the title. At the moment, it is too long. In the title, the country the study concerns should be indicated.
5. References should be formatted in accordance with the requirements of the Sustainability editorial office. This comment also applies to citations in the text (not superscript, but the item number in square brackets).
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 4 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThis is an exceptionally timely essay, with conclusions drawn skillfully from the data, and intentioned to be of assistance in implementing and sustaining distance learning. The article is clearly written, though, in many passages I was drowning in abbreviations/acronyms. On p 8 (293-4): "This survey randomly distributed survey questionnaires to 300 university faculty members and received 350 responses." You received more responses than you had distributed the questionnaires? How/why?
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe authors have fully answered my comments and could be considered for publication, good job.
