Applications of Biotechnology in the Environment: Arguments from Spanish Secondary School Students

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The paper is focused on Application of biotechnology in the environment: arguments of secondary school students. The manuscript must be extensively improved as content, structure and presentation. Please see below my main suggestions and complete them:

1. Title should include word Spanish: …. of Spanish secondary schools.
2. The emails of all authors must be followed by their initials.
3. Keywords must be more focused. I suggest as follows: biotechnology; secondary education; bioremediation; bacteria; environment; Spanish schools; microorganisms; plastic.
4. Remove the empty line from the text.
5. The Introduction section is currently overly lengthy and diffuse, with several repeated ideas. To enhance paper's  clarity and focus, I recommend restructuring the Introduction section into a few well-developed paragraphs (selecting info from actual text and adding info regarding sources of plastics and waste management) organized logically as follows:

• Waste management, with emphasis on the key sectors / main sources which are contributing to the huge plastic waste, including the most polluting sectors like constructions field, pharmaceutical field, petroleum industry and other sectors /fields the authors will consider (which generates plastics, etc.). In this regard I suggest checking and referring also to Studies about last stage of product lifecycle management for a pharmaceutical product, Environ. Prot. Ecol., 16(1), 2015, 56-62. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/277005786_Studies_on_the_last_stage_of_product_lifecycle_management_for_a_pharmaceutical_product;
• Bioremediation as an example of a sustainable and eco-friendly practice for plastic disposal (select text from actual text);
• Biotechnological approachesin the specific context of Spain, highlighting relevant national strategies, initiatives, or case studies (select text from actual text)
• The development of scientific reasoning and argumentation skills among secondary and high school students, particularly in relation to environmental education and sustainability (select text from actual text).

The entire Introduction should be approximately one page in length. At the end of the Introduction, a clearly defined paragraph presenting the aim of the paper should be included. This paragraph should be separated from the rest of the introduction for emphasis, but it should not be numbered as a subsection. The remained unused text must be selected and restructured in the Discussion section.

6. Last paragraph of Introduction. Aim of the study must be improved. A real aim of a study should be addressed from the point of view of the novelty/special aspects your research brings to the field, or the reason for choosing the topic (as you are presenting a special case, of the Spain). Develop the aim of the study as better as you can. What differentiate your paper from other in the same topic? Give a reason for interest in this paper.
7. Subsection 2.1. Context and participants. A total number of students must be provided in the main text, and, a table summarizing all the students, classified by classes or other criteria. However, the number of the students seems very small, as for a relevant statistic, a group should contain at least 33 subjects.
8. An interview is about a questionnaire. You must describe:

- How did you choose the items in the questionnaire/survey?

- Do your pretested the survey?

- You should introduce the method used, why it is useful for your investigation, what is the objective of your study related to the questionnaire and the main impacts that you want to obtain after the data gathered.

- How were the sample chosen?

- Is it representative for the population in the area/country?

-       Have you worked with a sociologist in making the questionnaire?

-       Who validated the questionnaire? etc. There is an entire methodology on how a questionnaire should be approached. Please clarify the aspect I mentioned.

9. Tables 2 and 3. A table with one line has no reason, transform them in text. Also, head of both tables must be completed in its first cell.
10. In Results section, all the question should be presented in a single table, summarizing tables 4 to 7.
11. Discussion section is very poor and inconclusive; it must be developed considering:

• The text from Introduction you will move here;
• Similarities in attitudes/habits regarding waste management of students from other countries (a table would be relevant) – I suggest checking Waste management strategy at a public university in smart city context. Environ. Prot. Ecol., 17(3), 2016, 1011-1020 https://intelligentjo.com/images/Papers/smart%20waste%20management/Waste%20management%20strategy%20at%20a%20public%20university%20in%20smart%20city%20context.pdf
• Measures for improving the students’ perception regarding waste management;
• Also, a last paragraph of Discussion, detailing the strengths and limitations of your research must be added (remove the text regarding these aspects from Conclusions and add it here)

12. Conclusions are much too long and irrelevant.
13. Appendix 1 has no role, it should be introduced in the main text, in the 2nd section.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Very interesting topic.

It would be advisable to add quotes to this paragraph to make it more reasoned: "Over the past 30 years, biotechnology has experienced rapid development in both scientific and economic issues, such as those related to health, genetically modified foods, and the environment; but it has also increased public awareness of the doubts surrounding several biotechnological applications. However, public awareness of the uncertainties surrounding several biotechnology applications has also increased, so we believe it is necessary to delve deeper into the analysis of arguments through personal interactions with students."

Also add quotes here: In the fields of agriculture, livestock, and the environment, there is also a great lack of awareness of the environmental uses of biotechnology, such as the use of genetically modified microorganisms for the more efficient disposal of human waste or polluting products.

The objectives are stated at the end of the introduction. There is one untranslated paragraph.

Small sample of participants.

It would be advisable to add the instrument used in the method.

The results are not entirely clear in the tables.

It would be helpful to expand the results and discussion section, as it is currently weak and the tables created are not fully understood. There is no study of the variables to be considered, and the sample is very small.

Author Response

Response to Reviewer 2 Comments
1. Summary
Thank you very much for taking the time to review this manuscript. Please find the detailed responses below and the corresponding revisions/corrections highlighted/in track changes in the re-submitted files.
2. Questions for General Evaluation	Reviewer’s Evaluation	Response and Revisions
Is the content succinctly described and contextualized with respect to previous and present theoretical background and empirical research (if applicable) on the topic?	Must be improved	We have actualized the theoretical background.
Are the research design, questions, hypotheses and methods clearly stated?	Must be improved	We have actualized the questions and methods.
Are the arguments and discussion of findings coherent, balanced and compelling?	Must be improved	We have changed the discussion.
For empirical research, are the results clearly presented?	Must be improved	Tables have been reorganized.
Is the article adequately referenced?	Can be improved	It has been revised and accurate.
Are the conclusions thoroughly supported by the results presented in the article or referenced in secondary literature?	Must be improved	Conclusions have been modified in order to improve them.
3. Point-by-point response to Comments and Suggestions for Authors
Comments 1: It would be advisable to add quotes to this paragraph to make it more reasoned: "Over the past 30 years, biotechnology has experienced rapid development in both scientific and economic issues, such as those related to health, genetically modified foods, and the environment; but it has also increased public awareness of the doubts surrounding several biotechnological applications. However, public awareness of the uncertainties surrounding several biotechnology applications has also increased, so we believe it is necessary to delve deeper into the analysis of arguments through personal interactions with students."
Response 1: Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with this comment. We have added a quote to this paragraph to make it more reasoned.
Comments 2: Also add quotes here: In the fields of agriculture, livestock, and the environment, there is also a great lack of awareness of the environmental uses of biotechnology, such as the use of genetically modified microorganisms for the more efficient disposal of human waste or polluting products. Response 2: Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with this comment. We have eliminated this paragraph due to the changes made in both fields introduction and discussion.
Comments 3: The objectives are stated at the end of the introduction. There is one untranslated paragraph. Response 3: We have, accordingly, included a clearly defined paragraph presenting the aim of the paper. It is separated from the rest of the introduction for emphasis but not numbered, page 6. Comments 4: Small sample of participants. Response 4: Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with this comment. As a consequence of not having a relevant statistic number of students (difficult for being a rural area), we have prioritized a qualitative analysis. Comments 5: It would be advisable to add the instrument used in the method. Response 5: Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with this comment. Therefore, we have added the instrument used in the method, pages 7 and 8. Comment 6: The results are not entirely clear in the tables. Response 6: Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with this comment. Therefore, we have summarized tables 4 to 7 in one only table (page 10). Comment 7: It would be helpful to expand the results and discussion section, as it is currently weak and the tables created are not fully understood. There is no study of the variables to be considered, and the sample is very small. Response 7: Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with this comment. Therefore, we have clarified tables by doing one only table more useful. Moreover, we have expanded the discussion section to profundize in the analysis of our results comparing that with educational context already studied.
4. Response to Comments on the Quality of English Language
Point 1:
Response 1:    (in red)
5. Additional clarifications
[Here, mention any other clarifications you would like to provide to the journal editor/reviewer.]

 

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The manuscript must be improved as presentation, references must be completed with all required info by MDPI draft and must be written in mdpi style. Always, the presentation must be impecable.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

minor revision is needed

Author Response

Thank you for your feedback. We'd like to inform you that we've thoroughly revised the manuscript, with particular attention to the overall presentation, the inclusion of all required reference information as per the MDPI draft, and the application of the MDPI style. We've made every effort to ensure the presentation is impeccable, as requested.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Table 2 is much clearer and the discussions more complete.

Author Response

Thank you for your valuable feedback. We're pleased to hear that Table 2 is now much clearer and the discussions more complete. We appreciate your insights.