Next Article in Journal
Comparative Analysis of Photosynthetically Active Radiation Models Based on Radiometric Attributes in Mainland Spain
Next Article in Special Issue
Aging Industries in the Regional Economy: How to Support an Aging China?
Previous Article in Journal
Accommodation and Avoidance: Functional Conflict Theory (FCT)-Based Governance Logic of Resettled Community Conflict in China
Previous Article in Special Issue
Design and Application of a Citizen Participation Tool to Improve Public Management of Drought Situations
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Sustainability through STEM and STEAM Education Creating Links with the Land for the Improvement of the Rural World

Land 2022, 11(10), 1869; https://doi.org/10.3390/land11101869
by Elisa Gavari-Starkie 1, Patricia-Teresa Espinosa-Gutiérrez 2,3 and Cristina Lucini-Baquero 3,*
Reviewer 1:
Land 2022, 11(10), 1869; https://doi.org/10.3390/land11101869
Submission received: 21 September 2022 / Revised: 8 October 2022 / Accepted: 12 October 2022 / Published: 21 October 2022

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

While I almost totally underwrite the discussion led in the manuscript, and fully accept and underline the importance of the topic, I would like to see scientific research in academic journals, not political manifestations.

The authors have collected a handful of important, trendy and sexy topic, and then mixed them into a complicated and weird mix:  STEM education, sustainability, rural problems, educational equity.   As said the end result is a big mess, bringing nothing new to the discussion.

Personally I find it more than weird that USA is taken up as a model country for education. Rather it sounds like a bad joke. While I understand that English-speaking material is easy to find from US, I hardly doubt that the US education system is a good example for anyone.  This is of course my personal opinion and no reason to propose the rejection of  the article.

What leads to my reject recommendation is that this is not research, but some kind of political manifestation and discussion.  This kind of stuff does not belong to scientific journals.  In the paper, there is no research conducted.  In the same line, there is no research gap defined, no research question formulated, no discussion on any scientific methods (as there were none) and no data and no conclusions on any data (how could).

This added to the fact that the authors have not even the trouble to superficially edit the article.  It is full of language mistakes, complicated or extremely simple sentence structures, and repetition.  The fact that the three last paragraphs of the whole article contained two similar, was a final proof for me of the total ignorance of the authors for any quality.

Author Response

Please see the attached file.
Thank you very much.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

STEM education is an educational approach that combines science, technology, engineering and mathematics. Its newest generation, STEAM, incorporates the arts and has the potential to expand STEM education, training and practical application. The bibliography is detailed and thorough, but could be expanded. I recommend more papers from sustainability.

Their main study objective was to consider rural education as a possible solution to rural depopulation in "Emptied Spain". To achieve these objectives, they have developed a qualitative methodology, initially identifying the concepts of interest, their relationships, and the scientific literature in the USA and Spain. In my view, the result is a valuable piece of work that has produced results that can be put into practice. Sustainability is also important part of the paper (altogether 102 words).

My suggestions: Confirm your research results with another research methods. This will give a stronger basis for the results obtained.

Author Response

Please see the attached file.
Thank you very much.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

While the article has been worked on, I think the very basic problems brought up in my first review persist.

As a discussion paper this is all fine, but should not be presented as research. I'm sure there is an audience for this type of paper also.

Reviewer 2 Report

 Accept in present form.

Back to TopTop