The Impact of Narrative Feedback, E-Learning Modules and Realistic Video and the Reduction of Misconception

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The article is full of words with a "-" in the middle of the syllables. Please correct this.

Please do not refer to the results of the study in the introduction.

Also, please present/describe what is meant by narrative feedback. How can this be characterized? Actually, the presentation of the definition of the elements of the treatment and the way other authors used them in their studies should be the object of a literature review section, which does not exist in this article.

Line 177 - authors are already presenting conclusions before the presentation and discussion of results. Please avoid this.

Line 189 - here, the authors present again what is meant by narrative feedback. Please check carefully this repetition of ideas/topics. And if in the presentation of the study, the authors start with the video, why starting here with the narrative feedback? Please use the same order to avoid confusion.

Discussion - again, here, the treatment is described. I suggest that this description be presented in just one place and not distributed throughout the paper. Actually, the description of the quasi-experiment should be all presented in the methodology and not in the presentation of results and discussion.

 

There is a repetition of ideas throughout the paper making it confusing. This should be carefully reviewed as of this repetition difficult reading and comprehension of the study. English can be improved. There are long and confusing sentences.

 

 

 

Author Response

All points from reviewer 1's comments have been explained in order. Please see the attachment

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Interesting research about different learning situations and modalities.

Author Response

Responses to comments from reviewer 1 have been represented to answer comments from reviewers 2. Because basically comments from reviewer 2 is the same comments from reviewer 1. Please see the attachment

 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

The paper presents valuable results which, in the time of pandemic-induced distance learning, should be known to every teacher and thus the article is, in my view, worth publishing.

Which I don't like is:

1. the text full of repetitions and "xxxx or xxxx" phrases. It's enough to explain synonims once, at the first mention.

2. there are lots of unnecessary hyphens in the middle of words!

3. randomly used capital letters, lacking justfication

4. table no. 1 is sloppy titled and seems to be incomplete. (Where are the data stadning for "X4-X5 = narrative feedback, X6-X9 = module of E-learning"?)

5. The objective of the research is mentioned everywhere exept for the chapter it should be in - the introduction.

6. mp3 is an audio file, not video.

In the enclosed file I marked (via Adobe Reader) above mentioned errors and suggestions. Their implemention will not require a lot of work but, at the same time, it will make the article clearer for the readers who, as I stated at the beginning, should be every teacher working from the distance.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

All points from reviewer 3's comments have been explained in order. Please see the attachment

 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

There are still some typos in the text (ex: line 85 - they shows, Tabel 1 - posttes). Moreover, there are still grammar mistakes. The whole document needs to be revised again. 

Example: Line 485 - 

"In other words, students who had high posttest scores can be said that these students have mastered the concept correctly... "

This is just an example... There are more in the text.

 

There are still lots of words in the text with the sign "-". Please correct this. (ex: lines 111, 112, 205, 476).

 

Section 3 - results - instead of using the past tense, please use the present:

Ex: line 244 - ...The contribution of each of these factors IS presented... (instead of WAS). 

Correct the whole section. You are presenting the results now (present). In the past tense should only be what you have done.

Line 314 - instead of saying that the results of data analysis... found, it is better to say that the results show, reveal, etc. Actually, YOU found but the results show.

 

There is still some repetition of ideas in the document. For instance, the description of the videos used in the experiment (line 503) was already presented before.

 

What are the limitations of this study? And future research?

 

 

 

 

 

Author Response

Please see the attachmant

 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf