Working Methodology with Public Universities in Peru during the Pandemic—Continuity of Virtual/Online Teaching and Learning

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This study explores an interesting and current topic. However, there are some suggestions for improvement: 

1. The article describes the activities aimed at ensuring of techno pedagogical change at the universities of Peru in order to adapt teaching to pandemic conditions in the very detail. Yet there is scarce information on the results of assessment of the project. The methodological structure of the project described in Materials and Methods section includes the Techno-pedagogical Support and Follow-up component. According to it, five strategies and multiple tools were used in assessment of the project activities. Nonetheless the results section presents only the course attendance information and no details and figures on participants perception or self- assessments.
2. It is also should be interesting to know what were the partially virtualized courses and how did they work comparing to fully virtualized courses. How they were evaluated by teachers and students at the end of the project?

 

3. There are some grammar mistakes and typos. For example:

Lines 48-49: In short, coping with the impact and looking ahead, seeking opportunities and educational innovation.

This sentence lacks a predicate.

 

Lines 191-114:  As it was an external diagnosis, there was a risk of focusing on aspects not considered by the educational institutions in their own  internal analyses [12, p. 165], thus the importance of systematising the data collection process, the selection of diagnostic techniques and the development of instruments that were  in line with the guidelines set out in SUNEDU Board Resolution 039-2020 [7] and Vice- ministerial Resolution 085-DIGESU [8], which each university subsequently articulated in its own regulations.

This sentence should be reformulated since it is not clear what the authors meant by this.

 

Lines 716-717:  One of the groups that received the least amount of training.

This sentence lacks a predicate.

 

Line 104-106: According to Espinosa [11], intercultural universities have several contextual/situational characteristics that are so embedded in the community that they need to be assessed in a glocal way.

The typo must be corrected.

Line 111: <…> thus the importance of systematising the data collection

The typo should be corrected.

 

4. Figures 1-3 are not legible. Bigger font size would be helpful.

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

There are hardly any bibliographic references in English. Authors should think of non-Spanish-speaking readers. The article is published in English to reach an international audience. For this reason, bibliographic references should also include a good number of accessible references written in English, without eliminating references in Spanish. Authors are requested to review recent international publications to be able to incorporate them into the foundation, discussion and list of references. 

Author Response

Please see the attachement

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Dear author(s),

I have read with much interest your paper titled “A Working Methodology with Public Universities in Peru during the Pandemic. Continuity of Non-Classroom Teaching and Learning”. The paper presents the methodology applied by Public Universities in Peru during the pandemic to continue the instructional process in the complete online environment. The paper is well structured and complexly approached.

However, there are some issues that I noticed must be clarified in order to I be able to recommend the paper for publication.

The paper does not present very clearly what is the novelty it brings. I strongly recommend to clarify/highlight:

1. What is new in this research?
2. What exactly is the purpose of the research
3. What is the research problem / gap that it seeks to fill (in relation to the proposed purpose)? This identified problem / gap would be highlight based on the study of specific literature (For example, if the effectiveness of this methodology was studied, then the documentary study should be based on works that address intervention methodologies in such situations, and, thus, to highlight which brings this new study compared to the studies already performed).

4. What are the research questions (in relation to the proposed purpose) to which the obtained results are answered
5. How do the obtained results respond to the addressed problem? How do the results obtained respond to the problem addressed? How the obtained results address the proposed goal (the Conclusions section should address the proposed goal and clearly summarize the answer to the research questions).

Author Response

Please see attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

Paper title:

Working Methodology with Public Universities in Peru during the Pandemic. Continuity of Non-Classroom Teaching and Learning

Dear author(s),

I have read with much interest your revised paper, titled “A Working Methodology with Public Universities in Peru during the Pandemic. Continuity of Non-Classroom Teaching and Learning”.

I understood that the manuscript presents the results of a "consultancy project", not a "research project" (as mentioned and in the authors' response). However, the questions addressed in the first review report aimed at including the respective information / data (answers to the questions) in the manuscript, for readers (not for the reviewer). Since the main types of manuscripts highlighted on the journal's website are Original research manuscript and Reviews, I considered it useful for authors to offer (in the first review report) those recommendations that focus especially on specific aspects for a research. Thus, the manuscript could have been improved by adding this data/information, if the project would be included a part of research (but they were not presented in the submitted version) which could have been completed the manuscript.

As I mentioned in the previous report the paper is well structured and complexly approached.

 

Apart from these recommendations (valid for the situation in which the project would be included a part of research, but they were not presented in the submitted version - but that is no longer the case), I have only a few minor points, as follows:

If you agree, I offer below some suggestions to replace certain terms:

- "non-face-to-face, non-classroom" with "virtual / online"

- "didactic" with "instructional"

- (page 278,279 and 534) "synchrony and asynchrony" with "synchronous and asynchronous"

Author Response

Dear Sir or Madam, 

Once again, we appreciate the recommendations made to this article, because it stimulates reflection on the counselling project carried out and, moreover, on the objective of the article.

We always defended the idea that we were not dealing with a research project, but with an intervention project arising from professional counselling. And, it was treated from this perspective.

The strength of this project is its origin, its objective and the intervention methodology, which has helped six Peruvian national universities to move towards a non-classroom-based university education.

We apologise if we misunderstood the meaning of your recommendations, and if the response was addressed only to you. 

As for the suggestions you offer to replace certain terms, they will be taken into account, and you will be able to check them in the new version of the manuscript that we are including.

We thank you again for taking the time to read our article. 

Best regards,