Teaching English to First-year Students in Russia: Addressing the Challenges of Distance Learning
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
I would suggesto to cut the introduction and paragraph 1.2 shorter and explain more in detail the experiment conditions in the first and second phase. (for instance: how many participants, age, mother tongue?). I would also explain more in detail the methodologies applied by the language teachers during pandemic time and non pandemic time. I would also insert some diagramm with data analysis to make results clearer.
Author Response
We appreciate the time and effort that you dedicated to providing feedback on our manuscript and are grateful for the insightful comments on and valuable improvements to our paper. We have incorporated most of the suggestions you have made. Please see below, in blue, for a point-by-point response to your comments and concerns.
Comments
Point 1: I would suggest to cut the introduction and paragraph 1.2 shorter and explain more in detail the experiment conditions in the first and second phase. (for instance: how many participants, age, mother tongue?).
Response:
Thank you for your remark. Some information about the experiment conditions was added:
It involved first-year students of engineering and computer science training programs (about 60 students both male and female aged 18-20). English is included into their syllabus as a foreign language since the absolute majority of students are the citizens of the Russian Federation. Participants were studying English for general purposes (EGP) and the level of English language proficiency among them varied from A2 to B1 according to the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR).
Stage 2 involved the correlation analysis of the results acquired in Stage 1 and the results obtained from the study carried out in 2019 before the COVID-19 pandemic. These two sets of data are comparable due to the fact that students entering the university training programs yearly are almost equal in numbers and similar in personal characteristics.
Point 2: I would also explain more in detail the methodologies applied by the language teachers during pandemic time and non pandemic time.
Response:
Thank you for pointing this out. The revised text reads as follows:
Students took a content-identical two-semester course “Foreign Language” (144 hours). In 2019 students were taught traditionally in classrooms, located at the university campus. In 2021 students were instructed by the same lecturers distantly, using the video-conferencing system (MS-teams) and Moodle-courses. The classes were recorded and uploaded to the Moodle platform after each webinar for students to have possibility to watch them as many times, as they needed. All students were encouraged to communicate with the lecturers by corporate emails as a complementary tool for student-faculty interaction. Webinars and e-mail communication were introduced to make a course more interactive and most closely resembling the traditional classes at university. The course for each academic semester included the following elements, evaluated on the basis of the point-rating system: 4 module tests, a mid-term test, a final test, reading, presentation of the project work results, a written assignment, speaking.
Point 3: I would also insert some diagramm with data analysis to make results clearer.
Response:
Thank you for this helpful suggestion a diagram and some information on the data was added to the results section.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
Dear Author(s)
Congratulations for having chosen such a compelling topic and for having carried out this research study.
However, please find attached a document with some improvements that must be made.
Regards
Reviewer
Comments for author File: Comments.doc
Author Response
We appreciate the time and effort that you dedicated to providing feedback on our manuscript and are grateful for the insightful comments on and valuable improvements to our paper. We have incorporated most of the suggestions you have made. Please see below, in blue, for a point-by-point response to your comments and concerns.
Comments
Title: you might want to include a word which indicates you refer to Russian undergraduates.
Response: Thank you for your suggestion. We absolutely agree that the context of study is of great importance, and the nationality of students needs to be specified. The revised title reads as follows on “Teaching English to First-year Students in Russia: Addressing the Challenges of Distance Learning”.
Abstract: Mention the participants are Russian as their characteristics might be different from students who study in a different context.
Response: We have added the suggested information:
The aim of this study is to investigate the psychological climate in first-year students’ academic groups in Russia after they experienced the period of distant learning at the initial stage of university studies (due to COVID-19 pandemic)….
Results: present them always bearing in mind your research questions. Lines 11-14: are those results?
Response: Thank you for your valuable suggestion. The result section of the abstract has been corrected on “The results of the study reveal considerable difference in psychological climate of the investigated groups. The findings suggest that the students whose university studies were not influenced by COVID-19 pandemic considered their academic groups to have more mutual understanding, greater desire to cooperate with other teams, better mood in the team, greater desire to participate in the joint affairs etc. in comparison with students who experienced a period of distance learning at the initial stage of their studies”
Conclusions: they are too general; make them more specific to your research study and also bear in mind your general aim; you should also include some pedagogical implications.
Response: Thank you for the suggestion. Conclusions indeed seem to be too general and ambiguous. The revised text is: “The transition to distance learning allows students to continue their studies under epidemiological restrictions. However, the factors affecting the speed of adaptation of first-year students in distance learning and determining the degree of their influence on the socio-psychological state of students remain insufficiently studied. This study contributes to the field by defining the peculiarities of the psychological climate in first-year students’ academic groups after they experienced a period of distant learning at the initial stage of university studies. It also specifies how the psychological climate is different from the academic groups of first-year students who were taught in a traditional format. Since psychological climate plays a crucial role for EFL instruction, measures must be taken to ease the first-year students’ adaptation process while studying online.”
Introduction:
Point 1: Lines 41-66: Provide evidence (“It is a well-known fact that...” (line 41) – according to whom; “According to some experts” (line 58) – which ones).
Response 1: The following references were added.
According to some experts, the success of first-year students’ adaptation is inextricably linked with such factors as academic achievements, critical thinking skills, social and emotional health [1, 2, 5, 7, 8].
Point 2: Lines 67-78: Mention the relevance of this information for your study; are your participants international students?
Response 2: Thank you for pointing this out. Our participants are not international students. We have added the suggested relevance of the information regarding international students’ adaptation for our study. The revised text reads as follows:
Since the context of interculturalism has become vitally important, one of the main directions is interaction between students, communication between Russian and international students in particular. Therefore, it is necessary to create multicultural learning conditions in which students have to overcome language barriers and adapt to the socio-cultural aspects of a new environment [2-5]. Besides the above-mentioned issues, the adaptation of international students is a complicated, dynamic, multilevel and multilateral rebuilding process of their motivational sphere under new conditions. Cooperation in education is one of the most critical tasks of the world community since it plays a vital role in the international collaboration process [6]. The increasing number of foreign students studying at university contributes significantly to its achieving high status and establishing reputation. Moreover, communication with foreign students is a valuable source of building strong international relationships.
Point 3: Lines 79-88: Improve coherence (“The authors consider...” (line 80) – which ones; you might want to say “Some authors….” or use the passive structure.
Response 3: Thank you for the remark. The revised text reads as follows:
The socio-psychological sphere of first-year students’ adaptation is a popular scientific research topic. Such aspects as the effect of anxiety on students’ academic performance, and its relationship with academic motivation, the influence of stress and difficulties related to the social sphere of adaptation on students’ progress, emotional resilience, etc. are becoming increasingly common nowadays [7]. An anxiety state that first-year students frequently experience is closely related to the following aspects: academic achievements, finances, and the necessity of forming new social bonds [8]. The social sphere of adaptation includes one of the most important components, which is social interaction with peers. Furthermore, the issues regarding the role of this interaction in facilitating the process of academic adaptation are becoming more and more serious as well [9].
Point 4: Lines 94-96: Minor changes to improve language. You should also add evidence for that statement.
Response 4:
The revised text reads as follows on “The researchers who deal with the issue of teaching first-year students note that such factors as poor sleep quality, lack of physical activity and excessive use of the Internet can lead to anxiety and cause depression [10-12]”.
Point 5: Lines 97-99: This study [13] is about 11, 12 and 13 year-old students (1st year of a boarding school); you might want to specify that or find another study more relevant to your research.
Response 5: Thank you for pointing this out. Though this study [13] is about 11, 12 and 13 year-old students, it is extremely relevant to our research, as in both studies a significant relationship between social support and homesickness is demonstrated. We have specified that and the amended text reads as follows:
Both social support and homesickness play a vital role in students’ adapting to a new learning environment. Homesickness is quite common among students of different age groups, no matter whether they are first-year students of a boarding school or university students living in dormitories. Those of them who have strong social support do not suffer from homesickness, whereas those students who do not receive it from their new learning environment are more vulnerable to homesickness. The symptoms of homesickness can vary and affect students’ academic performance, their social engagement and ability to adapt to a new environment [13]. This emotional state has a negative influence on various components of students’ psychological functioning, its cognitive, emotional, behavioural, physical, and social aspects. University authorities should spot students who are suffering from homesickness, and they should also provide them with some effective programmes or courses aimed at developing students’ ability to adapt to a new academic environment [14].
Point 6: Line 98: “students’ academic performance, their social engagement and ability to adapt to a new environment” – you should paraphrase as this is copied from the abstract.
Response 6: The phrase “students’ academic performance, their social engagement and ability to adapt to a new environment” (line 98) has been paraphrased in the following way:
The symptoms of homesickness can be various and tend to have a negative influence on students’ academic success, their social involvement and capability to adjust to a new learning environment [13].
Point 7: Line 129: Effect > affect?
Response 7: Thank you for pointing this out. It should definitely be ‘affect’ instead of ‘effect’. We are very sorry for the misprint; it has been corrected.
The literature review on the challenges of teaching first-year-students made it possi-ble to conclude that students face some problems in both academic and so-cio-psychological spheres of adaptation. These difficulties can impede the process of EFL instruction at university and affect the academic performance of students.
- Materials and Methods
Point 1: Lines 274-283 – this type of information should be included in the introduction.
Response 1: The paragraph was relocated to the introduction.
Point 2: The information about the questionnaire and data collection must be expanded: does the questionnaire include background questions about the sample (gender, nationality, international versus national students, etc.). What about the variables studied? It is not clear from the information provided in Tables 1 & 2.
Response 2: Unfortunately, the questionnaire doesn’t include any background questions. Some explanations were added:
The questionnaire covers several aspects which represent the components which make up the psychological climate of a group. These aspects can be indicated qualitatively in a positive or negative way.
Point 3: Information about the participants must be provided: number, gender, nationality, age, etc.
Response 3: Some information about the participants was added:
It involved first-year students of engineering and computer science training programs (about 60 students both male and female aged 18-20). English is included into their syllabus as a foreign language since the absolute majority of students are the citizens of the Russian Federation. Participants were studying English for general purposes (EGP) and the level of English language proficiency among them varied from A2 to B1 according to the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR).
Stage 2 involved the correlation analysis of the results acquired in Stage 1 and the results obtained from the study carried out in 2019 before the COVID-19 pandemic. These two sets of data are comparable due to the fact that students entering the university training programs yearly are almost equal in numbers and similar in personal characteristics.
Point 4: Line 297: in the end > at the end
Response 4: Thank you for pointing this out. The misprint was corrected.
Point 5: Reference to the questionnaire: with or without initials.
Response 5: Thank you for pointing this out. The initials were added.
Results: improve offering more information about the different variables.
Response: Thank you for this helpful suggestion a diagram and some information on the data was added to the results section.
Discussion: Organise it according to research questions and improve it. You should not provide new information at this point.
Response: Thank you for this helpful suggestion. The discussion section was revised and restructured in accordance with the research questions.
- Lines 350-351: why? Provide reasons and evidence based on your results.
Response: Some changes were made. The revised text reads as follows: Poor results of first-year students who studied online may be explained by insufficient support of peer interaction in the distance-learning format of study, resulting in lack of desire to communicate and cooperate with each other and other groups. They prefer individual form of work and are less willing to participate in joint projects.
- Lines 354-357: chunks of language repeated; revise this part
Response: Thank you for pointing this out. The sentence has been corrected on:
Evidently, first-year students who were forced to use exclusively online format of communication, did not have a chance to establish rapport, and organise peer interaction properly.
Conclusions: must be improved
Point 1 Lines 427-430: how does the researcher know that?
Response 1: The sentence has been corrected on: We consider it to be important to organise pedagogical support for first-year students who study on-line in order to improve the psychological climate in the study groups.
Point 2 Add some pedagogical implications
Response 2: Thank you for the helpful suggestion. Conclusions section has been revised. Some additional information on pedagogical implications for EFL training have been amended:
Students’ English oral communication includes the combination of monological and dialogical speech as well as such forms of interaction as a discussion and a cross-discussion with other groups. Despite the high level of digitalization of the educational process and a wide range of technologies used, communication in the distance format may be organized less efficiently than in the traditional format, especially, when peer interaction is not organised well enough. On-line learning can be performed via various digital means of organizing communication of participants in the educational process (video conferencing; messengers; communication tools integrated into LMS), though it may be difficult for the teachers to monitor and control the process of discussion within the groups.
Author Response File: Author Response.doc
Reviewer 3 Report
Dear authors,
Please see some comments I have made below.
Introduction: I believe you need to add references to these lines to support the claims you are making.
Line 40: "However, it has more negative than positive effects on students." (Reference?)
Line 41: "It is a well-known fact that adaptation is one of the most crucial factors that plays a vital role in creating students’ outlook on both their studies and social life in general." (Reference?)
Line 47: "Factors that make adaption process effective are the following (...)" (Reference?)
Line 52: "These challenges include the following: (...)" (Reference?)
Introduction: Please consider these other comments below.
Line 107: "Moreover, they do not possess critical thinking skills [1]" (I'm certain some students do possess critical thinking skills, so I would rephrase and say something like "some students do not have adequate critical thinking skills".)
Line 129: effect (affect)
Line 231:" psychological pressure that is currently only increasing due to the COVID-19 epidemic" (pandemic)" (What period are your referring to? Please specify.)
Materials and Methods:
Line 298: "It involved first-year students"; "All respondents volunteered" - How many students participated? Were the 2 groups - 2019/2021- equal in numbers? From a methodological pov I think it is important to mention these facts. Also, were these students studying English as a foreign language? What were their levels of proficiency? Were they studying general English, or English for Specific Purposes?
Discussion:
Line 354: "to learn each other better" ("to know")
Line 362: "participation in joint affairs" (joint projects?)
Line 403: "teaching stuff" (staff)
Conclusions:
Line 445: "detailed background of surveyed students" (detailed background such as how experienced these students were with using technology in the first place, because if they were uncomfortable with digital tools that would certainly have added to the pressure and their overall psychological discomfort)
References: Please check references because some of the years are not correct. See one example below, but check all of them please.
Tinto V (2013) - It was published in 1999.
Author Response
We appreciate the time and effort that you dedicated to providing feedback on our manuscript and are grateful for the insightful comments on and valuable improvements to our paper. We have incorporated most of the suggestions you have made. Please see below, in blue, for a point-by-point response to your comments and concerns.
Comments
Introduction: I believe you need to add references to these lines to support the claims you are making
Point 1: Line 40: “However, it has more negative than positive effects on students.” (Reference?)
+
Point 2: Line 41: “It is a well-known fact that adaptation is one of the most crucial factors that plays a vital role in creating students’ outlook on both their studies and social life in general.” (Reference?)
Response 2: Thank you for pointing out this. We consider these statements to be too general and not supported by some specific authors, that is why these statements were omitted.
Point 3: Line 47: “Factors that make adaption process effective are the following: (…)” (Reference?)
Response 3: The references have been added.
Point 4: Line 52: “These challenges include the following: (…)” (Reference?)
Response 4: The following references have been added.
Point 5: Line 107: Moreover, they do not possess critical thinking skills [1]. (I am certain some students do possess critical thinking skills, so I would rephrase and say something like “some students do not have adequate critical thinking skills”).
Response 5: Thank you for pointing this out. We do agree with the fact that the utterance “Moreover, they do not possess critical thinking skills [1]” seems to be far too categorical. Therefore, we have rephrased it and it reads as follows:
Moreover, there are also some students who do not have adequate critical thinking skills [1].
Point 6: Line 129: Effect > affect?
Response 6: Thank you for pointing this out. It should definitely be ‘affect’ instead of ‘effect’. We are very sorry for the misprint, it has been corrected.
The literature review on the challenges of teaching first-year-students made it possible to conclude that students face some problems in both academic and socio-psychological spheres of adaptation. These difficulties can impede the process of EFL instruction at university and affect the academic performance of students.
Point 7: Line 231: “Nowadays, first-year students have to face intense psychological pressure that is currently only increasing due to the COVID-19 epidemic (pandemic)”. (What period are you referring to? Please specify).
Response 7: Thank you for pointing this out! The period that we are referring to in our study is 2019-2021.
Materials and Methods:
Point 1: Line 298: “It involved first-year students”; “All respondents volunteered” – How many students participated? Were the 2 groups – 2019/2021 – equal in numbers? From a methodological pov I think it is important to mention these facts. Also, were these students studying English as a foreign language? What were their levels of proficiency? Were they studying general English, or English for Specific Purposes?
Response 1: Some information about the participants was added:
It involved first-year students of engineering and computer science training programs (about 60 students both male and female aged 18-20). English is included into their syllabus as a foreign language since the absolute majority of students are the citizens of the Russian Federation. Participants were studying English for general purposes (EGP) and the level of English language proficiency among them varied from A2 to B1 according to the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR).
Stage 2 involved the correlation analysis of the results acquired in Stage 1 and the results obtained from the study carried out in 2019 before the COVID-19 pandemic. These two sets of data are comparable due to the fact that students entering the university training programs yearly are almost equal in numbers and similar in personal characteristics.
Students took a content-identical two-semester course “Foreign Language” (144 hours). In 2019 students were taught traditionally in classrooms, located at the university campus. In 2021 students were instructed by the same lecturers distantly, using the video-conferencing system (MS-teams) and Moodle-courses. The classes were recorded and uploaded to the Moodle platform after each webinar for students to have possibility to watch them as many times, as they needed. All students were encouraged to communicate with the lecturers by corporate emails as a complementary tool for student-faculty interaction. Webinars and e-mail communication were introduced to make a course more interactive and most closely resembling the traditional classes at university. The course for each academic semester included the following elements, evaluated on the basis of the point-rating system: 4 module tests, a mid-term test, a final test, reading, presentation of the project work results, a written assignment, speaking.
Discussion:
Line 354: "to learn each other better" ("to know")
Line 362: "participation in joint affairs" (joint projects?)
Line 403: "teaching stuff" (staff)
Response: Thank you for pointing this out. The corrections were made.
Conclusions:
Line 445: "detailed background of surveyed students" (detailed background such as how experienced these students were with using technology in the first place, because if they were uncomfortable with digital tools that would certainly have added to the pressure and their overall psychological discomfort)
Response: Thank you for the valuable suggestion. It was beyond the scope of this paper. We will be able to implement this idea into our further research.
The sentence has been revised: The main limitation of the study is the fact that detailed background of surveyed students (e.g. such as how experienced these students were with using technology) and its influence on the psychological climate in study groups were not taken into consideration.
References: Please check references because some of the years are not correct. See one example below, but check all of them please.
Tinto V (2013) - It was published in 1999.
Response: Thank you for pointing this out. The reference was revised: Tinto, Vincent. (1999). Taking Student Retention Seriously: Rethinking the First Year of College. NACADA Journal. 19. 10.12930/0271-9517-19.2.5.
Author Response File: Author Response.doc
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
Dear Author(s)
Congratulations for the thorough revision you have made. The text has improved considerably.
Please remove etc. by adding or before the last word in the list (for example, on line 112: or emottional resilience.) and remove the in line 372 and write citizens instead of the citizens. You might also want to write the Pandemic instead of Pandemic.
Best wishes
Reviewer
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
Thank you very much indeed for your feedback! We have made a few amendments to the article according to your comments.
Please see the attachment.
Best wishes,
Authors
Author Response File: Author Response.doc
