Digital Brick: Enhancing the Student Experience Using Blockchain, Open Badges and Recommendations

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Today, buzzing is increasingly associated with digital technologies, which makes this paper relevant. The authors consider the possibilities of using blockchain and other digital technologies to create a special platform.
Although the authors show a significant amount of information on how different parts of the platform work, the study lacks integrity. The role and place of the platform in the educational ecosystem, its connection with all other subjects should be demonstrated more fully and clearly. It is desirable to build a diagram and show the connections in the work of the platform systemically, and from the point of view of the educational process not only as technological system.
The quality of fig. 11 is awful.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The article presents a relevant and topical issue and is attractive to the scientific community. 

In the theoretical framework, it would be advisable to look at aspects related to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) insofar as the object of study has correlations in the education of students (SDG number 4), as well as its relationship with social elements. 

Another aspect that can increase the quality of the theoretical framework is a contrast between digital economic education prior to COVID and after, where its use has increased exponentially. 

The first six figures should be improved in terms of presentation (avoiding coloured backgrounds) and the figures containing data should be enlarged and resolved. Otherwise, the image is pixelated, preventing a proper reading of what is to be read. 

Figure 11 needs an explanation in the image itself, since the four graphs do not help to know which variables are being analysed. 

In the conclusions, it would be interesting to have a prospective of the market, given that the fluctuation of cryptocurrencies has created a need for training in all areas.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Dear author(s),

I have read with much interest your paper titled “Digital Brick: Enhancing the Student Experience Using Blockchain, Open Badges and Recommendations”. The paper presents some data about introducing digital badges and blockchain as tools to share recognized achievements among earners and issuers, and machine learning algorithms to provide students with recommendations on the learning material, learning objects, courses and learning paths more suitable for their learning styles.

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

Please find below major points in the communication which needs clarification / reanalysis, rewrites and/or additional information and suggestions for what could be done to improve the paper.

General remarks

1.     For the abstract, I recommend a reorganization of the information for a clearer highlighting of the purpose, the applied methodology, the results and the conclusions.

2.     I strongly recommend to clearly highlight for readers, what is the (1) research problem / gap that it seeks to resolve / fill (in relation to the proposed aim) and (2) the associated research questions.

3.     As stated at line 196, Case study was used in research. I recommend to offer more details about this, in Methodology section.

4.     For the Methodology section, I recommend to highlight information about data analysis (software used, statistical parameters calculated etc.).

5.     In order to better over interpret the results, I recommend refer to more findings regarding previous studies.

6.     The conclusions section has not clearly evidence how this research answer to the research questions, how the results fill the (identified) gap/ resolve the (identified) problem and how sustain the importance of the study. I recommend improving the "Conclusions" section in order to more clearly reflects these aspects.

7.     I recommend to add a separate section, named "Research Limitations", positioned after the Discussion section.

Specific remarks

8.     Line 42, 224: I suggest to reword "ability" (as suggestion, can be used: potential / function)

9.     Line 48-52: I suggest moving the paragraph to the end of the Introduction section.

10.  Line 150/157: I suggest moving the text associated with Figure 2 to section 2.3 or vice versa, moving Figure 2 to section 2.2.

11.  I suggest moving the figures according to the place of citation in the text (see fig. 3, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12).

12.  I recommend improving the resolution for all figures and tables.

13.  I recommend highlighting the bibliographic references for the following paragraphs: line 62-67, line 325-327.

14.  Line 265: I recommend to remove “the conclusion we summarize our work and main 265 achievements.”

15.  Line 268: I think the text must revise (regarding “of the on the”)

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

Dear author(s),

I have read with much interest your revised paper titled “Digital Brick: Enhancing the Student Experience Using Blockchain, Open Badges and Recommendations”.

The manuscript has been improved regarding the aspects addressed in the review report. I have no additional comments.

Congratulations on your efforts to bring these improvements to the revised form!