STEM Language Literacy Learning in Engineering Education in Kazakhstan

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Please find my comments on the manuscript in the WORD file.

First, let me express my gratitude for the opportunity to review this paper before a large audience. It was a great honor. This paper investigates the important issue of STEM language literacy in tertiary education by extensively examining the literature and analyzing firsthand data collected at a university.

As a reviewer, my recommendation to the editor is to request that the author(s) revise the manuscript and resubmit it to the journal. If, after considering the comments and recommendations from other reviewer(s), the author(s) decide to follow them, I would like to share the following points for revision. 

 

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Some revisions on the language use will be required. 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear Author(s),

The abbreviations of the STEM and SWOT and the method of the research could be expressed in the abstract section. Please provide more information about the STEM language literacy because, presented information unfortunately is not sufficient.

The author(s) claimed that the need to integrate all elements of STEM in language education due to English plays a crucial role in STEM communication; to develop communicative skills and enhance creative thinking is increasing and this assertion as an important hypothesis was investigated.

Regarding the method, the author(s) multifaceted SWOT analysis was conducted in the study; however, there is weak information about the SWOT analysis. Please provide more information about the SWOT and the participants.

Regarding the results, the author(s) could be clarified the most important results for the readers as a diagram or graphic or the bullets. Also, the Conclusion and recommendations, the paper needs some enhancement about the practical implications. Additionally, it could be well to mention about the study’s limitations.

I congratulate the author(s) for efforts in this study.

Good luck.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Minor editing of English language can be required.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Thank you for revising the paper, and answering my questions. Still, you may want to go over the paper and adjust styles to the requirements. For example, tables still look inconsistent. It is not uncommon in writing papers, but I often copy and paste all the tables (and figures) on a separate document and check their consistency. Additionally, I would like the references to be edited further. You may want to refer to the recent issues of this journal. 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx