Comparison Between Guided and Non-Guided Homework as a Tool for Learning Electric Circuit Theory
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsAbstract should be more specific. The authors need to mention quantitative outcomes of their results and analyze accordingly to reach their conclusions briefly in the abstract part.
The Literature Review Section should be separated from the Introduction section and needs more recent research paper reviews, especially the articles published in the year 2021-2025. From the literature reviews, research gaps should be clearly identified and then describe how they developed their study and obtain findings.
Research questions and methods may be described in the Methodology section.
In section 2, there are some sentences where need some specific citations or links from where they got such information. How do they choose the population sample sizes?
What rubrics they followed to evaluate the home works? Does it validate their results? Was there any time frame? If there were delay, was there any penalty?
Figures need to be more clear. Axis numbers should be corrected. The axes' values are 4.5, 3.5, etc. these are not 4,5, 3,5, etc.
The author must look into the journal's paper writing style and follow those, especially, sequential citation style, reference list, tabs in the paragraph, font style, etc. in different parts of the manuscript.
The author must also look into the English language issue seriously. The sentence making is poor in some cases. They may use Grammarly or similar English language checker to improve their grammar, English language writing style, spelling, choice of appropriate words, typos, etc.
The reference list should be updated as per journal's format.
There are some grammatical errors and typos. These should be eliminated.
Author Response
"Please see the attachment."
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThank you for your submission and for sharing insights on the work you to support engineering students. Here are few comments on how to improve the work
The review of the literature could be more critical and should explicitly highlight how your work is positioned within existing research. Consider how you engage with previous studies, not just reporting, but critically analysing their arguments to support or defend your contributions. At the moment, it reads more like a summary/report of existing research, with most studies mentioned without a clear indication of how they relate to your work.
For example, you state:
"In the literature, there are different studies related to the problem of the Circuits 32 subject that have different approaches."
What message do you want the reader to take away from this statement?
Similarly, when you mention:
"These efforts can cover a wide range of options, from identifying difficulties (Hussain et al., 2010) to innovative methods using analogies (Rankhumise & Sitwala, 2014)."
What are the limitations of these approaches? What gaps exist in the research that your work addresses? A more critical discussion of these aspects will strengthen your review.
Perhaps the study design could be communicated more effectively through visual illustrations. Using diagrams, flowcharts, or conceptual models could help clarify the methodology.
The methodology section should focus on detailing how the research was conducted rather than interpreting the results. Clarify the research design, data collection process, and analytical methods to ensure readers understand the foundation of your study before engaging with the findings.
Improve the presentation of the visuals by using MATLAB or Python to generate clear, high-quality plots that effectively represent the data.
In the analysis, it would be valuable to examine how the findings relate to other events occurring throughout the student course, such as exams, coursework submissions, or other academic milestones. This context could provide deeper insights into potential influencing factors and patterns in student performance.
There is an opportunity to link the motivation for this work to student success and engagement, particularly in terms of detecting student engagement levels and intervening accordingly. Strengthening this connection could highlight the practical implications of the research and its potential impact on academic outcomes
Author Response
"Please see the attachment."
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
