The Power of Personalized Attention: Comparing Pedagogical Approaches in Small Group and One-on-One Early Literacy Tutoring

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This manuscript presents a well-articulated analysis of the contributions of emerging technologies to educational environments. Although the results are largely unsurprising, they are nevertheless valuable for documenting the current state of practice and highlighting existing patterns.

The paper is clearly written. The author identifies the problem effectively, and the research questions are stated with clarity. The research context, participant selection, research design, and procedures for data collection and analysis are all described in appropriate detail.

The use of software tools to process such a large-scale dataset represents a noteworthy methodological contribution. The explanation of each analytic step is particularly well done and enhances the transparency of the study.

As noted earlier, the findings align with expectations; however, the discussion is well connected to the relevant literature, and the implications of the results are thoughtfully addressed. Overall, the manuscript offers a meaningful contribution to the field. I hope the authors find these comments helpful.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

1. The acronyms should be spelled out in the initial use. RCT was never spelled out.
2. The topic, though using transcriptions for analysis, does not really support anything different from previous studies.
3. Using technology as the main difference from face-to-face tutoring has not yielded anything new. Although the transcripts were voluminous, there was nothing new in what was found - features, time allocation, and content are not new. 
4. It is suggested that the author/s look into the tutors and the learners, where possible, interesting findings may come out. Interviews or contexts of the tutors/tutees may provide other insights which have not been previously reported. 

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The paper explores different aspects of the relationships between one-on-one and two-on-one tutoring. The paper is generally well-written/structured/referenced. The discussion could benefit from the following points:

1. (RTC) to be added in the abstract (line 6). The full form and then (RTC) should be added in the introduction (line 20).
2. line 101, Gromada and Shewbridge or Gromada & Shewbridge?
3. linen 108, no space between Author 2025b.
4. line 114, Zajonc, 1965, should appear as Zajonc, 1965;
5. line 146, Wood, Burner, & Ross should appear as Wood et al., 1976
6. line 175, please add briefly further information, i.e., where OYM is implemented, etc.
7. line 202, Robinson et al., 2024 to be added in the references
8. line 230, Radford et al., 2022 or 2023 as in the references? Please make the necessary changes, where appropriate.
9. lines 236-245: Please provide further information about the students/tutors i.e., demographics, etc. This would contribute to a better understanding of the findings, as for instance, when reference to Spanish.
10. line 303, 80%
11. line 325-326, please add Zhang et al., 2025 in the references.
12. table 1: are the fonts different? Also in the tables/figures, should Note appear as Note. or Note: Please make the necessary changes throughout. Also, move Note to the previous lines (or leave an empty line (line 429).
13. line 409: check alignment
14. line 410-414: Given the nature of one-on-one tutoring, it is natural/logical for tutors to dedicate their full attention to the student -contrary to two-on-one tutoring, right? So here and in previous/followings parts, please add a brief comment about it (it goes without saying but also supported by the findings).
15. line 550, Please add the word conclusion to the title or add a short section
16. line 606, Wang et al., 2024 to be added in the references.
17. please check the references section for consistence (i.e., Gromada, A and C. Shewbridge or Gromada, A., & Shewbridge, C. / O’ Connor)
18. please add a comment about participants’ anonymity, participation in the research, etc

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf