A Confirmatory Evaluation of an Educational Orientation Tool for Pre-University Students

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Authors must include more references in order to improve theoretical research. If this happened conclussions will probably increase their relevance. This could increase the level of this research.

This paper proposes something that isn´t achive. For example references are insuficients and they must be included in disccussions and conclussions in order to make a stronger research. In other hand results are descriptive and there isn‘t a deep contrast about them.

Author Response

Point 1:

Author more includes more references in order to improve theoretical research. If this happened conclussions will probably increase their relevance. This could increase the level of this research.

This paper proposes something that is not achive. For example references are insuficients and they must be included in disccusions and conclussions in order to make a stronger research

Response 1:

We agree and we have done the revision:

In paragraph 27, 32, 45, 69, 329 and 338, We have increased references to improve theorical research both in the theorical  framework  amd in the discussions and conclussions in the total 18 new references.

Point 2:

In other hand results are descriptive and there is not a deep contrast about them.

Response 2:  

We have done the revision in paragraph 118 and 213 and included a new table  with multivariate regression coefficients besed on structural equations.

Thank for the insighst and interest, your comments have helped us improve the article.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The paper meets the aims of the journal Education Sciences. It synthesize information from disparate backgrounds and place research findings within a broad context, and provide full reports of findings and methodical details.

The results of the research provide an advance in current knowledge.

The conclusions are justified and supported by the results.

The data and analyses are presented appropriately.

The article is written in an appropriate way.

The study is correctly designed and technically sound.

The conclusions are interesting for the readership of the Journal

The authors have addressed an important long-standing question with smart experiments

The English language is appropriate and understandable

The paper is accepted without any further changes.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Point 1: The paper meet the aims in Educational Science. It synthesize informationfrom disparate backgrounds and place research findings a broad context, and provide full reports and findings to methodical details.

Response 1: 

Thank you very much for the insights and interest. Your comments have helped and encouraged us a lot in the article.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The quality of the text has been improved. There are enough number of references to improve conclussions and theoretical framework.