Impact of Applying Information and Communication Technology Tools in Physical Education Classes
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The paper presents research on assessing the impact of ICT devices on student performance and motivation in physical education classes. The topic of the research is interesting; however, the manuscript has some flaws that must be improved.
· Correct the last word in the abstract: “amotivation”.
· Introduction is too long, and it can be divided into 2 chapters: introduction, but also literature review or state-of-the-art.
· The way of giving references to the literature in the text is wrong. Please follow the template. Use numbers, not names and years.
· The list of references should be done according to the template.
· The conclusion must be improved. Do not use references from the literature in the conclusion. Add some research implications and research limitations.
· The literature and references are of good quality.
Author Response
We gratefully accepted your positive thoughts, helpful suggestions, and requests, and made the requested additions and modifications to the manuscript, please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
This study has an interesting topic on the employment of the ICT tool in the PE. Overall feature of this manuscript looks so well-done. A well-written paper!! However, for your potential readers, please consider the following comments. 1) Background: Need to describe cultural background of this study. This study looks meaningful regardless of the region or country. However, for better understanding on this paper, please contain a short description on it. 2) Method: For the translation of the scales, please describe the validity. It's on how to confirm the validity during the translation. Please clarify it (e.g. validity check during the translation of the scale). 3) Table: Checking about the quality of the table.
Author Response
We gratefully accepted your positive thoughts, helpful suggestions, and requests, and made the requested additions and modifications to the manuscript, please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
General and specific comments have been included along the text.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
We gratefully accepted your positive thoughts, helpful suggestions, and requests, and made the requested additions and modifications to the manuscript, please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 4 Report
Dear authors, some errors seen, or suggestions for improvement are shared:
Abstract
- The value of the measured statistics for each relevant variable must be added. This is more important than the distribution of the sample by sex, in the abstract.
- The essential explanation of why an increase in these variables was found in the ICT groups must be added.
Introduction
- 1º Paragraph. “physical activity” and “exercise” are different concepts. They need to be clearly defined. It should be considered whether to unify the terms, or not, throughout the text.
- 1º Paragraph. “Researchers tend to agree that the increasing use of digital technological devices can foster a sedentary lifestyle…” This statement cannot be affirmed, and even less in the plural (only one quote is provided). The cited study (Proctor et al. 2003) is from 20 years ago; The socio-technological phenomenon is especially sensitive in these decades due to its rapid progress, which is why current literature on the subject should be reviewed. Idem with Liebermann et al. 1997; Trout & Christie, 2007; Papastergiou, 2009; Bisgin, 2014.
- In general, the first part of the introduction should be reviewed with literature from the last 5 years (approximately). High-impact studies are provided that you can review to update this study:
Cueva, A.; Inga, E. Information and Communication Technologies for Education Considering the Flipped Learning Model. Educ. Sci. 2022, 12, 207. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12030207
Quintas, A. & Bustamante, J.C. (2021) Effects of gamified didactic with exergames on the psychological variables associated with promoting physical exercise: results of a natural experiment run in primary schools, Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, DOI: 10.1080/17408989.2021.1991905
Rutkauskaite R, Koreivaite M, Karanauskiene D, Mieziene B. Students’ Skills and Experiences Using Information and Communication Technologies in Remote Physical Education Lessons. Sustainability. 2022; 14(23):15949. https://doi.org/10.3390/su142315949
Quintas, A., Bustamante, J.-C., Pradas, F., & Castellar, C. (2020). Psychological effects of gamified didactics with exergames in Physical Education at primary schools: Results from a natural experiment. Computers & Education, 152, 103874, pp. 1-17. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.103874
- ICT should be better theorized. A theoretical framework is required (as has been provided with respect to motivation). It is suggested to review the scientific theory of gamification, which could bring together all the educational design that the study participants have made. This theory could justify both the intention to change motivation and the use of digital support tools (Facebook, Runtastic...)
- ICTs are not a homogeneous phenomenon: it must be specified which one or which ones the present study will be based on (videos, exergames, platforms, consoles, tablets, etc.). There are specific studies on each of them. It is proposed to be based only on the one investigated in this study: Runtastic. Likewise, it is proposed to change the title, and put the specific ICT that is studied.
- Paragraph 5. The reference to Vallerand is superfluous, and can confuse the main theory used (that of Deci and Ryan).
- “1.2. Perceived Motivational Climate” must be uploaded. The most recent study published in this section is from 2016. Science has advanced these 6 years.
- “2.3. Purpose of the Study and Hypotheses”. Specify the object of study in writing the hypothesis: substitute ICT for the specific tools used. Otherwise, it will be a very ambiguous study that does not allow the scientific community to move forward.
Method
- Paragraph 1. About a period at the end of the first sentence.
- “traditional teaching methods” must be specified.
- The procedure for assigning participants to each group should be clarified.
- Information on the distribution by sex in each group should be added.
- The second paragraph of Section 2.1 should be in the next section.
- The research design used must be specified.
- “2.3. Measures”. Reliability measures must be provided for each scale used (with Crobach's alpha, or even better with McDonald's r).
- “2.4. Data Analyses”. The measures of the tests of normality and homogeneity of variances must be provided.
Results
- How has the effect size of each significant difference been measured? The effect size must be specified.
- The website used must be specified.
- Unify the way of writing: with space or without space next to the "="
- “3.1. Learning outcomes”. In the last paragraph, there is talk of a distinctive difference only in women. Therefore, it should be specified before "results" if there were significant differences by sex in the distribution of groups, since it can affect the results.
Discussion
- Review more recent literature.
- Ambiguities must be rewritten: ICT must be replaced.
- “The results confirm that student performance shows a cor-relation with ICT use”. Why?.
- “Thus, it can be concluded that students monitoring their own performance with ICT devices and receiving feedback, gain an incentive to further improvement. Consequently, we recommend the integration of ICT devices…”. So, Are the improvements found due to the phenomenon of "feedback" received (something much studied), or to the ICT itself?
- “Our research results suggest that ICT devices can be integrated into everyday educa-tional practice, as their use encourages higher level student performance”. Why? The results found are powerful in this investigation, but a scientific discussion is not provided, that is, giving reasons for why what has been found has been found. Suggestion: a specific theory on ICT in education is needed to help interpret all these results.
Conclusions
- “the integration of such tools is recommended.” Why? A scientific study can only conclude very specific aspects that it has studied. General statements and suggestions transcend the scientific-descriptive. It seems that this study, which has strong points, loses rigor when it is used to justify big speeches ("ICT in education"). A more concrete, adjusted and humble language should be used (in terms of what can and cannot be affirmed).
- “We consider it important to point out that the use of tools alone does not contribute to the effectiveness of the teaching-learning process in terms of physical education either”. Why? It is precisely the essence of this study: the impact of applying information and com-munication technology tools in physical edu-cation classes.
- “In order to adapt the use of ICT tools in classrooms to the subject goals of physical education, appropriate teaching strategies”. Here "appropriate teaching strategies" is ambiguous. Which are suitable, which are not? If not specified, the statement is almost obvious.
Congratulations are given to the authors for this study, which is considered relevant, and rigorous. But changes are necessary.
Author Response
We gratefully accepted your positive thoughts, helpful suggestions, and requests, and made the requested additions and modifications to the manuscript, please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Thank you for improving the paper.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
Thank you again for your comments and suggestions that allowed us to greatly improve the quality of the manuscript.
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments have been included along the text.
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
Thank you again for your comments and suggestions that allowed us to greatly improve the quality of the manuscript.Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 4 Report
Congratulations to the authors for reviewing, point by point, the previous comments indicated.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
Thank you again for your comments and suggestions that allowed us to greatly improve the quality of the manuscript.
