Screening of the Impact of Dual Training in the Spanish University Press: A Documentary Review

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The article presents a well-structured and methodologically rigorous study that contributes valuable insights into the representation of university dual training in the Spanish higher education context. Its systematic approach and clear integration of content and discourse analysis make it a significant addition to current educational communication research. However, the article has some weak issues. These are lack of international context, apllied value and limitations. To be more specific, here are the following recommendations, which, I hope, will improve this article.  

Recommendations:

1. Expand the comparative perspective by including international examples or analysis of social media sources.

2. Add quantitative indicators of intercoder reliability to strengthen methodological transparency.

3. Develop a section with specific practical recommendations for universities.

4. Create a separate subsection titled “Limitations and Future Research” at the end of Disscussion and Conclusions section.

5. Proofread the entire article carefully — on page 13, line 410, one reference remains in Cyrillic and has not been translated into English.

6. Correct minor linguistic inconsistencies throughout the text.

7. Improve the readability and resolution of Figures 4 and 5, which are currently unclear.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The article needs carefully proofread.

Author Response

Queremos expresar nuestro sincero agradecimiento por su minuciosa revisión y sus sugerencias constructivas. Hemos tenido en cuenta cada uno de sus comentarios e integrado todas las mejoras solicitadas en la versión revisada del manuscrito. En concreto, se implementaron los siguientes cambios:

• El marco teórico se ha ampliado incorporando una perspectiva internacional más amplia, reforzando la contextualización y la relevancia del estudio.
• Las figuras 4 y 5 se han mejorado para aumentar la claridad visual y representar mejor las conexiones que surgen del análisis de datos.
• Los procedimientos metodológicos se han detallado aún más, incluyendo aclaraciones para reforzar la transparencia en los procesos de selección, codificación y análisis.
• Se ha incorporado una nueva subsección titulada “Recomendaciones prácticas para las universidades” a la sección de Discusión y Conclusiones, que traduce los hallazgos empíricos en una guía práctica para las instituciones de educación superior.
• Al final de la sección de Discusión y Conclusiones se ha creado una subsección aparte titulada “Limitaciones e Investigación Futura” , que aborda explícitamente las limitaciones de la investigación y propone vías para trabajos futuros.
• Se han realizado pequeñas revisiones lingüísticas a lo largo del manuscrito para mejorar la claridad, la fluidez y el estilo académico.

Todas las modificaciones están claramente marcadas en el manuscrito para facilitar su identificación durante el proceso de revisión.

Agradecemos sus valiosos comentarios, que han contribuido significativamente a mejorar la calidad, la claridad y la contribución de nuestro trabajo.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The methodology is sound, the approach robust and the data presented easily accessible. However the subject material is far more data science focused and less journalistic. The submission as a whole and the research question draw on news media but it may suit a more technologically focused publication, unless editors feel it aligns with the journal scopes. The findings drawing on Spanish media do offer good case study examples for scholars of European media and the journal article is well written. Overall this is a solid piece of work but it may suit an education or HE journal more than a media one.

Author Response

We sincerely thank you for your review and the comments provided regarding the thematic relevance of the manuscript. We appreciate that you highlighted the methodological robustness of the study, the clarity in the presentation of the results, and the relevance of the Spanish case as a valuable contribution for European media scholars.

Regarding your observation suggesting that the article may be more suited to an education-oriented journal, we would like to clarify that although the phenomenon studied is situated within the university context, the core focus of the research lies firmly within the field of communication and media studies, which is fully aligned with the aims and scope of Journalism and Media.

Specifically, this manuscript:

• Examines the role of digital university media as public communication actors responsible for producing and managing news content within the digital journalism ecosystem.
  • Explores how these media outlets contribute to shaping the agenda and public understanding of an emerging educational policy, acknowledging the contemporary transformations taking place in media communication.
  • Focuses on news production and consumption, communication management, the social and political impact of media discourse, and the institutional role of journalism in the construction of public knowledge—topics clearly included within the journal’s scope.
  • Provides original empirical evidence on the intersections between communication, technology, higher education, and socioeconomic development, contributing meaningfully to current debates on media in globalized societies.

In line with this, the article incorporates a methodological and theoretical approach grounded in media studies and offers a critical interpretation of the role of institutional communication in mediating between universities, companies, citizens, and public policies. For these reasons, we believe the manuscript offers new and relevant insights for the field of journalism and media, fully meeting the mission of Journalism and Media to advance the understanding of the social and political dimensions of communication.

We once again thank you for your thoughtful evaluation and trust that this clarification highlights more clearly the pertinence of the manuscript within the journal’s scientific and editorial framework.