Instrumentalization of a Model for the Evaluation of the Level of Satisfaction of Graduates under an E-Learning Methodology: A Case Analysis Oriented to Postgraduate Studies in the Environmental Field
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Dear Authors,
Thank you for submitting an interesting paper.
Some comments:
1) I would suggest that in cases like this "[1] refer to satisfaction" or "According to [2], the" you use the surname of the author to whom you refer and add the reference at the end of the sentence. Otherwise, it is hard to read such sentences
2) You say "sample of 150 graduates" but it should be clarified what sampling method was used, how the students from the sample were reached, how they were informed that they will take part in the research, how the ethical guidelines were ensured?
3) The information on the scale ("1. Strongly disagree" to "4. Strongly agree") is given only in the discussion part. It should be given in the methodology part because it is hard to read numbers in statistics without knowing this information
4) I didn't find the information on how the questionnaire was distributed. I suppose that some online program but which one?
5) It is mentioned that some experts were involved in evaluating the instrument but there is no information on their profile. It should be explained who were the experts by explaining their profile of expertise, how they were involved
6) In the conclusion/recommendation part is mentioned that there should be taken activities to "Review organizational processes to minimize the dissatisfaction rates of graduates from Central and South America, but especially from Eurasia". From my perspective, it is a strange recommendation because you do not know why they are dissatisfied. I think that the first step would be to go deeper and find out what causes the dissatisfaction and only then take activities.
Author Response
Dear reviewer:
A point by point response is included in the first page of the document.
Thanks!!
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
The article is devoted to an interesting and important topic. It has an interdisciplinary character and includes aspects of e-learning, modern teaching methods, and approaches, but also the application of students and the analysis of research data.
I have the following suggestions.
Figure 1&2 indicates that it is not clear.
Some of the tables should be merged. Many of the tables need to be integrated or streamlined.
Author Response
Dear reviewer:
A point by point response is included in the first page of the document.
Thanks!!
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
Line 153: The appropriate name for the methodology used is survey, with a cross-sectional design.
The sample selection procedure should be included.
Line 206: The results shown in Table 2 are data describing the sample, so they should go in the method section.
Line 312: The fourth factor should be eliminated, since it does not reach an eigenvalue greater than 1 (Kaiser's rule) and has only two items.
Line 359: The most important assumption in parametric statistics is homoscedasticity. ANOVA is robust to non-normality. It would be much more important to test for equality of variances.
Author Response
Dear reviewer:
A point by point response is included in the first page of the document.
Thanks!!
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
