International Students’ Perceptions towards Their Learning Experience in an International Network Seminar in Japan: During and Post the COVID-19 Pandemic

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The case study presented in this paper compares, for a recurring event (the International Network Seminar in Japan), the participants' perceptions in regards to different apects of said event, by analysing their reactions to editions prior, during, and after the COVID-19 pandemic (during which the event took place exclusively online).

The study is well conducted, from the motivation of choosing an apropriate event (with as little bias from external factor, such as ICT infrastructure issues, for example), to the analysis of study participants demographics, and to the choice of testing tools (the BEVI analysis). The methodology is described appropriately, and the results interpreted in a convincing manner.

There are some repetitions of ideas, and some brevity would be recommended in some portions of the article, but nothing major.

The references are appropriate and current (although a higher number wouldn't hurt), and the English is almost flawless.

There are some minor formatting issues (captions for tables 5 and 6 on page 7 need fixing), but they can be resolved easily.

 

Author Response

Point 1: There are repetitive of ideas, and some brevity would be recommended in some portions of the article, but nothing major. 

Thank you very much for your valuable comments and feedback.  

All the revisions have been highlighted in yellow in the text.  

Answer 1: Repetitive words and ideas have been shortened and revised  

Point 2: The references are appropriate and current (although a higher number wouldn't hurt), and the English is almost flawless.  

Answer to point 2: We would like to thank the reviewer for the opportunity to improve the references list in our study. We followed your advice and have included new references in the text. 

Point 3: There are some minor formatting issues (captions for tables 5 and 6 on page 7 need fixing), but they can be resolved easily.  

Answer to point 3: Captions for tables 5 and 6 on page 7 have been fixed. Please see the revised manuscript in the attached. 

Reviewer 2 Report

Excellent mixed methods analysis showing differences due to the pandemic. I recommend as a follow-up study supplementing the comparative summary descriptive statistics with pre-post difference testing (e.g., MANOVA, paired-samples t-test) as well as a factor analysis to confirm the clusters of interrelated survey questions. The current study is worthy of publication in its present form and is very well documented and grounded in a theoretical framework.

Author Response

Point 1: I recommend as a follow-up study supplementing the comparative summary descriptive statistics with pre-post difference testing (e.g., MANOVA, paired-samples t-test) as well as a factor analysis to confirm the clusters of interrelated survey questions. 

All the revisions and changes have been highlighted in yellow.  

Answer to point 1: Thank you for the suggestion for our article.  We have improved this part and included the suggested methods for further research.  

Reviewer 3 Report

Dear Editor

Dear Author

Please see my comment below to improve this manuscript.

Abstract: author may added some implications and contributions of this study.

Line 24 The findings of this study suggest that universities need to strive and define a meaning and purpose of international seminars… when? How? is this recommendation based on covid and post covid? I think there is no covid, these findings can also be triggered.

Introduction section is well written. Please add the structure of article in last paragraph. In addition, author need to separate introduction and literature review section.

Methodology section: how author analyze the data?

Discussion section: remain the reader what is the purpose of the study, then explain the result based on purpose of the study. in this section author should give more implications and recommendations.

This manuscript less references. please added more references. The number of references proves author have been read a lot of literature and have a basic knowledge in this field.

proofreading service is needed.

Author Response

Point 1:Abstract: author may added some implications and contributions of this study.   

Thank you very much for your valuable comments and feedback. All the changes have been highlighted in yellow colour in the text. 

We have added some implications and contribution of this study in the abstract. 

Point 2: Line 24 The findings of this study suggest that universities need to strive and define a meaning and purpose of international seminars… when? How? is this recommendation based on covid and post covid? I think there is no covid, these findings can also be triggered. 

Thank you for your suggestion for our article. We have included the’ when’ (post-COVID) and ‘how’ (virtual teaching tool with good practice) in our findings within our text. 

Point 3: Please add the structure of article in last paragraph. -  

Answer to point 3: Thank you for the recommendation: Yes, this structure is now included at the end of the Introduction and Background part in the manuscript.  

 

Point 4: The question: separation from introduction and literature 

Answer to point 4:  

Thank you for the suggestion for our article. We have decided to not adapt the separation between the Introduction and Literature Review, because we are following the same structure as other articles published in the same journal of Sustainability. See for example the following publications from the Sustainability journals: 

• Stracke, C.M.; Burgos, D.; Santos-Hermosa, G.; Bozkurt, A.; Sharma, R.C.; Swiatek Cassafieres, C.; dos Santos, A.I.; Mason, J.; Ossiannilsson, E.; Shon, J.G.; Wan, M.; Obiageli Agbu, J.-F.; Farrow, R.; Karakaya, Ö.; Nerantzi, C.; Ramírez-Montoya, M.S.; Conole, G.; Cox, G.; Truong, V. Responding to the Initial Challenge of the COVID-19 Pandemic: Analysis of International Responses and Impact in School and Higher Education. Sustainability 2022, 14, 1876. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14031876 
• Ferreira-Lopes, L.; Van Rompay-Bartels, I.; Bezanilla, M.J.; Elexpuru-Albizuri, I. Integrating SDG 12 into Business Studies through Intercultural Virtual Collaboration. Sustainability 2022, 14, 9024. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14159024 
• Dagiene, V.; Jasute, E.; Navickiene, V.; Butkiene, R.; Gudoniene, D. Opportunities, Quality Factors, and Required Changes during the Pandemic Based on Higher Education Leaders’ Perspective. Sustainability 2022, 14, 1933.

Point 5: Methodology section: how did author analyze the data?  

Answer to point 5: Analysis and how we analyzed the data have been described in detail in the methodology section. 

Point 6: Discussion section: remind the reader what is the purpose of the study, then explain the result based on purpose of the study . in this section author should give more implications and recommendations  

We have adapted and included the purpose of this study and have included it in the discussion section of this manuscript. This has been adapted and included in the Conclusion portion of this manuscript, as recommended by Reviewer 2.  

Point 7: This manuscript less references. please added more references  

Answer to point 7: We would like to thank the reviewer for the opportunity to improve the references list in our study. We followed your advice and have included new references in the text. 

Point 8: Review English –  

Answer to point 8: Thank you so much for your continued recommendations to improve the quality of our manuscript. A native English speaker has proof-read the latest version of the manuscript and suggested revisions, which have been implemented. Unfortunately, the answers from students cannot be changed despite their grammatical errors, as they are direct quotes, and we’d prefer to keep the original statements.