Exploring Higher Education Mobility through the Lens of Academic Tourism: Portugal as a Study Case
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThis study raised an interesting topic, carried out research around the international academic tourism worldwide, selected Portugal as the research object, and discussed the influencing factors of the COVID-19 epidemic in this special situation. The research results can to some extent illustrate the impact of international academic research on tourism and how local resources should be actively utilized, which has certain enlightening significance. However, unfortunately, due to the limited number of respondents, there are still some doubts about its representativeness. In addition, since the current COVID-19 epidemic has passed, whether its research results are applicable to the analysis of influencing factors of other similar special phenomena still needs further discussion.
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageThere are still some misunderstandings in English vocabulary and long texts. Please carefully proofread and correct them.
Author Response
|
We would like to thank you for the reviewer' valuable comments concerning this article. Their insights were very helpful in enhancing the quality of our work. We carefully considered and implemented the suggestions and revisions, resulting in the current version of the article. Please see the attachment. |
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThank you for affording me the opportunity to peruse the manuscript. The issues under consideration bear substantial significance within the realm of research. The inquiry into academic tourism appears to be a promising avenue for investigation, with the implications stemming from the COVID-19 pandemic representing a noteworthy facet. Nonetheless, there exists room for refinement, which the authors may contemplate.
The section detailing methodology design, ethical considerations, and protocol warrants meticulous presentation. Furthermore, the rationale behind the chosen method should be expounded, drawing support from scholarly and methodological sources. In the event that a case study serves as the selected research method, a comprehensive elucidation of its specific design and requisite criteria is imperative. Moreover, the model derived from the literature review to underpin the case study should be articulated.
The Results section is recommended to provide a more expansive treatment of the research's findings. In addition to the mere enumeration of outcomes, their thorough description and analysis assume paramount importance.
The Discussion section merits a discrete demarcation from the Conclusions section. Furthermore, its augmentation can be achieved by facilitating a discourse between the results posited by the authors and those of other scholars deemed most influential in the research domain. Addressing the limitations of the research, which extend beyond their current delineation, would enhance clarity in the research landscape.
A comprehensive presentation of the debate between the authors' findings and those of preeminent scholars in the field should be a focal point of the Discussion section.
In order to bolster scientific significance and delineate avenues for further inquiry, the Future Research section could be more expansively developed.
It is acknowledged that the comments proffered do not question the significance of the explorations, suggesting that with requisite enhancements, the manuscript may be deemed suitable for scholarly publication.
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageFinal version should be proofread.
Author Response
We would like to thank you for the reviewer' valuable comments concerning this article. Their insights were very helpful in enhancing the quality of our work. We carefully considered and implemented the suggestions and revisions, resulting in the current version of the article.
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsDear Authors,
First, your article has a mixture of two topics which should be separately researched. Second, the descriptive statistics presented are not too consistent for publication in this journal. Third, your topic has no clear connection to the journal's topics.
I do not recommend its publication in this journal.
Yours faithfully,
Author Response
Thank you for the comments. We have tried to improve the article for publication accordingly.
Kind regards
Reviewer 4 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe paper's objective is clearly outlined, with the authors articulating their intent to revisit the concept of international academic tourism and the examination the impact of the pandemic on the influx of international higher education students to Portugal.
The Literature Review section demonstrates a well-structured presentation, offering a clear perspective supported by diverse and recent references. Consequently, the concept of academic tourism is comprehensively explained and interpreted.
However, it is suggested a more extensive discussion of academic tourism within the framework of sustainability. Although brief discussions on this aspect occur in lines 430-432 and 436-431, considering this journal's profile, a more profound exploration and additional references would be beneficial. One suggestion is to investigate the sustainability messages conveyed by Portuguese universities in theirs marketing communication during the COVID-19 pandemic. This exploration could help briefly evaluate whether these messages influenced students' destination choices during this period.
The sections on conclusions, limitations, and future research are discussed from various perspectives and appropriately contextualized.
Author Response
We would like to thank you for the reviewer' valuable comments concerning this article. Their insights were very helpful in enhancing the quality of our work. We carefully considered and implemented the suggestions and revisions, resulting in the current version of the article.
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 5 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThis is a well-written manuscript about international “degree” students and academic tourists in Portugal. The main contribution of this paper is the clarification of the term “international academic tourism”. Additionally, I didn’t find significant issues in the text except some typos (e.g., page 1, line 41). However, I have two comments:
1. “3. certificate mobility, which involves shorter stays abroad to improve skills (e.g., summer program, cultural or language course, conferences, workshops), without going for a degree or credits [34].” (page 3, lines 138-140) However, in Europe, students often receive credits (ECTS) for completing summer programs such as HEIs’ summer schools and/or workshops.
2. Consider renaming “4.2. Implications for science” section (page 9, line 379). I think that “implications for theory” sounds better.
Author Response
We would like to thank you for the reviewer' valuable comments concerning this article. Their insights were very helpful in enhancing the quality of our work. We carefully considered and implemented the suggestions and revisions, resulting in the current version of the article.
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe authors made some improvements after receiving the comments.
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageEnglish requires final proofreading.
Author Response
We would like to thank you for the reviewer' valuable comments concerning this article. Their insights were very helpful in enhancing the quality of our work. We carefully considered and implemented the suggestions and revisions, resulting in the current version of the article.
Final version was proofread accordingly.
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsDear Authors,
In my view, your article does not contain any empirical research as requested by the journal. The descriptive statistical data is not consistent enough to generate hypotheses or to use proper research methodologies as those presented in the articles herein published. It is an article suitable for being published in conference proceedings.
Yours faithfully,
Author Response
Thank you for the comments. We have tried to improve the article for publication accordingly.
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
