Self-Assessment of the Entrepreneurial Competence of Teacher Education Students in the Remote Study Process
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
This study has an interesting and promising theme. It is supported thematic specific literature; however, it has some structural and methodological flaws, which are detailed trough comments across the article.
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Thank you for the review. We highly appreciate all your comments and suggestions and did corrections recording to them it can be seen in the attached file.
Respectfully,
Agnese Slišāne
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The paper lacks the theoretical framework about self- assessment. No one reference from the original belongs to the recent literature on self-assessment in higher education. As this paper is focused in self-assessment, the authors must include references on this, but also try to implement particular pedagogies and methods for assessment in higher education. For example, EAT framework described in Evans, C. (2013). Making sense of assessment feedback in higher education. Review of
Educational Research, 83(1), 70-120. Other recent publications from the same author and similar approaches would be requested.
http://0-journals-sagepub-com.brum.beds.ac.uk/doi/abs/10.3102/0034654312474350
Author Response
Thank you for the review. We highly appreciate your comments and suggestions. Despite the fact that in the article self-assessment was used as an assessment tool, your suggestions were valuable and we integrated them into the article. Thank you for the reference to the specified author (Evans, 2013), we used the publication “Making sense of assessment feedback in higher education” and other publications the get more information about the self-assessment process in HE process (authors are stated in the updated article). The added information can be seen in the attached file.
Respectfully,
Agnese Slišāne
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Thank you for the opportunity to review the manuscript entitled “ Self-Assessment of the Entrepreneurial Competence of Teacher Education Students In The Remote Study Process”.
The aim of the present study was to examine the correlation between their assessment of entrepreneurial competence and their readiness/ability to develop this competence to their students, as well as which methods/activities they see as suitable to do so in the classroom as well as in the remote study process.
The manuscript submitted for review examines a topic of great relevance in the field of educational psychology as is to understand how teacher education students self-assess their entrepreneurial competence, whether there is any correlation between their assessment of entrepreneurial competence and their readiness/ability to develop this competence to their students, and what methods/activities they see as suitable to develop entrepreneurial competence in the classroom as well as in the remote study process.
The topic is very important and the conceptual analysis made in the text is quite deep. The most literature consulted is quite current and the sample is quite large (which is a strength for your work.). I would like to thank the efforts by the authors of the manuscript and congratulate them on the work. Overall, the writing is clear, the goals are well described, the introduction should explain the objectives of the study based on the review of the previous literature and the conclusions are properly made and presented. I consider that the constructs proposed in the abstract of the work are quite well explained. Therefore, the manuscript brings significant knowledge of the scientific literature so and still covers existing gaps in the field. The study sample is not very large (and this is a limitation of the work) and in addition, I believe that the Authors should give the manuscript a common thread to all the work, better connect all the sections of it.
Best wishes for Authors.
Author Response
Thank you for the detailed and well explained review. We highly appreciate all your thoughts and suggestion. Referring to all the comment we made corrections that can be seen in the attached file.
Respectfully,
Agnese Slišāne
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
I agree with the changes introduced in the text.
Reviewer 2 Report
Observations done in the first report are included at the current version
