Exploring the Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on University Students’ Learning Life: An Integrated Conceptual Motivational Model for Sustainable and Healthy Online Learning

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

This article addresses de effects of Covid-19 among students in higher education (universities). The fact that universities in many countries have been forced to organize their teaching activities through online platforms and methodologies has created a plethora of challenges both for teachers and for learners. This article focus on the impact of such actions on the learners' side. In this sense, this article has a great potential to provide guidelines for scholars working as teachers (professors, associate professors, lecturers, etc.) in universities. 

However, there are several aspects that need to be reviewed. 

GENERAL COMMENTS

After the discussion section (in section 7), authors elaborate a conceptual model development that seems to guide / support their discussion. I wonder whether this framework should be introduced before, since it seems that it is important in terms of their approach when doing their analysis. 

Regarding the methodology, authors do not explain which is the population of their study, and how they determined the total amount for the sample. Is this sample statistically representative? How the snow ball method will guarantee the randomness criteria of selecting the participants in the Google survey? They justify their sample size with a sentence which is not clear "... sample sizes are recommended...": it seems that they are saying that sample sizes have to be either large or small... However, there is a clear procedure to calculate the sample size, according to certain percentage of error, etc. Did the authors determined their sample size using this approach, or it is more likely to be a pilot study aiming at being exploratory?

Regarding the section 4 (results and discussion), authors introduce several categories (page 5, lines 171 and forth). However, they do not explain how they created those categories. In addition, through the text we can read: "...in Figure 1 as (a) Work and..." But when we have a look to the Figure 1, the names of te categories are different from the names used within the text. I will suggest to use the same categories, to be consistent. 

Regarding section 7, it seems that authors are providing there like a literature review. For instance, in several places they introduce definitions (i.e. page 11, lines 325 and so forth). I wonder why they did not introduced those definitions before. Are they using them in order to design the questionnaire, for example? In addition, if this section is devoted to discuss the results of this study with the literature, this aim is not clear, because many times authors present others' conclusions, statements, approaches, but they do not discuss them using their data as evidence to support their argument. I would suggest not to accept any others' statement, unless their selection is part of their own approach (and if so, then it has to be presented at the beginning of the article, as theoretical framework, or as they model that they want to discuss with their study). 

For instance, their integrated conceptual motivational model (page 14, Figure 9) should be presented before, as it seems that is the model proposed by the authors, so they must discuss this model drawing on the results of their study. 

Overall, I recommend to reorganize the article, to better present and discuss the data collected, in order to better justify their conclusions. 

Author Response

Response to reviwer1

Reviwer1:  Are the research design, questions, hypotheses and methods clearly stated?

Authors Response/ action taken: Yes, in the new revised and proofread version, we have added section3 named  3. Research Questions    that includes  four research question reemphasized that this study is purely EXPLORATORY QUALITATIVE RESEARCH DESIGNE. Therefore, this study does not have hypothesis to be tested. However, the flow of this study starts diagnosing the problem qualitatively, then introduce conceptual model as mapped solution to these problems.  For Method, we had added, one subsection named 4. 2 Data Analysis Process On how the qualitative analysis was performed.

Reviwer1:  For empirical research, are the results clearly presented?

Authors Response/ action taken: This study is purely EXPLORATORY QUALITATIVE RESEARCH. Therefore, this study does not have hypothesis to be empirically tested. However, one of the main contribution, in this study is to introduce conceptual model, as authors believed to solve research gab and provide it to be empirically tested by further future research in the field.

Reviwer1:  Is the article adequately referenced?

Authors Response/ action taken: New references added wherever any new updates performed  

Reviwer1:  (in section 7). I wonder whether this framework should be introduced before, since it seems that it is important in terms of their approach when doing their analysis. 

Authors Response/ action taken: The flow of this study starts by diagnosing the research problem qualitatively, then introduce conceptual model as mapped solution to these problems.

Reviwer1: Regarding the methodology, However, there is a clear procedure to calculate the sample size, according to certain percentage of error, etc. Did the authors determined their sample size using this approach, or it is more likely to be a pilot study aiming at being exploratory?

Authors Response/ action taken: Yes Sir, As we have stated earlier Authors would like to reemphasize that this study is purely EXPLORATORY QUALITATIVE RESEARCH DESIGNE. In which indicates that sample size was used in the study is more than enough to conduct QUALITATIVE RESEARCH analysis.

Reviwer1: Regarding the section 4 (results and discussion), authors introduce several categories (page 5, lines 171 and forth). However, they do not explain how they created those categories.

Authors Response/ action taken: Authors  added, one subsection named 4. 2 Data Analysis Process on how these categories  created using  the qualitative themetic  analysis.

Reviwer1: In addition, through the text we can read: "...in Figure 1 as (a) Work and..." But when we have a look to the Figure 1, the names of te categories are different from the names used within the text. I will suggest to use the same categories, to be consistent. 

Authors Response/ action taken: Authors have considered your suggestion and match with same names.  

Reviewer 2 Report

The topic is one of high interest. However, the relationship between the questions asked and the the theoretical model identified should be more clearly stated as well as the relevance of the identified themes to the conceptual model.

The themes identifies should be better explained in terms of psychological or pedagogical consequences.

The conclusions should include aspects related to the use of the conceptual model described.

You must use quotations marks for the text in lines 135-139 as it is very similar to the cited document

Throughout the text:

Remove the brackets from the percentages for a better understanding 

Check the language - the sequence of tenses is not correct in many places (lines 97 - 108, 209 - 216, 277-291

Use a space before any brackets

Line 56 - wrong choice of tenses 

The numbering of the subchapters in Introduction is not right (Chapter 1, subchapter 2.1. and 2.2). You do not have a Chapter 2.

Lines 72-82 The history of the pandemic should not be presented in such detail.

Line 101 - Define MCO

Line 114 - Define ODL (you could add the abbreviation in line 101) and ICT

Line 127 - THE self-administrated questionnaire - the definite article is missing

Line 133-134 -  as this will prevent the researcher from extracting enough rich data - not understandable

Line 177 - Figure 1 is not consistent with its explanations above it

Line 221 - Unclear: Although the number of incremental of hours

Line 296 - Spelling mistake: conceptual model biased on relevant

Line 320 - 330 - Not enough theoretical support. Avoid using other theoretical concepts - state clearly the concepts used and cite them accordingly.

Line 399 - 400 - The sources should be mentioned and cited: Therefore, many scholars suggested that there is a need for planning a sustained and attractive design of the online curriculum.
 

Line 444 - Genitive missing - students online learning experience technically 

Author Response

Response to reviwer 2

Reviwer2:The conclusions should include aspects related to the use of the conceptual model described.

Authors Response/ action taken:  we have considered that and added short paragraph at the end of conclusion part as follow:  In order to help universities accomplish this goal, we have developed a framework, which we believe will support students as they deal with the challenges imposed by the move to online learning. This framework, we believe, will help drive students, teachers and universities all around the world to improve their online learning in a healthy and sustainable fashion.

Reviwer2:You must use quotations marks for the text in lines 135-139 as it is very similar to the cited document

Authors Response/ action taken:  You are right, we already paraphrase entire section of   Research Method and reintroduced again.

Reviwer2: Remove the brackets from the percentages for a better understanding
Authors Response/ action taken:  All brackets already removed  from the percentages in the new revised version
 

Reviwer2: Check the language - the sequence of tenses is not correct in many places (lines 97 - 108, 209 - 216, 277-291

Use a space before any brackets

Line 56 - wrong choice of tenses 

The numbering of the subchapters in Introduction is not right (Chapter 1, subchapter 2.1. and 2.2). You do not have a Chapter 2.

Authors Response/ action taken:  The second round professional proofread has been done with corrections

Reviwer2Line 177 - Figure 1 is not consistent with its explanations above it (already edited)

Authors Response/ action taken:  (Already edited)

Reviwer2: Line 221 - Unclear: Although the number of incremental of hoursincremental

Authors Response/ action taken:  (Already edited)

Reviwer2: Line 296 - Spelling mistake: conceptual model biased on relevant

Authors Response/ action taken:  The second round professional proofread has been done with corrections

Reviwer2: Line 320 - 330 - Not enough theoretical support. Avoid using other theoretical concepts - state clearly the concepts used and cite them accordingly.

Authors Response/ action taken:  (Already edited)

Reviwer2:Line 399 - 400 - The sources should be mentioned and cited: Therefore, many scholars suggested that there is a need for planning a sustained and attractive design of the online curriculum.

 Authors Response/ action taken:  (Already added and edited)

Reviwer2:Line 444 - Genitive missing - students online learning experience technically 

Authors Response/ action taken:  The second round professional proofread has been done with corrections

Reviewer 3 Report

The aim of this article is to analyze some important university student’s perceptions on the challenges and hurdles they face during the Covid-19 pandemic when they use IT platform applications for online learning activities, and in so doing to develop a conceptual motivational model that introduces solution and clear map to overcome such challenges and hurdles for students. See abstract: lines 23-27.

The data set for this study was collected during peak time of pandemic period between 16th of May 2020 and 5th of June 2020. See line 28-30. The authors’ Introduction is a way to describe rapidly a very difficult situation arisen because of COVID-19 disease in the world in the first half of 2020. See lines 42-70.

Malaysia is the Country chosen by the authors to detect their perspective topic’s conclusions. See lines 81-95. A special focus in the paper is then addressed towards ODL (Online Distance Learning) and its related use of ICT platforms as a way to by-pass the MCO (Movement Control Order) phases. See lines 96-124.

One of the main features of COVID-19’s spreading around the world has been a panic situation that directly affected many businesses and organization systems, including the education system. Subsequently, on 27th of May 2020, the Higher Education Ministry in Malaysia declared that all teaching and learning activities in all universities and other high education centers must be conducted through online platforms until 31st December 2020. See lines 87-93.

ODL has therefore been confirmed as best method for both students and educators, especially during the different, long MCO phases, to be carefully managed through highly technological online ICT platforms. See lines 97-124.

The authors’ research method and data collection are detailing explained at paragraph 3. Research Method and Data Collection line 125 forward. The authors have made use of a “snowball” sampling constructed also using WhatsApp, Facebook and calls to solicit the data collection. See particularly lines 135-145.

Descriptive statistics on the respondents are furnished in paragraph 4.1 Respondents demographics information line 147 and in Table 1. at line 157 according to five components, that is: (i) gender, (ii) age group, (iii) academic qualification, (iv) type of university, and (v) nationality).

During the diffusion of ODL Education in Malaysia became the unique source of it until April 2020, then extended until ending December 2020, many challenges and complains have arisen by the side especially of students were depressed by the general situation. See lines 158-170. A recapitulation of feelings and general fears students have been exposed during the pandemic disease of COVID-19 is shown in Figure 1. at line 179.

One of the main complains arisen is detailed in lines 180-199, and it refers to the perception or fear of being overloaded by the tasks of online courses.

Quite the 70% of students felt themselves overloaded by online courses. See Figure 2. at line 207.

At line 208 forward it is shown as students have spent about 5 hours a day before their computers to do online tasks related to ODL Education in Malaysia. See also Figures 3. and 4. at line 218 and 220 respectively.

At paragraph 4.4.2. Theme (II) Challenges relevant to Mental and Health Issues at line 231 forward, the authors highlight how the main challenges related to ODL have been connected to mental and health issues. Figure 6. at line 258 shows students complained huge stress due to mainly: (i) pressure on online tasks; (ii) limited and week internet connection, (iii) limited resources relevant to subjects, (iv) unfamiliar study environment, and (v) the worrying about to be one of the COVID-19 victims.

Other features of the stress generated during pandemic and manifested because of MOC and ODL phases in Malaysia are explained in detail at lines 259-273. A tripartite Figure 7. at line 275 show some consequences of COVID-19 pandemic on university students.

Paragraph 6. Status and Source of Students Motivation during COVID19 explain students were more affected by stress have been those with less self-motivation. See lines 277-291 and Figure 8. at line 293.

Paragraph 7.1. Students Sustainable wellbeing at line 302 forward is a kind of new introduction about the integrated conceptual model the authors try to build around the factors that influence students’ sustainable wellbeing. This model will also be based on some well-known theories such as self-determination theory and other theoretical concepts from relevant literature reviews. See particularly lines 320-322.  

COVID19 pandemic forced many university students to 312 experience unfamiliar environments, as they have to fully adopt online learning and adapt study 313 from home through virtual online platforms. See lines 312-314.

Self-motivation is an asset for students’ wellbeing, and the authors wish to underline how that grows through distance-learning is different from that arises in a living community through face-to-face interactions. See lines 332-346.

Self-motivation is therefore dissected into components such as: (i) self-determination; (ii) self-efficacy; (iii) self-regulation. See paragraph 7.2. Personal Factors lines 331-376.

The authors wish to enhance how complex sustainable wellbeing is to analyze, due to its building features that is: a) personal factors; b) technical factors; c) socio-environmental factors.

A Figure 9. at line 477 is provided to this aim.

The Conclusions at lines 478-494 underline the research states the number of serious challenges and problems students from more 15 public and private Malaysian Universities have faced during COVID-19 when they use different online learning platforms.

MINOR CHANGES REQUEST

• Please check the orthography in Figure 8. at line 293 (“attintion” in 8-B);
• Please re-join all of your lines 1-367 starting from line 368 at paragraph 7.2.2. Self-Regulation. From there you have built an independent research is worthwhile to be published. Your preceding descriptive information especially at lines 96-145 can be concentrated and shortened, focusing since the start on the interest you have for self-regulation to allocate sufficient cognitive resources to accomplish learning tasks;
• Finally, which are solution and clear map to overcome challenges and hurdles students from more 15 public and private Malaysian Universities have faced during COVID-19 when they use different online learning platforms?

Please state this point better in the final paragraphs.

Kind Regards,

Author Response

Response to reviwer 3

Reviwer 3 : abstract: lines 23-27 (Already added and edited)

 Authors Response/ action taken:  The second round professional proofread has been done with corrections

Reviwer3: See line 28-30. The authors’ Introduction is a way to describe rapidly a very difficult situation arisen because of COVID-19 disease in the world in the first half of 2020. See lines 42-70.

Authors Response/ action taken:  The second round professional proofread and revised version these lines have been paraphrased.

Reviwer3:

See lines 96-124, Authors Response/ action taken in revised version these lines have been paraphrased.

Authors Response/ action taken in revised version these lines have been paraphrased.

 See lines 87-93, Authors Response/ action taken in revised version these lines have been paraphrased.

See lines 97-124, Authors Response/ action taken in revised version these lines have been paraphrased.

See particularly lines 135-145. Authors Response/ action taken: You are right, we already paraphrase entire section of   Research Method and reintroduced again.

Reviwer3:

Please check the orthography in Figure 8. at line 293 (“attintion” in 8-B);

Authors Response/ action taken:  (Already edited) 

Reviwer3:  Finally, which are solution and clear map to overcome challenges and hurdles students from more 15 public and private Malaysian Universities have faced during COVID-19 when they use different online learning platforms? Please state this point better in the final paragraphs.

Authors Response/ action taken:  we have considered that and added short paragraph at the end of conclusion part as follow:  In order to help universities accomplish this goal, we have developed a framework, which we believe will support students as they deal with the challenges imposed by the move to online learning. This framework, we believe, will help drive students, teachers and universities all around the world to improve their online learning in a healthy and sustainable fashion.

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

The reviewed version has been significantly improved. Now the focus of the paper is more clear (since the authors include their research questions, which contributes to improving the clarity of the text). In addition, the further details about how they conducted the data analysis contributes also to clarify the paper and some of the models (figures) included in the discussion section (i.e. figure 9). It is also easier to follow the conclusions, since the authors groups the main contributions in three groups or categories. However, they assume at the end of their article that their model (figure 9) "will support students as they deal with the challenges imposed by the move to online learning." But there is no evidence other than authors' believe to make this claim. I will suggest to state that this model could support students ... but additional research is needed in other to confirm that claim.

Author Response

we have read reviwer1 comments and suggestions regarding last four lines in the conclusion (lines 519- 223). We appreciate them, and we totally agree with a his/her good comments and suggestions. 

 We have reintroduce those lines as suggested:

In order to help universities accomplish this goal, we have developed a framework which we believe this framework could support students as they deal with the challenges imposed by the move to online learning. This framework, we believe, it could help drive students, teachers and universities all around the world to improve their online learning in a healthy and sustainable fashion. Yet, an additional empirical research is needed to test and confirm this framework.