Inclusion or Isolation? Differential Student Experiences of Independent Learning and Wellbeing in Higher Education

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The issue of the manuscript is very interesting (the relationship between well-being and independent learning at the universities). The used methods are qualitative and quantitative at the same time. The relevance of the paper is clear-cut (the lack of the similar empirical findings). We can detect the strengths of the paper: the structure follows the scientific norms (except one thing – the description of the sample) and the ethical norms. The number of the respondents is high enough (in the case of the focus-group interviews and in the case of the quantitative part well). The key phenomena of the theoretical part are the well-being and independent learning. Moreover, some points of the paper are missing or not enough seductive.

In my opinion the manuscript can be improved in the following points:

-        the theoretical part is a little bit limited to me. The notion of well-being can be more detailed. I think this has to be similar highlighted than ‘independent learning’.

-        if the target population are university students, the authors have to draw the similar findings etc. in the field of well-being.

-        Because the authors focus on only one country they have to highlights the features of that system and that students’ body.

-        The year of 2020, 2021 and 2022 shaped the life of the students deeply. Perhaps this will be interesting from the aspect of well-being and independent learning.

-        I can not see the description of the sample (the authors should create a table for these data). But perhaps this is my fault.

-        In the quantitative part statistical tests can be used.

-        We can not read all the captions in the figures.

-        The title contains the notion of inclusion and isolation. Perhaps these can be removed because these elements are less highlighted in the theoretical part.

-        I can see other elements of limitations – the date of the research e.g.. The relationship was verified rather with qualitative elements (we can not see really cause and effects relationship in the quantitative part in my opinion - eg. verified with a regression modell).

-        The contents of the interviews have to be more detailed (guideline). This is very important from the aspect of reliability.

-        The differences of the well-being and independent learning according the used variables (gender, age, international students etc.) may be described in the theoretic part.

-        Research questions and hypotheses can be formulated too. Perhaps one RQ is not enough.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Would like to express my appreciation for the valuable contribution your paper makes to the literature, particularly in shedding light on the implications of independent learning for student wellbeing. Your research is commendable in its exploration of the Charter's development and its role in contextualizing the principles of best practice.

Author Response

Thank you for these positive comments on our work. We are pleased you enjoyed reading this article.

Reviewer 3 Report

The findings indicate interrelationship between independent learning and well-being.  The results also provide much meaningful data and suggestions on how higher education can scaffold independent learning for various groups. The article will be most helpful to other higher education institutions who are employing independent learning or contemplating the use of independent learning. I agree independent learning is both a process and a product. The article is well done and represents a scholarly effort.  Specific comments of students and staff added to a foundation for understanding the study. 

Author Response

Thank you for these positive comments on our work. We are pleased you enjoyed reading this article.