A Systematic Review of Social Media Integration to Teach Speaking
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
I found the approach interesting, but it could be improved by correlating the data obtained and showed in this paper with teachers 'and students' perceptions of speaking abilities gained by conducting online teaching activities by communication platforms such as zoom, Google meet, Skype, etc.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
The author(s) defines social media as “as any technology that enables the distribution and sharing of knowledge over the Internet” in lines 114-115. Based on that definition, the author(s) then selectively analyzed 27 research papers that examine the use of “social media” in language learning, which includes various digital platforms and resources including WhatsApp, YouTube, TED Talks and Skype. I feel that the types of social media being analyzed in this paper needs to be organized/categorized- for example, depending on how they disseminate information/opinions, whether the audience can uptake the shared knowledge and be able to recreate it, and how this whole process of engaging in social media influence the way the speaker uses particular languages or language varieties. Or at least the author(s) needs to subcategorize these social media outlets into different categories such as MIM and SNS.
The most troubling part of this paper is that I am not quite convinced with a small set of research papers the author(s) selected, analyzed and presented here. With the advancement of technology and digital tools, more and more researchers have examined the use of social media and technology in language learning and use and I feel that 27 articles presented here do not sufficiently represent the whole body of the research in the field.
Author Response
Please see the atttachment. Thank you.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Overall comments
The topic of this paper is relevant, interesting, and up-to-date, and the reported work seems original. The idea of the paper is straightforward. However, upon reading the paper, some major concerns came up, outlined below.
Title
The title is acceptable in its current form.
Abstract
The abstract is well organized, and it clearly articulated relevant information about this research paper. However, much of it is about background and aim, and ended with a brief statement of results. It also needs to highlight the research design/methods, main research findings, and contributions as well as limitations and implications of the study.
Introduction
Introduction is well written and provides a background for this research as well motivation for this study. The rationale of this study is properly indicated. However, the significance needs to be properly asserted.
Literature Review
The literature review appears to be comprehensive.
Discussion
The discussion section needs to be made stronger, especially to acknowledge limitations of the study. Further, the discussion needs to relate the findings to relevant literature, to highlight the contribution of this research, to put it in context, and to cross validate with previous studies.
Conclusion
The conclusion provides a light summary of the findings and results of this study. It is well structured and logically written, so it provides a sound recollection of the main theme of this study. However, the contribution made by this study is not properly articulated in the conclusion, and moreover certain aspects of the abstract seem slightly inaccurate. The conclusion section should be expanded to highlight the unique contributions and limitations of the study. The discussion and conclusion sections should make clear how the research findings contribute new knowledge to the field.
Plagiarism check results:
/* Similarity check with iThenticate revealed a similarity index of 10%, which is considered appropriate. A maximum of around 60 quoted words is accepted per paper. There are NO papers with over 60 words. No previously copyrighted material was used.
Dear AUTHOR, summarizing my feedback, I expect your contribution to be highly valued by journal’s readers, if you improve it according to the review statements. I enjoyed reading your manuscript, and I am looking forward to seeing your research published.
Best wishes
Author Response
Please see the attachment. Thank you.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 4 Report
It deals with an interesting article to encourage teachers to use social networks in class. This article has a quality of structure and clarity. I would like to suggest that in the conclusion, this article discuss the difficulties of using social media, due to the digital divide. Could it be an obstacle?
Author Response
Please see the attachment. Thank you.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
I understand that the authors thoroughly read the comments and made some changes. But as I stated in the previous round, I still don't feel that analyzing 27 articles would not be enough-- especially, there is a growing body of literature about the given topic.
Author Response
Please see the attachment. Thank you
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
