Challenges and Difficulties in Implementing an Income-Contingent-Financing Model in Higher Education in Colombia
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The submission lacks the basics of a scientific paper:
- The abstract is very broad and unclear.
- The introduction is too lengthy, not focused, and talks about some countries- without specifying the domain of the paper's interest.
- No mention of neither the research questions/hypotheses nor the methodology.
- The paper jumps from the introduction to the results without conducting any analysis. Then followed by the conclusion.
The authors need to follow the proper format and logic in writing a research paper.
Author Response
Please see the attached file
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The manuscript is focused on the problematic of higher education and financing model. Authors wrote theoretical study. The text divided into three chapters. It is written in understandable form, but I have got some comments, which could lead into improving of the manuscript. The comments are presented below.
- As I wrote above, the text is divided into three chapters, but I think, that some chapters are missing. The methodology chapter could introduce about the choosing of relevant issues. This process is noticed in the results chapter, but it should be mentioned in the methodology chapter. On the basis of this, the result chapter should be reviewed more precisely. Also the discussion chapter is missing. Please read some studies, which are similar like this one and rewrite your study according them.
- The result chapter of the manuscript is written as text. Could you add some tables or figures? They could cause more clearly and in understandable way. Please try it revise.
- The references include also non-english sources. I think, this journal has got international impact, so only English literature sources should be used or minimally translate non-english sources into English language
I hope my comments are helpful.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
This article focuses on outlining the political and social challenges facing the implementation of income-contingent financing (ICF) systems in counties to facilitate the attainment of higher education for citizens.
I would like to highly commend the authors for this interesting study. I do however have a few comments that I think will further improve this work.
- First, I think the article would benefit from an improved structure. Mainly, further dividing the text sections i.e. literature review, methodology...etc.
- Second, as it stands now, it is difficult to pinpoint the literature gap(s) identified by the authors and how this article addresses this gap or gaps. In other words, the authors should aim to more clearly identify the contribution of the article and how it relates to existing literature.
- Third, in line 183, the authors mention the Matthew effect. This concept needs to be further explained.
- Fourth, more emphasis should be placed on discussing the difficulties and challenges of implementing ICF which is not discussed until section 3.2 of the article. As it stands, a significant portion of the article is spent discussing other financing options not directly relevant to the topic of the article.
- Fifth, the conclusion section of the article does not include any limitations to this research nor does it include any areas of future research.
- Sixth, in the introduction section, the structure of the paper on sections is not provided. The authors are asked to include a brief description of the structure of the paper.
- Seventh, the citation and referencing style of the article is not in accordance with the Journal guidelines. The authors are encouraged to review the author instruction section on the journal's website and make any necessary adjustments.
I hope that my suggestions and comments will help improve the article. Good luck!
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
The revised version shows much improvement.
The authors need to include (Colombia) in the paper's title.
Author Response
Colombia is added in the title.
Made a new review and grammar and spelling corrections
Reviewer 3 Report
The revised version is much better.
Since the article focuses on the implementation of ICF in Colombia, then that should be added to the title.
Spelling and grammar checks should be done throughout the article.
Author Response
Colombia is added in the title.
Made a new review and grammar and spelling corrections
