Evaluation of Online and Offline Communication Skills in Higher Education

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

In this manuscript, the authors assess and compare the online and offline communication skills of High School students, and report some findings that can have impact of the management of a progressively more virtual instruction.

The introduction is clear, readable and adequately organized, and describes the dimensions and importance of communicative literacy, and those relevant for education. The assessment is based on an already published and validated questionnaire, and the results are neatly reported.

However, there are some questions that should be revised:

- The questionnaire had already been published and validated, and the construct under study well known. Please state more clearly what is the original contribution of this paper.

- It would be highly advisable to provide support and/or a rationale for the hypotheses therein. E.g., why should there be differences among students in different careers, and what does it imply?

- Likewise, it is strongly needed to explain the practical implications for education in virtual, face-to-face of hybrid models, stating the differences among courses (if any).

Appart from that, there is a small typo in the research questions, and I think also the third should be presented as an item of the list.

Author Response

Comment: In this manuscript, the authors assess and compare the online and offline communication skills of High School students, and report some findings that can have impact of the management of a progressively more virtual instruction.

The introduction is clear, readable and adequately organized, and describes the dimensions and importance of communicative literacy, and those relevant for education.

The assessment is based on an already published and validated questionnaire, and the results are neatly reported.

However, there are some questions that should be revised:

 

Comment:

The questionnaire had already been published and validated, and the construct under study well known. Please state more clearly what is the original contribution of this paper.

 

Reply:

The article's contribution is significant in that it investigates online and offline communication skills. Unlike the previous research, the items were mixed, so that the tendency to answer in series to all the items regarding online or offline communication skills was eliminated.

 

Comment:

It would be highly advisable to provide support and/or a rationale for the hypotheses therein. E.g., why should there be differences among students in different careers, and what does it imply?

 

Reply:

Hypotheses were formulated regarding the existence of significant differences depending on the specialization, in order to determine whether the students from the Communication specialization have a higher level of communication skills than the students from the other specializations.

 

Comment:

Likewise, it is strongly needed to explain the practical implications for education in virtual, face-to-face of hybrid models, stating the differences among courses (if any).

 

Reply:

The basic implications of this study aim to suggest the need to develop safe spaces for online interactions [48] to improve the quality of students' relationships with friends and colleagues in higher education. The implications of the research can be highlighted from the perspective of the high level of online assertiveness among students. The development of online communication skills among university students will help them practice an assertive language and behavior in online educational activities in the academic environment.

 

Comment:

Appart from that, there is a small typo in the research questions, and I think also the third should be presented as an item of the list.

Reply:

This aspect is mentioned in the second objective of the research.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

The first part of the article is the Introduction, but it is necessary to add a new chapter. New chapter should be Previous research, in which the authors will refer to earlier and more recent research in this area, and in further work, they will compare the results.

 

Tables are good, but in my opinion some of them should be replaced with graphs.

The Discussion and especially the Conclusion is very short. I think it is necessary to give more detailed conclusions and refer to similar research in the discussion and compare the results.

The references are satisfactory, and it can be seen that the authors used some of the latest ones as well for recommendation.

Author Response

Comment:

The first part of the article is the Introduction, but it is necessary to add a new chapter. New chapter should be Previous research, in which the authors will refer to earlier and more recent research in this area, and in further work, they will compare the results.

 

Reply:

All the studies that were found both previous and current are presented in the section 2.2. Current studies focused on the investigation of online and offline communication skills.

 

Comment:

Tables are good, but in my opinion some of them should be replaced with graphs.

 

Reply:

The tables include detailed data.

 

Comment:

The Discussion and especially the Conclusion is very short. I think it is necessary to give more detailed conclusions and refer to similar research in the discussion and compare the results.

Reply:

Discussion

The research data indicate a significantly higher degree of online sociability among university students. The results of another research [48] showed that online communication was used very frequently to talk with friends, even more often than offline. Online communication is positively associated with the quality of relationships with other colleagues, which has great implications on the way of socializing in the academic environment.

Also, the research data indicate a significantly higher level of online assertiveness among university students. The results of exploratory research by Baker and Jeske [49] showed that participants who engaged more frequently in online activities reported significantly higher levels of assertiveness.

In future research, approaches that combine qualitative and quantitative methods [52] are needed to better understand the psychological characteristics of those who use online and offline communication in the academic environment.

All these implications show the importance of evaluating the online communication skills of university students, in order to identify the level of online assertiveness and sociability in the online environment at group level.

 

[48] Gomez-Baya, D.; Rubio-Gonzalez, A.; Gaspar de Matos, M. Online communication, peer relationships and school victimisation: a one-year longitudinal study during middle adolescence. International Journal of Adolescents and Youths 2019, 24(2), 199-211.

[49] Baker, A.E.; Jeske. Assertiveness and anxiety effects in traditional and online Interactions. International Journal of Cyber Behavior, Psychology and Learning 2015, 5(3), 30-46.

[52] Hughes, M. G., Griffith, J. A., Byrne, C. L., Nei, D. S., Harkrider, L. N., Zeni, T. A., Shipman,A. S., Connelly, S., Mumford, M. D., & O’Hair, H. D. (accepted, 2015). Examining online communication: A method for the quantitative analysis of qualitative data. In J. E.Jones & M. L. Baran (Eds.), Advances in knowledge acquisition, transfer, andmanagement: Mixed methods research for improved scientific study.

 

Conclusions

The most significant results of the research are the following: significantly higher online sociability; significantly higher online assertiveness; significantly higher offline emotion detection; significantly higher offline self-disclosure. Bachelor students had significantly higher online skills than the Master students. Depending on the specialization, the students of the field Communication and public relations revealed the highest levels of communication skills.

 

Comment:

The references are satisfactory, and it can be seen that the authors used some of the latest ones as well for recommendation.

Reply:

Thank you for all the suggestions on improving the quality of the article!

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

The author's corrections are satisfactory