A Path Model of University Dropout Predictors: The Role of Satisfaction, the Use of Self-Regulation Learning Strategies and Students’ Engagement

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The revised article requires some changes to be admitted in the journal, but the overall assessment is positive, so when the authors make some changes it can be accepted for publication.

There are 5 self-citations of the authors, they are excessive, they must select the most relevant ones.

Abstract and keywords:
They must use internationally recognized descriptors (e.g.) those contemplated in the ERIC Thesaurus.

Introduction
An update of the cited references is necessary, the authors must include works published in the last 5 years, especially in the last 2-3 years. In the context where they carry out their study (Spain), there are various works by Salanova et al.; Meneghel et al., etc.; that should be cited in their work, especially those related to "engagement" in higher education.

Method
Participants
They make a description of the participants, but it would be precise to indicate which 2 Spanish universities the subjects of the sample belong to.
Instruments
They report the reliability of the instrument scores, differentiated by each dimension or factor, through the alpha coefficient, but it would be suggested that they use another alternative route in addition to the one used as the omega coefficient.

Results

The analyzes carried out are relevant and respond to the purposes of the study.

Discussion

The authors should include in the discussion of the article references of international works carried out in recent years in prestigious journals, in order to increase the thematic relevance of the work and raise the Price index (thematic news index), to increase the number of citations and references (beyond the 34 presented).

Author Response

In the present document the reviews of the reviewer 1 have been responded correctly.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

This paper deals with a very important problem associated with   university dropout, a phenomenon that concerns many countries. This study aimed to analyze the extent to which the intention to drop out of university is predicted as a function of satisfaction and expectations with the course, the engagement with the course, and the use of SRL strategies. The participant completed the CARE questionnaire and the data were explored by Path analyses. The results showed that the intention to drop out is directly   explained by students´ engagement and indirectly by the use of SRL strategies, through engagement. Changes in engagement and in the use of SRL strategies were found to associate with satisfaction. And the effect of satisfaction and the use of SRL strategies explained a proportion of students’ engagement. The findings are important for research and to design interventions focusing on students’ intention to drop out and the prevention of such phenomena.

This is a well performed research on drop out. Valid scales were used for measuring the involved variables and the implementation of Mplus produced interpretable outputs which are presented in a lucid way. The aim and the research hypotheses are clearly stated and the findings indeed inform theory and practice.

 This article, overall, is written and presented in a formal way which facilitates reading and comprehension. I recommend publication in this form. The results are important and makes a significant contribution to the literature.

Author Response

The reviews of reviewer 2 have been correctly answered in the present document.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf