Emerging Virtual Communities of Practice during Crises: A Sustainable Model Validating the Levels of Peer Motivation and Support
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report (Previous Reviewer 1)
Dear Author(s)
Thank you for engaging with the revisions requested.
The revisions are adequate.
All the best with this publication.
Author Response
Many thanks for the feedback!
Reviewer 2 Report (Previous Reviewer 2)
Comments for author File: 
Comments.pdf
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report (Previous Reviewer 3)
Good work
Author Response
Many thanks!
This manuscript is a resubmission of an earlier submission. The following is a list of the peer review reports and author responses from that submission.
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Dear Author(s)
The topic is interesting and apt for the current higher education space. The manuscript requires some changes in order to improve, and these include the following:
1. the abstract - needs to be addressed to include the purpose of the study and the theoretical framework.
2. the literature review should include a critical debate of the theory and not simply a description.
3. the methodology should include the philosophical view of the world applied in this study as well as the ethical considerations in this research.
4. the implications and limitations of this research should be overtly set out as well as suggestions of future research.
Overall, the language needs to be checked. The verbal tenses are incorrect at times, the syntax and punctuation also need to be checked.
The referencing convention should be consistent throughout and especially the font size and type in the end-of-text list.
Wishing you all the best with the research.
Author Response
Please see attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Dear Authors,
Thank you for giving me the chance to review your manuscript “Emerging virtual communities of practice during crises: A sustainable model validating the levels of peer motivation and support”. It was an interesting read in deed seeing instructors’ perceptions being used as a validating element of the findings, and how you approached formulating a sustainable model of the levels of peer support on social media in fostering a positive environment during crisis.
However there is room for leveraging the quality of this manuscript. Please check the following:
· The abstract is too wordy and over detailed, and tend to mix up readers. Kindly review, ensuring to address the following only in your abstract:
Purpose of the Study - In one or two sentences, give your readers a very broad understanding of the need-to-know background information for your study, and how your manuscript will contribute to this knowledge.
Research Design and Methodology- Your abstract should include an outline of how your study was conducted through a short description of your research design and methodology. Include, if relevant, your sample size, methods for analysis, and the duration of the study. Do not mention very specific details such what is the Delphi technique and how it works. They can explore it later on during the course of the manuscript.
Results - The majority of your audience reads abstracts because they are interested in the results of published research. As such, the results section should be the longest component of your abstract. In three to six sentences, describe the key findings of your study in the order they are discussed in the manuscript. Aim to clearly describe how your results answer your research questions(s). Include as much detail as possible and remember to report negative findings.
Implications- Provide readers a few key points regarding the implications of your study that you describe in your paper.
· The introduction does not reflect the gap in the literature that you are trying to fill through your study on a global perspective. It is very short and quick, and lacks rigor. You should review it in this sense using seminal literature.
· The literature review needs reviewing. The section on virtual communities of practice needs substantial work. It is written to experts with term, neglecting novice ones. Please use current and up-to-date literature. You may need to add an additional section on vCoPs. Moreover, sections should make a logical flow leading to the topic being addressed. As is, the literature is only two sections with limited logical flow. A literature should speak a story.
· In the methodology section, you should make sure to explain the choice of the research paradigm you have adopted for readers. It is not clear why did you chose this methodology. You should present a good argument.
· The analysis of data is problematic. It is not clear how you analyzed this bulk of qualitative data. On page 3, line 92, you mention that data was qualitative and quantitative. But this does not remain consistent across the paper. As a reader, I got lost, and found that you carried out a thematic analysis; but did not understand how this thematic was carried out, and on what basis. I highly appreciate attending to this.
· The discussion section lacks rigor. At this stage you should be relating your findings to the international literature, showing where you converged, and where you diverged. This sections requires substantial review.
· The reference list has many mistakes in regards to APA 7. Please review.
Author Response
Please see the attachement.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
The researchers did not provide clarification about the motivation behind the study. What is the study's significance, and how would it be helpful for the relevant community? In discussion, a comparison with previous literature is required.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 4 Report
I do not wish to review this study further. It requires extensive editing for grammar, style, content and methods. Further, I don't believe a whatsapp group that existed prior to the pandemic, constitutes a VCoP. The authors can be directed to this paper: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/13/7994
