Creating the Habit of Recycling in Early Childhood: A Sustainable Practice in Spain
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Dear authors
Thank you for the opportunity of reading this interesting report of your exploratory study. Your manuscript was clear and logically sequenced. Your research has yielded some findings that are worth reporting and do contribute to the importance of early childhood education for sustainability. The literature review was very well described, bringing together a range of literature relevant to the topic, providing a logical justification for the direction of the research. The literature was well analysed and was particularly useful when considering the findings of the research. The reporting of the data did a great job of highlighting the points that you wished to convey. The writing is mostly clear throughout. In its current form the manuscript makes a compelling case for inclusion in this journal as I could see a clear link between the research questions, the method of analysis, and the presentation of the findings.
I have evaluated this paper as requiring minor spell checking. I have noted the following:
Abstract: As the focus of this paper is early childhood education I was unclear why the word ‘schools’ was used (lines 17 and 24). Are the three early childhood centres attached to schools? If so then this needs to be clarified in the body of the paper as you are writing for an international audience and in some countries early childhood care and education services are attached to primary and/or secondary schools.
Introduction
Line 68 – the term school centres is used here. Just need to be consistent in the terms used.
Line 94 – the term preschools is used here. Also on line 99 preschool settings is used. Again just need to be consistent in the terms that are used
Line 103 and 106 – the direct quote uses only a single quotation mark
Line 108 – use the word educators instead of teachers. Any reason for this?
Lines 109 and 113 – double quotation marks are used for the direct quote. Need to use the same format
Materials and MethodsLine 136 – when talking about the pilot test this was developed in two centres in Cordoba and one in Seville then in the next line these centres are referred to as schools – see also lines 141 and 143.
3.1 Phases and research tools
Line 173 – the term school is used here
Lines 176 – change “the seven first ere” to the first seven were
Line 177-178 – Suggested change only “Instead the question number eight was the following one:” to Question number eight asked:
Line 180 – used the word experience – does not seem a good fit. Suggest that another word is used such a programme or exploratory study.
Line 184 – suggest that you change the word needed to required
Line 185 – use the word centre here whereas in lines 200 and 203 ‘school centre’ is used. Again just be consistent.
Lines 205-206 – seems to be missing some words. “Third, and concerning parents, pre- and post-questionnaires were distributed”.
Line 210 – single quotation mark used at the end of the quote whereas a double quotation mark is used at the beginning (line 208)
Line 212 – suggestion only – insert ‘on’ after impacted
Line 213 – only use the word school here
Line 217 – suggestion only – delete for and insert with – “in the surveys carried out with parents…”
Line 221 – here centres is used “participating centres”
Line 242 – only use the word school here.
Line 251 – change “mainly two and three year old) to “mainly 2 and 3 years old) to be consistent with elsewhere in the paper [see for example line 147]
Lines 258-259 – suggested change only from “Furthermore, there is a concern about establishing… to “Furthermore, establishing a recycling culture in the centre was seen as important”
Lines 261,263, 265, 273 – again the word school is used. This has a different connotation to centre
Line 275 – suggest you change ‘the right’ months to “not ideal months”
Line 280 – use the past tense “activity would be a better option.”
Line 284 – suggested changed from “Fourth, there is a great” to “Fourth, this was a great…”
Line 292 and 295 – direct quote so use double quotation marks
Line 297 – suggested change from “parent noticed that the child” to “parents noticed that their child..”
Lines 299 – 303. Two single sentences. Combine to make a paragraph.
Line 316 – used past tense for showed
Lines 330 -331 – it would be helpful to explain further how Figure 12 illustrates how “They compromise on sustainability teaching in order to motivate their students”
Lines 339 and 340 – only use the word school here
Line 352 – suggest that you insert ‘this’ after answered
Lines 353-354 – suggest that you change “Third, researcher have noticed that the answers show a great increase of the level of importance given the participation…” to “Third, researchers noticed that the answers showed an increase in the level of importance given to the recycling process through their participation”
Lines 354-355 – The sentence “In addition, parents assured after the programme that they taught their children how to recycle (100%)” needs further clarification.
Line 361 – unclear what is meant by “help to establish the new value”?
Line 370 – suggest that you insert “do” before teach
Line 375 – insert ‘the’ in front of researchers
Line 380 – only the term schools is used here
Line 388 – school centre is used in this line as well as schools.
Line 389 – centres is used in this line while in the next line 390 school is used. Go through the remained of the conclusion to ensure consistency of terms.
Author Response
First of all, we would appreciate your positive and kind evaluation of this manuscript. We have made a great effort and we are very satisfied that you consider our manuscript to contribute substantially to the importance of early childhood education for sustainability.
We have revised our paper accordingly. Please find below our replies to your comments. Our replies and comments are in the dark blue Font.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
The study explores a valuable issue for both early childhood education and environmental sustainability. The research builds on the work that has previously been done as reflected in the use of the literature. It is well written, clear and succinct.
Further detail regarding the analysis of the qualitative responses would have enhanced the scientific soundness of paper. What methods were used to analyse these?
I would be interested to know what the intended learning outcomes were for some of the planned activities in the teaching unit. While the concepts regarding sustainability/recycling were clear in some activities e.g. the sorting, I wondered what concepts children would be learning from sticking the aluminium onto a drawing?
Some minor grammatical edits are required.
Author Response
Thank you immensely for your comments. We are pleased to know that you consider that this research explores a valuable issue for both early childhood education and environmental sustainability.
We want to thank for your feedback. We have revised our paper accordingly. Please find below our replies to your comments. Our replies are in the dark blue Font.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
