Study of the Presence of Sustainability Competencies in Teacher Training in Mathematics Education

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

I congratulate the authors for their work. It is evident that a great deal of effort has gone into compiling a study of this nature.

There are some aspects that I believe would improve the paper.

In the introduction the authors want to make clear the importance of sustainability education and the role of mathematics in particular. This is done quite well, but they move from one part to another, without any order. They should reorder some paragraphs of the introduction, commenting first on university education and sustainability and then on mathematics and sustainability. In addition there are some more current references dealing with the latter.

Every table should stand on its own. However, in order to understand Table 3, it is necessary to know what each of the acronyms in it means. That information is a couple of pages earlier. Could the meaning of each of the acronyms be placed at the bottom of the table? That would make table 1 disappear.

When they talk about weighted average, they should specify what the weightings are.

To better understand Figure 6, they ought to specifically show the calculation of some of the values.

 

 

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

The author(s) have clearly presented the importance of incorporating the sustainability of competencies (e.g., critical contextualization, sustainable use of resources, preserving ethical principles) in mathematics education to enhance the critical thinking and problem solving skills of students in a a rapidly changing world that has constantly increasing problems of social and environmental issues. The research questions are also clearly presented and answered based on the quantitative data obtained from the content analysis of syllabi used in three degree programs.

The authors used content analysis to analyze the syllabi. It will be helpful if the authors provide more information about the features of the syllabi they analyzed. Were there certain rules that all instructors should include certain information on their course syllabi? What was the departmental (or university) criteria in the preparation of the syllabus? Were there common syllabi used across the certain courses? What are the similarities and differences among the syllabi across the programs?

A detailed information about the analysis of syllabi is needed. How did the researchers code the certain information on the syllabi based on the framework they used? The authors obtained some quantitative data from the content analysis and used the quantitative data to answer their research questions. However, how the authors quantified their results from their content analysis of the information in the syllabi needs to be explained in the method section of the study. What are the coding techniques they used to analyzed the syllabi? What is the level of agreement between coders? The method section needs to contain detailed information about the quantification of the data. If the authors explain how they analyze the syllabi and obtain the quantitative data from their analysis, the results of the study will be more convincing and meaningful for the readers. The authors can illustrate their analysis by providing some sample syllabi (or statements from syllabi) and examples of their coding or any other methods they used. This will also enhance our ability to evaluate the results of the study and their implications for future research.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf