Trauma-Informed School Programming: A Partnership Approach to Culturally Responsive Behavior Support

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

You have to specify that your contribution is a pilot study not only in the abstract or in the conclusions. Also the methodology has to be reported in the paper (and not only in the abstract). 

It is always interesting to read about quantitative choices that in the discussion are matched with qualitative data, without any clear examples.

Ex. p. 9: The qualitative analyses of teacher narratives appears to be consistent with this notion. 

Author Response

Thank you to the reviewer for their comments. Please see attachments for a list of the amendments made.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Although the intervention was worthwhile, the study and findings seemed preliminary at best.

 

Specific comments:

1. What was "Teachers" a key word? The key words should be carefully and thoughtfully chosen.
2. Please standardise the use of "Trauma informed" or "Trauma-informed".
3. There was no evidence of sample size calculations. How was the sample size determined?
4. "72 (N=42 Males) student behavioural and attendance data. The sample consisted of 68 First Nation students" - so is it 72 or 68? This reads rather confusing.
5. There was no discussion of study limitations. This was a very small pilot and the results must be interpreted cautiously
6. The table in the Appendix was truncated.

Author Response

Thank you to the reviewer for their comments. Please see attachments for a list of the amendments made.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

This paper addresses a highly complex, interesting and innovative topic. It provides scientific evidence on an educational reality that is well known in Australia, but little known in other countries. 
Faced with the problem of continuing differences in educational outcomes between First Nations and non-indigenous students, a whole process of educational intervention and research is set in motion, incorporating the participation of the most relevant members of the community. This process is extensive (two years of programme implementation) and has several phases, which are well detailed throughout the document. The idea is to promote the use of culturally sensitive practices to mitigate the impact of colonisation, transgenerational trauma and structural inequalities on students. It also aims to understand changes in staff attitudes, practices and self-efficacy in relation to these practices. 
The theoretical framework adequately presents the state of the art, justifying the relevance of the study and setting out the aims of the study well. Similarly, the material and methods section describes the fundamental elements of the process, such as the participants, the measuring instruments and the characteristics of the programme (further expanded in the annexes). Both quantitative and qualitative measurement techniques are used, which is very relevant for this type of study. 
The results are well structured and presented. There is a reduction in behavioural difficulties, as well as notable improvements in staff reports of knowledge and attitudes; the results are therefore positive and it would be interesting if this work could be replicated in other schools. Also, as explained in the discussion, there are some issues that need to be explored further and it would be appropriate to continue along the lines already started by refining the programme and its derived research.
I consider this to be a solid, well-written document of great educational and scientific relevance. I would like to express my congratulations for carrying out interventions of this type in schools, improving the social, emotional and cultural reality of all those involved. 

 

 

 

Author Response

Thank you to the reviewer for their comments. Please see attachments for a list of the amendments made.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Thank you for the revisions.