Next Article in Journal
Creativity and Social Capital: The Pillars of Venice’s Success in the New European Bauhaus Programme
Previous Article in Journal
Sexual Harassment or Just Coaching? Sport Students Making Sense of Possibly Sexualising Coach Behaviours
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Teacher Training to Take Care of Students at Risk of Exclusion

Soc. Sci. 2022, 11(12), 544; https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci11120544
by María Trinidad Cutanda-López 1,* and María Begoña Alfageme-González 2
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Reviewer 3:
Soc. Sci. 2022, 11(12), 544; https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci11120544
Submission received: 16 September 2022 / Revised: 13 November 2022 / Accepted: 14 November 2022 / Published: 24 November 2022

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Congratulations on the article! Please consider some comments I made below.

157-8: "in political, institutional, curricular and organizational and results keys" (consider revising "keys" - from political, institutional, curricular and organizational "perspectives")

190: the information collection (data)

194:  from which the results that are analysed and presented here come (are extracted)

205:  different groups of the same universe (?)

215: Research simple (?)

I'm not sure about the referencing - is it according to the journal's guidelines? I mean in particular the fact that you included the authors in brackets at the beginning (in the References section).  

Author Response

Thank you very much for your considerations. we have proceeded to make the suggested changes.

Reviewer 2 Report

I think that you should name the title Teacher training to take care of students at risk of exclusion

Author Response

Thank you very much for your considerations. we have proceeded to make the suggested changes

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments:

You should improve the coherence and cohession. You should avoid long sentences.

Line 21: in the Theoretical Framework you shouls include, at the beginning, more authors.

In addition, you can improve this part including actual literature.

Line 167: the conclusions drawn in the theoretical framework section should be supported by relevant citations.

Line 712: in conclusions, more contributions from the literature are missing and therefore more citations that support or contradict the results obtained in this study should be included.

 

 

Author Response

Thank you very much for your considerations. we have proceeded to make the suggested changes
Back to TopTop