Tackling Controversial Issues in Primary Education: Perceptions and Experiences of Student Teachers

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The theme is certainly interesting and relevant and the introduction makes this more interesting by discussing the definition of controversial issues. While the article says what it wants to do, there is not a clear research question, which later in the text makes the outcomes less clear than it could have been.

The literature review is relevant for the theme, but it consists of much "grey" literature, that is reports from Amnesty, Oxfam and others, while there should have been more examples of empirical research in the line of what is presented in the article. The lack of a research question proper, makes the review less focused than this reviewer would have wanted, instead it is theme-oriented towards freedom of speech.

Methodology is to a degree well explained, but it seems unclear what was the return rate of the e-mail questionnaires. This says a lot about the significance of the results. This and the fact that the nominal figures are too small to justify counting avpercentages as a way of reporting is a weekness. At least this should have been commented. The results are difficult to assess when they appear as 'issues', while the quotations in many ways give more, and makes the article interesting. It means that the findings actually are qualitative in the main, while the tables cannot prove much more than is said in the verbal summaries. They are of course not representative.

The final conclusions and recommendations are valuable and interesting discussion takes place. However, the lack of a precise research question means that there is a lack of distinct discussion with other research and a lack of clear focus. This makes the article as a whole less valuable than it could have been and more of a contribution to the broader discussion of cotriversial issues in school.

Finally, the article has gathered empirical material in England, but given the international nature of the issue, it would have been good to see some more discussion with international research literature ad a comment on what an investigation in the English context possibly can contribute to this.  

Author Response

May I thank the reviewer for their detailed comments on my article. 

I am pleased that the reviewer found the theme interesting and that the introduciton was helpful in discussing the definition of controversial issues. There isn't a single research question, as the article was approached in a more thematic way. The data is a subset of a much bigger project, and data has been extracted form this in order to focus for this particular special edition of the journal (see lines 269, 270).

I agree that some of the literature is "grey". It owuld have been useful to give exmaples of further examples of empirical research, as much of the material published in this area is now very dated (as is indicated in the first paragraph of the article) originating in the later twentieth and early twenty-first century. Whilst I have made some reference to this in the opening paragraphs of the article it os not a major focus, given the time that has elapsed since publication.

Regarding the methodology, it is not possible to indicate the return rate for the online quesitonnaire. As all responses are anonymous, only identified by region, it is not possible to know which universities participated and this how many students had access to the survey link via their course leader or other senior academic. I have added a comment on the size of the sample (lines 236 - 238) and the need to treat the findings as tentative as a result (added to lines 383, 384).

I am pleaed that the reviewer found the quotes form student teacher useful, as giving voice to their perceptions is an important part of the research project overall. The findings are qualitative in the main, and this was the intention. The tables are provided for illustrative purposes, and I believe that the journal likes authors to present informaiotn in ways easily accessible to the reader. My intention in including the tables is not to suggest that there is a signficant quantitative aspect to the research, rather to provide informaiton in an accesssible and clear, efficient manner.

I am very pleased that the reviewer finds the final conclusions and recommentaitons valuable, and appreciate them stating this. 

I have added to the conclusion to comment on what an investigation in the context of England could potentially be broadened through rufther research in order to contribute to the overal debate in a wider international context (lines 426-428).

Reviewer 2 Report

1. The introduction must clearly define "children." Specifically, when teaching controversial issues---female genital mutilation, sex education, abortion, capital punishment, poverty, etc.---age and maturity are crucial. I strongly disagree with Erricker (2003) that power is the primary reason adults "control and young people's values and behaviors." Science has demonstrated that children's brains are not fully developed until age 25, when the prefrontal cortex is fully functional. I agree that secondary students (roughly ages 14-18 in the United States should engage in controversial issues, with guidance from the teachers and established rules for civility and respect. So, I would suggest establishing a specific age range, 6 year-olds are not prepared for many controversial issues. In the U.S., parents and other groups would be involved in this issue and it can result in legal actions and consequences for schools and teachers. 
2.  Regarding the "isms" discussed on page 1 (lines 27-33), these  terms are occasionally used to silence opponents by calling them "racists," "Islamophobes," and other names. Moreover, the term "Islamophobia" was created by a radical Islamist group to stifle all criticism of their behaviors--including violence and suppression of speech--as anti-Islamic. This is a clever political and rhetorical devise aimed at controlling language and behavior for political gain. Of course, this is not always the case, but a brief acknowledgement of this is warranted. 
3.  Views can be controversial even if "reason" is not the primary mode of analysis. Generally, religion is based on faith and not reason. Opponents of abortion and other issues may base their opposition based on Biblical interpretations. Ideology is crucial to social studies and one's core values and beliefs determine their political and economic views. 
4.  The "British values" could be described as Western values rooted in the Enlightenment. (Lines 103-117). In the U.S. safe spaces are controversial--students are entitled to physical safety but do NOT have any protection from opinions, beliefs, and values they abhor. Freedom of expression protects "extremist" and "hate" speech in America. I recognize that the United Kingdom offers less protection for "hate" speech. I would suggest the author explore the consequences of Hess's approaches to controversial issues (lines 162-180). Choosing each option may present educators with challenges or trouble with parents, such as charges of indoctrination. Also, I suggest a brief mention of the NCSS Position Statement on Teaching about Religions in Social Studies. (https:/www.socialstudies.org/positions/study_about_religions). 
5. The author's methods and conclusions are sound. I think it is important to note that teaching controversial issues can be dangerous to teachers and schools. The need excellent training on methods and materials, sound judgment and the ability to perceive potential troubles, community support, and administrative support. This is crucial in the United States, where the culture is bitterly divided, and people are often intolerant of diverse views. 

Author Response

I note that this reviewer particularly felt that the introduciton neded to be clarified. I respond to each of their points in turn.

1. The focus for the article is student teachers in their final year to training, and their fellings about potentially controversial and sensitive issues they may face in their first teaching post. Thus the focus is on primary education, but not on children as it is the perceptions of student teachers that is my concern. Where children raise issues, the newly qualified teachers will need to be ready to know how to cope in age and stage appropriate ways. The issues is not so much whether children are ready to discuss the issues, but whether new teachers are ready when matters arise, so that they can respond in appropriate ways.
2. I have added a brief acknowledgement on the problematic nature of isms and phobias, thank you for this suggestion (lines 34 - 36).
3. I appreciate that there are different definitions of controversial issues, but the once that I work to involves "reason" as the primary mode of analysis. This is why I set out a definition early on in the article. Setting this parameter limits the extent of controversial issues, particularly with regard to some of the arguments presnted by religious groups.
4. I agree that so called "British values" could be described as Western values tooted in the Enlightenment. It is a term used in the eduation system in England and is a matter of government policy, and subject to inspection by the national regulator. As such it is context-specific and, as some of the student teacher note, they are very uncomfortable with it as a concept. I have added a reference to the NCSS (lines 174-176) and noted the inappropriateness of indoctrination as opposed to education. Thank you for this suggesiton.
5. I have added to the conclusion to reinforce the point that excellent training is needed for teachers (and in this case student teachers in their final year) in order to equip them to support children and deal with any controversial issues they may raise (lines 393-397).

Reviewer 3 Report

This is an excellent and helpful article. After very carefully delineating the controversies, and policies surrounding the dealing with controversial issues in the Primary classroom a study of last year student teachers was conducted to learn their attitudes toward and proposed ways of dealing with controversial issues. Defining controversy is always an issue and is not fixedly definable.

The study reveals the range of concerns and the training experiences of student teachers and compares results from a 2008 cohort with that of 2016 showing changes in emphasis and issues considered controversial or in need of being in the curriculum of teacher training

Overal a well written and very helpful article. A classic in providing evidence for policy in a changing world.

note a few typos; line 253 do not to and 167 necessarily

Author Response

May I thank the reviewer for their positive and encouraging comments. I am pleased that they felt the controversies were delineated clearly. I am pleased that they appreciated the focus on student/trainee teachers and how their perceived needs might inform the curriculum for their training courses.

I have amended the two typographical errors (see lines 261 and 170).

I also hope that this research may impact on policy, even in some small way.

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

I find the added text to address the main critical comments in a way that is sufficient for publication.

Author Response

Thank you to the reviewer for this positive response.