Spiritual Education of Children in a Post-Secular Context in the 21st Century: A Discussion Paper

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Some confusion exists between a claim in the Abstract that mental well being is increasing and comments in lines 88 - 97. I'm sure this will be easy to fix.

Paragraphing is a problem. With long paragraphs, it's harder to follow the semantic flow of the article. Consider dividing some of the text into smaller paragraphs, for example, lines 44, 67, 84, 147, 174, lines 191 to 230, 302.

I realize languages differ in the use of articles, and noun/verb agreement, but it would help the article's argument to look at the following instances where corrections in English would improve the text:

In the Abstract "are related somehow", The first section, The following section,

line 31 and possesses [not that]

line 52 is not just a loosely-tied set of concepts

line 90 in Denmark [no capital]

line 99 refers not refer

lines 117, 118, and 119 seem to be written from the perspective of a reviewer not the author. Please omit these sentences.

line 155 Penelope's web

line 166 something that transcends the existing

line 170 thinking, willing, and judging

line 179 which could in turn

line 188 How do these perspectives

line 194 but does not necessarily have

line 199 (...) by giving attention to 

line 242 crises or a crisis

line 273 young people as they develop and are formed 

line 276 them [not these]

line 293 emphasizes

line 358 that the adult verbally expresses his or her own feelings

line 362 this work begins with adults from different arenas

I'm very aware that getting small points like these ones is irritating if you don't know how the reviewer feels about your good work. Well, please be assured that this article is important and should be included in the Journal. Well done. I like the way you describe dannelse and compare it to Bildung and to Hannah Arendt's concept of thinking. I also think there is urgency in the argument you make for the vitalization of a children's and young people's spiritual awareness, and the language they need to express their concerns. 

 

Author Response

Thank you for your comments with both thorough and specific feedback. We believe you have helped us significantly to improve the manuscript. We have done our best to address all your comments.

 

Reviewer 1:

Some confusion exists between a claim in the Abstract that mental well being is increasing and comments in lines 88 - 97. I'm sure this will be easy to fix.

 We have fixed this in the abstract. However, we have re-organised the article and changes the abstract accordingly.

 

Paragraphing is a problem. With long paragraphs, it's harder to follow the semantic flow of the article. Consider dividing some of the text into smaller paragraphs, for example, lines 44, 67, 84, 147, 174, lines 191 to 230, 302.

Thank you for this comment and pointing to specific places in the text. We have divided the text these places, as well as other places in the manuscript.

 

I realize languages differ in the use of articles, and noun/verb agreement, but it would help the article's argument to look at the following instances where corrections in English would improve the text:

 

In the Abstract "are related somehow",

The first section, The following section,

line 31 and possesses [not that]

line 52 is not just a loosely-tied set of concepts

line 90 in Denmark [no capital]

line 99 refers not refer

lines 117, 118, and 119 seem to be written from the perspective of a reviewer not the author. Please omit these sentences.

line 155 Penelope's web

line 166 something that transcends the existing

line 170 thinking, willing, and judging

line 179 which could in turn

line 188 How do these perspectives

line 194 but does not necessarily have

line 199 (...) by giving attention to 

line 242 crises or a crisis

line 273 young people as they develop and are formed 

line 276 them [not these]

line 293 emphasizes

line 358 that the adult verbally expresses his or her own feelings

line 362 this work begins with adults from different arenas

Thank you very much. This is very helpful and specific to address.

 

I'm very aware that getting small points like these ones is irritating if you don't know how the reviewer feels about your good work. Well, please be assured that this article is important and should be included in the Journal.

Thank you for this kind comment.

 

Well done. I like the way you describe dannelse and compare it to Bildung and to Hannah Arendt's concept of thinking. I also think there is urgency in the argument you make for the vitalization of a children's and young people's spiritual awareness, and the language they need to express their concerns.

Thank you.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This is a potentially very interesting submission exploring existential and spiritual education as a perspective on the education of children in the Danish context by including healthcare research about spiritual care as well as drawing on the disciplines of theology and philosophy in relation to dannelse and mental well-being of children and young people. In particular, I appreciated the influence of the philosophers such as Gadamer, Arendt and Kierkegaard (among others) in the exploration of existential and spiritual care. Notwithstanding, there are some concerns that I have that need to be addressed before this submission can be published.

Firstly, I am not quite sure what is being argued in this submission. Investigating the more transcendental dimensions of spiritual education by drawing on recent healthcare research and policies, highlighting relevant perspectives from theology and sociology on this topic is not really new. This has been done before (more generally). There needs to be a more convincing warrant for the submission. Drawing in the perspectives of, for instance, Gadamer, Arendt and Kierkegaard in relation to dannelse and how this tells us something about spiritual education in the Danish context would go some way to providing a more convincing warrant for this paper.

Secondly, while the concept of dannelse is thoroughly described and explicated, the notion of spirituality is not so well articulated. The literature in the field of children’s spirituality is rich and indicates that spirituality is much more than a transcendent dimension of life exceeding the normal limits of human cognition. This is an area of the submission that requires some significant re-working. I suggest the authors look at the work of David Hay and Rebecca Nye, who are considered seminal writers in this field. Also, the International Journal of Children’s Spirituality contains more than 20 years of scholarship in this field – I find it curious that there is only one reference to the scholarship from this journal in the submission. I would expect to see references to writers such as Eaude, Hyde, Mata-McMahon, Nash (to name just a few) who have contributed to this journal). I should note that is good that the authors have made reference to the work of Tobin Hart and Roehlkepartain et al.

Also pertinent here is how children and childhood are being defined. Are the authors referring to early childhood (generally understood as being from birth to 8 years of age) or is childhood understood more broadly as including adolescents (up to about the age of 18)? This needs to be made clear in the submission.

The general lack of vocabulary in relation to spiritual and existential dimensions of life is an issue not limited to the Danish context. I wonder if this needs to be recognised (with reference to the literature) and then discussed more specifically within the Danish context.

Importantly too, what are the implications and recommendations for practice that might be made as the result of this investigation? In other words, how might healthcare workers in both hospitals and community contexts promote spiritual care and advance the aims of spiritual education with children? This needs to be clearly articulated in the conclusion of the paper, along with any limitations – at present, there is no clear ‘Conclusion’ section to the paper.

A couple of general points: the conventions of academic writing should be more closely adhered to - for example, “According to Psychology Professor Tobin Hart”, should simply be “According to Hart (2006)”. Some of the instruction on the MDPI template have not been removed (see for instance p. 3 of the submission) suggesting that more thorough proof reading is needed.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The quality of English used is satisfactory, although more thorough proof reading is required.

Author Response

Thank you for your comments with both thorough and specific feedback. We believe you have helped us significantly to improve the manuscript. We have done our best to address all your comments.

This is a potentially very interesting submission exploring existential and spiritual education as a perspective on the education of children in the Danish context by including healthcare research about spiritual care as well as drawing on the disciplines of theology and philosophy in relation to dannelse and mental well-being of children and young people. In particular, I appreciated the influence of the philosophers such as Gadamer, Arendt and Kierkegaard (among others) in the exploration of existential and spiritual care. Notwithstanding, there are some concerns that I have that need to be addressed before this submission can be published.

Thank you for your interest in the article and your concrete feedback.

 

Firstly, I am not quite sure what is being argued in this submission. Investigating the more transcendental dimensions of spiritual education by drawing on recent healthcare research and policies, highlighting relevant perspectives from theology and sociology on this topic is not really new. This has been done before (more generally). There needs to be a more convincing warrant for the submission. Drawing in the perspectives of, for instance, Gadamer, Arendt and Kierkegaard in relation to dannelse and how this tells us something about spiritual education in the Danish context would go some way to providing a more convincing warrant for this paper.

Thank you for this comment. We have emphasized in the manuscript how this is particularly important in both a Danish context but also beyond. We have also re-organized the article and the focus of the discussion to provide a more convincing warrant for the manuscript.

 

Secondly, while the concept of dannelse is thoroughly described and explicated, the notion of spirituality is not so well articulated. The literature in the field of children’s spirituality is rich and indicates that spirituality is much more than a transcendent dimension of life exceeding the normal limits of human cognition. This is an area of the submission that requires some significant re-working. I suggest the authors look at the work of David Hay and Rebecca Nye, who are considered seminal writers in this field. Also, the International Journal of Children’s Spirituality contains more than 20 years of scholarship in this field – I find it curious that there is only one reference to the scholarship from this journal in the submission. I would expect to see references to writers such as Eaude, Hyde, Mata-McMahon, Nash (to name just a few) who have contributed to this journal). I should note that is good that the authors have made reference to the work of Tobin Hart and Roehlkepartain et al.

Thank you for this comment. We have looked into the work of these and other scholars in the field and have added it to the manuscript. We have emphasized the notion of children’s spirituality, as well as re-organized the structure of the discussion.

 

Also pertinent here is how children and childhood are being defined. Are the authors referring to early childhood (generally understood as being from birth to 8 years of age) or is childhood understood more broadly as including adolescents (up to about the age of 18)? This needs to be made clear in the submission.

We have clarified this in the manuscript that this involves both children and youth.

 

The general lack of vocabulary in relation to spiritual and existential dimensions of life is an issue not limited to the Danish context. I wonder if this needs to be recognised (with reference to the literature) and then discussed more specifically within the Danish context.

Thank you for this comment. We have tried to broaden this concern to other contexts as well, also with refence to fx Australia.

 

Importantly too, what are the implications and recommendations for practice that might be made as the result of this investigation? In other words, how might healthcare workers in both hospitals and community contexts promote spiritual care and advance the aims of spiritual education with children? This needs to be clearly articulated in the conclusion of the paper, along with any limitations – at present, there is no clear ‘Conclusion’ section to the paper.

We have added a conclusion to the manuscript both summarizing the discussion as well as pointing towards practical implications. We have also an implication aspect in the aim.

 

A couple of general points: the conventions of academic writing should be more closely adhered to - for example, “According to Psychology Professor Tobin Hart”, should simply be “According to Hart (2006)”. Some of the instruction on the MDPI template have not been removed (see for instance p. 3 of the submission) suggesting that more thorough proof reading is needed.

The manuscript has undergone a proof reading service provided by our Faculty.

 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

The quality of English used is satisfactory, although more thorough proof reading is required.

We have had a more thorough proof reading of the manuscript performed.

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Thank you for the opportunity to review this paper. The work would benefit from a more in-depth consideration of the literature and a more consistent integration of it into the discussion. Additionally, the implications for an international audience are lacking. Overall, the paper does not appear to make a significant contribution to the existing knowledge base.

Author Response

Thank you for your comments with both thorough and specific feedback. We believe you have helped us significantly to improve the manuscript. We have done our best to address all your comments.

 

Thank you for the opportunity to review this paper. The work would benefit from a more in-depth consideration of the literature and a more consistent integration of it into the discussion. Additionally, the implications for an international audience are lacking. Overall, the paper does not appear to make a significant contribution to the existing knowledge base.

Thank you for this feedback. We have considered more of the literature in the field as well as integrating it into the discussion. We have also made it clearer how this is not limited to a Danish context. We hope that you now find the paper relevant.

Reviewer 4 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

First, I think the introduction is a bit long, but it is informative.

Second, the structure is logical. The only criticism is related to the study's conclusions, which are missing. To move to the next stage of publication, the study needs the author's conclusions.

Misspellings: See line 301 where God is written god.

Author Response

Thank you for your comments with both thorough and specific feedback. We believe you have helped us significantly to improve the manuscript. We have done our best to address all your comments.

 

First, I think the introduction is a bit long, but it is informative.

Second, the structure is logical. The only criticism is related to the study's conclusions, which are missing. To move to the next stage of publication, the study needs the author's conclusions.

Misspellings: See line 301 where God is written god.

Thank you for this feedback. We have added a conclusion and corrected misspellings, We have also rewritten the introduction and re-organised the manuscript-

 

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Thank you for your revision work. - I can see that you have taken on board much of what I suggested in my original review. I can see that the manuscript is particularly important in a Danish context, and you have now included relevant literature from the field of children's spirituality. These certainly strengthen your submission. Your paper also now reads much more coherently.

The abstract needs just a little further refinement - it should be only one paragraph in length, and it should briefly (1) state the problem you are addressing, (2) state how your submission is going to address the problem, (3) indicate the findings - in your case, “dannelse” or “bildung,”“the basic movement of spirit” and “the life of the mind,” and (4) conclusion - as the result of your investigation, what does your submission conclude?

I think once you have done this, your submission could be recommended for publication.

All the best!

Author Response

Comment: The abstract needs just a little further refinement - it should be only one paragraph in length, and it should briefly (1) state the problem you are addressing, (2) state how your submission is going to address the problem, (3) indicate the findings - in your case, “dannelse” or “bildung,”“the basic movement of spirit” and “the life of the mind,” and (4) conclusion - as the result of your investigation, what does your submission conclude?

Respond: thank your for your help. We have changed the abstract accordingly.